Bartek Palmowski [2008-05-23 09:07]:
Johannes Winkelmann wrote: />/So you'd end up with a package you can't reproduce after the 'work' is
removed, because you didn't make patches from your changes. Seems like a major step back, and nothing that should be actively encouraged.
Pkgfile is the only "interface" to interact with building process, whats the point of doing all changes to Pkgfile then rebuild, do changes again, then rebuild again (note that source package gets extracted every time that happens. Lets look at the situation when maintainer 'A' tries to build some port, he needs to perform some "surgery" on the Makefile, to do that in usual method he needs to think of a sed lines or make a patch, put in on the Pkgfile, and then perform build only to notice that he made i.e stupid mistake. With the pkgmk -b feature he could do it quikly, and by _memorizing_ (im talking about minor changes) apply those modifications to Pkgfile, which would speed port developing process and make it easier.
I wonder whether we can protect ourselves from releasing a port that only worked because we messed with the srcdir directly :) maybe we could make pkgmk _not_ create the final package if -b is used, so you just get to see whether the build succeeded, but you'll only get a package if you do _not_ use -b. Regards, Tilman -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?