Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 15:49:21 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 193183] [STAGE] net/beacon: Request MAINTAINERship, pkg-descr cleanup Message-ID: <bug-193183-13-zrURZNVBgU@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-193183-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-193183-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193183 --- Comment #27 from C Hutchinson <portmaster@bsdforge.com> --- (In reply to John Marino from comment #26) > (In reply to C Hutchinson from comment #25) > > (In reply to John Marino from comment #23) > > > can you tell use what perllocal.pod.gz does and why we need it? > > > Or why it's bad that it's compressed instead of plain text? > > > > > > Why do we care about this file? > > > > I (we) don't. But check-plist, and the port do. :) > > > This is a completely bogus answer. > If I don't want perllocal.pod.gz in the port, then I simply remove it in the > post-install target. I'm not forced to keep it. > > As the maintainer, you should know exactly why this file is needed, or if > it's needed. If it's not, then just remove it and be done with it. Sorry. Yes. Of course. It was intended tongue-in-cheek. I didn't know you really cared. It's a perlbrew||cpanminus -ism. I cobbled a Perl script to clean up this very thing. But since it's empty (of documentation), it's harmless. So I didn't think it worth bothering with. If it bothers you. I can deal with the Module' extra entry, and bump it's version, to reflect that. But IMHO, in the here-and-now. It doesn't really seem necessary. Personally, I'm glad that this showed up. As I gained some useful information, where man(1) && perldoc(1) pages are concerned, when dealing with ports. > > > > I only learned about MANCOMPRESSED from the porters documentation, when > > I ran up against this issue. However. I became frustrated, when it > > didn't work as anticipated/documented. It wasn't until I discovered > > that the documentation omitted compress-man: as a prerequisite. That > > it worked as intended. > > I have never ever seen "compress-man" before. I've never used it. The > documentation omits it because you aren't supposed to use it is my guess. > If I haven't seen it before, where are you getting told to use it? I found compress-man: in many (recent STAGE'd ports). A quick grep(1) of the ports tree, will reveal what I'm saying. But don't worry. I have no intention of using it in the future. :) Thanks for taking the time to review, and critique my submissions, John. --Chris -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-193183-13-zrURZNVBgU>