svn commit: r406930 - head/archivers/file-roller

[John Marino]

On 1/25/2016 1:39 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:50:13AM +0100, John Marino wrote:
> 
> Hmm, but how is the fact that zipinfo is a symlink $LOCALBASE/bin/unzip is
> irrelevant?  The port wants unzip (not zipinfo), and the granule of change
> is a line; regardless of the contents, it's -1 +1.

Not really.
In my view, what it _wants_ is to register the package.  It doesn't
matter what causes the register, only that it's registered.  I could
have just as easily requested a man page and it would still work as
intended.

Now, for those susceptible to pedantism, I can see how it would seem
less correct but the whole "_DEPENDS" scheme is like this.  We don't
list *every* file a port might depend on, we just pick one.  That one
file is enough to create the registry.

Given that point of view, and given that zipinfo cannot exist without
unzip, I see those as equivalent.

TLDR;
Whatever guarantees the dependency registry is correct enough because
the actual file is can never be considered representative of the true
requirement.


> 
>> I saw the two as equal and thus "dealer's choice" and I chose the latter.
> 
> Having to add an explanatory comment makes it -1 +n, so the two get a little
> less equal once you consider this. ;-)

Maybe, but I wanted somebody to pause before changing it in the future.

John