From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sat Feb 29 10:02:05 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB2E325A8B1 for ; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:02:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mpp302@gmail.com) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48V24s2kwCz4KMX for ; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:02:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mpp302@gmail.com) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 5DC4E25A8B0; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:02:05 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D59725A8AF for ; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:02:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mpp302@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wm1-f42.google.com (mail-wm1-f42.google.com [209.85.128.42]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48V24q4phLz4KLy; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:02:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mpp302@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wm1-f42.google.com with SMTP id z12so6034300wmi.4; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 02:02:03 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=VUItshrgzR2peEZa6/0eUMgZDZjE+FrveObUK8FiQdY=; b=gwvEhqDSJBrAMTGoSI/GUNIlAQIF/XStVh4ipw/RzFxNizV5iZfEQEHbt316KTlkDZ Vrahw5ZVjCw5Xr6HUP51EMscSEXX83rTUDXETk2dk7MXA0zSo7YDcEB2nbnM80IHgZ2Q SKx2uhjPLH3jaVDFq+fECkRAt3RheWFY7wBgk3XZWgs/0Tf1rhk5LLCAuGVnb8OOB03t f4LWAaFtoZRrJX2wDarO84ykuRqYcISseT2sFd+7NHtd9KYNX94lcuO5uZG1oqH8Pepw q9/67Q7/oMbAqC2Kp4zXLC/2IgICapkE5Hzs5DwiEJBzQ89gV9e/iYHuSzC8jZYsVh5C IuBA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV4z+9GR6pGe00LVtT+eOCcQNjmDsRWUWDhS960fPh71jINCshd DRPCGPV0w6RrWA3BN2FlSwUDvmuStuU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyIqTSBMUu3jJ0goAhWDWeBaMr5BapTV4FhImkDraFzTnNNIs+pQp0TRqAFszLw9MrF06yRng== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c119:: with SMTP id w25mr9769047wmi.112.1582970521258; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 02:02:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2a02:8109:98c0:40ee:5e5f:67ff:fef4:ffd8? ([2a02:8109:98c0:40ee:5e5f:67ff:fef4:ffd8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j14sm17127537wrn.32.2020.02.29.02.02.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 29 Feb 2020 02:02:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: When to use TMPPLIST instead of pkg-plist? To: Mathieu Arnold Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org References: <20200228231533.y2ezerqj7ypuyc7q@atuin.in.mat.cc> From: Mateusz Piotrowski <0mp@FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 11:02:23 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200228231533.y2ezerqj7ypuyc7q@atuin.in.mat.cc> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 48V24q4phLz4KLy X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of mpp302@gmail.com designates 209.85.128.42 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mpp302@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.01 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[FreeBSD.org]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; IP_SCORE(-1.01)[ip: (-0.33), ipnet: 209.85.128.0/17(-2.99), asn: 15169(-1.67), country: US(-0.05)]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[42.128.85.209.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[0mp@FreeBSD.org,mpp302@gmail.com]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[42.128.85.209.rep.mailspike.net : 127.0.0.17]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[0mp@FreeBSD.org,mpp302@gmail.com] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:02:05 -0000 On 2/29/20 12:15 AM, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 10:06:19PM +0100, Mateusz Piotrowski wrote: >> Do we have any (perhaps unwritten) policy for when to use TMPPLIST? And when >> should a port maintainer stick to pkg-plist? > We do not. A port maintainer should stick to pkg-plist. That's what I thought. Is there a reason for it? Does it all boil down to that fact that pkg-plist is much more explicit and easier to debug/review? Or there is another reason? Cheers, Mateusz