Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 13:53:51 -0500 From: Glenn Johnson <gjohnson@srrc.ars.usda.gov> To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Handling tarballs with no version Message-ID: <20010419135351.A60770@node7.cluster.srrc.usda.gov> In-Reply-To: <20010419205924.G1527@ringworld.oblivion.bg>; from roam@orbitel.bg on Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 08:59:24PM %2B0300 References: <20010419125305.A48871@node7.cluster.srrc.usda.gov> <20010419205924.G1527@ringworld.oblivion.bg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 08:59:24PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 12:53:05PM -0500, Glenn Johnson wrote: > > > I have a port that I maintain that does not use a version number in > > the tar file. If I update the port and bump either the PORTVERSION > > or PORTREVISION variable, then users who have the port installed > > will get a CHECKSUM mismatch when doing an upgrade. How can I > > force the update of the distfile when one installs the port? I was > > thinking that running the distclean target prior to fetch would work > > but what is the cleanest way to implement that? > > Absolutely bump the PORTREVISION; then, leave it up to the users > to make sure they have the latest. Yes, this will break automated > builds, but such is life :( > > Invoking distclean before fetch would be a *bad* idea - it would force > a re-fetch every time somebody tries to build this port, or some port > dependent on it. Well, what I had in mind was to only run the distclean target if the tar file was out of date. I thought maybe an md5 comparison could be done and if that fails then run the distclean target to purge the old tar file, followed by a fetch of the new tar file. The problem I am envisioning with the current arrangement is that the user could set NO_CHECKSUM=yes after it fails the first time. The port will then be built using the old distfile but labeled as whatever the current PORTREVISION is set to. There would be a mismatch here. The other possibility of course is that the user gets a failure someplace else, likely a patch, but this at least avoids the problem of the PORTREVISION not matching reality. -- Glenn Johnson USDA, ARS, SRRC Phone: (504) 286-4252 New Orleans, LA 70124 e-mail: gjohnson@srrc.ars.usda.gov 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?20010419135351.A60770>