ccache 3.0 port

Ion-Mihai Tetcu itetcu at
Tue May 11 16:55:47 UTC 2010

Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 11 May 2010 17:19:02 +0100
Matthew Seaman <m.seaman at> wrote:

> Hash: SHA1
> On 11/05/2010 16:46:00, Christer Edwards wrote:
> > should I post the current portlint-approved Makefile someplace for
> > further consideration, or should I go about a process of submitting
> > it? If the latter, what is the appropriate way to submit a
> > new/updated port?
> If you can build ccache-3.0, install it and deinstall it without any
> plist problems, then the port is ready for submission.  Well, the new
> version of ccache you build should actually work properly as well...
> To submit an update, generate a diff against the previous version of
> the port using 'diff -Nur'.  Attach this to a PR 'send-pr -a
> port.diff'

I prefer

> - -- fill in the fields in the PR as sensibly as possible: the
> Severity and Priority fields have become rather debased so just set
> them to 'serious' and 'medium' respectively.  

NO, please. Just because some people don't think, there's no need for
us to imitate them :)

There's nothing urgent or serious about this PR.

> Category is 'ports'.
> If you were the maintainer of the port, Class would be 'maintainer
> update'; as you aren't the Class should be 'change request' (which is
> correct in this case, even if one of the changes is to make yourself
> maintainer).  

Change request. Or did I miss where the OP said that the current
maintainer gave him the maintainership?

> Tag the subject line of the PR with '[patch]' (or '[maintainer]' as
> appropriate), the port location relative to /usr/ports (ie.
> "devel/ccache") and a short description of the change: eg "update to
> 3.0".
> You don't really need to put anything in the 'How to Repeat' section,
> nor do you really need to put much in the 'Description' section, but I
> think it useful to supply links to any changelogs or lists of fixed
> bugs or similar so people can see what this update includes.  If your
> update adds or removes or renames files in the port, it's good to
> enumerate those changes in the description of the PR, as this will be
> a great deal of help to the commmitters.

Yes, please do. The more verbose, the better.
> As you aren't maintainer of this port, your PR will be passed to the
> port maintainer for approval.  You may be asked to fix any problems,
> or the maintainer may have reason to reject your update.  Rejection
> of a straight version update is unlikely.  Mostly maintainers will be
> grateful that someone has volunteered to do the work of generating it.
> Given the port maintainer is a committer, he might commit changes
> himself; otherwise it will be passed back to one of the usual set of
> ports committers.


- -- 
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
  "Intellectual Property" is   nowhere near as valuable   as "Intellect"
FreeBSD committer -> itetcu at, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD)


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list