jonathan at kc8onw.net
Mon Nov 17 14:09:02 PST 2008
Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:39:10 -0500 Jonathan <jonathan at kc8onw.net>
>> 1) The handbrake build system unmodified uses wget to download all
>> it's dependencies itself. The patches to modify the build system
>> to not do this are fairly significant and are a maintenance
>> headache. Would allowing the port to download it's dependencies
>> itself be acceptable or do I need to continue using the ports
>> distfile system and maintaining awkward patches?
> Dependencies as in *_DEPENDS? If yes, please try to maintain those
Handbrake custom patches many of the libraries it uses so I can't use
system version of those libraries. The handbrake team strongly
discourages building from source and wants people to use binaries so the
only all-in-one source for the library tar files currently is their
development server. To build handbrake while using FreeBSD ports
distfiles involves patching the build system to not fetch and extract
the archives and let FreeBSD do it which is a fairly large patch (nearly
1/3 of the file is involved in the patch).
> Does this auto-fetch system has any provision for verifying the
> integrity of those files? Like our checksums from distinfo.
No it does not.
>> 2) In addition to the above the developers have stated they would
>> strongly prefer that we not download the dependencies directly from
>> them as the server is not load balanced. In this case do we fetch
>> them directly anyway, host them on FreeBSD controlled systems, or
>> something else altogether?
> Umm, handbrake's build system downloads them from where? Can't we
> download from the same place? If not, yes, we can mirror them on
See above, if we have the port built from source they would pretty much
have to be mirrored on MASTER_SITE_LOCAL.
>> 3) The Handbrake developers prefer to directly distribute binaries
>> rather than have people building handbrake themselves but this goes
>> again the ports philosophy where building from source is the
>> primary method and packages are a convenience. Should I make the
>> port a stub that installs a pre-compiled binary like the teamspeak
>> port does?
> Do they make available binaries for all our supported OS versions?
> What about head? What about other archs that i386? For short no,
> please don't do that.
If I choose to have the port build from source I can count on *not*
getting any support from the development team as they are pretty dead
set against anything other than pre-built binaries.
More information about the freebsd-ports