From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 25 07:06:33 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF51716A4F0 for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 07:06:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from 62-15-211-171.inversas.jazztel.es (62-15-211-171.inversas.jazztel.es [62.15.211.171]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDD6243D4C for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 07:06:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es) Received: from redesjm.local (orion.redesjm.local [192.168.254.16]) j3P75rFC035825; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 09:05:53 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from josemi@redesjm.local) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by redesjm.local (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id j3P75nck000965; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 09:05:49 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from josemi@redesjm.local) From: Jose M Rodriguez To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 09:05:48 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <20050414111426.775f6afd.lehmann@ans-netz.de> <20050424185528.1799cd84.lehmann@ans-netz.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200504250905.49493.josemi@redesjm.local> X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir Milter (version: 1.1.0-3; AVE: 6.30.0.7; VDF: 6.30.0.116; host: antares.redesjm.local) cc: ports@dino.sk cc: Yarema Subject: Re: splitting courier-authlib into master+slave ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 07:06:34 -0000 El Lunes, 25 de Abril de 2005 06:19, Yarema escribi=F3: > --On Sunday, April 24, 2005 18:55:28 +0200 Oliver Lehmann > > wrote: > > Oliver Lehmann wrote: > >> Ok, you both convinced me. I'll change -base (allready done, I'm > >> testing) > > > > It's uploaded now. I also changed sysconftool to a build-dep since > > we need ed during the install target and not later, and we don't > > need it after the installation for a running courier-authlib. > > Oliver, as usual a couple of notes regarding the latest you uploaded > :) > > .if ${AUTHMOD} =3D=3D authbase > CONFIGURE_ARGS+=3D--with-base --with-pam > > shouldn't that be: > > CONFIGURE_ARGS+=3D--with-base --with-authpam > > Also you reintroduced: > .if defined(WITH_SYSLOG_FACILITY) > CONFIGURE_ARGS+=3D--with-syslog=3D${WITH_SYSLOG_FACILITY} > .endif > > This is handled at runtime by the: > files/patch-authdaemond.in > files/patch-authdaemonrc.in > patches. Of course it does no harm, but there's no need to tweak the > compile time --with-syslog=3D if one is free to tweak it at run time > all they want. This is a compat env to previous versions of courier-authlib and=20 courier-imap. I can't found a reason to break existing functionality. > > The pkg-descr-pwd still refers to /etc/pwd.db instead of getpw() or > getpw(3). Of course the authpwd subport could be sent to the great > bit-bucket in the sky and nobody would miss it.. ;) but I don't > really care anymore. Thanks for making PAM the default. :) > > One last note. There's a few places where portlint complained that > you have blank spaces at the end of the line: > Lines 45 and 62 in your version of Makefile.ext > /\s\+$// will fix them in vim. > And a few places where you have spaces instead of tabs indenting the > line: Lines 58,60,61,63,64,66,67,68,69 and 78 in Makefile.ext > / \+/ will find these. > > Most likely artifacts of cutting and pasting. > > One of the advantages of not having Makefile.ext as a separate file > is that portlint helps find such things. I ran portlint and fixed > these every time I posted a tweaked version of the port for you to > review. > I also become to think that if we only import Makefile.ext from Makefile=20 and we import Makefile from slave ports, there isn't no real reason to=20 not merge Makefile.ext code directly into Makefile. > And one last idea I had was that if you were to adopt the standalone > meta and stand alone base organization I demonstrated. Then the This have a mayor drawbacks: you must hand sync things like PORTVERSION=20 into both. And include a common Makefile.inc has never the placet of=20 portlint. > naming could go back to courier-authlib without -base and a > courier-authlib-meta. And if we were to go that way then why not a This will break any prob that portupgrade may chase the split. The port=20 will 'All' the functionality, including actual options, will be=20 courier-authlib. I even doubt if it is a good idea moving this from mail to security. =20 Adding a security category will be simple. And not need a repocopy=20 request. Just add the components ports and make an update. > courier-meta where we could select not only courier-authlib No. You can't make all the functionality of courier from actual=20 component. Also, there are people like me that don't like courier as a=20 MTA. > BUILD_DEPENDS but whether to install courier or courier-imap and/or > sqwebmail. With Makefile.opt and Makefile.dep available why do we > need a meta port and a -base? This strays from the naming convention > used by rpm based packaging. Just a thought... be carefull with this aproach. We can't make 'subproducts' from a build=20 like rpm. In the ports system, this will end up with more real work to do and=20 maintaint. Keep this simple when possible, it's very common found that you doesn't=20 have the resources to maintaint your 'criatures' when live goes on. =2D- josemi