From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 10 02:33:43 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC2B51065675 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 02:33:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@telenix.org) Received: from mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 966DE8FC14 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 02:33:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@telenix.org) Received: (qmail 5019 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2009 02:33:43 -0000 Received: from april.chuckr.org (HELO april.telenix.org) (chuckr@[66.92.151.30]) (envelope-sender ) by mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 10 Mar 2009 02:33:42 -0000 Message-ID: <49B5CF76.60407@telenix.org> Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 22:24:54 -0400 From: Chuck Robey User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090121) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Noland References: <49B41108.8060105@telenix.org> <20090308210404.3895216d@gumby.homeunix.com> <49B5BBB2.4080405@telenix.org> <1236647663.1730.10.camel@balrog.2hip.net> In-Reply-To: <1236647663.1730.10.camel@balrog.2hip.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 OpenPGP: id=F3DCA0E9; url=http://pgp.mit.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ports@freebsd.org, RW Subject: Re: portmanager modifying bsd.port.mk X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 02:33:44 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Robert Noland wrote: > On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 21:00 -0400, Chuck Robey wrote: > RW wrote: >>>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 14:40:08 -0400 >>>> Chuck Robey wrote: >>>> >>>>> Here's the portmanager listing, maybe someone here can tell me what's >>>>> causing portmanager to want to patch my bsd.port.mk, and why the >>>>> patchfile should be so far off, and what might be the CORRECT way to >>>>> fix this. Oh, BTW, I run current, and keep myself that way via cvsup. >>>> IIRC the patch was made so that when portmanager built a port, the >>>> makefile would call back into portmanager to let it modify the >>>> dependencies. Portmanager had a major rewrite just before the original >>>> author had a row with some FreeBSD people and abandoned the project. >>>> AFAIK the feature wasn't yet used, so it doesn't matter if the patch >>>> doesn't apply since it's a null operation. > Ahh, I didn't realize that portmanager was moribund. OK, I can figure out what > to do from here, then, thanks. I might not like the method being used by > portmanager very much, but it's not worth complaining about a dead port. Too > many other choices, aren't there? > >> It's not exactly dead... I keep it running, because it is still the best >> available option. Just before sending my mail, I took a look at the cvs log, last entry is from more than 6 months ago, unless something is somehow fubared with my archive. If it sits unchanged for so long, I interpreted that as being dead, I wasn't trying to be insulting, maybe I made an incorrect assumption. The patch I saw in the bsd.port.mk was there in order to add in a couple of Makefile variables, and that just seems a really odd method to use for that purpose. I don't honestly know how portmanager works, so I couldn't give any meaningful criticism, it just seemed so odd that I couldn't figure out the goal behind it. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkm1z28ACgkQz62J6PPcoOlZNgCcC86aFuuz37IerQpV6Z081IPT ZrwAnRXsUgaQFnxg8WrllnAEF6DvJagF =7mON -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----