From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Aug 28 06:16:02 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@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 231A6D9C
 for <freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 06:16:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76])
 (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 0A40713E3
 for <freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 06:16:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118])
 by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s7S6G11K073723
 for <freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 06:16:01 GMT
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Bug 193061] stage-fy japanese/eijiro-fpw
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 06:16:02 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports Tree
X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s)
X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People
X-Bugzilla-Who: turutani@scphys.kyoto-u.ac.jp
X-Bugzilla-Status: Needs Triage
X-Bugzilla-Priority: Normal
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-193061-13-dU7ZrTocYJ@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-193061-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-193061-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ports bug reports <freebsd-ports-bugs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports-bugs>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports-bugs>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 06:16:02 -0000

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193061

--- Comment #2 from turutani@scphys.kyoto-u.ac.jp ---
I think this is necessary.
we must check whether a special file exist before entering any target,
for in some case, port must depend on some other port to extract the archive.
I think "EXTRACT_DEPENDS=" must be in prior to any target, is it right ?
users who want to use this port must have a data normally stored in a cd-rom,
and there are many types of cd-rom versions with different directory tree...
In addition, shell command in this ports merely runs "echo", so it is safe
even if it was run many times.

If we must avoid this shell command outside of any targets,
I think port should EXTRACT_DEPENDS on lha in any cases.
do you think which is better ?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.