Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 15:13:03 +1000 From: Sam Lawrance <boris@brooknet.com.au> To: Stephen Hurd <shurd@sasktel.net> Cc: ports <ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Clarification on fetch/extract targets Message-ID: <8623CF89-858D-4524-9B4A-9147913739F3@brooknet.com.au> In-Reply-To: <4674572D.9060707@sasktel.net> References: <4673B0DB.3040100@sasktel.net> <A067E197-1540-43E6-B396-7F08179C0CA2@brooknet.com.au> <46742CF6.3050901@sasktel.net> <20070616202819.GA29331@rot13.obsecurity.org> <4674572D.9060707@sasktel.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 17/06/2007, at 7:33 AM, Stephen Hurd wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: >>> Actually, I found it quite easy to have the port pull the sources >>> from svn. Who are we concerned about making it easier for and >>> why (and how is it any easier?) >>> >> >> Everyone behind a firewall that only allows fetching via HTTP/FTP, >> for >> one. Also everyone without live network access, and those with >> pay-per-download who have a free local distfile mirror, etc. >> >> Tarballs are overwhelmingly preferred. >> >> Kris >> > Ok... I was looking at it from the standpoint of someone who wants > the newest version and doesn't care of the pkg-plist is stale. > They could just bump PORTREVISION and reinstall. > > So... how about this: > - A distfile target which generates a distfile. The idea being > that this would be the one on the local distfile mirror or what > have you. > - A WITH_SVN option (defaults to off) which allows the end user to > specify he/she wants to use the subversion. > > In this case then, the end user would need to bump PORTREVISION and > enable the WITH_SVN option. Rather than suggesting that users change PORTREVISION, just suggest that they set WITH_SVN and force an upgrade (eg. portupgrade -f yourport).
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8623CF89-858D-4524-9B4A-9147913739F3>