FreshPorts beta now displays VuXML data

[Dan Langille]

On 22 Sep 2004 at 15:15, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 07:35:20PM -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I just finished the first cut of the code that marks commits as affected
> > by VuXML data.  Have a look at your favourite VuXML entry and see if the
> > associated package is affected.
> > 
> >    e.g. http://beta.freshports.org/?package=pine
> 
> Thanks, Dan! I've experimentally added links on VuXML.org pages to
> FreshPorts URLs like the one above.  Thus, if you click on a package
> name at say
> http://vuxml.freebsd.org/e9f9d232-0cb2-11d9-8a8a-000c41e2cdad.html
> it will probably have you looking at the right FreshPorts entry.

That looks good.  I hope that type of linking makes it easier for 
others to link.

FWIW, I am making progress on the VuXML issues.  I have found that I 
need to set historical PORTEPOCH for all ports that have a PORTEPOCH 
[1].  By historical, I mean for each commit in FreshPorts.  That's 
the only way I can then get a proper test result from 'pkg_version -
t.  I'm almost there.

This page http://beta.freshports.org/tmp/epoch-fetching-slave.txt 
(500KB) lists the ports that have a PORTEPOCH, the commits for that 
port, and the historical value of the PORTEPOCH value for that 
commit.  I do this by literally fetching each revision of the 
Makefile.  FreshPorts knows that revision is associated with each 
commit (that information is in the cvs-all email0.

Obtaining the PORTEPOCH values is not a simple grep command.  You 
must do a "make -V PORTVERSION". There are 27 ports containing an 
EPOCH value that are also slave ports.  Of these 27, two set their 
own EPOCH value, the other 25 get it from the MASTERPORT.  It is 
thoese 25 ports which are going to be tougher.  There are 15 distinct 
master ports involved (fortunately, none of them have their own 
MASTERPORTs).

I'm not yet sure how I'm going to cope with these master ports.  The 
others should be straight forward.

[1] FWIW, there are 246 ports with a PORTEPOCH value.  This differs 
from the result of this command, perhaps because not all such ports 
are in the INDEX I'm using (e.g. archivers/bsdtar)

   awk -F\| '$1 ~ /,/ {print $2 "/Makefile"}' /usr/ports/INDEX-

-- 
Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/
BSDCan - The Technical BSD Conference - http://www.bsdcan.org/