Subject: Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/security/sudo
To: Quentin Garnier <>
From: Roland Illig <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 10/26/2005 21:52:06
Quentin Garnier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 12:53:02PM +0000, Roland Illig wrote:
>>Module Name:	pkgsrc
>>Committed By:	rillig
>>Date:		Fri Oct  7 12:53:02 UTC 2005
>>Modified Files:
>>	pkgsrc/security/sudo: Makefile
>>Log Message:
>>Fixed a pkglint warning.
> Shouldn't pkglint be fixed instead?

I don't think so. I have added the warning with a specific purpose: To 
catch misspelled or superfluous instances where PKGREVISION is defined.

> (Note: this particular commit was annoying because besides fixing a
> non-existent issue

My change may not have fixed any bug per se. Nevertheless I felt a need 
for this change because creating new packages is often done like taking 
an existing Makefile and modifying it until it fits. That is, every 
current package is possibly used as an example how to create a working 
package. These examples (that is: every package) should not only work, 
but should also represent the way new packages are intended to look 
like. Specifically, I want the packages to "look good" and "feel good". 
Just remember that NetBSD is said to be of high code quality.

 > it broke consistency with the branch

Maybe I haven't taken the "best time" to apply this patch. Had it been 
better applied shortly _before_ a branch instead of shortly _after_, to 
minimize the probability of having to pull it up?

> which means it's not as easy to pull-up securtity-related changes.

> Sudo has bad history, it's not a reason to make things harder.)

I don't understand this "bad history". :(