ports/54351: devel/portlint and /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk disagree about port Makefile order

[Kim Scarborough]

>Number:         54351
>Category:       ports
>Synopsis:       devel/portlint and /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk disagree about port Makefile order
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    freebsd-ports-bugs
>State:          open
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Thu Jul 10 19:10:02 PDT 2003
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     Kim Scarborough
>Release:        FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE-p7 i386
>Organization:
>Environment:
System: FreeBSD housecat.unknown.nu 5.0-RELEASE-p7 FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE-p7 #0: Mon May 5 11:53:22 CDT 2003 toor at housecat.unknown.nu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/HOUSECAT i386


	
>Description:
	This is either a sw-bug with the portlint port, or a doc-bug with
	/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk. 

	bsd.port.mk says that the following variables should go in this
	order in a port's Makefile:

	PKGNAMEPREFIX
	PKGNAMESUFFIX
	DISTNAME
	CATEGORIES
	DISTFILES
	EXTRACT_SUFX
	MASTER_SITES
	MASTER_SITE_SUBDIR

	However, portlint will scream and die if you don't have said
	variables in *this* order:

	CATEGORIES
	MASTER_SITES
	MASTER_SITE_SUBDIR
	PKGNAMEPREFIX
	PKGNAMESUFFIX
	DISTNAME
	EXTRACT_SUFX
	DISTFILES

>How-To-Repeat:
	
>Fix:

	I'd be glad to send a patch, but I don't know which is right.
	bsd.port.mk seems more "official", but I'm sure more port maintainers
	run portlint than read bsd.port.mk.


>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: