Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 01:46:18 +0200 From: Jean-Yves Lefort <jylefort@brutele.be> To: Philip Gollucci <p6m7g8@mac.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Ports using CVS Message-ID: <20020507014618.A2487@jsite.lefort.net> In-Reply-To: <30ADFDFE-614A-11D6-A936-00039371BBE2@mac.com>; from p6m7g8@mac.com on Mon, May 06, 2002 at 07:37:12PM -0400 References: <20020506140116.A90622@jsite.lefort.net> <30ADFDFE-614A-11D6-A936-00039371BBE2@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 07:37:12PM -0400, Philip Gollucci wrote: > Thats a good point. It hadn't occurred to me. The only other thing > that comes to mind > would be that if theres file in the files/ dir that get applied as > patches, wouldn't they only > work agaist the CVS version which was tagged and then made a > distribution ? > > I'm sure you've though of that though, so they're probably something I'm > missing. Yes I tought of that: the maintainer of the port takes the responsability to decide if he can apply patches, or if he has to use sed. I already ported a few applications this way, and experience shows that the method is okay; restrictive sed patterns provide enough security; one could include a check to forbib the use of the port if some files have changed too much (a kind of 'relaxed checksum'). Regards, Jean-Yves Lefort > Just my ideas though. > > On Monday, May 6, 2002, at 08:01 AM, Jean-Yves Lefort wrote: > > > On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 10:40:43PM -0400, Philip Gollucci wrote: > >> I'm not a ports committer, but I'm guessing because the Checksums will > >> hardly ever match cause the CVS files are constantly being changed! > >> > >> On Sunday, May 5, 2002, at 10:24 PM, Jean-Yves Lefort wrote: > >> > >>> I am planning to submit a PR which will add CVS support to the ports > >>> system; > >>> that is, ports will be able to be fetched from their CVS repository. > >>> > >>> However, I once submitted a port fetching its distribution using CVS, > >>> and > >>> the committer rejected the port, answering (literally): > >>> > >>> "use cvs files as distfiles is not good idea." > >>> > >>> Could some ports committer tell me why it is not a good idea? > > > > And what is wrong in dropping the checksum? Whenever you choose > > to fetch a distribution via CVS, you agree to not care about > > the checksum. -- * Jean-Yves Lefort -- jylefort@brutele.be -- http://lefort.homeunix.org/ * To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020507014618.A2487>