From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 25 17:20:47 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86F801065679; Fri, 25 May 2012 17:20:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rsimmons0@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD1088FC08; Fri, 25 May 2012 17:20:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbmv11 with SMTP id v11so1052433vbm.13 for ; Fri, 25 May 2012 10:20:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UVJ8RJ75pjpvjlPBV5xCoEaYOTCJpj3OQ8whgJeH3aQ=; b=gF/2pt4QuauCWiWxRXRAhuucWVWZVjPW+UQ/uixf//r0E53h72cdnlakZyKVgr85QH tcXIRdPnCm1pVSU6Hflzh55xVVH5CiDKbjnUskjcxa5PmY4LtqzP1JnzIkcnO3NyI3dJ YS9OFwVJQCDtHP19RcTwRCeAFwNZA8BdOG8QfLpbb923b0QE+ET4Sz9UK74Ul0cUvZct oSHPdsVBld3F1ptBFn1dDPLCoKTZA1tIdo0htDXqxsfl3kk8zc8wDIgtleSiz+VbJT2r /v0/bc9YNcpUxRXp/TxXCrLqObwKywWlmbGC9es04dwEdwYkODjv1/gs/2Q0ma0Ps9k0 Nqmg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.69.110 with SMTP id d14mr3755383vdu.124.1337966446254; Fri, 25 May 2012 10:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.113.97 with HTTP; Fri, 25 May 2012 10:20:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120525165617.GB24924@atarininja.org> References: <9880B4F2567E41A582B6B9DA178AECFD@black> <20120522125710.GB18115@atarininja.org> <20120522211434.GA5483@atarininja.org> <20120525003844.GA24924@atarininja.org> <20120525165617.GB24924@atarininja.org> Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 13:20:46 -0400 Message-ID: From: Robert Simmons To: Wesley Shields Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: eadler@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Heimdal 1.5.2 problem 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: Fri, 25 May 2012 17:20:47 -0000 On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Wesley Shields wrote: > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:21:54PM -0400, Robert Simmons wrote: >> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Wesley Shields wrote: >> > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 06:29:20PM -0400, Robert Simmons wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Wesley Shields wro= te: >> >> > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 03:08:31PM -0400, Robert Simmons wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Wesley Shields = wrote: >> >> >> > As the person who committed this update I will take responsibili= ty for >> >> >> > seeing this through. Would you mind opening a PR with this patch= and CC >> >> >> > both myself and the maintainer so it can be properly tracked. I = will >> >> >> > work with both of you to make sure it is addressed. >> >> >> >> >> >> I got some good feedback about the patch. ?I was missing a "\". ?A= lso, >> >> >> it was noted that I shouldn't make changes to the default settings= in >> >> >> this patch since it is meant to correct a problem. ?I removed the >> >> >> change to default. >> >> > >> >> > I'm not opposed to removing the change to the default, but it does = cause >> >> > another problem. See below. >> >> > >> >> >> Perhaps the different default is not the best solution. ?Maybe the= re >> >> >> should be a message that at least one backend is needed for the po= rt >> >> >> to function, but none have been selected by default? >> >> > >> >> > If a backend is required the port should refuse to build if no back= end >> >> > is selected. This is pretty easy to do, just check for at least one= of >> >> > the backends. I have no idea if multiple backends can be supported = so >> >> > you may or may not want to also check for that. >> >> >> >> I may have been too hasty. ?I've thought of a situation where one >> >> would want to build the port with no backend at all. ?If one wanted t= o >> >> use the tools in the port to administrate a remote install of Heimdal= , >> >> they may want to build it without a backend. >> >> >> >> My initial thoughts were only for installing the port as a Heimdal >> >> server, and with the --with-berkeley-db=3Dno problem fixed it does no= t >> >> wrongly find the version of BDB in the base OS. ?With this fix, the >> >> port can function with no backends selected. ?It just won't be able t= o >> >> function in a server capacity. >> >> >> >> I am also not an expert in Heimdal, I just installed it from source >> >> via its own instructions and compared that with what the FreeBSD port >> >> was doing. ?I'd wait for the maintainer to make changes to the defaul= t >> >> behavior for the above reason. >> > >> > This all sounds perfectly reasonable to me. :) >> > >> > If I'm understanding you correctly the patch[1] in ports/168214 is the >> > correct one to commit. The only change I would make is not bumping >> > PORTREVISION since the option is off by default. Sounds like the only >> > thing left to do is wait for maintainer comment on the PR and commit >> > accordingly. >> >> Sounds good. =A0One question: what do you mean by PORTREVISION being off >> by default? > > There is no need to bump PORTREVISION because the option which you are > changing is off by default so there's no need to force a rebuild of it > on the package cluster since your changes are going to have no effect > there. > > For those that have the option to on, it hasn't built properly for them > yet so bumping is going to have no effect either. I understand what you're saying. However, my change would actually change the package cluster. Because those packages were built with "--without-berkeley-db" rather than "--with-berkeley-db=3Dno" the old packages were built with broken BDB support by accident. By fixing this, the default package is actually going to be different than the one built before this change. I would recommend bumping PORTREVISION because of this.