From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 16 18:33:29 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@FreeBSD.org 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 D0F4416A468 for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 18:33:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from shurd@sasktel.net) Received: from misav03.sasknet.sk.ca (misav03.sasknet.sk.ca [142.165.20.164]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BDBE13C44B for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 18:33:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from shurd@sasktel.net) Received: from bgmpomr1.sasknet.sk.ca ([142.165.72.22]) by misav03 with InterScan Messaging Security Suite; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 12:33:28 -0600 Received: from server.hurd.local (adsl-76-202-204-41.dsl.lsan03.sbcglobal.net [76.202.204.41]) by bgmpomr1.sasknet.sk.ca (SaskTel eMessaging Service) with ESMTPA id <0JJQ0020RRJRGN00@bgmpomr1.sasknet.sk.ca> for ports@FreeBSD.org; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 12:33:28 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 11:33:26 -0700 From: Stephen Hurd In-reply-to: To: Sam Lawrance Message-id: <46742CF6.3050901@sasktel.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <4673B0DB.3040100@sasktel.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2) Gecko/20070523 SeaMonkey/1.1.1 Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Clarification on fetch/extract targets 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, 16 Jun 2007 18:33:29 -0000 Sam Lawrance wrote: >> So, I created a new port (ports/113608) for Code::Blocks which has >> not had a source code release for almost two years despite constant >> development. However, the currently correct way to get the source is >> via subversion. The port currently does this, but I'm unsure of >> exactly what is required by the fetch and extract targets, so I'm not >> sure what the "right" thing to do here is. I can think of a few >> possibilities: >> >> 1) The fetch target is intended to do all the steps which require a >> network connection and extract is intended to places the files into >> WRKSRC >> - In this case, the fetch target would use svn co to WRKSRC and the >> extract target would do nothing. This is what the port currently does. >> >> 2) The fetch target is intended to place source archives into DISTDIR >> and extract is intended to place them into WRKSRC >> - In this case, the extract target would use svn co to WRKSRC and the >> fetch target would do nothing. >> >> 3) The fetch target is intended to place a source archive in DISTDIR >> and the extract target is intended to extract that archive into WRKSRC >> - Here I would need to do the svn checkout in the fetch target, >> archive it, then delete it. >> >> 4) The fetch target retrieves sources in the distribution format and >> extract places them into WRKSRC >> - In this case, you would svn co to a DIST_SUBDIR in fetch, then >> extract would copy that to WRKSRC >> >> 5) fetch *MUST* fetch a source archive into DISTDIR. None of this >> svn/CVS checkout stuff in the ports tree. >> - Hrmph. So rather than bumping PORTREVISION to the desired >> subversion revision and having it Just Work, one needs to make a >> source archive and host it somewhere himself and be responsible for >> updating it himself too. > > In the past, it has been easiest if the maintainer (you) creates an > archive of the source and either puts it up for download, or asks for > it to be mirrored as a local distfile (the committer who deals with > the PR will do this for you). > > To make it easier for yourself, you might create a "roll-tarball" > target in the port, which you (or future maintainers) can use to > automatically fetch the source from subversion and create a new source > archive. Actually, I found it quite easy to have the port pull the sources from svn. Who are we concerned about making it easier for and why (and how is it any easier?)