Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 08 Jan 2021 17:31:28 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 252497] audio/zita-resampler: Update to 1.8.0
Message-ID:  <bug-252497-7788-YSHZ8oaDQM@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-252497-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-252497-7788@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=3D252497

--- Comment #7 from Fernando Apestegu=C3=ADa <fernape@FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to daniel.engberg.lists from comment #6)

Apparently it does.

/tmp/252497/audio/zita-resampler$ portlint -AC
WARN: Makefile: for new port, make $FreeBSD$ tag in comment section empty, =
to
make SVN happy.
WARN: /tmp/252497/audio/zita-resampler/files/patch-CMakeLists.txt: patch was
not generated using ``make makepatch''.  It is recommended to use ``make
makepatch'' when you need to [re-]generate a patch to ensure proper patch
format.

/tmp/252497/audio/zita-resampler$ make patch

=3D=3D=3D>  License GPLv3+ accepted by the user
=3D=3D=3D>   zita-resampler-1.8.0 depends on file: /usr/local/sbin/pkg - fo=
und
=3D=3D=3D> Fetching all distfiles required by zita-resampler-1.8.0 for buil=
ding
=3D=3D=3D>  Extracting for zita-resampler-1.8.0
=3D> SHA256 Checksum OK for zita-resampler-1.8.0.tar.bz2.
=3D=3D=3D>  Patching for zita-resampler-1.8.0
=3D=3D=3D>  Applying FreeBSD patches for zita-resampler-1.8.0

/tmp/252497/audio/zita-resampler$ make makepatch
Generated patch-CMakeLists.txt
The previous patches have been placed here:
/tmp/252497/audio/zita-resampler/work/.makepatch-tmp/archived-patches

/tmp/252497/audio/zita-resampler$ portlint -AC
WARN: Makefile: for new port, make $FreeBSD$ tag in comment section empty, =
to
make SVN happy.

Now... I'm not completely sure about replacing the upstream Makefile with
CMake. For one, it (obviously) pulls CMake in the dependencies list that is=
 not
super light to build. Also, what if we commit this and upstream does not ac=
cept
the CMakeList.txt? Are we going to port all the things in the upstream Make=
file
to the CMakeList.txt when something changes?

Don't get me wrong, I think CMake is in general far superior than old GNU
tools, but wouldn't it be better to send the patch upstream and wait and se=
e if
they adopt it?

Cheers

--=20
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-252497-7788-YSHZ8oaDQM>