From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 9 23:17:53 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 8E9FF16A41F for ; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 23:17:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from fenner@research.att.com) Received: from mail-yellow.research.att.com (mail-dark.research.att.com [192.20.225.112]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18DE243D49 for ; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 23:17:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from fenner@research.att.com) Received: from bright.research.att.com (bright.research.att.com [135.207.20.189]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B6057FF7; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 19:17:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by bright.research.att.com (8.12.11/8.12.10/Submit) id j99NHqL9007329; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 16:17:52 -0700 From: Bill Fenner Message-Id: <200510092317.j99NHqL9007329@bright.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: Vizion References: <200510071001.j97A1c23029414@freefall.freebsd.org> <1128726978.3009.63.camel@zircon.zircon.seattle.wa.us> <200510072327.j97NR4BN032652@bright.research.att.com> <200510091424.52316.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 16:17:52 -0700 Versions: dmail (linux) 2.7/makemail 2.14 Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org 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 23:17:53 -0000 >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? Normally, the distfile survey would send a periodic email to maintainers of ports that are unfetchable; however, it doesn't send email about ports that are marked "BROKEN". This has an unfortunate interaction with ports that are marked BROKEN because they're unfetchable. Fixing this interaction will go on my TODO list. >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. What it looks like to me is that Zend changed how you get the evaluation version and the port didn't get updated. The port is for 3_5_2 and the current version appears to be 4.0. > I hate it when ports drop out of maintainence and finish up not being >available. Me too. However, people can't always keep up with the things that they'd like to do. I spent about 3 years not being a good port maintainer and neglecting the distfile survey - other things came up. >Also installing as a port has significant benefits -- so how >do we get a system that deals with these 'oddities'? Eliminate the people from the system?... Bill