andrew clarke pisze:
I'll attempt a PR, but I'm not at all competent enough in Perl to be confident in providing a patch.
I was not refering to patching Perl code, rather that supplying new port and a little modification to net/p5-Net-Twitter/Makefile in a patch format (diff).
I filled a PR ports/137305.
I have to wonder - why have these recent versions of this port been committed but not tested? If it was tested, presumably it would be flagged as "BROKEN".
No. The port builds properly, it's just missing some functionality because of missing dependency. This is something automatic checks couldn't catch, and this is what a port maintainer should notice. But, things like this do happen.
But isn't the rationale of the Ports tree to have buildable, working software?
Yes, that's why when you have noticed and verified that the problem exists you should fill in a PR. Even though you can't supply a patch to fix it you would let the maintainer know.
-- Cezary Morga _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
