Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 14:40:51 +0200 From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> Cc: Simon Barner <barner@in.tum.de> Subject: Re: /usr/ports/Tools [was: GNU packages and gettext] Message-ID: <3F991DD3.60707@fillmore-labs.com> In-Reply-To: <1066961895.31335.22.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> References: <20031023152135.GC15574@zi025.glhnet.mhn.de> <3F9877FA.7000204@fillmore-labs.com> <1066957266.31335.12.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <3F987DB9.1000604@fillmore-labs.com> <1066958525.31335.16.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <3F9882C5.1030800@fillmore-labs.com> <1066961895.31335.22.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 21:39, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > >>Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 21:17, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: >>> >>>>Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 20:53, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Simon Barner wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>I have two approaches in mind how one could tackle this problem at its >>>>>>>root: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>[...] >>>>>>> >>>>>>>2. Modify portlint such that it reports an error when either >>>>>>>`charset.alias' or `locale.alias' are in the pkg-plist. >>>>>> >>>>>><advertisement> perhaps the portconflitcs tool will help? </advertisement> >>>>> >>>>>Have you send-pr'd this? It can be added to /usr/ports/Tools. >>>> >>>>Currently in a closed alpha: >>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2003-October/005712.html >>>> >>>>I will check it in sometime after 4.9R :) probably to devel/portconflits. >>> >>>I was thinking it might make a nice simple addition to our Tools >>>directory...but a port will do, too, I guess. >> >>It is designed as a complementary tool to portlint, therefore the advertisement. >>Portlint checks the style of the port before installing, portconflicts the >>packing list afterwards. First I though of making something like Bill Fenners >>portsurvey(TM), but I think it might be useful for new ports too. I can still >>send out email reminders, if this is A Good Thing. Where doe you think it would >>have its place in the Tools directory? To be honest, I use none of the nifty >>little snippets there. > > If it's going to be like portlint, a port would be fine. As for useful > Tools, I find plist invaluable. The reason why I called them "nifty little snippets" is that they are not ready for widespread use. A port is expected to install its dependencies and documentation. Compare for example cdiff: Do you prefer http://people.FreeBSD.org/~eivind/cdiff (from http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/cvs.operations.html) or /usr/ports/textproc/cdiff or should we have /usr/ports/Tools/scripts/cdiff Do you see what I mean? I guess most people use portlint, but few know about the existence of plist. Perhaps we should have a category portingtools, with portlint, porteasy, porttools etc. Even if it is only a virtual category it would make live easier for porters: consider to install awk -F\| ' $7 ~ /\<portingtools\>/ { print $1" ("$2"): "$4 }' /usr/ports/INDEX
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3F991DD3.60707>