Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 17 Nov 2014 21:49:55 +0100
From:      Antoine Brodin <antoine@FreeBSD.org>
To:        John Marino <marino@freebsd.org>
Cc:        "svn-ports-head@freebsd.org" <svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>, "svn-ports-all@freebsd.org" <svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>, "ports-committers@freebsd.org" <ports-committers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r372684 - head/www/rejik
Message-ID:  <CAALwa8kAih6mObjUxfOcYvT7RQx50yrVCwJom0J=FZwsA0OwJQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <546A5D30.4020300@marino.st>
References:  <201411172031.sAHKVvih060140@svn.freebsd.org> <546A5D30.4020300@marino.st>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 9:40 PM, John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> wrote:
> On 11/17/2014 21:31, Antoine Brodin wrote:
>> Author: antoine
>> Date: Mon Nov 17 20:31:56 2014
>> New Revision: 372684
>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/372684
>> QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r372684/
>>
>> Log:
>>   Mark BROKEN (please don't resurect broken ports...)
>>
>
>
> I believe the port was a new effort -- it wasn't just a revival.
>
> Is failure to stage as non-root considered "broken" ?  Wouldn't there be
> a lot of broken ports with that criteria?

Hi,

Failing to build/stage as a regular user is generally not considered
broken.  But it's not best practice and often there is something fishy
in those ports, like files needing special ownership but
@(owner,group,) missing from plist.  Currently less than 200 ports
fail to build/stage as a regular user (less than 1% of the ports
tree).
In the case of rejik I was going to fix it (removing one line from the
Makefile) but then I noticed it was doing other things wrong...

Cheers,

Antoine



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAALwa8kAih6mObjUxfOcYvT7RQx50yrVCwJom0J=FZwsA0OwJQ>