Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 23:40:42 +0200 From: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [BRAINSTORMING] simplifying maintainer's life Message-ID: <54078ADA.8080805@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <5407649A.80500@FreeBSD.org> References: <20140903082538.GE63085@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20140903145614.158f8e89@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <20140903135029.GK63085@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20140903165622.3bff54e0@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <20140903150018.GL63085@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <5407649A.80500@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am 03.09.2014 um 20:57 schrieb Bryan Drewery: > I support autoplist. The point that if something failed to build and is > now missing for packaging, yet expected, exists today already. I never > have carefully analyzed the build of a port to see if it is building > everything I expected down to every file. I trust that if there is an > error building something I requested that it will halt the build. Does > this make me a bad maintainer? Probably. I'm sure most maintainers do > this. It builds, it works, ship it. The "it works" part is obviously > skipped by many as well. makeplist now assumes the build is proper, so > I'm sure many maintainers do the same. Whatever makeplist (or tinderbox > or poudriere the past X years) has been telling them. I've seen only a > handful of cases where something didn't build but the build itself > passed and hit the plist error. The vast majority of builds do not have > this problem. Please speak only for yourself. I am manually editing plists all the time to avoid astonished users. If some automated build for some script language can be leveraged to reuse their list, that's fine with me, but automatically generating the list from the stage area is too dangerous. I have too often seen ports missing to build features or modules due to some changed API on a requisite port, or a requisite that was no longer found when the requisite was upgraded -- and while the manually-maintained plist does not ward off complaints about missing #ifdef...#endif'd out features due to the same reason, it will at least detect missing files.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54078ADA.8080805>