From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 9 21:29:19 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2940D16A41F; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 21:29:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com) Received: from lakecmmtao05.coxmail.com (lakecmmtao05.coxmail.com [68.99.120.79]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 734C643D46; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 21:29:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com) Received: from dns1 ([64.58.171.82]) by lakecmmtao05.coxmail.com (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20051009212922.IKDB2425.lakecmmtao05.coxmail.com@dns1>; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 17:29:22 -0400 From: Vizion To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 14:24:51 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <200510071001.j97A1c23029414@freefall.freebsd.org> <1128726978.3009.63.camel@zircon.zircon.seattle.wa.us> <200510072327.j97NR4BN032652@bright.research.att.com> In-Reply-To: <200510072327.j97NR4BN032652@bright.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200510091424.52316.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> Cc: Bill Fenner , ports@freebsd.org, Joe Kelsey Subject: Re: FreeBSD ports: 1 unfetchable distfiles: shells/ksh93 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: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 21:29:19 -0000 On Friday 07 October 2005 16:27, the author Bill Fenner contributed to the dialogue on- Re: FreeBSD ports: 1 unfetchable distfiles: shells/ksh93: >Joe, > >>I can only assume that whatever script your test uses is somehow >>incorrect. > >Based on feedback already received today, I'm planning on skipping >the tests on any port that sets FETCH_ENV, FETCH_CMD, or has a do-fetch: >target. I don't know how easy these will be to implement, so please >bear with me. > >By the way, is it legally reasonable for the port to accept the >pre-download license on behalf of the user? While you are looking at this issue -- is there any way a request to the port maintainer could be initiated, asking the maintainer to regularly check the status of the port when the port is broken (file cannot be fetched) to bring the port up todate? For example Zend cannot be fetched. I think what happened was Zend created a port of the Zend server which can install, right out of the box. The mistaken assumption seems to have been made that the the current ZendStudio file from Zend will also unpack without the need for a port. The fact is it does not. I hate it when ports drop out of maintainence and finish up not being available. Also installing as a port has significant benefits -- so how do we get a system that deals with these 'oddities'? david -- 40 yrs navigating and computing in blue waters. English Owner & Captain of British Registered 60' bluewater Ketch S/V Taurus. Currently in San Diego, CA. Sailing bound for Europe via Panama Canal after completing engineroom refit.