Wesnoth development team provides two versions for the game: one is the stable versin, which has already a port games/wesnoth, and one is the development version. To support both versions, for testing purposes, it is recommended to add a port for the devel version (similar to other ports). Fix: Patch attached with submission follows: How-To-Repeat: n/a
I personally am not a fan of "-devel" ports. They are often troublesome to maintain as evidenced by this very port getting pruned for lack of maintenance. And it's *huge*. Why should dev versions be in ports? Shouldn't there be a s/w quality standard? It seems from the description that the reason is "testing purposes". Is that supposed to be FreeBSD users testing a beta before the release to avoid surprises? If so, has that historically been valuable for wesnoth and what guarantee is there that it will be cared adequately to avoid a repeat removal? Also, maybe you should contact phillip@freebsd.org since he's the one that maintained the original wesnoth-devel and see if he wants to commit it? Finally: it's not going to get committed if doesn't support STAGE. does it?
*** Bug 191846 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
1) Regarding the "development" version. I don't see why you would have an issue if a maintainer wants to support it. Just because you wouldn't use this version of the port doesn't mean others wouldn't. Wesnoth has extremely long development cycles and that is why I wanted to try to get this version back into being because the stable version is getting long in the tooth feature wise compared to this one. The current stable release was done almost a year ago (2013-09-05). I am a volunteer as everyone is but at this time I have been putting more time and effort into my ports. 2) I stared with the existing (not dead) wesnoth port this time and that has support for stage. Is there something broken or missing? 3) What format should I use to attach a new port? A shar file or a tar.gz or something else? Rusty
1) I've started the conversation with portmgr to establish a policy of -devel ports in general. It's not fun when a maintainer throws not one, but two ports on the heap when they give it up, and there are lots of problems with the -devel port is older than the real port. This is not about a single maintainer volunteering for a port -- it's a general burden multiplied potentially by 25,000 ports. And there's always a committer that has to deal with committing it, so there's a discussion that only ports that can really justify a -devel version will get it, especially given the new quarterly branches. There's also a discussion about port quality and using FreeBSD users as beta testers. for the specific case of wesnoth, it's probably best to get them to release again. There's no quality guarantee on a snapshot. 2) That comment was for the version hardy provided. 3) use a shar, but don't compress it or put it into a tar file. Just attach it do the PR. I think there's a 1MB size limit on attachments on bugzilla.
Alright, if you still want this port, here are some things that need to happen: 1) update to version 1.11.16 (or later) 2) Use OPTION_SUB [A] 3) Use <OPTION>_CONFIGURE_<ENABLE|WITH|> [A] 4) Use USES+= tar:bz2 5) STAGE IT! [A] https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-options.html The lack of staging alone is enough to close this PR. Please indicate if you are planning to update the shar or if you want to withdraw the PR.
Ok, I had thought that this was dead but if not, I will try to rebuild the port this weekend. Rusty
I actively try to suppress -devel ports when they aren't really justified, but I checked out the wesnoth site and there really indication of an imminent release and a -devel port might actually be useful to give bug feedback. However, we do prefer the -devel and stable version are maintained by the same person and in this case it will be. The port still has to be high-quality though and the submission needs a bit of work.
Created attachment 147324 [details] Shar
The previous version supported staging but I have updated to the latest devel version and used staging to verify and correct the plist: root@tethys:/usr/ports/games/wesnoth-devel # make check-plist ====> Checking for pkg-plist issues (check-plist) ===> Parsing plist ===> Checking for items in STAGEDIR missing from pkg-plist ===> Checking for directories owned by MTREEs ===> Checking for directories handled by dependencies ===> Checking for items in pkg-plist which are not in STAGEDIR ===> No pkg-plist issues found (check-plist) root@tethys:/usr/ports/games/wesnoth-devel # make package ===> Building package for wesnoth-devel-1.11.16 root@tethys:/usr/ports/games/wesnoth-devel # I was unsure what you are looking for concerning #3 as the current wesnoth port doesn't have this. It seems to work though. Everything else updated as requested and shar attached. Please advise what else you need. Rusty
(In reply to rnejdl from comment #9) > I was unsure what you are looking for concerning #3 as the current wesnoth > port doesn't have this. No, it doesn't and that's the problem. Please read page "[A]" again to figure out how to use that functionality. you must implement everywhere possible. I see lots of places you skipped using these. And I'm pretty sure that option-dependent CMAKE stuff can be simplified as well although I don't have a link for your atm.
also, " make check-plist" is a great start, but I really want poudriere testlogs (-t or testport) for a new port.
ah, I see i wasn't specific enough I also want <option>_LIB_DEPENDS, <option>_BUILD_DEPENDS, <option>_RUN_DEPENDS etc. Everything that you can implement.
Can I have an example of a port that implements all of this correct to compare to? I think it is fair to say that a sizeable chunk do NOT. Rusty
All new ports use modern options and old ports are continually being converted when the port is touched for other reasons. example: X.if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MNOTIFY} XCMAKE_ARGS+= -DENABLE_NOTIFICATIONS=on XLIB_DEPENDS+= libdbus-1.so:${PORTSDIR}/devel/dbus X.else XCMAKE_ARGS+= -DENABLE_NOTIFICATIONS=off X.endif should be NOTIFY_LIB_DEPENDS+= libdbus-1.so:${PORTSDIR}/devel/dbus NOTIFY_CMAKE_ON= -DENABLE_NOTIFICATIONS=on NOTIFY_CMAKE_OFF= -DENABLE_NOTIFICATIONS=off .include <bsd.port.options.mk> You can simplify all your options. Read /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.options.mk if it helps.
should be: NOTIFY_LIB_DEPENDS= libdbus-1.so:${PORTSDIR}/devel/dbus actually (no "+=" but rather "=")
Rusty, what's the status of this? FYI, I've de-CC'd on like 100 PRs, this is one of the few I'm still following but that won't be the case forever.
At this time, I'm going to let this go. I don't have the time to completely rewrite this port. Let's close this and someone else can get this up and running if they want it. Rusty
(In reply to rnejdl from comment #17) > At this time, I'm going to let this go. I don't have the time to completely > rewrite this port. Let's close this and someone else can get this up and > running if they want it. "completely rewrite the port" ?? Either you have a flair for the dramatic or you don't get how little is left to do. In either case, I'm happy to close the PR. Thanks!
From my understanding of your comments, I need to rewrite more than half the Makefile to make it comply with what you are looking for. I will look at this again tonight after the kids are in bed and see if I have made this harder than it should be.