pkg/43165: print/tex-pgfplots distfile checksum error

[kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost]

>Number:         43165
>Category:       pkg
>Synopsis:       print/tex-pgfplots distfile checksum error
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       low
>Responsible:    pkg-manager
>State:          open
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Thu Apr 15 02:55:00 +0000 2010
>Originator:     Robert Elz
>Release:        NetBSD 4.0 / i386 (irrelevant)    pkgsrc current 2009-04-14
>Organization:
        Prince of Songkla University
>Environment:
System: NetBSD jade.coe.psu.ac.th 4.0_STABLE NetBSD 4.0_STABLE 
(JADE-1.696-20080517) #9: Fri May 23 18:55:13 ICT 2008 
kre%jade.coe.psu.ac.th@localhost:/usr/obj/4/kernels/JADE i386
Architecture: i386
Machine: i386
>Description:
        The distfile available on the master sites for print/tex-pgfplots
        does not match (size of checksum) the pkgsrc distinfo file.

        The version on f.n.o is 0 bytes ...

>How-To-Repeat:
        move aside any diffent distfile for print/tex-pgfplots

mv ..../distfiles/tex-pgfplots-1.2.2/pgfplots.tar.xz /some/where/safe

        then attempt to fetch it again

cd ..../pkgsrc/print/tex-pgfplots
make checksum

        Notice that the file fetched from all of the master sites
        is 234436 bytes, whereas the distinfo expects 226660 - and that
        the final fetch attempt (from f.n.o) fetches an empty file.

>Fix:
        Find out what happened, and whether the difference is expected
        (perhaps the package has been upgraded upstream, as it appears
        to have no version number in the master site distfile name)
        Then do something appropriate...

        I haven't verified this one, but my system generally fetches
        distfiles for updates packages within a few hours of the pkgsrc
        upgrade - and it fetched the "different" distfile, rather than
        the one expected by pkgsrc - which suggests that the distfile was
        changed on the master site either at, or very very close to, the
        time the package was updated - if that's true, then there should
        be no need to go through any kind of distfile renaming dance, as
        no-one using pkgsrc will have the one that pkgsrc currently expects.

        If that's not true, then probably DIST_SUBDIR will need to
        be set to PKGNAME instead of PKGNAME_NOREV and a revbump done
        to make the dist-subdir be ....nb1 (if the package has changed,
        and anyone might have built the old one, a revbump would be needed
        of course anyway - but not necessarily if no-one has ever been able
        to build the existing one because of the distfile problem).