Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 10:22:00 +0400 From: Yuriy Grishin <usgrishin@samaradom.ru> To: Wesley Shields <wxs@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, miwi@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [www/sams] why did commiter bump PORTREVISION ? Now it's broken. Message-ID: <49717908.5090802@samaradom.ru> In-Reply-To: <20090116213608.GC43075@atarininja.org> References: <4970C86E.6050900@samaradom.ru> <20090116213608.GC43075@atarininja.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Wesley Shields wrote: > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 09:48:30PM +0400, Yuriy Grishin wrote: > >> Hello >> I'm the maintainer of the port www/sams. >> >> In early of December 2008 the developer released new version of SAMS -- >> 1.0.4 >> I tried to take most of users comments and sent pr >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=129816 >> >> Few days afterwards miwi wrote that he couldn't extract my diff (may be >> because I had sent it using windows+seamonkey?) >> I upload files to my homepage and submitted follow-up. >> A few days later I saw that the port has been updated, BUT: >> 1) http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=129816 the pr is open (is >> it normal?) >> > > The PR is still open because it has not been resolved yet. Your patch > is still outstanding. > I see. >> 2) commiter bumped PORTREVISION and it leads to port corruption because >> >> -------------------Makefile------------------- >> .... >> DISTNAME= ${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION} >> .... >> -------------------Makefile------------------- >> thus it searches sams-1.0.3 instead of sams-1.0.4 ==> hash check will fail >> > > According to the CVS logs PORTREVISION was bumped because of the > OpenLDAP update. This is normal. > > The distfile information never changed with this commit. I was just now > able to fetch and verify the checksums for the distfile so I don't see > any problem. When the patch in ports/129816 is applied there won't be a > problem with checksum either as the distinfo will be updated to reflect > the new distfile. > I didn't know that distfile is untouched now. Thanks for the explanation. >> Questions : >> >> 1.Should have I say in the pr that it was not only has been updated by >> me but also by the developer? >> > > I don't understand what you're trying to say here. > > I mean.... Not only a few options to the port added (make config options). Binaries are also different thus distfiles must be different otherwise the port is broken. I didn't know about the trick with distfiles, sorry for the panic. >> 2.What should I do now? >> > > Nothing. I'm sure Martin will get to this PR when he has time and will > contact you if there are any problems with the update. Allright, okay.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49717908.5090802>