Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 01:43:04 -0500 From: jhell <jhell@DataIX.net> To: Wesley Shields <wxs@freebsd.org> Cc: dougb@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Ports <FreeBSD-Ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ports-mgmt/portmaster distfile expression matching Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1001160121090.38997@qvfongpu.qngnvk.ybpny> In-Reply-To: <20100116032344.GA9210@atarininja.org> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1001152118250.74752@pragry.qngnvk.ybpny> <20100116032344.GA9210@atarininja.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 22:23, wxs@ wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 09:32:32PM -0500, jhell wrote: >> >> Hi Doug, >> >> Recently in upgrading x11-wm/xmonad and x11-wm/xmonad-contrib I had >> noticed that when portmaster asks to delete a distfile, when it asks about >> xmonad-0.9.1 it was also asking to delete the xmonad-contrib-0.9.1 before >> it had even upgraded xmonad-contrib. Is this a problem on portmasters >> behalf or is this on ports structure side ?. >> >> What do you or anyone else think about each port possibly keeping >> obsolete-distfiles list one much like distinfo but a concatenated list of >> previous distinfo's that had once been used allowing a ( make distclean ) >> or something routine to be built into the ports infrastructure to parse >> that file in each port ? > > Bad idea. That list will get quite large for some ports. > > I believe there is a PR about embedding the distinfo information into > +CONTENTS. > That would be keen! As for the idea I had, I was thinking more along the lines of pruning the proposed obsolete-dists file to only have the versions for the last three or so releases in there but ultimately would be up to the port maintainer to judge whether something should stay or not. If the distinfo is recorded into the +CONTENTS file, how is the removing program going to differentiate between say 3 other versions that the user may have choose not to remove in a previous instance. ? or for that, the problem that I had "xmonad-0.9.1 -> xmonad-contrib-0.9.1" where it wanted to remove anything that had a xmonad prefix. I think a simple obsolete file would be a better way around this as you could write into the ports system a way to parse the number of lines that are in the current distinfo file and multiply that by 2 or 3 or what ever a maintainer would choose by given variable in their own port and ultimately re-write the obsolete file list. Just my thoughts but written lists are usually more of a sure practice rather than trying to match every pattern that J Random Developer decides to give to their tar-balls. Best regards, -- jhell
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1001160121090.38997>