[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: profanity 0.7.0
> Am 08.09.2019 um 19:09 schrieb Leonardo Taccari <leot%NetBSD.org@localhost>:
> js-pkgsrc%heap.zone@localhost writes:
>> Just dump the upstream changelog in the commit? This was an update over several releases though, so I'm not sure if that would not have been too much?
> Yes, this help possible pkgsrc-wip-changes@ reader to know what to
> expect when updating to a newer version (for more information please
> give a look to `Notes regarding commit messages' in
Ok, will do next time :).
>> They wouldn't work anymore, as I skipped several versions when updating it. profanity changed quite a lot.
>> What would be a good place for that TODO? I have no NetBSD machine to try this on, though, which is another reason I did not port the patches :). It seemed better to just use ncurses than untested code that most likely suffered from bitrot and would need updating?
> Sorry, I meant wip/profanity/TODO refers to curses(3) patches that ATM
> are no longer present and no rationale was present in the commit message
> regarding removal of them.
> It wasn't untested code: at least when they were added I was able to use
> profanity built against curses(3). By just removing them - given that
> generic mk/curses.buildlink3.mk is used it will probably fails in the
> configure phase. I will try to retest them and reapply them.
Sorry, I didn't mean that you didn't test it. I meant that if I would update it to 0.7.0 and just make the patches apply again, I would make them untested patches that might make it break on NetBSD. It seemed safer to just remove them and require ncurses.
Main Index |
Thread Index |