From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sat Feb 29 22:16:26 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 84EA62428E5 for ; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 22:16:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portmaster@BSDforge.com) Received: from udns.ultimatedns.net (static-24-113-41-81.wavecable.com [24.113.41.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "ultimatedns.net", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48VLN84t5jz3HHt for ; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 22:16:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portmaster@BSDforge.com) Received: from udns.ultimatedns.net (localhost [IPv6:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1]) by udns.ultimatedns.net (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 01TMGfHi070339 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 29 Feb 2020 14:16:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from portmaster@BSDforge.com) X-Mailer: Cypht MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: In-Reply-To: <82e555d3-f75a-ecd3-e72a-4d0b63a8a40c@gmail.com> From: Chris Reply-To: portmaster@BSDforge.com To: Theron Subject: Re: When to use TMPPLIST instead of pkg-plist? Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 14:16:47 -0800 Message-Id: <913f7a767bef8434939bd68225eb1a69@udns.ultimatedns.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 48VLN84t5jz3HHt X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of portmaster@BSDforge.com has no SPF policy when checking 24.113.41.81) smtp.mailfrom=portmaster@BSDforge.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.85 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[portmaster@BSDforge.com]; XM_UA_NO_VERSION(0.01)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.28)[ip: (-0.51), ipnet: 24.113.0.0/16(-0.26), asn: 11404(-0.58), country: US(-0.05)]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[BSDforge.com]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; REPLYTO_ADDR_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.98)[-0.982,0]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.20)[0.202,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:11404, ipnet:24.113.0.0/16, country:US]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] 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 22:16:26 -0000 On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 14:30:14 -0500 Theron theron=2Etarigo@gmail=2Ecom said > On 2020-02-29 14:44, Bob Eager wrote: > > make makeplist > > > > I believe > > > Indeed=2E=C2=A0 A port may also provide its own definition of makeplist=20 > (ideally preserving the /you/have/to/check/=2E=2E=2E nag) to make maintenance= =20 > easier, but any changes to resulting pkg-plist can still be easily seen= =20 > by version control=2E=C2=A0 Is providing such helpers encouraged / discoura= ged=20 > as a policy? It's a tool, in an aid for automation/convenience=2E A good maintainer will recognize that, and act accordingly=2E :) IOW it's not 100%, and it's output is subject to scrutiny by the maintainer= =2E --Chris >=20 > Theron