Bug 193450
| Summary: | [STAGE] net/spread4: Enable STAGE support, Take Maintainership | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Ports & Packages | Reporter: | Chris Hutchinson <portmaster> |
| Component: | Individual Port(s) | Assignee: | freebsd-ports-bugs (Nobody) <ports-bugs> |
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||
| Severity: | Affects Some People | CC: | marino, portmaster |
| Priority: | Normal | Keywords: | patch |
| Version: | Latest | ||
| Hardware: | Any | ||
| OS: | Any | ||
| Attachments: | |||
Created attachment 147041 [details]
net/spread4 QA output for 2014-09-07.diff
net/spread4
Requisite QA output for 2014-09-07.diff, also attached.
--Chris
As per portlint, and since spread has a special BSD-like license [1], consider adding in: * LICENSE & LICENSE_FILE (The latter only if there is a standalone license in distrubtion files http://www.spread.org/license/license.html Created attachment 147042 [details]
net/spread4 [request maintainer] STAGE
net/spread4
Attached diff, 2014-09-07.diff, OBSOLETES previous.
All the same, except I think I used a cleaner style, for
PORTDOCS installation.
See also net-spread4-QA-output, for requisite QA output.
Thank you for all your time, and consideration.
--Chris
Created attachment 147043 [details]
net/spread4 QA output against 2014-09-07.diff
net/spread4
Requisite QA log, for 2014-09-07.diff, also attached.
--Chris
(In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #2) > As per portlint, and since spread has a special BSD-like license [1], > consider adding in: > > * LICENSE & LICENSE_FILE (The latter only if there is a standalone license > in distrubtion files > > http://www.spread.org/license/license.html I wondered about that. It currently uses PKGMESSAGE= ${WRKSRC}/license.txt For the license file, already included. I guess I'll give LICENSE_FILE a go. Thanks for reviewing my submission, Kubilay. --Chris They may not be mutually exclusive considerations, and each PKGMESSAGE, and LICENSE_FILE does something different. The former is display only, the latter copies/includes the license into DATADIR. Have a read of the license link provided earlier, their may be a clause regarding something like a 'prominent message during installation' or equivalent. Created attachment 147044 [details]
[request maintainer] STAGE, LICENSE_FILE
net/spread4
This is the same as the last diff. I have only added, and tested
LICENSE_FILE, as requested by Kubilay.
Please find 2014-09-07.diff, for details.
Thank you.
--Chris
(In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #6) > They may not be mutually exclusive considerations, and each PKGMESSAGE, and > LICENSE_FILE does something different. The former is display only, the > latter copies/includes the license into DATADIR. > > Have a read of the license link provided earlier, their may be a clause > regarding something like a 'prominent message during installation' or > equivalent. Yes. I read the license. I already maintain net/spread. Which has only ever used the PKGMESSAGE method. But, as mentioned, just previously, I have added LICENSE_FILE. I might also note. I have always copied license.txt to DOCSDIR/LICENSE. Surely that covers it. :) Thanks for reviewing my submission, Kubilay. --Chris You're welcome (In reply to C Hutchinson from comment #0) > I already maintain net/spread, so why not spread4? :) I would phrase the question differently. Why does we need both net/spread and net/spread4? Can't we remove the older one? (In reply to John Marino from comment #10) > (In reply to C Hutchinson from comment #0) > > I already maintain net/spread, so why not spread4? :) > > > I would phrase the question differently. > Why does we need both net/spread and net/spread4? Can't we remove the older > one? Fair assertion. I quite agree. But until I reconcile those that depend on the old version. I'll need to keep both. I too had given that question some thought, and had planned to bump net/spread with an EXPIRES assertion, soon. In short. You're correct. There [ultimately] needn't the two. But AFAICT, there needs to be today. :) --Chris this has compress-man target too, and <pre><post> _AND_ <options> includes. (In reply to C Hutchinson from comment #8) > I might also note. I have always copied license.txt to > DOCSDIR/LICENSE. > > Surely that covers it. :) This isn't correct. You just define LICENSE_FILE to where it is in WRKSRC and it will get installed automatically. Your precopy is unnecessary and actually wrong. Your ".if !exists" lines in post-install run 100% of the time. You are checking $STAGEDIR, which you control, and the files you are checking don't exist so they are created. However, you are overriding the @sample keyword which is supposed to do the same thing. I think in general you assume whatever was there before is correct, but this is a bad assumption. These lines were in place to mimick @sample keyword. Now that you use @sample, you should have removed them. It's these kinds of details that trip you up again and again. Thank you, very much, John. Please let me correct these. So I can develop better habits. By doing them. I also hate adding more work, to your already overburdened workload. :) Thanks again, John. --Chris no, once I've started working on it, it would be more work for me to stop and take your changes. ugg, this is a gross error: All of your man pages in pkg-plist end in ".1" or ".3" instead of the correct ".1.gz" and ".3.gz". You knew that, right? It is impossible for that error to pass "make check-plist". It means it was untested. (In reply to John Marino from comment #17) > ugg, this is a gross error: > > All of your man pages in pkg-plist end in ".1" or ".3" instead of the > correct ".1.gz" and ".3.gz". You knew that, right? > > It is impossible for that error to pass "make check-plist". It means it was > untested. Yes. I knew that. But only when they have been packed. Which, because of my having slipped the compress-man: nonsense in made it OK(ish). In short; yes. I won't do it again -- really. :) Just about done, BTW. --Chris A commit references this bug: Author: marino Date: Wed Sep 10 00:38:04 UTC 2014 New revision: 367793 URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/367793 Log: Stage net/spread4 PR: 193450 Submitted by: Chris Hutchinson Stage fixes: marino Changes: head/net/spread4/Makefile head/net/spread4/pkg-plist I'm done. You can compare mine version I just committed to yours and score yourself at home. I'm going to bed, goodnight. Created attachment 147149 [details]
net/spread4 [req maintainer] STAGE, LICENSE*
net/spread4
corrects previous errors, as reported by JM.
adds STAGE, LICENSE_FILE
makes [hopefully] needed corrections.
I've expanded on LICENSE, as per my _current_ understanding
(fingers crossed)
Please see 2014-09-09.diff attached. See also net-spread4-QA-now,
also attached.
Thanks, and sorry for the extra bother.
--Chris
Created attachment 147150 [details]
net/spread4 QA for 2014-09-09.diff (also attached)
net/spread
QA for 2014-09-09.diff, also attached.
Thanks.
--Chris
Chris, honestly the extra bother is attaching new patches *after* I commit mine to complete the PR and *after* I explicitly say, "don't submit new patches, I'm working on it". What's the point? I closed the PR. I get sent a lot of email and it eats up time just to figure out your post is obsolete before you make it. |
Created attachment 147040 [details] [request maintainer] STAGE net/spread4 I already maintain net/spread, so why not spread4? :) adds STAGE modifies pkg-plist, Makefile (as necessary) Please find 2014-09-07.diff, attached. See also requisite QA log, net-spread4-QA-out, also attached.