From owner-freebsd-ports  Fri Feb  4 15:31: 3 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from bubba.whistle.com (bubba.whistle.com [207.76.205.7])
	by builder.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D458431A
	for <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri,  4 Feb 2000 15:31:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from archie@localhost)
	by bubba.whistle.com (8.9.2/8.9.2) id PAA16064;
	Fri, 4 Feb 2000 15:30:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com>
Message-Id: <200002042330.PAA16064@bubba.whistle.com>
Subject: Re: need help with portlint
In-Reply-To: <20000204151939.A63064@area51.fremont.ca.us> from Michael Haro at "Feb 4, 2000 03:19:39 pm"
To: mharo@area51.fremont.ca.us
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 15:30:48 -0800 (PST)
Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

Michael Haro writes:
> > I still think portlint should be more tolerant of, and robust
> > in the face of, blank lines. They make comments easier to read.
> 
> If you have patches, feel free to send them to me. =)
> 
> Also, if you have a makefile that you know is fine, yet portlint
> complains about it, let me know which port and I'll look into
> it.

My only complaint is that it seems to get confused by blank lines.
First, what's so bad about blank lines?  They help make the Makefile
readable. Secondly, they shouldn't be so confusing to portlint.

Here is the example I was working on..

  http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/security/skip/Makefile?rev=1.17

Anyway, I don't have any patches for portlint so can't demand too much :-)

-Archie

___________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs   *   Whistle Communications, Inc.  *   http://www.whistle.com


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message