Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 19:01:58 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 192228] New port: databases/bucardo Message-ID: <bug-192228-13-F1iZoX8GN2@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-192228-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-192228-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192228 --- Comment #9 from John Marino <marino@FreeBSD.org> --- So this illustrates why the procedure outlined in section 3.4 is not foolproof. You came up with no errors, but yet the port failed. There's no "poudriere-equivalent" for poudriere in this case. The two things section 3.4 cannout test are: missing dependencies and illegally touching the filesystem. The real solution, eventually, is to have a poudriere-based check run automatically as part of the PR process. It's on the long-term plans I understand, but we don't have it yet. For now we need to look forward to a poudriere-based redports... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-192228-13-F1iZoX8GN2>