I'd just set REVISION=1 and drop the other REVISION-foo, but either way is ok
--
Sent from a phone, apologies for poor formatting.
On 25 January 2026 12:27:01 Stuart Cassoff <[email protected]> wrote:
Built and tested ok with SWIG 4.2.1 and SWIG 4.4.1 on amd64 and i386.
diff -Nurp /usr/ports/devel/subversion/Makefile ./Makefile
--- /usr/ports/devel/subversion/Makefile Thu Jan 15 03:10:01 2026
+++ ./Makefile Sun Jan 25 07:13:12 2026
@@ -5,13 +5,15 @@ COMMENT-ruby= ruby interface to subversion
COMMENT-ap2= apache2 subversion modules
COMMENT-gnome-keyring= GNOME keyring support for subversion
+REVISION= 0
+
VERSION= 1.14.5
DISTNAME= subversion-${VERSION:S/rc/-rc/}
PKGNAME-main= subversion-${VERSION}
-REVISION-main= 0
+REVISION-main= 1
PKGNAME-perl= p5-SVN-${VERSION}
PKGNAME-python= py3-subversion-${VERSION}
-REVISION-python= 0
+REVISION-python= 1
PKGNAME-ruby= ruby${MODRUBY_BINREV}-subversion-${VERSION}
PKGNAME-ap2= ap2-subversion-${VERSION}
PKGNAME-gnome-keyring= gnome-keyring-subversion-${VERSION}
diff -Nurp
/usr/ports/devel/subversion/patches/patch-subversion_bindings_swig_include_svn_types_swg
./patches/patch-subversion_bindings_swig_include_svn_types_swg
---
/usr/ports/devel/subversion/patches/patch-subversion_bindings_swig_include_svn_types_swg Wed
Dec 31 19:00:00 1969
+++ ./patches/patch-subversion_bindings_swig_include_svn_types_swg Fri Jan
23 10:29:08 2026
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+https://github.com/apache/subversion/commit/bf72420e86059a894fa3aacbbd6e3bee9286e46e
+
+
+Index: subversion/bindings/swig/include/svn_types.swg
+--- subversion/bindings/swig/include/svn_types.swg.orig
++++ subversion/bindings/swig/include/svn_types.swg
+@@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ svn_ ## TYPE ## _swig_rb_closed(VALUE self)
+ %typemap(in, noblock=1) apr_pool_t * {
+ /* Verify that the user supplied a valid pool */
+ if ($input != Py_None && $input != _global_py_pool) {
+- SWIG_Python_TypeError(SWIG_TypePrettyName($descriptor), $input);
++ SWIG_Error(SWIG_TypeError, "a '$type' is expected");
+ SWIG_arg_fail($svn_argnum);
+ SWIG_fail;
+ }
