[MAINTAINER] update java/java-tutorial to jdk-tutorial-2005.02.17 1) Updated manual to most recent version. 2) added WITH_EXTRAS knob to include source code examples Fix: N/A
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->hq I'll handle this.
State Changed From-To: open->feedback Here are some suggestions: - PORTREVISION= 0 is useless. - I think the port should notify the user about WITH_EXTRAS option before installing the port. - The "Set your browser to ${DOCSDIR}/index.html" statement is indeed quite useful but would be better in pkg-message as the statement will not be displayed when installing from a package. I suggest using files/pkg-message.in (using %%DOCSDIR%%) and SUB_FILES=pkg-message.
Here are some suggestions: - PORTREVISION= 0 is useless. Agreed >- I think the port should notify the user about WITH_EXTRAS option >before installing the port. Agreed >- The "Set your browser to ${DOCSDIR}/index.html" statement is indeed >quite useful but would be better in pkg-message as the statement will >not be displayed when installing from a package. I suggest using >files/pkg-message.in (using %%DOCSDIR%%) and SUB_FILES=pkg-message This port makes little sense as a package and is why I didn't set up pkg-message. It is made only of documents. Ability to control pkg-message with the WITH_EXTRAS statement is a bit more involved. There may be a way to create pkg-message "on the fly" during an earlier target like extract or build by using something like @${CAT} ${MESSAGE} > ${PKGMESSAGE} then I can still adjust ${MESSAGE} if WITH_EXTRAS is defined and feed it into ${PKGMESSAGE}. It will take a little time to experiment with this and to get it right, mean while this port is unfetchable and the PR as submitted works. I'll leave it up to you to decide wither to commit now or wait until I've made the cosmetic changes you've suggested. -Mike
Hi Michael, On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 03:27:46PM -0800, Michael C. Shultz wrote: > This port makes little sense as a package Indeed, you're right. My bad. :) I'll commit the patch as-is (without the PORTREVISION line). But I think we should move the message to post-extract target (or any other you feel more relevant which occurs before the port is actually installed). If you agree with that, no need to send another PR, you may just send the patch directly to me. Herve
On Sunday 20 February 2005 04:29 pm, Herve Quiroz wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 03:27:46PM -0800, Michael C. Shultz wrote: > > This port makes little sense as a package > > Indeed, you're right. My bad. :) > > I'll commit the patch as-is (without the PORTREVISION line). But I > think we should move the message to post-extract target (or any other > you feel more relevant which occurs before the port is actually > installed). If you agree with that, no need to send another PR, you > may just send the patch directly to me. > > Herve I do think having the message show when its packaged is a good idea, I need to do the same thing for another port as well so I appreciate that you suggested it. However I want to manipultate the message depending on WITH_* defines because, well because I just want to, so this is an interesting chalange. Now that I am not under a time constrant there is no excuse not to put in everything you suggested. I'll send a patch to you when it is ready and I hope you will nit pick it to death, because again time is a no longer a factor and I do like ports to be absolutely perfect, or as close as possible anyways. :) -Mike
State Changed From-To: feedback->closed Patch commited. Thanks for your contribution.