Bug 252013 - [NEW PORT] net-p2p/airdcpp-webclient: Peer-to-peer file sharing application for file servers/NAS devices
Summary: [NEW PORT] net-p2p/airdcpp-webclient: Peer-to-peer file sharing application f...
Status: Open
Alias: None
Product: Ports & Packages
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Individual Port(s) (show other bugs)
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any Any
: --- Affects Only Me
Assignee: freebsd-ports-bugs (Nobody)
URL:
Keywords: feature, needs-qa
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2020-12-21 12:05 UTC by Ven1m
Modified: 2021-02-12 12:57 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
ven1m: maintainer-feedback+


Attachments
patch (18.89 KB, patch)
2020-12-21 12:05 UTC, Ven1m
no flags Details | Diff
New diff updated to airdcpp 2.11.0 (18.89 KB, patch)
2021-01-09 19:29 UTC, Ven1m
ven1m: maintainer-approval+
Details | Diff
airdcpp 2.11.0 with fix for umask and home directory (18.95 KB, patch)
2021-02-12 12:57 UTC, Ven1m
ven1m: maintainer-approval+
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Ven1m 2020-12-21 12:05:52 UTC
Created attachment 220776 [details]
patch

net-p2p/airdcpp-webclient: <New port, initial commit>

 * Added custom rc.d to control service.
 * User and group airdcpp is created in order to avoid to run the service as root.

Some things to consider when reviewing the port:
 * Built as one package with both client and web UI in one package. Is this OK and could be split later on if this should be needed? Can be split according to https://airdcpp-web.github.io/docs/advanced/compiling-options.html
 * etc/airdcpp/ is used for both config file, but also for all other files created by the service. Should these have been located in share/airdcpp instead? It includes a mix of config, log and client files. It is not possible to split these as far as I know.
 * Could tbb be added to default options in order to be used when official packages are created, or should it be kept as a non-default option?

QA:
  * portlint: OK (WARN: Makefile: possible use of absolute pathname "/var".)
Comment 1 Zamana 2020-12-29 03:41:27 UTC
Oh my...

I should have visited this place before.

This port was submitted Dec, 21, and today, Dec, 29, I finished my port I was about to sumitt it...

That's life.
Comment 2 Ven1m 2020-12-29 07:28:13 UTC
(In reply to Zamana from comment #1)

That’s unfortunate! Do you have any feedback to give? Did you solve it differently? 

This port needs qa. I was not able to successfully set up poudriere in a jail and have only tested the port with FreeBSD 12.2 and amd64.
Comment 3 Zamana 2020-12-29 12:12:23 UTC
Hello Ven1m!

I made the port by using my own article:
https://gist.github.com/Zamana/4b8021d79f626d5cf656926aa465a652

and the FreeBSD ports documentaion (the easy one).

I didn't use poudriere or qa (what is qa anyway?).

Everything was made in a jail in FreeNAS 11.3 and it is working just fine, exactly the same way my official jail with AirDC++ 2.10.1 is running.

No errors or warnings.

Thanks.
Comment 4 Ven1m 2021-01-09 19:29:17 UTC
Created attachment 221428 [details]
New diff updated to airdcpp 2.11.0

Updated to latest version, 2.11.0.

Tested on FreeBSD 12.2 amd64
Comment 5 Ven1m 2021-02-12 12:43:49 UTC
I have been running this port for a while now with no major issues. I realized that the airdcpp_umask is not working after reboot, but if I restart the service the correct umask is applied.

I have found out that _umask does not seem to be supported by FreeBSD yet, can't find it in the documentation. Still it seems to work, at least when restarting the service. But maybe there is something else in play here.

As a temporary solution I've added a line with umask ${airdcpp_umask} before the run_rc_command.
Comment 6 Ven1m 2021-02-12 12:57:10 UTC
Created attachment 222387 [details]
airdcpp 2.11.0 with fix for umask and home directory