Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-24 Thread Tijl Coosemans
On Thursday 24 December 2009 06:43:02 Ulrich Spörlein wrote: On Tue, 15.12.2009 at 10:00:18 +0100, Tijl Coosemans wrote: On Tuesday 15 December 2009 09:10:47 Matthew Seaman wrote: Uh -- is it actually possible to create an empty directory when installing from a pkg tarball? I ran into this

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-24 Thread Ulrich Spörlein
On Thu, 24.12.2009 at 13:22:40 +0100, Tijl Coosemans wrote: On Thursday 24 December 2009 06:43:02 Ulrich Spörlein wrote: On Tue, 15.12.2009 at 10:00:18 +0100, Tijl Coosemans wrote: On Tuesday 15 December 2009 09:10:47 Matthew Seaman wrote: Uh -- is it actually possible to create an empty

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-23 Thread Ulrich Spörlein
On Tue, 15.12.2009 at 10:00:18 +0100, Tijl Coosemans wrote: On Tuesday 15 December 2009 09:10:47 Matthew Seaman wrote: Uh -- is it actually possible to create an empty directory when installing from a pkg tarball? I ran into this problem with the phpMyAdmin port, and the only good way

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-16 Thread Michaël Grünewald
Hi, Warren Block wrote: A suggestion: USE_FAKE is not descriptive. It doesn't tell what is fake or what happens. I'm not sure fake is the even the right word. USE_FAKEROOT is better, but still ambiguous: it's not really fake, and root can mean too many things. I guess what I'm trying to

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-16 Thread Florent Thoumie
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Baptiste Daroussin baptiste.darous...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, I have updated the fakeroot patch, it now can apply on an uptodate version of the ports. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/133815 For information the fakeroot patch is a port of

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-16 Thread Baptiste Daroussin
I don't know if this should be a port setting. I think this should be a user setting. So, I think WITH_FAKE / WITH_FAKEROOT is a better choice. Obviously ports not working with fakeroot would have to define something like IGNORE_FAKEROOT, the same kind of variable we have for MAKE_JOBS. I

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-15 Thread Matthew Seaman
Julien Laffaye wrote: It will also ensure the quality of the _packages_. For example, if the port create an empty folder, it's common that the package forget to create it. Uh -- is it actually possible to create an empty directory when installing from a pkg tarball? I ran into this problem

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-15 Thread Tijl Coosemans
On Tuesday 15 December 2009 09:10:47 Matthew Seaman wrote: Uh -- is it actually possible to create an empty directory when installing from a pkg tarball? I ran into this problem with the phpMyAdmin port, and the only good way I found to solve it was to add a stub file into any empty

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-15 Thread Baptiste Daroussin
Uh -- is it actually possible to create an empty directory when installing from a pkg tarball? I ran into this problem with the phpMyAdmin port, and the only good way I found to solve it was to add a stub file into any empty directories.  You could use a post install script or an mtree

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-15 Thread Matthew Seaman
Tijl Coosemans wrote: On Tuesday 15 December 2009 09:10:47 Matthew Seaman wrote: Uh -- is it actually possible to create an empty directory when installing from a pkg tarball? I ran into this problem with the phpMyAdmin port, and the only good way I found to solve it was to add a stub file

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-15 Thread Warren Block
A suggestion: USE_FAKE is not descriptive. It doesn't tell what is fake or what happens. I'm not sure fake is the even the right word. USE_FAKEROOT is better, but still ambiguous: it's not really fake, and root can mean too many things. I guess what I'm trying to say is consider a name

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-15 Thread Baptiste Daroussin
2009/12/15 Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com: A suggestion: USE_FAKE is not descriptive.  It doesn't tell what is fake or what happens.  I'm not sure fake is the even the right word. USE_FAKEROOT is better, but still ambiguous: it's not really fake, and root can mean too many things. I guess

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-15 Thread Lars Engels
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 09:09:22AM -0700, Warren Block wrote: A suggestion: USE_FAKE is not descriptive. It doesn't tell what is fake or what happens. I'm not sure fake is the even the right word. USE_FAKEROOT is better, but still ambiguous: it's not really fake, and root can mean too

Re: New version of the fakeroot patch

2009-12-14 Thread Julien Laffaye
Hi porters, I do agree with the idea of a fakeroot. As bapt said, it will make supporting NOPORTDOCS easier: no more patches against the vendor Makefile(s) !!! It will also ensure the quality of the _packages_. For example, if the port create an empty folder, it's common that the package forget