Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:13:03 -0800 From: "Michael C. Shultz" <ringworm01@gmail.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, Dan Langille <dan@langille.org>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: MOVED - from == to? Message-ID: <200601151913.04681.ringworm01@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20060116015538.GA29320@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <43CA449C.28180.3247619B@dan.langille.org> <20060115230735.GB19392@soaustin.net> <20060116015538.GA29320@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 15 January 2006 17:55, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 05:07:35PM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 12:48:28PM -0500, Dan Langille wrote: > > > Can the FROM field be the same as the TO field in ports/MOVED? I > > > think not. > > > > eik and I were trying to convince people that that would be a good > > technique to note 'previously removed port has been reinstated', but I > > don't think we convinced anyone. > > > > My original interpretation of MOVED, when I built portsmon, was that > > it contained a complete historical record of ports that had been > > deleted and/or moved. To build the view of the 'latest' change, portsmon > > walks the tree and follows multiple entries. The reason I did it this > > way is that so I could say 'PR #xyz was orginally about foo/bar-devel but > > now it is about foo/bar since that's where foo/bar-devel got moved to." > > > > However, I also failed to convince people that keeping the historical > > entries was useful, and now some (but not all) of them have been flushed. > > > > Given that, we might as well flush the rest of them, and the from=to > > entries as well. > > There's a larger problem which is that it's impossible to correctly > parse the information in MOVED as it currently stands. e.g. > > editors/emacs|editors/emacs19|2004-03-20|emacs 19.x moved to a non-default > port location editors/emacs21|editors/emacs|2004-03-20|emacs 21.x moved to > default port location > > The intention of the above is that old versions of editors/emacs > (which were emacs 19.x) should be followed to editors/emacs19. But a > newer editors/emacs port is 21.x, so it should not follow there. > > The way MOVED was intended to be parsed was to start at the > "appropriate date" in the file and only parse entries after this date. > The problem is that there's no unambigious way to determine > "appropriate date": it's supposed to mean the date of the port from > which the package was built, but this is not recorded in the package > (or clearly defined itself: in most cases it's the date of the port > Makefile, except for ports that .include other things, > i.e. potentially every port). > > A better solution might be to additionally record the PKGVERSION of > the port at the date of the MOVED entry, since this may be easily > parsed and used to determine whether the entry applies to a given > package. The problem is that PKGVERSION is not always uniquely > defined and may sometimes depend on OSVERSION and other factors. > > I don't know how to fix this. > > Kris The MOVED data base is usless from my point of veiw. Only useful purpose it serves is to explain what happened to a port that is no longer in the collection and it does that poorly. Seems like CVS records would be a better way to follow a port's history. IMO a port should only have one entry, and that is only if it was removed, here is how the fields might be set up: category/portname | date removed | reason If the port was renamed in the reason column just enter something like: renamed: new category/ portname If the port is placed back into service then remove it's record. Just my opinion... -Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200601151913.04681.ringworm01>