Ping
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 03:05:14PM +0100, Alex Raschi wrote:
> Ping
>
> Ports and patch reattached for convenience.
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 09:16:52PM +0100, Alex Raschi wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 01:35:38PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > On 2021/02/22 14:05, Alex Raschi wrote:
> > > > I attached the new versions of skalibs (2.10.0.2) and execline
> > > > (2.8.0.0), these fixes a few bugs and change backtick(1) options
> > > > slightly.
> > > >
> > > > I also attached a new port of the newly created mdoc(7) ports of the
> > > > execline HTML documentation. With this one i get:
> > > >
> > > > Warning: execline-man-pages-2.8.0.0.1 conflicts with etsh-5.4.0v0 (shells/etsh):/usr/local/man/man1/if.1
> > > >
> > > > However shells/etsh does not seem to provide a real if(1) command, i
> > > > checked the PLIST of etsh and the if command seems to be an internal
> > > > shell command (execline provides an if command but does not conflict
> > > > with etsh). Any suggestion to fix this?
> > >
> > > either register the conflict with @conflict markers (in both ports),
> > > or install docs to a different dir. conflict markers seems ok to me.
> > >
> > > it might be better to just include the manuals in the main package.
> > > you can use multiple DISTFILES.
> > >
> > > > As said in the previous emails i get these with execline too:
> > > >
> > > > in default FLAVOR: the following libraries in WANTLIB look like masked by RUN_DEPENDS: skarnet
> > > > in FLAVOR "static": the following libraries in WANTLIB look like masked by RUN_DEPENDS: skarnet
> > > >
> > > > I have also checked that these ports work with -fno-common.
> > > >
> > > > Any comments and/or OKs?
> > >
> > > SHARED_LIBS = execline 2.8
> > > SHARED_LIBS = skarnet 2.10
> > >
> > > start with 0.0. if the build system doesn't produce a library with the
> > > right name to match this, patch or pass in via make(1) variables until
> > > it does.
> > >
> > > https://www.openbsd.org/faq/ports/specialtopics.html#SharedLibs
> > >
> > > @so lib/libexecline.so
> > > @lib lib/libexecline.so.${LIBexecline_VERSION}
> > > @bin lib/libexecline.so.2.8.0.0
> > >
> > > @so lib/libskarnet.so
> > > @lib lib/libskarnet.so.${LIBskarnet_VERSION}
> > > @bin lib/libskarnet.so.2.10.0.2
> > >
> > > there should just be "@lib lib/libxyz.so.${LIBxyz}" lines, no
> > > symlinks etc.
> > >
> > > these are probably what's responsible for portcheck's "masked by" warning.
> > >
> > > pkg/DESCR says "has no security issues"
> > >
> > > a bold claim! I don't think it's a good idea to include that bit.
> > >
> > > I would drop the static flavours unless there's a really good reason
> > > for it (usually "it's helpful to run in a chroot for a webserver").
> > >
> >
> > The reason for the static flavor is basically the same as for example
> > shells/dash: it can be really useful in a chroot since it acts
> > functionally the same as a shell. Anyway i will remove it in case.
> >
> > I modified the ports to match your suggestions, below there is the diff
> > to add @conflict to etsh. Thanks!
> >
> > Index: shells/etsh/pkg/PLIST
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /cvs/ports/shells/etsh/pkg/PLIST,v
> > retrieving revision 1.2
> > diff -u -p -r1.2 PLIST
> > --- shells/etsh/pkg/PLIST 30 Mar 2019 18:14:32 -0000 1.2
> > +++ shells/etsh/pkg/PLIST 22 Feb 2021 19:55:45 -0000
> > @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
> > @comment $OpenBSD: PLIST,v 1.2 2019/03/30 18:14:32 bcallah Exp $
> > @conflict osh-*
> > +@conflict execline-*
> > @pkgpath shells/osh
> > @shell bin/etsh
> > @shell bin/tsh
>
>
>
> Index: shells/etsh/pkg/PLIST
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/ports/shells/etsh/pkg/PLIST,v
> retrieving revision 1.2
> diff -u -p -r1.2 PLIST
> --- shells/etsh/pkg/PLIST 30 Mar 2019 18:14:32 -0000 1.2
> +++ shells/etsh/pkg/PLIST 22 Feb 2021 19:55:45 -0000
> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
> @comment $OpenBSD: PLIST,v 1.2 2019/03/30 18:14:32 bcallah Exp $
> @conflict osh-*
> +@conflict execline-*
> @pkgpath shells/osh
> @shell bin/etsh
> @shell bin/tsh
No comments:
Post a Comment