[MacPorts] #41069: file @5.15_0 gives errors instead of a result
MacPorts
noreply at macports.org
Sat Mar 8 01:42:01 PST 2014
#41069: file @5.15_0 gives errors instead of a result
----------------------+--------------------------
Reporter: ralph@… | Owner: ryandesign@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: Normal | Milestone:
Component: ports | Version: 2.2.0
Resolution: | Keywords:
Port: file |
----------------------+--------------------------
Comment (by kimmo@…):
@ryandesign, sorry, didn't know about the need for a comment. Thanks for
pointing that out.
Can you please provide more information about how the issue is not fixed
and how to reproduce the problem?
For me the patch fixes the issue. I even created a local port today to
verify it within MacPorts: https://github.com/suominen/macports-
gw/tree/master/sysutils/file
I didn't include the existing patches in the port as they seemed
unnecessary or undesirable. However, I don't think including them would
make a difference when it comes to the issue in this ticket.
It would be helpful if each patch file explained the reason for the patch.
This way it would be easier for others to assess them and consider for
inclusion upstream. It is a standard practice now in pkgsrc:
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/pkgsrc/sysutils/file/patches/patch-
aa?rev=1.6&content-type=text/plain
Here are my thoughts on the patches, without having an easy way of knowing
why they really were added originally.
- patch-getline.diff: this seems unnecessary; the binary is linked
correctly and runs without the change
- patch-magic-Magdir-msdos.diff: having file produce different results
depending on which packaging system was used seems very undesirable to me.
However, a change like this would definitely be appropriate to bring up on
the file mailing list or bug tracker.
- patch-magic-Makefile.am: an uncompiled collection of the magic entries
is not needed, but I could see how it might be interesting as a reference.
Was that the reason for the patch? I think proposing this upstream with
the reasoning behind it would also be good.
If I can help with proposing any of these (or future issues) upstream,
please let me know.
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/41069#comment:12>
MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for OS X
More information about the macports-tickets
mailing list