Created attachment 269157 [details] [PATCH 1/1] news/inn: Use blocklist Starting from FreeBSD version 1500000, prefer the new blocklist nomenclature. Once older versions are no longer supported, we should use blocklist exclusively.
Is this being coordinated with upstream? Given that the port is just a veneer around automake and 1) upstream is not dead 2) the change equally applies to other environments such as NetBSD I think this should be driven with a release so we don't carry a massive patch.
(In reply to Kevin Bowling from comment #1) Not coordinated at the moment, but you are correct, currently it should not be working on NetBSD. I was planning on submitting a pull request here (within a few weeks): https://github.com/InterNetNews/inn Would you prefer to wait until the patch is accepted upstream and then patch for blacklist, as opposed to what is proposed here (patching for blocklist)? In other words, the "massive patch" will only need to be carried until stable/14 reaches EoL, as blocklist was not backported to stable/14 for reasons unrelated to this PR.
Yes, if there is some need for urgency the patch upstream can be pulled from GitHub. Otherwise I suggest just asking for a point release once this is merged.
(In reply to Kevin Bowling from comment #3) Excellent! I'll do that. Thank you!
For cross-reference: https://github.com/InterNetNews/inn/pull/335
Upstream has accepted to update to the new "blocklist" nomenclature. I'll see if we can use REINPLACE_CMD instead of a "massive patch" for FreeBSD < 1500000. Thank you for the suggestion!
Created attachment 269498 [details] use upstream commit Can you have a look at this or adapt it to your liking?
Note that I guess it will just stop working if someone runs a new inn release on 14.x. This seems like a ridiculous amount of work for word salad.
(In reply to Kevin Bowling from comment #8) Yes, that patch will not work on 14.X-RELEASE. Also, it's better not to build the port from GitHub, because the "configure" file is not present (it must be manually autogenerated). The file however, is present in the tarball. My plan was to wait for an official release tarball, and resubmit the original patch, perhaps using REINPLACE_CMD to avoid having many similar patch files. The REINPLACE_CMD should only apply .if ${OPSYS} == FreeBSD && ${OSVERSION} < 1500000.
Created attachment 269521 [details] [PATCH] news/inn: Use blocklist Something like this, but inverted (blocklist -> blacklist for older versions). What do you think?
(In reply to Jose Luis Duran from comment #10) I guess a sed approach will be easiest. Can you pull the changes from my patch to update inn-current so it contains your upstream PR so we can validate both ports?
Created attachment 269529 [details] [PATCH] news/inn: Use blocklist - Includes changes to news/inn-current - Fixes to the previous news/inn patch Once upstream publishes a new release, the find/sed can be switched to: .if ${OPSYS} == FreeBSD && ${OSVERSION} < 1500000 @${FIND} ${WRKSRC} -type f -exec ${SED} -i '' -e 's/BLOCKLIST/BLACKLIST/g' {} + @${FIND} ${WRKSRC} -type f -exec ${SED} -i '' -e 's/Blocklist/Blacklist/g' {} + @${FIND} ${WRKSRC} -type f -exec ${SED} -i '' -e 's/blocklist/blacklist/g' {} + .endif Thank you!
(In reply to Jose Luis Duran from comment #12) Almost there, I think you may need the sed you suggested when BRANCH == 2.8 immeidately and you don't need the second entry in distinfo. Marking as approve since these are trivial fixups.