Created attachment 193730 [details] audio/festival
Take
Hi Michael, There are a number of issues with the patch. * It does not fetch patches. * PORTVERSION and DISTVERSION can not be used simultaneously * The patches in files/ are not generated in the proper format Would you have a look at them?
Hi, Sure, I will take a look
Created attachment 193912 [details] WIP version using salsa.debian.org
Hi Michael, I uploaded a work in progress version of a patch. The main problem is that I can not found the patches to apply in salsa.debian.org.
Thank you! It seems the patch fetching part is beyond me so far. About patches, "make clean patch makepatch" freaks out and creates a lot of new files in files/ -- I'd rather selectively bring the patches that I changed to the spec, and not touch those that I don't know what they're doing and leave them to the maintainer?
Michael, thank you for all the work you've put in so far. And thank you, Fernando, for the testing. Regarding the last point in comment #2: > * The patches in files/ are not generated in the proper format "proper" is not the right word. At least some of the current patches have been "hand-made" and/or contain comments describing their purpose and origin. It may also be better to group multiple related patches -- such as those addressing the same bug -- into a single file. Please, do not regenerate them all JUST to satisfy portlint. > I'd rather selectively bring the patches that I changed to the spec Yes, the completely new and unrelated patches can be generated to satisfy everyone :)
(In reply to Mikhail Teterin from comment #7) While I agree with Mikhail that we shouldn't make portlint happy for the sake of it, I think the patches are clear enough to be autogenerated in a file basis. This sometimes helps debugging problems since one can one pretty easily know if a file will be patched or not. I think regenerating the patches will improve the port. Regarding the other issue, Michael In order to regenerate the patches, you would need to apply the patches in files/ by hand (make extract && cd work && for patch_file in ../files/patch-*;do patch -p0 -E -i ${patch_fiile};done && cd .. && make makepatch I attach a .shar file that has the patch files reworked. There's still the pending issue with the extra patch files that need to be downloaded. There are a number of patches in salsa.debian.org but their names don't seem to reflect a relation with the patches we need.
Created attachment 193951 [details] WIP shar file with port skeleton
The [tag] convention is not necessary anymore.
@Fernando, Why do we have a shar for a port update? If they're no longer needed, or obsolete, let's obsolete the existing attachments so they don't confuse the current state of the issue @Maintainer Are you able to provide a QA'd patch to resolve this issue?
(In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #11) Creating a patch from shar is easy -- and Michael has done that already. What I'd like to do is break the port into two: speech_tools and festival itself, depending on the former...
(In reply to Mikhail Teterin from comment #12) It just occured to me that you might be mi@aldan (maintainer). If this is the case, please assign yourself the issue, and ideally, update your maintainer lines to use your bugzilla email. That way the auto-assigner can handle your ports PR's without someone else having to manually :)
Update still pending
Friendly reminder.