On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 09:56:55 +0100 Chris Rees <cr...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> 2011/6/22 Alexey Dokuchaev <da...@freebsd.org>: > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:33:14AM +0400, Ilya A. Arkhipov wrote: > >> Ok i rewrite patch and do with argument, and write patch to portlint ;) > > > > Wow, if you could write a patch to portlint that is would correctly suggest > > that MAINTAINER/COMMENT/LICENSE should be grouped together, and FOO_DEPENDS > > would be closed to USE_BAR knobs, I'd be very grateful! > > > > Just to make myself clear on this issue: COMMENT/LICENSE are general > > software information, FOO_DEPENDS and USE_BAR knobs both specify > > dependencies (that is, package-related stuff). I believe that it does not > > make sence to mix them, hence LICENSE should be defined before _DEPENDS, not > > after. > > > > I agree 110% with this. It confused me a while ago when I started to > use LICENSE, but I think the general acceptance is that we should > have: > > PORTNAME > PORTVERSION > etc > > MAINTAINER > COMMENT > > LICENSE > > So license in a separate block; you can have several license lines > making the MAINTAINER/COMMENT block unnecessarily large. > > Not too sure about keeping _DEPENDS with USE; there're additional > variables often set with USE, perhaps a block for _DEPENDS and then > USE etc underneath? (could follow with USERS/GROUPS). > > Example: > > PORTNAME > PORTVERSION > etc > > MAINTAINER > COMMENT > > LICENSE > > LIB_DEPENDS= > > BUILD_DEPENDS= > > RUN_DEPENDS= > > USE_FOO > FOO_ARGS > USE_BAR > > USERS > GROUPS *dEPENDS and USE* are really the same thing, dependencies (with, maybe, some rare exceptions). So I'd say they should go together. -- Ion-Mihai Tetcu <ite...@freebsd.org> _______________________________________________ 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"
