Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 17:10:20 GMT
From: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org>
To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/89164: [PATCH] /var/db/pkg/{portname}/+CONTENTS files sometimes contain wrong data
Message-ID: <200511171710.jAHHAKMb036762@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR ports/89164; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org>
To: "Michael C. Shultz" <ringworm01@gmail.com>
Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/89164: [PATCH] /var/db/pkg/{portname}/+CONTENTS files
sometimes contain wrong data
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:06:11 +0100
> > > > > > Could you send the standalone bsd.port.mk patch to this PR?
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, should have said where it was, gets put
> > > > > into /usr/local/share/portmanager but I'll attach the patch to this
> > > > > message anyways.
> > > >
> > > > So this incorporates your portmanager into bsd.port.mk? I'm afraid we
> > > > can't possibly include this in the official ports tree without making
> > > > portmanager part of base system, do we?
> > > >
> > > > What kind of feedback you're expecting from us, then?
> > >
> > > Most important is that you recognize there is a problem with
> > > how +CONTENTS files are generated.
> >
> > Yes, there is a long standing problem and we're aware of it. Sadly, no
> > workable solution was submitted so far (at least I haven't found any PR
> > filed against it).
>
> Well portmanager in base would solve the problem. I'd say I could
> just pull out the portion that generates the list but portmanager is very
> integrated so that would be a lot of work for no really good reason.
>
> It would be easy to name it something else and disable unneeded
> features however.....
I think fixing the problem within the scope of existing tools (sh/awk
soup under /usr/ports/Mk) is doable and much more preferable.
> > > Wether or not you all choose to make portmanager as a part
> > > of the base system is up to you all, I really just wanted to let
> > > you know that when portmanager is installed in a user system
> > > I'd like it to make the adjustment to bsd.ports.mk. If portmanager
> > > is removed I'll make sure it smoothly returns bsd.ports.mk
> > > to a usefull state as part of the deinstall process.
> >
> > You're free to do whatever you want in your software. Just note that you
> > have to patch bsd.ports.mk every time user cvsuped the tree, not only on
> > portmanager install/deinstall.
>
> It checks for make -V PORTMANGER output every time a port is upgraded/rebuilt,
> if no output it reapplies the patch.
>
> The thing to be aware of though is while the patch is in bsd.ports.mk any time
> a port is registered at installation time it will be portmanager making the
> packing list, even if the port is manually installed or with portupgrade.
>
> I'd like to leave the behavior that way if it is ok with you, if not I can
> have it revert the patch after each port is installed and registered so that
> whenever portmanager is'nt being used bsd.port.mk is in its original state.
It's really up to you. We don't decide what portmanager should be doing,
you decide that.
--
Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz>
<pav@FreeBSD.org>
lofi> My _sympathetic_ opinion about kdevelop is that it's a huge pile
of shit that might at least work okay if used in Linux.
lofi> My neutral opinion is that it's just a huge pile of shit.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200511171710.jAHHAKMb036762>