#42457: [update] volatility 2.3.1 -------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: jul_bsd@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: maintainer Port: volatility | -------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by ryandesign@…): Replying to [comment:2 jul_bsd@…]:
Most patch, I saw in the tree where just patch-* so I took the same format. do I need to report as a but if name is not correct?
Well that's a slightly different thing. You're talking about patches that a port will use. Frank was talking about the patch you attached to this ticket, which will not be used by a port, but will be used by a committer to update a port. But for both types of patch files, adding the ".diff" extension allows us to view the diff properly in Trac, so it's desired. The decision to name patchfiles (those patchfiles that portfiles use) "patch-*.diff" was made probably 5-7 years ago if I recall. Ports that have not been touched since before then might still have patch names that don't conform to that pattern. Patch naming is not the most important thing in the world, but we have this standard naming convention that we decided on, so it's nice to use it.
Where is the documentation for sub-port? nothing in http://guide.macports.org. or a template/example?
I don't believe we have any documentation written yet. Grep the existing Portfiles for "subport" if you want to find example ports. More comments: * Is the custom livecheck needed? Usually googlecode projects don't need a custom livecheck; the default usually works fine. * Could you tell us more about the "FIXME" comment you added, and what difficulties you're running into telling MacPorts to download and use that second distfile? -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/42457#comment:3> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X