Fixed size and checksum mismatch for dist tarball. It looks like the tarball is generated by the software maintainer from CVS, which can lead to both size and checksum mismatch.
Any chance it way a legitimate changes? As described in Porter's Handbook you should analyse and describe changes instead of just correct checksum and size. -- Sem.
On 2005-04-09 20:23 +0400, Sergey Matveychuk <sem@FreeBSD.org> wrote: # Any chance it way a legitimate changes? # # As described in Porter's Handbook you should analyse and describe # changes instead of just correct checksum and size. As described in the PR, it looks like the tarball is being auto-generated from files pulled from a CVS repository. Looking at the tarball, the contents of the CVS directory changes each time the files are pulled from CVS and tarballed. It looks like the authors are generating the tarball each night or almost every night. That is the reason for the size and checksum change... this also means that having a static size and checksum in distinfo is going to cause the port to not build in most cases. For instance, the latest info for the bindtest.tgz file from ftp://ftp.kame.net/pub/kame/misc/ (which is the first master site listed in the Makefile) has a modified time of "2005-04-08 20:09:00", a size of 9568 and a different checksum than the one I submitted in the PR. -- Linh Pham question+fbsdports@closedsrc.org http://closedsrc.org/
There's 2005-04-09 20:09 file there now, even. Does that mean your patch is not useful, because it's lifespan is one day? Then I think we'll need more permanent solution. -- Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz> <pav@FreeBSD.org> It also explains why paper clips just lie there while you look at them, but as soon as you turn your back, they run away, giggling wildly, and transform themselves into coat hangers.
I have set the MD5 checksum and size for the distfile to IGNORE in distinfo, added/bumped PORTREVISION, and added IGNOREFILES to Makefile. I ran portlint against my version of the port and it didn't like the "extra" IGNOREFILES line in the Makefile... so I don't know if it doesn't know about it or if I didn't put it in the right location. Attached is the updated diff against the current version of the port. Hope it's okay. -- Linh Pham question+fbsdports@closedsrc.org http://closedsrc.org/
Dear maintainer of FreeBSD port net/bindtest, please take a look at http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?q=79691 Do you approve the latest patch? -- Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz> <pav@FreeBSD.org> Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger.
State Changed From-To: open->feedback Asked maintainer for approval
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->pav Handle
Hi Pav, I reread the discussion, and it seems that there is no real solution since bindtest generated from CVS. I approve the changes to ignore the checksum until i found a better solution. Regards, Janos Mohacsi Network Engineer, Research Associate NIIF/HUNGARNET, HUNGARY Key 00F9AF98: 8645 1312 D249 471B DBAE 21A2 9F52 0D1F 00F9 AF98 On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > Dear maintainer of FreeBSD port net/bindtest, please take a look at > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?q=79691 > > Do you approve the latest patch? > > -- > Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz> > <pav@FreeBSD.org> > > Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for they are subtle and > quick to anger. >
State Changed From-To: feedback->closed Committed, thanks!