From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Mon Feb 26 14:11:19 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACE45F277A0; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 14:11:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from ainaz.pair.com (ainaz.pair.com [209.68.2.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 569B476BCA; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 14:11:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from ainaz.pair.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ainaz.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 140D33F74B; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 09:11:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from anthias (vie-188-118-240-174.dsl.sil.at [188.118.240.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ainaz.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1B2E13F74A; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 09:11:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:11:15 +0100 (CET) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Mathieu Arnold , Adam Weinberger cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r462376 - in head: . emulators emulators/wine-staging In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <201802200837.w1K8b1QY087980@repo.freebsd.org> <20180220123937.qvahs2zdvvjritel@ogg.in.absolight.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 14:11:19 -0000 On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > Sorry, but this broke INDEX, and poudriere bulk -a because it > left the tree with a non existing dependency. This is not OK. I totally agree, and I'm sorry I missed this. (Of course this happened the only time in years I did not use rmport.) On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Adam Weinberger wrote: > The point is that a broken INDEX is a bad situation, and when it happens, > it needs to be rectified immediately. As soon as you started getting the > INDEX failure messages (and especially after Mat notified you of it) I did not get any INDEX failure message at all. Not a single one. Or I would have jumped on it right away. (In fact, I did write my response to Mat right after his note, but was on a train and so it got stuck out until I found it in my outbox. And he did not mention a broken INDEX, "just" a broken port.) > Please, next time, when you receive notification that INDEX is broken, > don't wait 5 days to respond. Agreed, and I would never let anything like a broken INDEX sit for any period (if I knew about it). Luckily it seems antoine helped by adjusting pipelight where, apparently, enough of Wine Staging got moved into Wine itself before the demise of the former? Thanks (and sorry)! Gerald