On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 12:10 AM, Ion-Mihai Tetcu ite...@freebsd.org wrote:
To submit an update, generate a diff against the previous version
of the port using 'diff -Nur'. Attach this to a PR 'send-pr -a
port.diff'
I prefer http://ionut.tetcu.info/FreeBSD/How-to-submit-a-diff.txt
On Fri, 14 May 2010 12:16:41 -0600
Christer Edwards christer.edwa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 12:10 AM, Ion-Mihai Tetcu
ite...@freebsd.org wrote:
To submit an update, generate a diff against the previous
version of the port using 'diff -Nur'. Attach this to a PR
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 May 2010 19:03:28 +0100
Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/05/2010 17:55:38, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
On Tue, 11 May 2010 17:19:02 +0100
Matthew Seaman
On May 10, 2010, at 10:52 PM, Sahil Tandon sa...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Alberto Villa wrote:
On Tuesday 11 May 2010 03:37:01 Sahil Tandon wrote:
Regarding portlint's FATAL output, please review Package Naming
Conventions in the Handbook. Specifically, If the software
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Alberto Villa avi...@freebsd.org wrote:
PORTVERSION= 3.0.p1
DISTNAME=${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION:S/.p/pre/}
DISTVERSION=3.0pre1
is shorter and cleaner
That's longer,
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 8:31 AM, Sahil Tandon sa...@tandon.net wrote:
Actually, after thinking about this some more, avilla@'s DISTVERSION tweak
is more elegant and gives us the same end result with less fiddling. Stick
with that and sorry for the noise!
should I post the current
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/05/2010 16:46:00, Christer Edwards wrote:
should I post the current portlint-approved Makefile someplace for
further consideration, or should I go about a process of submitting
it? If the latter, what is the appropriate way to submit a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 May 2010 17:19:02 +0100
Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/05/2010 16:46:00, Christer Edwards wrote:
should I post the current portlint-approved Makefile
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/05/2010 17:55:38, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
On Tue, 11 May 2010 17:19:02 +0100
Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
To submit an update, generate a diff against the previous version of
the port using 'diff -Nur'. Attach this
[*] Did anyone have any good suggestions for a replacement for Gnats
yet? I know there is a desire to replace it with something better.
The project to come up with a prototype for its replacement has stalled.
I hope to restart it after completing some urgent upcoming package build
work.
mcl
As a disclaimer, I don't have much experience maintaining ports. I've
altered a few for my own personal use, but never delved too deeply
into the official details of it all.
I have been working with the upstream maintainer of ccache to solve an
issue related to ccache and buildworld on amd64. I
On Mon, 10 May 2010, Christer Edwards wrote:
but I'm running into complaints from portlint that I'm not sure how to
address.
I am eager to learn and I'm happy to dedicate the time to put this
together, if someone doesn't mind offering advice on getting it to
pass portlint's critical eye.
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Sahil Tandon sa...@freebsd.org wrote:
Regarding portlint's FATAL output, please review Package Naming
Conventions in the Handbook. Specifically, If the software version has
strings like ``alpha'', ``beta'', ``rc'', or ``pre'', take the first
letter and put it
On Tuesday 11 May 2010 03:37:01 Sahil Tandon wrote:
Regarding portlint's FATAL output, please review Package Naming
Conventions in the Handbook. Specifically, If the software version has
strings like ``alpha'', ``beta'', ``rc'', or ``pre'', take the first
letter and put it immediately after a
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Alberto Villa avi...@freebsd.org wrote:
PORTVERSION= 3.0.p1
DISTNAME=${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION:S/.p/pre/}
DISTVERSION=3.0pre1
is shorter and cleaner
That's longer, and cleaner is debatable.
--
Adam Vande More
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com wrote:
DISTVERSION= 3.0pre1
is shorter and cleaner
That's longer, and cleaner is debatable.
Well I've used DISTVERSION and it now reports 'looks fine.'
What is the next step?
--
Christer Edwards
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Alberto Villa wrote:
On Tuesday 11 May 2010 03:37:01 Sahil Tandon wrote:
Regarding portlint's FATAL output, please review Package Naming
Conventions in the Handbook. Specifically, If the software version has
strings like ``alpha'', ``beta'', ``rc'', or ``pre'', take
17 matches
Mail list logo
