Opened 14 years ago
Closed 14 years ago
#25411 closed update (fixed)
Update webalizer version to 2.21-02
| Reported by: | mike.mclean@… | Owned by: | drkp (Dan Ports) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
| Component: | ports | Version: | |
| Keywords: | haspatch maintainer | Cc: | sewebster@… |
| Port: | webalizer |
Description
Patch attached which:
- Updates webalizer to 2.21-02
- Updates the homepage to http://www.webalizer.org/
- Uses the bzip2 version of the download
- Adds all 3 checksums
- Changed lib dependancies to use port:<portname> style
- Adds dep for Berkeley DB (previous version silently failed to activate DNS option if configure could not find bdb)
- Adds additional variants to support options in new version (GeoIP)
Attachments (1)
Change History (10)
Changed 14 years ago by mike.mclean@…
| Attachment: | webalizer.2.21-02.patch added |
|---|
comment:1 Changed 14 years ago by mf2k (Frank Schima)
| Keywords: | haspatch maintainer added |
|---|---|
| Version: | 1.9.1 |
comment:2 Changed 14 years ago by sewebster@…
comment:4 Changed 14 years ago by mike.mclean@…
The attached patch doesn't touch the revision, just the version which properly increased from 2.01-10 to 2.21-02
comment:5 Changed 14 years ago by sewebster@…
Right, I think we are supposed to change the revision back to 0 when upgrading the version, since the revision is just for macports-only "revisions"? That's my understanding of the guide anyway.
comment:6 Changed 14 years ago by mike.mclean@…
I've not seen that in the guide (and there are parts of the guide that are incorrect and out-of-date). Can we get a comment from someone with the committer bit set?
comment:7 Changed 14 years ago by drkp (Dan Ports)
| Owner: | changed from macports-tickets@… to dports@… |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → assigned |
Yes, the revision should be removed (thus set back to zero) when the version is incremented -- it's used to force rebuilds of the port when the portfile is modified but the upstream version remains the same.
I'm curious why you switched to port: dependencies; lib: dependencies are usually preferred because they allow any port that provides the given file to satisfy them.
I suspect the fetch.user and fetch.password aren't necessary (I realize that they aren't new to this patch).
Other than that, the patch looks good.
comment:8 Changed 14 years ago by mike.mclean@…
My reading of section 5.4.1 in the guide seemed to prefer port dependancies, so I changed it. If the preferred in a lib dependency, I can change that. Just let me know.
comment:9 Changed 14 years ago by drkp (Dan Ports)
| Resolution: | → fixed |
|---|---|
| Status: | assigned → closed |
Don't think it really matters in this case since I don't know of any other ports that could be used to provide those dependencies. I'll just leave them alone
- r69174 applies the patch (without the revision line and without changing the dependencies). I couldn't get the patchfile to apply cleanly so made the changes by hand. Possible I missed something.
- r69175 makes some whitespace changes
- r69176 adds the db47 dependency (told you I'd miss something!)
Thanks!
Reduce revision to 0?