From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 22 14:18:56 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13779106564A; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:18:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iw0-f182.google.com (mail-iw0-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A32738FC13; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:18:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iwr19 with SMTP id 19so1002340iwr.13 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 07:18:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=O5x8zcZ61XX6bH8j5bMAkcEsOCHBNj0u8ItDUkE/5nU=; b=FZwMPmx+OQNI2hU57z00Dja5iflE1Kee8hgGcCvYO7W39AVEOEnIVrjuKGDN2jdYg6 iCqjIOjGQDZ4jBb5y7t2gdlZWYszlqqKIz9zT0Scdjx1N1gREk7Sxc3I6CIsD42UIj5i 0TVtkrSBUKaGbUWiKhPk1kW7g1EJ22NesKpPA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=Jgm6BlcVgJ85ixbF57a2aC0VkegACrcUO0CphCptV4P+6f5gA4LW6Ar1edKUtUPpOD 8tVlfAxlGHELYFMBji3N3mCDZW8Zn7napAtKNcJjTLGdsC8hJ6NFWNcniijm2ekOSSQa JAg/z+oUNDb+zTMF+RE9gxCI1LJQGP0DD8CKQ= Received: by 10.231.200.82 with SMTP id ev18mr677752ibb.45.1308752335109; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 07:18:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: utisoft@gmail.com Received: by 10.231.49.193 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 07:18:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110622160233.8b6156e1.itetcu@FreeBSD.org> References: <20110621214013.6cc4760e@heavennet.ru> <20110622020048.GA83940@FreeBSD.org> <20110622064224.GB94185@FreeBSD.org> <20110622160233.8b6156e1.itetcu@FreeBSD.org> From: Chris Rees Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:18:24 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 9qDJf2NK0_xwTblJtiSmh8qwEKI Message-ID: To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: ports@freebsd.org, "Ilya A. Arkhipov" , Alexey Dokuchaev , kwm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OpenTTD 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: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:18:56 -0000 2011/6/22 Ion-Mihai Tetcu : > On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 09:56:55 +0100 > Chris Rees wrote: > >> 2011/6/22 Alexey Dokuchaev : >> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:33:14AM +0400, Ilya A. Arkhipov wrote: >> >> Ok i rewrite patch and do with argument, and write patch to portlint = ;) >> > >> > Wow, if you could write a patch to portlint that is would correctly su= ggest >> > that MAINTAINER/COMMENT/LICENSE should be grouped together, and FOO_DE= PENDS >> > would be closed to USE_BAR knobs, I'd be very grateful! >> > >> > Just to make myself clear on this issue: COMMENT/LICENSE are general >> > software information, FOO_DEPENDS and USE_BAR knobs both specify >> > dependencies (that is, package-related stuff). =A0I believe that it do= es not >> > make sence to mix them, hence LICENSE should be defined before _DEPEND= S, not >> > after. >> > >> >> I agree 110% with this. It confused me a while ago when I started to >> use LICENSE, but I think the general acceptance is that we should >> have: >> >> PORTNAME >> PORTVERSION >> etc >> >> MAINTAINER >> COMMENT >> >> LICENSE >> >> So license in a separate block; you can have several license lines >> making the MAINTAINER/COMMENT block unnecessarily large. >> >> Not too sure about keeping _DEPENDS with USE; there're additional >> variables often set with USE, perhaps a block for _DEPENDS and then >> USE etc underneath? (could follow with USERS/GROUPS). >> >> Example: >> >> PORTNAME >> PORTVERSION >> etc >> >> MAINTAINER >> COMMENT >> >> LICENSE >> >> LIB_DEPENDS=3D >> >> BUILD_DEPENDS=3D >> >> RUN_DEPENDS=3D >> >> USE_FOO >> FOO_ARGS >> USE_BAR >> >> USERS >> GROUPS > > *dEPENDS and USE* are really the same thing, dependencies (with, maybe, > some rare exceptions). So I'd say they should go together. > Just to satisfy a nagging question inside me (I'm sorry, you're going to regret having me around!). Do you mean: BUILD_DEPENDS LIB_DEPENDS RUN_DEPENDS USE_FOO USE_BAR or BUILD_DEPENDS LIB_DEPENDS RUN_DEPENDS USE_FOO USE_BAR ? Apart from the aesthetics appeal of the latter, I also think that there should be a distinction between the USE and DEPENDS -- only USE sets cool variables for the Makefile to then use... Chris