Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 04:52:23 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 227600] porter's handbook: use of distinfo Message-ID: <bug-227600-7788-hR8NjVXHTn@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-227600-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-227600-7788@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=3D227600 Chris Hutchinson <portmaster@bsdforge.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |portmaster@bsdforge.com --- Comment #8 from Chris Hutchinson <portmaster@bsdforge.com> --- (In reply to freebsd from comment #7) > (In reply to Kurt Jaeger from comment #6) > I don't think it's appropriate to rely on a particular ports-mgmt tool in > the explanation, particularly given there are different tools in use by > different people. >=20 > In any case, the problem is not so much creating a new port from scratch = but > tweaking an existing port. As explained in comments 3 & 4, one should be > using the "makesum" target rather than the "fetch" target when trying to > fetch when the port skeleton (e.g. makefile and distinfo) is inconsistent. >=20 > Perhaps 4.1 #1 could additionally say something like=20 >=20 > Note: If executing port build stages individually, the fetch target will > fail if distinfo exists and does not match the distfile to be fetched. In > this case, the makesum target should be run instead. It will fetch the n= ew > distfile first, then replace distinfo with the appropriate checksum > regardless of what was in distinfo before. +1 :-) --Chris --=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-227600-7788-hR8NjVXHTn>