Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 14:30:04 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Trevor Johnson <trevor@jpj.net> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/Mk bsd.port.mk Message-ID: <20021103223004.GB25257@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20021103084715.F95677-100000@blues.jpj.net> References: <200211030543.gA35hnMM018389@repoman.freebsd.org> <20021103084715.F95677-100000@blues.jpj.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --]
On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 09:27:28AM -0500, Trevor Johnson wrote:
> > * If the ${COMMENT} file does not exist, use the value of the
> > ${PORTCOMMENT} variable instead. This will allow us to incrementally
> > phase out pkg-comment [1]
>
> This is not IBM-compatible. IBM cards only have 80 columns. Using 14 of
> them for
>
> PORTCOMMENT=""
>
> leaves only 66 for the comment itself, unless a continuation card is
> used. NetBSD and OpenBSD have chosen the
> shorter name COMMENT instead. That leaves 70 columns for the comment.
> Our portlint recommends 70 (or fewer columns), so existing ports which
> pass portlint are already consistent with the shorter name, but not
> necessarily with the longer one.
>
> Here's a patch. I tested it and it failed "make package" in the same
> manner that bsd.port.mk rev. 1.427 does ("pkg_create: only one package
> name allowed ('for' extraneous)"). It also failed "make deinstall" in the
> same way ("pkg_delete: package 'portlint-2.3.3' doesn't have a prefix").
The problem with using COMMENT is that a number of ports already
override it, so this patch breaks them.
Kris
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQE9xaNsWry0BWjoQKURAsPkAJ0UvsNT5tFZPBOnzxwprTwhUk3kzQCgwjng
hhyMc+otmqp4vofolhdAhGc=
=NzMI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021103223004.GB25257>