Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 23:07:30 +0200 From: chukharev@mail.ru To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Subject: Re: About ports QA by 'port test' Message-ID: <op.u9t2ashnmhpy7y@vova-vaio> In-Reply-To: <3cb459ed1003170558s45d0d7bcv96094f28efb68a24@mail.gmail.com> References: <op.u89g6dh3mhpy7y@vova-vaio> <3cb459ed1003160605x2eb9fe76h28ba8bdc35f9f3c@mail.gmail.com> <20100316134607.GA3204@straylight.ringlet.net> <3cb459ed1003170558s45d0d7bcv96094f28efb68a24@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:58:49 +0200, Alexander Churanov <alexanderchuranov@gmail.com> wrote: > Folks, > > If the portlint would be told to ignore errors like missing PORTVERSION, > then how do you know whether the port is correct or not? > > From my point of view, the issue is the portlint pretends to parse > makefiles, but does not implement full make :-). For example, as far as I > understand, the line 2188 just verifies that the file has a line starting > with PORTVERSION. Portlint should use "make -V PORTVERSION" instead. It's true that portlint parses makefiles. But I believe its task is checking style, not implementing make. Correctness is checked by the next stage of the test. I have modified the script so that a FATAL error of portlint does not stop the test. One more file is used for results of portlint now. New results will come to the site as the test is run over the list of the installed ports. > Alexander Churanov, > maintainer of devel/boost-* devel/boost* have style of implementing related ports really different from recommended in FreeBSD Porter's Handbook section 5.8 MASTERDIR. So, the reason for complains from portlint is stylistic disagreement ;-) -- Vladimir Chukharev Tampere University of Technology
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.u9t2ashnmhpy7y>