Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 22:18:45 -0400 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/misc/iso-codes Makefile Message-ID: <434DC405.8070904@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20051013014733.GA19572@soaustin.net> References: <200510130045.j9D0jdf2087285@repoman.freebsd.org> <20051013014733.GA19572@soaustin.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 12:45:39AM +0000, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>> Having this port marked BROKEN prevents nearly 75 GNOME ports from
>> building, and I'm not okay with that. While Koop sorts out the
>> distfile situation and works on updating the port, I've temporarily
>> hosted the old distfile on MASTER_SITE_LOCAL, and I'm removing the
>> BROKEN and DEPRECATED lines that linimon added.
>
> Well, I suppose this serves me right for committing when I'm not 100%
> healthy. You're right, I should have checked the dependency tree before
> doing this commit.
>
> However, I should note that after the first few hundred commits to clean
> up port fetching problems, they all start to look alike -- and most of
> the ones I've marked BROKEN have been for projects that have been dead
> for years (most recent ones: early WAIS implementation; software
> accelerator for XFree86 v3).
>
> But I'll start double-checking.
>
> mcl
Heh, I'm certainly not going to point any fingers at you. Actually, I
figured I was breaking rules with my commit there ::P
Perhaps BROKEN isn't the right variable to use in these situations? I
mean, when MASTER_SITE_FREEBSD retains a copy of the distfile, and the
original MASTER_SITE disappears, marking the port BROKEN only serves to
prevent users from installing it (aside from encouraging people to fix
it, that is).
Perhaps we could mark such ports as DEPRECATED, but instead introduce a
BIG_LOUD_WARNING variable that complains noisily but doesn't actually
prevent the port from being used? Same thing could be used for ports
with an incorrect pkg-plist. There's no reason that we should be
punishing our users and preventing them from installing the ports, but
spitting out "WARNING: THIS PORT IS INCOMPLETE BECAUSE..." and "EMAIL
${MAINTAINER} TO LET THEM KNOW THAT THEIR PORT IS INCOMPLETE" after
every single step or something might be more useful to the greatest
number of people.
Food for thought, and possibly only useful in an ideal world.
# Adam
--
Adam Weinberger
adamw@magnesium.net || adamw@FreeBSD.org
adamw@vectors.cx || adamw@gnome.org
http://www.vectors.cx
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?434DC405.8070904>