Clarification on fetch/extract targets

Sam Lawrance boris at brooknet.com.au
Mon Jun 18 12:16:56 UTC 2007


On 18/06/2007, at 7:28 PM, Stephen Hurd wrote:

> Sam Lawrance wrote:
>>
>> On 17/06/2007, at 7:33 AM, Stephen Hurd wrote:
>>
>>> Kris Kennaway wrote:
>>>>> Actually, I found it quite easy to have the port pull the  
>>>>> sources from svn.  Who are we concerned about making it easier  
>>>>> for and why (and how is it any easier?)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Everyone behind a firewall that only allows fetching via HTTP/ 
>>>> FTP, for
>>>> one.  Also everyone without live network access, and those with
>>>> pay-per-download who have a free local distfile mirror, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Tarballs are overwhelmingly preferred.
>>>>
>>>> Kris
>>>>
>>> Ok... I was looking at it from the standpoint of someone who  
>>> wants the newest version and doesn't care of the pkg-plist is  
>>> stale.  They could just bump PORTREVISION and reinstall.
>>>
>>> So... how about this:
>>> - A distfile target which generates a distfile.  The idea being  
>>> that this would be the one on the local distfile mirror or what  
>>> have you.
>>> - A WITH_SVN option (defaults to off) which allows the end user  
>>> to specify he/she wants to use the subversion.
>>>
>>> In this case then, the end user would need to bump PORTREVISION  
>>> and enable the WITH_SVN option.
>>
>> Rather than suggesting that users change PORTREVISION, just  
>> suggest that they set WITH_SVN and force an upgrade (eg.  
>> portupgrade -f yourport).
>
> You mean have it just grab the current head no matter what when  
> WITH_SVN is enabled?  *shudder*
>
> All kinds of arguments against that spring to mind...
> - This is essentially an option to break the pkg-plist
> - The current trunk may not build/work/etc so the option will only  
> work "sometimes"
> - The version number becomes wrong if a later update to the port  
> increases the revision to something less than the current one, the  
> tools will "upgrade" it to an older version
>
> These are just the ones that spring to mind initially... I'm sure  
> there are other wild and crazy things that would/could happen.

Maybe I don't understand what you're trying to do.  What's the point  
of bumping PORTREVISION?

For that matter, what's the point of WITH_SVN given what you've just  
said?




More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list