Created attachment 221527 [details]
Sugested git diff
devel/bingrep: Adopt and Update to 0.8.4
- Use GH
- Added DOCS (README.md)
- Added EXAMPLES (screenshots)
^Triage: If there is a changelog or release notes URL available for this version, please add it to the URL field.
Q/A: Is it possible to use the official release tarball?
Some small improvements:
# Packaging list block
# Options definitions
# Options helpers
# Out of order targets
(In reply to Fernando Apesteguía from comment #1)
- Q/A: Is it possible to use the official release tarball?
Why should I use CRATESIO if project is located at GH?
I prefer GH because I can test latest commits easy just adding GH_TAGNAME.
Could you explain why should I use CRATESIO?
- Some small improvements:
Thanks, I will fix textproc/cast2gif too because it is an identical port.
(In reply to Nuno Teixeira from comment #2)
I meant the official tarball release from GH: https://github.com/m4b/bingrep/archive/0.8.4.tar.gz
According to the Handbook: "5.4.3. USE_GITHUB
If the distribution file comes from a specific commit or tag on GitHub ****for which there is no officially released file****..."
But if there is one and can be used, it is preferred. It would mean using MASTER_SITES. Have a look at sysutils/fusefs-libs for example.
However if the idea is to update the port to very specific commits and not to releases, then GH_TAGNAME would be good.
(In reply to Fernando Apesteguía from comment #3)
https://github.com/m4b/bingrep/archive/0.8.4.tar.gz isn't a release tarball
and there is no release available like libfuse:
/!\ bingrep-0.8.4: Makefile warnings, please consider fixing /!\
MASTER_SITES contains https://github.com/m4b/bingrep/archive/, please use
But I have understand the importance of using MASTER_SITES when release tarballs are available.
Should I use CRATESIO?
And I think it make no sense to use CRATESIO for this port.
There is no release tarball, so we need to use USE_GITHUB, right?
Created attachment 221555 [details]
Sugested git patch with fixes
(In reply to Nuno Teixeira from comment #5)
(In reply to Fernando Apesteguía from comment #7)
Something's not right here:
=> Attempting to fetch https://codeload.github.com/m4b/bingrep/tar.gz/0.8.4?dummy=/m4b-bingrep-0.8.4_GH0.tar.gz
fetch: https://codeload.github.com/m4b/bingrep/tar.gz/0.8.4?dummy=/m4b-bingrep-0.8.4_GH0.tar.gz: size unknown
fetch: https://codeload.github.com/m4b/bingrep/tar.gz/0.8.4?dummy=/m4b-bingrep-0.8.4_GH0.tar.gz: size of remote file is not known
m4b-bingrep-0.8.4_GH0.tar.gz 600 kB 2527 kBps 01s
=> Fetched file size mismatch (expected 616298, actual 614453)
=> Trying next site
=> Attempting to fetch http://distcache.FreeBSD.org/ports-distfiles/m4b-bingrep-0.8.4_GH0.tar.gz
fetch: http://distcache.FreeBSD.org/ports-distfiles/m4b-bingrep-0.8.4_GH0.tar.gz: Not Found
=> Couldn't fetch it - please try to retrieve this
=> port manually into /portdistfiles/ and try again.
*** Error code 1
Created attachment 221588 [details]
Sugested git diff with refreshed distinfo
I forgot to refresh distinfo.
(In reply to Nuno Teixeira from comment #9)
testbuilds look fine. fernape@, will you commit this update or should I... ?
A commit references this bug:
Date: Sat Jan 16 20:49:42 UTC 2021
New revision: 561762
devel/bingrep: update to 0.8.4 and set MAINTAINER
Submitter becomes maintainer (already maintainer or several ports)
Submitted by: email@example.com
Sorry for the delay, but my machine was really busy rebuilding rust, gcc, llvm...
I think we need package seeding in poudriere.