cvs commit: ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin Makefile distinfo pkg-plist

[Mathieu Arnold]

+-Le 19/01/2004 10:45 -0800, David O'Brien écrivait :
| On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 05:38:01PM +0100, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
|> +-le 19/01/2004 08:32 -0800, David O'Brien ?crivait :
|> | On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 07:44:37AM -0800, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
|> |> mat         2004/01/19 07:44:37 PST
|> |> 
|> |>   FreeBSD ports repository
|> |> 
|> |>   Modified files:
|> |>     mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin Makefile distinfo pkg-plist 
|> |>   Log:
|> |>   Update to 2.62
|> |>   Have the least thing possible between bsd.port.pre.mk and post.mk
|> | 
|> | Please back this out.  It is hard to read and find the dependencies.
|> | The Porter's handbook clearly documents where w/in a port's Makefile
|> | {BUILD,RUN}_DEPENDS belong in the Makefile.
|> 
|> Do you really mean that every perl port that does this should be changed
|> ? it's the first time someone tells me so.
| 
| Well, I guess that opens up a discussion then.  I don't use many "p5"
| ports, but I certainly do use SpamAssassin daily.  So I hadn't noticed
| that they go against the Porters Handbook and 'portlint'.  It is
| important to keep things all in the proper section so a user like me can
| know what dependencies there are.  Often I install dependencies from a
| precompiled package before I add local patches to the "leaf" port that I
| ultimately want installed.

Well, portlint will complain if you do things badly, but it won't complain
when you do just that.
perl ports have been done this way for ages, I mean, the normal
dependencies at the right place, and the dependencies depending on perl
version at the end. I was told it was the right way to do it when I began
updating ports, so I though it was the right way.

-- 
Mathieu Arnold