Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 19:59:55 -0600 From: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> To: John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com>, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: review of new tcpcrypt port... Message-ID: <5464109B.8020204@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20141113011157.GD24601@funkthat.com> References: <20141108100709.GF24601@funkthat.com> <20141113001649.GB24601@funkthat.com> <5463FCF6.4040901@FreeBSD.org> <20141113011157.GD24601@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On 11/12/2014 7:11 PM, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > Bryan Drewery wrote this message on Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 18:36 -0600: >> On 11/12/2014 6:16 PM, John-Mark Gurney wrote: >>> John-Mark Gurney wrote this message on Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 02:07 -0800: >>>> I'd like someone to review the attached port for me to commit... It >>>> contains a daemon to run on divert sockets to implement the tcpcrypt >>>> protocol. I have tested this port w/ HEAD and it works fine w/ the >>>> attached patch... >>>> >>>> The included patch has been submitted upstream and committed, but a >>>> new release has not yet been released. >>>> >>>> portlint -A looks fine. >>> >>> As I haven't received a review, in a couple more days, probably Friday, >>> I'll commit the port... >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >> >> Can you include the security/Makefile bit in the patch too please? > > Hmm... Thought I did, but I clearly did not... Fixed... I've attached > the latest version of the port.. > >> Have you ran it through poudriere? At the very least 'env DEVELOPER=1 >> make stage' and 'make check-plist' are required. Portlint is not >> sufficient, nor can it even be trusted in all cases. > > I didn't do poudriere, but I did all the building w/ DEVELOPER=1 > set, which did fix a few things.. Well 'make check-plist' must be ran manually. I think I'll enable it automatically soon. I've avoided it because it would break Redports even more. > > Looks like port test from porttools as documented at: > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/testing-porttools.html > > Is wrong.. you need to be in the port directory for it to work... > Ugh. That's a bad page. I'm working on a blog article for this case to get out soon. I may get it into the Journal as well. >> If you check those and get back to me I'll approve it. > > Thanks... > >> Usually you'd need a port commit bit to commit anything, or an approval >> (which is different than a review). I hate our process, but that's how >> it is. Poke people in #bsdports on EFNet, or me on IRC, for >> approvals/reviews in the future. > > Well, I'm fine w/ someone else committing the port, just trying to save > someone the work, and trying to get it into the tree in a timely > manner.. I viewed the review as approval... Guess I should have made > it more clear in my original request... > > btw, the included patch has been upstreamed, but they haven't tagged a > new rc yet... > 3 comments: 1. No need for commented line in the Makefile 2. Only 1 WWW for pkg-descr 3. If 'make check-plist' passes then I approve it and you can commit yourself. I am mentoring several src committers for ports and getting them bits after enough work, so just ping me whenever you have more. Thanks, Bryan [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUZBCbAAoJEDXXcbtuRpfPRJwH/iElqiBKaFaBbQ3Sz8s3wQZU cMBb4VoVQkNeSPILPCdCjUMyzFd4FKJ250f2LGqK4f4pYMtqZdMNS4dY518lAOS3 k+2XmteBdvQQVlbNU1NtwFP2h9Iz0GyoYNkwdenSj8f58GZkPWZdcT007Bvg2bt6 7PKjHmZMAiOjjAUTKurAKV+XHTnbIsIEbpja0lDPPfYWzA/0Ns7qdY9MFJx/EcWe THYYUBdsdc3MhU5vRQr7KJpfcMEEr4W4fgQHTgR3xnLkv7cZiKxMg+Bki62fTC7T FllH6dsRAVuoI4KDH7y413UqSWyrTZI4/UCVcGFWjABBS0qUN01EUTGKogRNceA= =sv0b -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5464109B.8020204>