From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 31 15:27:15 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E27BA106566B; Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:27:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wxs@atarininja.org) Received: from syn.atarininja.org (syn.csh.rit.edu [129.21.49.45]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5BF48FC08; Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:27:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by syn.atarininja.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 7A2275C45; Sat, 31 Mar 2012 11:27:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 11:27:09 -0400 From: Wesley Shields To: Jason Helfman Message-ID: <20120331152709.GA41164@atarininja.org> References: <20120329184921.GA2021@dormouse.experts-exchange.com> <4F74BC4F.70801@FreeBSD.org> <20120329204016.GT82505@dormouse.experts-exchange.com> <20120330131816.GB30070@atarininja.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: Gabor Kovesdan , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: post-deinstall target is invalid 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: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:27:16 -0000 On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:14:02PM -0700, Jason Helfman wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 01:40:16PM -0700, Jason Helfman wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 09:47:27PM +0200, Gabor Kovesdan thus spake: > >> >On 2012.03.29. 20:49, Jason Helfman wrote: > >> >> I will work on a effort, as well, to get some supporting > >> documentation > >> >> into > >> >> the Porter's Handbook. > >> >Jason, thanks for this cleanup work. Have you checked if there is any > >> >portlint check for this? It would also be very valuable. > >> > > >> >Gabor > >> > > >> Your welcome, and thanks. > >> > >> I did consider it, however it was also noted to me that portlint > >> shouldn't > >> take the place of poor port coding. That doesn't mean it can't be done, > >> but > >> I also tend to agree with this. Perhaps adding logic to bpm would be a > >> good > >> way to wrap it up, as well. > > > > I'm not sure we should add anything to bpm. It's a legitimate name of a > > custom target which maintainers can use if they want. We should be > > vigilant of code which assumes it will be called though, but there's > > nothing wrong with it being a custom target that the maintainer wants > > for one reason or another. > > > > -- WXS > > > > > I don't completely disagree, however the target is never used, and in all > cases it merely performed the actions that were already being done in a > pkg-deinstall script, or the action wasn't done due to an assumption that > the target was valid. My comment was about adding code to bsd.port.mk. Removing the dead code that was already in the tree was the right thing to do, thank you. -- WXS