Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 21:21:50 -0700 From: Jason Nordwick <nordwick@scam.xcf.berkeley.edu> To: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: new ports Message-ID: <3581FE5E.F05A47DE@scam.xcf.berkeley.edu> References: <3581C674.D9843F57@scam.xcf.berkeley.edu> <19980613031426.22805@follo.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Eivind Eklund wrote:
>
> Yes, there is. You can go through each port, verifying that it is 'up
> to standards' (see the handbook), and mail in a gnats followup saying
> that you've done so and it is OK (or suggesting changes to the port to
> make it OK). This makes it much easier for the committer, as he can
> feel much more confident of his own review.
>
What is "up to standards"? In the Handbook it gives this process as a test:
Testing the port
You should make sure that the port rules do exactly what
you want it to do, including packaging up the port. Try
doing `make install', `make package' and then
`make deinstall' and see if all the files and directories
are correctly deleted. Then do a `pkg_add
`make package-name`.tgz' and see if everything re-appears
and works correctly. Then do another `make deinstall' and
then `make reinstall; make package' to make sure you
haven't included in the packing list any files that are
not installed by your port.
Is this sufficient? Is there anything else that I should check?
I'll be happy to test some this weekend.
> Eivind.
Thanks,
Jay
--
4.4 > 95
http://www.xcf.berkeley.edu
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?3581FE5E.F05A47DE>