ports/143949: editors/openoffice-3: system unzip pickiness unhelpful for OpenOffice build

[Dag-Erling Smørgrav]

The following reply was made to PR ports/143949; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des at des.no>
To: Andrew Reilly <areilly at bigpond.net.au>
Cc: Howard Goldstein <hg at queue.to>,  bug-followup at FreeBSD.org,  joerg at NetBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/143949: editors/openoffice-3: system unzip pickiness unhelpful for OpenOffice build
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 12:16:18 +0100

 Andrew Reilly <areilly at bigpond.net.au> writes:
 > If the command line args used by the ooo build are meaningful,
 > then I think that this could represent a bug (or misfeature) in
 > the new unzip, rather than in the ooo port.
 
 A while ago, I did a review of ports that used unzip(1).  Many of them
 used flag combinations that were completely meaningless (no-op or
 self-contradicting) or even unsafe.
 
 This is a borderline case, and you could make a good case for changing
 unzip(1) to accept -u and -o together, not least because there is an
 example that uses -uo in the man page :) But in what way does -uo differ
 from -o alone?  If there is no difference, then using -uo is pointless,
 although *allowing* it is harmless.  If there is, is there also a
 difference between -uo and -ou?
 
 I can't remember what the default behavior (without either -f or -u) is.
 
 In any case, neither -f, -u nor -o should not be used with -n.  Using -f
 and -n together results in no files being extracted, -n cancels -u, and
 -o and -n directly contradict each other.  Using -f and -u together is
 not a good idea either: they agree on updating existing files, but
 disagree on extracting new ones; which one takes precedence?
 
 DES
 --=20
 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des at des.no