On 2/25/2014 23:08, A.J. 'Fonz' van Werven wrote: > Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >> Can we stop advertising the above, this is completly wrong, it hides the >> dust behind the carpet and won't fix anything! >> >> The said port is needed a fix. > > Granted: it's not staging itself that is the problem, it's incorrect usage > thereof. But anyone possessing even the tiniest trace amount of realism > will have to concede that port maintainers do occasionally get it wrong. > And when they do the errors as reported by the OP are a tell-tale symptom.
No one should have a problem conceding that. The issue is that it seems that many ports are staged without checking in redports / poudriere or otherwise. I was even guilty of this the other day. I was on the road and I created two new ports that easily passed with DEVELOPER_MODE. Neither built in clean environment though and I got rewarded with pkg-fallout messages. A lot of stuff gets committed that it's clear was never remotely tested, not even with portlint. But don't blame the tools -- the port needs to be fixed. I agree that we should never advise "NO_STAGE=yes", ever. If the port is broken, so be it. PR, patch, normal process. There's been a lot of understandable grumbling due to growing pains of major infrastructure changes by users, so telling users to revert these changes isn't a good look. Let's just try to get the port fixed in a reasonable timeframe (e.g. get the guy that broke it to take care of it). John _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"