Date: Sat, 21 May 2016 11:11:12 -0600 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, marino@freebsd.org, Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r415078 - in head: . Mk Message-ID: <43145C09-EC33-4738-9FE7-5DC34A74D64B@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <20160521162931.GA97771@FreeBSD.org> References: <201605121820.u4CIKROJ004026@repo.freebsd.org> <20160513160151.GA30219@FreeBSD.org> <20160513182837.GF49383@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20160513201919.GA48945@FreeBSD.org> <CAPyFy2A9L1cCikOrgBAWUo0GTCLJ4EgzqukhobaJp%2BZqv7_SpQ@mail.gmail.com> <20160519122306.GA24015@FreeBSD.org> <20160521112728.GA624@FreeBSD.org> <364d3d9f-63ff-18c8-c730-a11c57dc0673@marino.st> <20160521114358.GC624@FreeBSD.org> <20160521122522.GJ21899@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20160521162931.GA97771@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 21 May, 2016, at 10:29, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >=20 > On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 02:25:22PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 11:43:58AM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: >>> On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 01:33:36PM +0200, John Marino wrote: >>>> On 5/21/2016 1:27 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: >>>>> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:23:06PM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: >>>>>> ... >>>>>> I'm still not convinced though, sorry. Ports tree can be = obtained by >>>>>> a number of means, but this new ugly TIMESTAMP thingy is added = for a >>>>>> very specific usecase, and there should be no problem to require = that >>>>>> for that particular usecase, exported ports tree must have its = files' >>>>>> mtimes correctly set. (If svn/git/hg are not setting right = mtimes on >>>>>> export, they should be fixed.) It looks more like quick'n'dirty = hack >>>>>> rather than thoroughly thought-out solution. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Given lack of replies, I guess I'd have to elaborate a bit on = problems >>>>> with TIMESTAMP and why I'm against it. >>>>>=20 >>>>> 1. It does not line up with distinfo format... >>>>> 2. It is not needed even if ports repo is obtained as tarball... >>>>=20 >>>> Maybe it could/should be implemented as a makefile variable = instead? >>>>=20 >>>> e.g. REP_TIMESTAMP=3D >>>>=20 >>>> Just a suggestion. I don't disagree with you. >>>=20 >>> While still hackish, it's a *lot* less ugly and bogus as tainting = distinfo. >>> (New variable in Makefile is OK because that's what Makefiles are = made of: >>> variables, targets, and recipes. Adding TIMESTAMP to distinfo is = NOT OK >>> because distinfo describes port's distfiles in a form of FOO(), = BAR(), ... >>> values per each distfile.) >>=20 >> Implementing it as a Makefile variable would make it not = automatically >> updated. >=20 > Even if we can agree on REP_TIMESTAMP variable, why `make makesum' = cannot > sed -i the Makefile? Oh god, please, no. Please do not mess with Makefiles. Rather than having it come from 'makesum', can an svn hook write it to = distinfo? May help it stay more current. # Adam --=20 Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org http://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43145C09-EC33-4738-9FE7-5DC34A74D64B>