Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 12:28:03 -0500 From: Wesley Shields <wxs@atarininja.org> To: Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: distfile belongs to? Message-ID: <20061205172803.GA51892@atarininja.org> In-Reply-To: <790a9fff0612050838s66c655fapfde80d4038f64ca2@mail.gmail.com> References: <17771.24717.95357.989644@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <456B70E9.4030408@FreeBSD.org> <20061204213106.GA42084@atarininja.org> <45749998.3070308@FreeBSD.org> <20061204232125.GA42307@atarininja.org> <790a9fff0612050838s66c655fapfde80d4038f64ca2@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 10:38:42AM -0600, Scot Hetzel wrote:
> The bsd.port.mk patch could be changed to:
>
> .if (${OSVERSION} > 602100 && ${OSVERSION} < 700000) || ${OSVERSION} >
> 700027
> PKGDISTFILE= "comment distfile"
> .else
> PKGDISTFILE="distfile"
> .endif
> :
> :
> - ${ECHO_CMD} "@distfle $${file}" >> ${TMPPLIST}; \
> + ${ECHO_CMD} "@${PKGDISTFILE} $${file}" >> ${TMPPLIST}; \
>
> This would allow the bsd.port.mk patch be added, without having to
> update the pkg_install tools on older systems.
>
> Then the ports tools (portupgrade, portmaster, ..) could be changed to
> look for either "@distfile" or "@comment distfile" in the +CONTENTS
> file.
I was going to suggest wrapping the patch in an OSVERSION check for the
proper pkg_info update, however I think your approach is better. There
are some cosmetic changes to be made, and a discussion I would like to
have before I take this any further...
Cosmetic change:
With the patch applied using the -F flag on a package which does not
have the distfile information recorded looks like this:
wxs@ack ~ > pkg_info -F qemu-0.8.2s.20061128
Information for qemu-0.8.2s.20061128:
Distfile(s):
wxs@ack ~ >
I'm going to make it ignore the -F flag when there are no recorded
distfiles (and document this fact in the manpage).
As for the discussion:
I did find an old thread[1] which discusses this. The point was raised
that +CONTENTS is probably not the perfect place for this, to which I
agree. But putting it in +DISTINFO will require more complexity than
embedding it in +CONTENTS. The argument could be made that recording
the distfiles which were used to make the contents justifies the
existence of their names in +CONTENTS (as a @comment).
I'm willing to move them to +DISTINFO instead if people feel strongly
enough about them NOT being in +CONTENTS. For now, I'm operating on the
premise that +CONTENTS is the place for them (though not optimal) and in
a form which will not require changes to pkg_create to handle.
> I also noticed that the patch to the pkg_info man page is using a
> lower case f, instead of an upper case F for the option to show the
> distfiles of a given package.
Thanks, I missed that. I'll post updated patches when they are
complete.
-- WXS
[1]:
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/htdig/freebsd-ports/2006-January/028839.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061205172803.GA51892>