Bug 243309 - sysutils/dirvish erroneously marked BROKEN unfetchable
Summary: sysutils/dirvish erroneously marked BROKEN unfetchable
Status: Open
Alias: None
Product: Ports & Packages
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Individual Port(s) (show other bugs)
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any Any
: --- Affects Many People
Assignee: freebsd-ports-bugs mailing list
Depends on:
Reported: 2020-01-13 04:09 UTC by Nathan Robertson
Modified: 2020-01-19 23:38 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
bugzilla: maintainer-feedback? (tarkhil)

Remove the BROKEN unfetchable line from the sysutils/dirvish Makefile (381 bytes, patch)
2020-01-13 04:09 UTC, Nathan Robertson
no flags Details | Diff
Differences between ancient Fedora tgz and website version (3.15 KB, patch)
2020-01-17 06:30 UTC, Nathan Robertson
no flags Details | Diff
Updated checksum and Makefile (1.09 KB, patch)
2020-01-19 23:38 UTC, Nathan Robertson
no flags Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Nathan Robertson 2020-01-13 04:09:15 UTC
Created attachment 210681 [details]
Remove the BROKEN unfetchable line from the sysutils/dirvish Makefile

r516897 updated sysutils/dirvish/Makefile on line 13 to:

BROKEN=         unfetchable

The source is fetchable, and I've commented out that line and tested it, and dirvish installs fine on my machine.
Comment 1 Nathan Robertson 2020-01-13 04:12:10 UTC
Added antoine@FreeBSD.org to the cc: list, as his check-in marked this port as BROKEN unfetchable.
Comment 2 Antoine Brodin freebsd_committer 2020-01-13 06:17:40 UTC

=> dirvish-1.2.1.tgz doesn't seem to exist in /usr/ports/distfiles/.
=> Attempting to fetch http://www.dirvish.org/dirvish-1.2.1.tgz
fetch: http://www.dirvish.org/dirvish-1.2.1.tgz: size mismatch: expected 46908, actual 48604
Comment 3 Kubilay Kocak freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2020-01-13 09:54:02 UTC
@Nathan If you can provide a patch to update the distribution file and/or its checksum after evaluating the source of the checksum mismatch, please re-open the issue
Comment 4 Nathan Robertson 2020-01-17 06:30:38 UTC
Created attachment 210807 [details]
Differences between ancient Fedora tgz and website version
Comment 5 Nathan Robertson 2020-01-17 06:35:34 UTC
I can not find anywhere a tarball that matches the SHA sum in the ports for this. I have gone looking through Debian and Fedora, and have found that the current Fedora (31) matches the tarball they distributed in Fedora 12 (ie. very ancient). Incidentally, Debian's tarball matches that SHA sum as well. But I can't find one that matches the one in FreeBSD.

I've attached a patch showing the differences between the really ancient Fedora one and the one on the dirvish.org website now. It's just a bunch of places in the source code and documentation which were saying version 1.2, and should have been 1.2.1. Somebody has fixed that, re-released and not announced the change.

There used to be a distfiles directory on ftp.freebsd.org. I don't know whether something like that still exists, but if it does, it'd be nice to get access to the tarball that matches the SHA sum this port uses.

Otherwise, given the attached patch looks very safe, and the fact the source code being used by Fedora hasn't changed in so many years (and current Debian, for that matter), I'd say it'd be safe just to update the SHA sum to what's on the website, and re-enable the port.
Comment 6 Nathan Robertson 2020-01-19 23:24:12 UTC
Ok, I located a copy of the dirvish-1.2.1.tgz from the FreeBSD distfiles (I found it cached on an old server. There are two differences between the version on the website and the old one in the distfiles:

1. A one line change to the dirvish.conf(5) man page.
2. The distfiles tarball has all the files in the root. The website version has them in a subdirectory (dirvish-1.2.1)

Here's a copy and paste of this:

nathanr@nathanr:~/tmp$ sha256sum freebsd-ports-dirvish-1.2.1.tgz dirvish-1.2.1.tgz
75bf0b1b42c6ecf6e133202550b2c65e914e9b22a540da31ba44cc652e6d3e2a  freebsd-ports-dirvish-1.2.1.tgz
6b7f29c3541448db3d317607bda3eb9bac9fb3c51f970611ffe27e9d63507dcd  dirvish-1.2.1.tgz
nathanr@nathanr:~/tmp$ tar -xzf dirvish-1.2.1.tgz
nathanr@nathanr:~/tmp$ mv dirvish-1.2.1 dirvish-website
nathanr@nathanr:~/tmp$ mkdir dirvish-freebsd-ports
nathanr@nathanr:~/tmp$ cd dirvish-freebsd-ports/
nathanr@nathanr:~/tmp/dirvish-freebsd-ports$ tar -xzf ../freebsd-ports-dirvish-1.2.1.tgz
nathanr@nathanr:~/tmp/dirvish-freebsd-ports$ cd ..
nathanr@nathanr:~/tmp$ diff -urN dirvish-freebsd-ports dirvish-website
diff -urN dirvish-freebsd-ports/dirvish.conf.5 dirvish-website/dirvish.conf.5
--- dirvish-freebsd-ports/dirvish.conf.5        2008-03-26 02:35:43.000000000 +1100
+++ dirvish-website/dirvish.conf.5      2012-01-07 14:26:00.000000000 +1100
@@ -786,7 +786,7 @@
 .ta +.5i +36m
        wd { sun }      +3 months
        wd { sun } md { 1\-7 }  +1 year
-       wd { 1 } md { 1\-7 } mo { 1,4,7,10 }    never
+       wd { 1 } md { 1\-7 } mo { 1 4 7 10 }    never
        hr { 10\-20 }   +10 days
 .ft R
Comment 7 Nathan Robertson 2020-01-19 23:38:08 UTC
Created attachment 210880 [details]
Updated checksum and Makefile

Updates to the Makefile:
- The distribution now untars into a subdirectory.
- Remove the BROKEN flag

Updates to distinfo:
- New checksum.

See my previous comment in this bug showing a diff between the contents of the previous FreeBSD distfiles tarball and the new one published on the website. The differences are safe and immaterial.

I believe this patch is safe to apply.