Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 09:13:56 +0200 From: John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r324901 - head/biology/tinker Message-ID: <521468B4.7000704@marino.st> In-Reply-To: <20130819075747.GA23143@lonesome.com> References: <201308181138.r7IBcZdA083649@svn.freebsd.org> <5210C446.8080908@FreeBSD.org> <521116E3.7030403@marino.st> <52114BFE.3010302@FreeBSD.org> <5211BB5F.40306@marino.st> <20130819075747.GA23143@lonesome.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8/19/2013 09:57, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 08:29:51AM +0200, John Marino wrote: >> However, I'll try to email somebody over there to confirm they rerolled >> it, and try to get them to say why. > > This port is notorious for rerolled distfiles. When I was doing the > tier-2 builds, it was one of the builds that failed the most often. As a follow-up, the author of Tinker returned my email and let me know that .06 was rerolled for a minor reason. He didn't realize that any package system feature Tinker and in fact thought his license prevented that. He then said it was "ok" for FreeBSD to have it because ports distributes the source code and builds from source. He's been informed about the consequences of rerolling tarballs and I told him the license restriction could actually prevent exposure of his software as it (should) prevent binary distribution, so binary-only users would never see it. I'm still waiting for a response to that, but the immediate conclusion is that the reroll was confirmed and the distfile should be fine. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?521468B4.7000704>