From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 6 14:56:06 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1308106566B for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2011 14:56:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-ports@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C9D28FC0A for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2011 14:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pm621-0006aR-2F for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 15:56:05 +0100 Received: from 189.61.208.111 ([189.61.208.111]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 15:56:05 +0100 Received: from kubito by 189.61.208.111 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 15:56:05 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org From: Raphael Kubo da Costa Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 12:55:48 -0200 Lines: 39 Message-ID: <87zkq91abv.fsf@gmail.com> References: <8762syroh6.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 189.61.208.111 User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.2 (berkeley-unix) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Lb+ZL1Qz3OjKd1eFcqSSNfKxcFk= Subject: Re: Call for testers: projectM comes to FreeBSD! [re ports/152823] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 14:56:07 -0000 Chris Rees writes: > and the authors are _dreadful_ at making releases. I have a feeling > this may be the last. :( Then there's not much to do indeed... >> + @${REINPLACE_CMD} -e '/return NULL/d' ${WRKSRC}/actor_projectM.cpp >> >> Is this one from upstream? If so, isn't it better to put it in files/? > > No, this is one I made. They've written a dummy function in, but it's > type struct * and tries to return NULL. Hmm, if it's a function with a return type other than void, it should return at least something. > I have a serious hatred of files/patch-*; they break with most > updates, they bloat the repository and make it slower for everyone to > csup as well. I thought that a ${REINPLACE_CMD} was a cleaner way of > doing so. To be honest (note I'm not a ports committer, so there might be reasons for this), I don't personally like the current way patches are added: it's better than when they were just called patch-aa and nobody would ever be able to know what their purpose was (the CVS log normally wouldn't help much), however it's still hard to tell when something was obtained from upstream or is something local, if upstream has been contacted about the patch or what exactly it is supposed to fix. Adding some notes about this in the file before the diff itself would certainly help a lot. However, I feel this is still better than sed'ing in the Makefile is worse than that -- you are effectively patching the source in a way that is harder to separate than the building of the port itself, and since it is still a form of "patching", it will break the same way it would if it was in files/.