From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun May 25 07:13:05 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36D104F5
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sun, 25 May 2014 07:13:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D56F259C
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sun, 25 May 2014 07:13:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.0.21] (unknown [130.255.19.191])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88FCC435C7
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sun, 25 May 2014 02:12:50 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <538197E3.1070609@marino.st>
Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 09:12:35 +0200
From: John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st>
Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Is staging a port really this simple?
References: <524CE820.5060003@missouri.edu>
 <20131003061511.GF85314@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
 <538179d9.ERL3ZKEnk4pQKKib%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
 <CADtCJqoTpSB0E9uN8Y6CkZm_8wjU0b5Pc50vT=pB-bHjZmGpeQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADtCJqoTpSB0E9uN8Y6CkZm_8wjU0b5Pc50vT=pB-bHjZmGpeQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 07:13:05 -0000

On 5/25/2014 09:09, Zsolt Udvari wrote:
> 2014-05-25 7:04 GMT+02:00 Perry Hutchison <perryh@pluto.rain.com>:
>>  post-install:
>> -       @[ -f ${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf ] \
>> -               || ${CP} -p ${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf.sample \
>> -                       ${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf
>> +       @[ -f ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf ] \
>> +               || ${CP} -p ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf.sample \
>> +                       ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf
> Your condition is unneeded.
> You don't need check the existence of
> ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/etc/distcheckd.conf because you'll copy it, the
> ${STAGEDIR} are empty!!!!
> The reason of "old" check was: shouldn't overwrite the existing
> distcheckd.conf (in system, not STAGEDIR). These checks are
> unnecessary, the 'pkg' does it.
> 


no, the @sample keyword in pkg-plist does that (replacing other lines
there).  pkg doesn't do this by itself, it needs to be told.

John