Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 09:29:05 +1100 From: Dewayne Geraghty <dewayne.geraghty@heuristicsystems.com.au> To: marino@freebsd.org, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-ports@freebsd.org" <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Support for pkg_* Message-ID: <530FBC31.1050408@heuristicsystems.com.au> In-Reply-To: <530D18DE.6020003@marino.st> References: <530C5793.2070208@heuristicsystems.com.au> <20140225141144.GA87810@spectrum.skysmurf.nl> <20140225163457.GI83610@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20140225220844.GA92169@spectrum.skysmurf.nl> <530D18DE.6020003@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 26/02/2014 9:27 AM, John Marino wrote: > On 2/25/2014 23:08, A.J. 'Fonz' van Werven wrote: >> Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> >>> Can we stop advertising the above, this is completly wrong, it hides the >>> dust behind the carpet and won't fix anything! >>> >>> The said port is needed a fix. >> Granted: it's not staging itself that is the problem, it's incorrect usage >> thereof. But anyone possessing even the tiniest trace amount of realism >> will have to concede that port maintainers do occasionally get it wrong. >> And when they do the errors as reported by the OP are a tell-tale symptom. > No one should have a problem conceding that. The issue is that it seems > that many ports are staged without checking in redports / poudriere or > otherwise. > > I was even guilty of this the other day. I was on the road and I > created two new ports that easily passed with DEVELOPER_MODE. Neither > built in clean environment though and I got rewarded with pkg-fallout > messages. > > A lot of stuff gets committed that it's clear was never remotely tested, > not even with portlint. But don't blame the tools -- the port needs to > be fixed. I agree that we should never advise "NO_STAGE=yes", ever. If > the port is broken, so be it. PR, patch, normal process. > > There's been a lot of understandable grumbling due to growing pains of > major infrastructure changes by users, so telling users to revert these > changes isn't a good look. Let's just try to get the port fixed in a > reasonable timeframe (e.g. get the guy that broke it to take care of it). > > John > Good point John, but its a seeping breakage - and most likely an inadvertent constraint from /usr/ports/Mk. I PR'ed net/rsync in Nov 2013, openssl and monit in February (both added staging); and I'm confident that if I extended the "base" system with other ports rooted in /usr that there would be others. Its always a tar stat related failure and the ONLY way to get ports, that use PREFIX=/usr to build their package, is to also add MANPREFIX=/usr. Ref: openssl, monit - http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=187076 rsync - http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=183669 Regards, Dewayne.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?530FBC31.1050408>