Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:58:41 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@FreeBSD.org> To: Jonathan <jonathan@kc8onw.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Updating multimedia/handbrake Message-ID: <20081117235841.1133cfe3@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <4921E47E.7000001@kc8onw.net> References: <4921E47E.7000001@kc8onw.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_/tD02J=JE1SEdoHBIu9l5KfQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:39:10 -0500 Jonathan <jonathan@kc8onw.net> wrote: > I have some general questions/issues about updating and maintaining > the multimedia/handbrake port. >=20 > 1) The handbrake build system unmodified uses wget to download all > it's dependencies itself. The patches to modify the build system to > not do this are fairly significant and are a maintenance headache. > Would allowing the port to download it's dependencies itself be > acceptable or do I need to continue using the ports distfile system > and maintaining awkward patches? Dependencies as in *_DEPENDS? If yes, please try to maintain those patches. Does this auto-fetch system has any provision for verifying the integrity of those files? Like our checksums from distinfo. =20 > 2) In addition to the above the developers have stated they would > strongly prefer that we not download the dependencies directly from > them as the server is not load balanced. In this case do we fetch > them directly anyway, host them on FreeBSD controlled systems, or > something else altogether? Umm, handbrake's build system downloads them from where? Can't we download from the same place? If not, yes, we can mirror them on MASTER_SITE_LOCAL. > 3) The Handbrake developers prefer to directly distribute binaries > rather than have people building handbrake themselves but this goes > again the ports philosophy where building from source is the primary > method and packages are a convenience. Should I make the port a stub > that installs a pre-compiled binary like the teamspeak port does? Do they make available binaries for all our supported OS versions? What about head? What about other archs that i386? For short no, please don't do that. >=20 > As I write this email it seems 3 may be the most acceptable solution > for both sides. Anyone see any significant downsides to this other > than the need to possibly have separate packages for 6 and 7? >=20 > Thank you for your time, > Jonathan Stewart > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >=20 --=20 IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" FreeBSD committer -> itetcu@FreeBSD.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B --Sig_/tD02J=JE1SEdoHBIu9l5KfQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkkh6RYACgkQJ7GIuiH/oeXxYgCeMsSomGcoEM2ZwGR5cFvCgNJj NBMAmwehrDXdq9R+iE1BK+48zcIcRE29 =8hs5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/tD02J=JE1SEdoHBIu9l5KfQ--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081117235841.1133cfe3>