Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 09:28:27 -0400 From: Wesley Shields <wxs@FreeBSD.org> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>, Diane Bruce <db@db.net> Subject: Re: patch for force fetch Message-ID: <20110517132827.GA98772@atarininja.org> In-Reply-To: <4DD1796F.2000305@FreeBSD.org> References: <4DD0CC21.5050305@FreeBSD.org> <20110516120807.GA34582@night.db.net> <BANLkTi=MKn09fG6SQ2MPdRGNi6rJ=t8biA@mail.gmail.com> <4DD1796F.2000305@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:22:23PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 16/05/2011 19:53 Eitan Adler said the following: > >> I've run into this myself and simply done the manual rm -f. This looks like > >> a great addition. > > > > what about make distclean ? > > Can you please elaborate? > If you mean that I could just run 'make distclean', then my answer is > why should I. I.e. if the ports infrastructure already knows that > there is something wrong with a local copy of a distfile (wrong size, > wrong checksum), then it should just do the right thing and not annoy > me to run some cleanup action. While I certainly don't disagree with you here, I do want to point out that keeping old distfiles around when the checksum is different has saved my butt more than once. It's very useful to not delete the old distfile. On more than one occasion I've had to diff old and new distfiles to figure out why the checksums are different. If ports just deleted the old one I may not be able to get it back. I do like the idea of ports DTRT and just fetch the new file, but can we have it move the old one to some place safe instead of delete it? -- WXS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110517132827.GA98772>