Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 16:22:08 -0500 From: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com> To: Michael Haro <mharo@area51.fremont.ca.us> Cc: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>, FreeBSD Ports Team <ports@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: bsd.port.mk timeout idea Message-ID: <20000502162208.C88844@lovett.com> In-Reply-To: <20000502123641.A49857@area51.fremont.ca.us>; from mharo@area51.fremont.ca.us on Tue, May 02, 2000 at 12:36:41PM -0700 References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005011709050.42183-100000@illiad.adhesivemedia.com> <vqcya5tbbjp.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000502123641.A49857@area51.fremont.ca.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 02, 2000 at 12:36:41PM -0700, Michael Haro wrote: > What about having bsd.port.mk fetch a version file from the freebsd > website and compare the versions reported. Maybe fetch/update this file > every time a make fetch is done because I assume that when a make fetch > is done that the user has access to the Internet. Ouch! Single points of failure^Wpresence are almost always a bad idea. Perhaps every time the INDEX is regenerated, we stamp a date somewhere, say Mk/port.timestamp -- don't put it in bsd.port.mk or an existing file so we don't get history spammage. It should then be a SMOP to kick out a warning message if your timestamp is <N> months behind, or outright failure if it's <N+M> months behind, kind of like the way in which some time-based software licenses work. -aDe -- Ade Lovett, Austin, TX. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000502162208.C88844>