When to use TMPPLIST instead of pkg-plist?

[Mathieu Arnold]

On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 11:29:18AM -0800, Chris wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 11:02:23 +0100 Mateusz Piotrowski 0mp at FreeBSD.org said
> 
> > On 2/29/20 12:15 AM, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 10:06:19PM +0100, Mateusz Piotrowski wrote:
> > >> Do we have any (perhaps unwritten) policy for when to use TMPPLIST? And
> > > when
> > >> should a port maintainer stick to pkg-plist?
> > > We do not.  A port maintainer should stick to pkg-plist.
> > 
> > That's what I thought.
> > 
> > Is there a reason for it? Does it all boil down to that fact that
> > pkg-plist is much more explicit and easier to debug/review? Or there is
> > another reason?
> TMPPLIST is an artifact of the QA process when making a port. It is used

So, I stopped reading there because as this is wrong, all that comes
afterwards was also ;-)

TMPPLIST is the file where all of PLIST_FILES/DIR go after being
processsed for %%FOO%% placeholders, it is where pkg-plist ends up, also
after being processed for placeholders.

It is also where stuff get added, like .info files from the INFO
variable, @ldconfig calls from USE_LDCONFIG, rc file from USE_RC_SUBR,
docs and examples from PORTDOCS and PORTEXAMPLES, and probably a few
other things pile up in there.

All in all, TMPPLIST is the temporary file where every file, directory,
keyword... utimately every part of the framework, end up putting what
needs to end up in the package.

It is also used in the QA process, to tell the user if stuff is wrong
wrt what is really installed, but it is not the other way round.


-- 
Mathieu Arnold
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 963 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20200301/15821f44/attachment.sig>