Update to latest version Fix: Patch attached Patch attached with submission follows: How-To-Repeat: N/A
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->jgh I'll take it.
Hi, Please consider this alternative patch: It altered it to build the jar via source, and I substitute on the jbidwatcher script, instead of doing seds. The patch file is there so git isn't a dependency of the build. I've also put JAVA_VERSION as an environment variable into the script, and modified it to use the version named jar. Side-effect is cleaner install target with some of above changes. Thanks for your consideration! -jgh
Jason Helfman wrote: > I was wondering if you have had any time to look at the patch I've > submitted to your pr? > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/166402 I was actually unaware of it to be honest... I generally only check the status of my PRs every couple weeks, and you must have hit my spam filter. Frankly, I don't see a reason to build from source. The cleanup of the do-install target looks nice... I inherited the port pretty much as-is, and have only been updating the version number and checksums as I don't care much except that it works. I'm also hazy on why fixing the java version at install time would be a benefit. It seems that then any upgrade of Java would require an upgrade of jbidwatcher. So... off hand I like: The new do-install target And dislike: The new launcher script Building from source However, I think the update should be committed first, then enhancements added. If you would file a PR and CC me after this is committed, I'll likely be a lot more receptive.
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Stephen Hurd <shurd@sasktel.net> wrote: > Jason Helfman wrote: > >> I was wondering if you have had any time to look at the patch I've >> submitted to your pr? >> >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/**query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/166402<http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/166402> >> > > I was actually unaware of it to be honest... I generally only check the > status of my PRs every couple weeks, and you must have hit my spam filter. > > Frankly, I don't see a reason to build from source. The cleanup of the > do-install target looks nice... I inherited the port pretty much as-is, and > have only been updating the version number and checksums as I don't care > much except that it works. > I chose to build from source, because in the portstree there is no reason to not build from it, in my humble opinion, if we can. > > I'm also hazy on why fixing the java version at install time would be a > benefit. It seems that then any upgrade of Java would require an upgrade > of jbidwatcher. > It's not fixing anything. It is just exporting it as an environment variable. > > So... off hand I like: > The new do-install target > > Great. > And dislike: > The new launcher script > Is this based only on the environment variable export? This is becoming more standard in many java related ports. > Building from source > What is wrong with building from source? > > However, I think the update should be committed first, then enhancements > added. If you would file a PR and CC me after this is committed, I'll > likely be a lot more receptive. > I can do that, thanks.
jgh 2012-03-31 18:50:10 UTC FreeBSD ports repository Modified files: misc/jbidwatcher Makefile distinfo Log: - Update to 2.5 PR: ports/166402 Submitted by: maintainer, shurd@sasktel.net Feature safe: yes Revision Changes Path 1.27 +1 -1 ports/misc/jbidwatcher/Makefile 1.24 +2 -2 ports/misc/jbidwatcher/distinfo _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "cvs-all-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
State Changed From-To: open->closed Committed. Thanks!