From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Fri Jul 24 06:59:02 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A352371CB0; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:59:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BCg6G19skz3Vrf; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:59:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 1045019DF2; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:59:02 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:59:02 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Renato Botelho Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r542955 - head/archivers/arj Message-ID: <20200724065902.GA76895@FreeBSD.org> References: <202007231923.06NJNwNF002722@repo.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <202007231923.06NJNwNF002722@repo.freebsd.org> X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:59:02 -0000 On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 07:23:58PM +0000, Renato Botelho wrote: > New Revision: 542955 > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/542955 > > Log: > Pet portlint: Declare USES early This is most definitely a false-positive (as of recently, portlint(1) mishandles USES) and pessimizes readability by breaking natural flow of things. At the very best, you could've moved the USES line above GNU_CONFIGURE, but placing it between closely related IGNORE_PATCHES and EXTRA_PATCHES certainly looks bogus. Please do not blindly trust linters and always check the result from the human perspective. ./danfe