Bug 240698
| Summary: | devel/libvterm: Update to git20190828 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Ports & Packages | Reporter: | checo1705 | ||||||||
| Component: | Individual Port(s) | Assignee: | Adam Weinberger <adamw> | ||||||||
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||||||||||
| Severity: | Affects Only Me | CC: | adamw, dem.procopiou | ||||||||
| Priority: | --- | Flags: | bugzilla:
maintainer-feedback?
(dem.procopiou) dem.procopiou: maintainer-feedback+ |
||||||||
| Version: | Latest | ||||||||||
| Hardware: | Any | ||||||||||
| OS: | Any | ||||||||||
| Bug Depends on: | |||||||||||
| Bug Blocks: | 240699 | ||||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||
So, homebrew uses http://www.leonerd.org.uk/code/libvterm/ as their libvterm library instead. I don't know our history, nor ANY of the differences between them, but is there a reason we went with the no-releases library from neovim instead of LeoNerd's libvterm? Created attachment 207656 [details]
git20190917
(In reply to Adam Weinberger from comment #1) Wish I knew too, but, from neovim wiki "For some dependencies we maintain temporary "forks", which are simply private branches with a few extra patches, while we wait for the upstream project to merge the patches." and "For all other cases, Nvim builds against and supports both the "vanilla" dependency (without Nvim's patches) and typically much older versions.". I cannot see any harm on using the "fork" while I admit it is not a good practice. I cannot see any recent patches from the neovim fork, in fact almost all the commits are done by Leonerd itself, git20190826 should be identical to release 0.1, perhaps We shall use that or refactor the port to use the releases provided. Created attachment 207662 [details]
release 0.1.1
Now I understand; master is mirror, 0.1 was first release, 0.1.1 is bugfix taken upstream from neovim's nvim branch. I think We should refactor the port. Would it be necesary to use PORTLINT?
(In reply to checo1705 from comment #5) I meant PORTEPOCH, not portlint No, it wouldn't. [adamw@apnoea ~] pkg version -t git20161218 0.1.1 < A commit references this bug: Author: adamw Date: Mon Oct 7 15:32:48 UTC 2019 New revision: 513963 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/513963 Log: libvterm: Update to 0.1.1 and change upstream source Previously, we were using a neovim-maintained fork of upstream, which these days is essentially a staging group before being merged to the official repo. Releases come from the official upstream, though, so this commit tracks that instead of cherry-picking from the neovim repo. While here, mark perl as being test-only. PR: 240698 Submitted by: checo175 secmailpro Approved by: maintainer Changes: head/devel/libvterm/Makefile head/devel/libvterm/distinfo head/devel/libvterm/pkg-plist Geez, this whole time I was waiting for Demetris to approve the PR. I just realized that you did so weeks ago. Sorry about that, and thank you for being on top of it! |
Created attachment 207641 [details] trivial patch Update to lastest commit since neovim needs a newer version