Created attachment 219669 [details] Port files Resurrect py-rrdtool_lgpl based on https://github.com/commx/python-rrdtool and take maintainership.
Hi Darius, The reason this port was removed was, that it uses EOLed python27. Did you try if it works with Python >= 3.6?
Yes, I tested this with Python 3.7 and it work for my use case (a Python script to log stats from my VDSL modem)
Please rework the Makefile, use portlint and see below. As far as I can tell this falls under https://wiki.freebsd.org/Python/PortsPolicy and all of its recommendations. Please submit patches as .patch of .diff files, not compressed.
After looking at it a bit longer, I'm not sure if it's right to revive a port in this case. The new port comes from completely different sources, but has the same function. Also, I think that in case of a new port a naming scheme like py-python-rrdtool or maybe py-rrdtool would be more appropriate.
Is it possible to create some kind of 'sub port' to rrdtool that just compiles the Python extensions? That way non-Python users are not lumbered with them but they are available via pkg. I can do the work but if you are aware of a port I can crib the idea from that would be very helpful.
(In reply to darius from comment #5) > Is it possible to create some kind of 'sub port' to rrdtool that just compiles the Python extensions? I don't see anything else besides the python extension, actually. Anyways, the port should leverage usual USES=python infrastructure and get distribution files from PyPI (CHEESESHOP). The port would look much like devel/py-hg-evolve that rhurlin@ ported recently.
Created attachment 220310 [details] patch with new, not resurrected port Hi Daniel, Inspired by comment #6 I created a port that should work as expected. Some decisions had to be made: - The port should not be a further development of the former port databases/py-rrdtool-lgpl, because the naming does not fit well and the former port was based on other sources - Um zukünftige Updates zu erleichtern, soll der Sourcecode von Pypi bezogen werden - While the original source on Github is called python-rrdtool [1], the project page on Pypi [2] and the tarball there are only named rrdtool. The port should be fully named as on Github, plus the prefix depending on the Python version. So that CHEESESHOP can find the source, a part of PORTNAME had to be moved to PKGNAMEPREFIX - I have extended the text in pkg-descr with information from the github page. Also the URL now points to the original source [1] https://github.com/commx/python-rrdtool [2] https://pypi.org/project/rrdtool/ IMPORTANT: I think it would be useful if the port would additionally inform that the Python bindings can also be installed by enabling the OpTION PYTHON in the main port databases/rrdtool. But this should not be done if the Python bindings are to be installed via databases/py-python-rrdtools. What do you think about all this? If you agree in principle, it would be nice to test this proposal for the port. If the port builds, installs, and if it works as expected with rrdtool ...
LGTM except why do we have pkg-plist if autoplist is set?
Created attachment 220315 [details] patch with new, not resurrected port, without pkg-plist Of course, you are right. Wrong failure ;) Thanks for the hint.
(In reply to Rainer Hurling from comment #7) > - While the original source on Github is called python-rrdtool [1], the project page on Pypi [2] and the tarball there are only named rrdtool. The port should be fully named as on Github, plus the prefix depending on the Python version. The port name should follow the name on PyPI, not GitHub. Two python libraries/packages may have same project name on GitHub but they'll have different names on PyPI.
Created attachment 220348 [details] patch with new, not resurrected port, without pkg-plist (In reply to Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh from comment #10) > The port name should follow the name on PyPI, not GitHub. Two python > libraries/packages may have same project name on GitHub but they'll > have different names on PyPI. As I have learned now from tcberner (thanks!) in [1], "PORTNAME MUST exactly match the registered PyPI package name, if the package is registered on PyPI." [1] https://wiki.freebsd.org/Python/PortsPolicy#Prefixing_.28py-.2A.29 Many thanks, Sunpoet, for the hint! There is a corrected patch in the attachments area now :)
A commit references this bug: Author: rhurlin Date: Fri Jan 8 14:55:01 UTC 2021 New revision: 560778 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/560778 Log: databases/py-rrdtool: New port, version 0.1.15 As the successor to the deprecated port databases/py-rrdtool_lgpl [1], this port is intended to inherit its functionality, but comes from a different source [2][3] and is also named differently. [1] https://sourceforge.net/projects/py-rrdtool/files/ [2] http://www.nongnu.org/py-rrdtool/ [3] https://github.com/commx/python-rrdtool PR: 251126 Submitted by: darius@dons.net.au (new maintainer) Approved by: arrowd (mentor) Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D28038 Changes: head/databases/Makefile head/databases/py-rrdtool/ head/databases/py-rrdtool/Makefile head/databases/py-rrdtool/distinfo head/databases/py-rrdtool/pkg-descr
Committed, thanks! Sorry for the long delay. Have fun :)