From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 20 18:50:11 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C65FB106564A for ; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 18:50:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4EB48FC12 for ; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 18:50:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAKIoBHV094110 for ; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 18:50:11 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id oAKIoBcn094109; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 18:50:11 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 18:50:11 GMT Message-Id: <201011201850.oAKIoBcn094109@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Anonymous Cc: Subject: Re: ports/148777: [New Port] sysutils/qjail: Utility to deploy large number of jails quickly X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Anonymous List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 18:50:11 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/148777; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Anonymous To: joeb Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/148777: [New Port] sysutils/qjail: Utility to deploy large number of jails quickly Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 21:43:38 +0300 "joeb" writes: > There are many existing ports with no distinfo so I fail to see why you > think this is an error. This was done on purpose so I can update the dist > file with fixes or enactments without having to wait for months to get the > update commented because the makesum values have changed. This technique is > communally used when the port make files will never change but allows the > maintainer to maintain the product without delays in moving updates into the > existing port. Then mark it RESTRICTED as the distfile may not be identical across ftp mirrors and CDROM. > And when it comes to the messing with /etc/rc.d/jail file I was told by the > jail maintainer that he was addressing the bugs I pointed out in a up coming > release and that I should just replace it with my corrected one as part of > my port. So that is what I am doing. Have you tried to rename it and install into PREFIX/etc/rc.d? The port fails to restore original /etc/rc.d/jail upon deinstall and jail.original ends up overwritten after second install.