On Wed, 19 Jan 2011, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2011/01/19 09:41, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> > Since I don't know how to fix this, can someone send me a correct diff?
>
> see below, I think this one is better.
>
> I cleaned up whitespace a bit too, sorted WANTLIB, and added a patch
> to fix a typo in xxxterm.desktop (which makes the patch slightly annoying
> to apply to a tree which you might commit from; cd /usr/ports/www/xterm;
> cvs up -dA (** NO -P **); then you can patch with -E -p0).
>
> > > > you can also just use
> > > > ${SUBST_CMD} -o ${SHAREOWN} -g ${SHAREGRP} -c ${WRKSRC}/xxxterm.desktop
> > > > ${PREFIX}/share/applications/xxxterm.desktop
> > > > instead of doing install+subst
> > >
> > > But then you have to do chown anyway, since SUBST_CMD does not support
> > > "-m mode" switch.
>
> if the desktop file had been in the ports tree instead (e.g. in
> www/xterm/files) then we could not rely on the mode as the tree
> might have been checked out with umask 002. but it's ok here,
> because the file is in the tarball with the correct permissions
> (pkg_subst just copies the existing permissions - I wouldn't
> oppose -m support for pkg_subst, I think it was discussed before
> but I don't recall the outcome).
>
> I'm ok with this update and diff, but at this point I would like
> to see an ok from another ports hacker who has been through a
> couple of release cycles as obviously we are going to be short
> on time to fix any problems.
I don't really see the point of adding this:
> +SUBST_VARS += TRUEPREFIX
