Simone Rota wrote:
Hi everybody,
many of the CLC maintainers already know that at http://www.varlock.com/clcuild/ there's a summary of the automated build process for clc ports.
First of all, congratulations to all maintainers, I got 356 ok / 47 failed, last time (crux 1.3) we had 306 / 240, I think this is a symptom the quality of ports is raising up.
See, that's cause mine weren't included. I take the curve down! ;) Well, problem is I will not be able to update my server to 2.0 for at least a week or two, since I got live mail, dns, web, etc. etc on it and just don't have downtime for it right now. So if anyone can go out of their way and test the following ports (after doing ports -u): gtk-engines-bluecurve gtk-engines-mist gtk-engines-thinice (Robert, I took over this one to complete the set) gtk-engines-xfce postfix stunnel syslog-ng xautolock icewm spamassassin mawk mrtg xblast xsoldier I still have to fix these two: gtk-engines-cleanice (wants gtk 2.4.x, I got 2.2.4) gtk-engines-smooth (something is wrong) I am thinking in a week or two, to start looking at ports that weren't tagged 2.0, to see if there are any I can adopt (if they matter). Problems: Since 1_3 is a branch, what do we do with gtk2-* ports? I really think the cvs tree is getting a little dirty with old names. Can we make a leap with 2.0 and make it its own branch too and clean out the crud? I am concerned that with every update, we lose ports that people no longer maintain. I really feel we got to create an automated list generation of abandoned ports so people can "adopt" them if they're interested. Here is current way to find untagged ports: #!/bin/bash CVSDIR=/home/$USER/PORTS/clc ### <<< UPDATE THIS LINE find $CVSDIR /usr/ports/{contrib,unmaintained} -type d \ -maxdepth 1 -printf "%f\n"| \ grep -v CVS | sort | uniq -u I think having 2.0 as a separate list can allow us to quickly find abandoned ports and have a clean start for the 2.x series. What do you guys think? Also, and I guess I'll get kicked for this, but I didn't ask before I did, so maybe I did wrong, but when I set up gtk-engines-* ports, I assumed, since 1.3 is a branch, that we didn't need gtk2-engines-* any more, and I removed them. Was that a bad thing? If it was, I guess I can recover them, but... I noticed gtk2 was still there... so... should I return gtk2-engines-* or not care? Victor