svn commit: r469188 - head/ports-mgmt/pkg_replace

[Baptiste Daroussin]

On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 09:45:34AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote:
> > On 6 May, 2018, at 09:04, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 08:41:36AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote:
> > > > On 6 May, 2018, at 04:27, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 10:15:03AM +0000, Koichiro Iwao wrote:
> > > > > New Revision: 469188
> > > > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/469188
> > > > > 
> > > > > Log:
> > > > >   ports-mgmt/pkg_replace: Update to 20180424
> > > > > 
> > > > >   - Cleanup code
> > > > >   - Speed up and strictly check package's dependencies
> > > > >   - While here, pet portlint by using pkg-plist instead of PLIST_FILES
> > > > 
> > > > Could you explain what did you achieve by moving three-line PLIST_FILES
> > > > into pkg-plist?  How can "pet portlint" be a reason for a change while
> > > > we generally encourage converting <6-line pkg-plist's into PLIST_FILES?
> > > > 
> > > > ./danfe
> > > > 
> > > > > -
> > > > > -PLIST_FILES=	sbin/pkg_replace \
> > > > > -		man/man1/pkg_replace.1.gz \
> > > > > -		"@sample %%ETCDIR%%/pkg_replace.conf.sample"
> > > > 
> > > > Correct PLIST_FILES should read:
> > > > 
> > > > PLIST_FILES=	sbin/pkg_replace \
> > > > 		man/man1/pkg_replace.1.gz \
> > > > 		@sample\ etc/pkg_replace/pkg_replace.conf.sample
> > > > 
> > > > ./danfe
> > > 
> > > Sorry, Alexey, but portlint was right here. @sample and other macros
> > > should
> > > *never* appear in PLIST_FILES. Even if the port installs only a
> > > single file,
> > > if it’s a @sample, it goes in pkg-plist.
> > Same why :)
> > 
> > Alexey is wrong imho about the '\' the quotes where fine, but he is
> > right about
> > the replacement of the %%ETCDIR%%.
> > 
> > I don't understand why keywords should be forbiddent in PLIST_FILES macros?
> > 
> > The framework itself uses macros in PLIST_FILES
> 
> Oh, my. I thought this was a thing! I was so certain that this was (at least
> at one time) policy. Did this change, or did I just invent the whole thing?

I never heard about it, but I have lost track of things for quite some time, so
maybe it happened at some point, and if that is the case, I would be curious of
the rational :)

Bapt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head/attachments/20180506/2fdc32e0/attachment.sig>