From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 21 13:40:01 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5EECEB7 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2012 13:40:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.135]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D5288FC08 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2012 13:40:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q9LDe17e024950 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2012 13:40:01 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q9LDe19L024949; Sun, 21 Oct 2012 13:40:01 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 13:40:01 GMT Message-Id: <201210211340.q9LDe19L024949@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Raphael Kubo da Costa Subject: Re: ports/172777: New port: net/libnfs a client library for accessing NFS shares X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: Raphael Kubo da Costa List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 13:40:01 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/172777; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Raphael Kubo da Costa To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Cc: Manuel Creach Subject: Re: ports/172777: New port: net/libnfs a client library for accessing NFS shares Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 16:34:59 +0300 A few comments after looking at the Makefile: o It would be good if you could adapt the header comments to the new format. o Setting PORTREVISION to 1 (and in that location) is wrong, since this is a new port. I suggest running `portlint' to look for this kind of issue. o Try using USE_GITHUB and its related variables so you do not need to hardcode the whole MASTER_SITES address. o You probably need not override FETCH_ARGS. o The port itself already seems to always set _FILE_OFFSET_BITS to 64, so the CFLAGS addition is redundant. o The port does not list any build dependency except for the autotools stuff, so I wonder if changing LDFLAGS is really necessary. o Still on the same subject, are you sure you need to change ACLOCAL_ARGS and and AUTOMAKE_ARGS?