Re: PR/47769 CVS commit: pkgsrc/textproc/ispell-ro

[Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR pkg/47769; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: PR/47769 CVS commit: pkgsrc/textproc/ispell-ro
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 05:39:14 +0700

     Date:        Fri, 26 Apr 2013 19:55:02 +0000 (UTC)
     From:        rodent%NetBSD.org@localhost
     Message-ID:  <20130426195502.E297663ECDD%www.NetBSD.org@localhost>
 
   |  It will only be a problem in this package if upstream regenerates
   |  the distfile for the next version and doesn't choose to name it
   |  something sensible.
 
 And for anyone who still has the 2002 distfile (its name has never changed).
 The DIST_SUBDIR was (as you say) added because there were two different
 rom.spell files - there still could be two different rom.spell files.
 
 Certainly that the pkgsrc package name changes is 100% irrelevant to this
 question.
 
 Once a DIST_SUBDIR has been added for that reason, it can't be removed until
 the distfile changes name (usually this happens when the upstreap maintainer
 releases an updated distfile for a version, then later releases a new version,
 with a new name).
 
 But in general, using a DIST_SUBDIR for any distfile that has no version
 identity is a good thing, as those are the files that tend to change
 without any external sign (in their names).   This isn't pkgsrc taking
 a position on the name of the distfile, just sensibly placing it for
 best pkgsrc usage.
 
 kre
 
 ps: I appreciate that people having a distfile from 10 years ago is
 probably unlikely - but it isn't impossible.   I should still have the
 old one archived somewhere, though I don't have it in my distfiles
 directory (if I had as much disc space 10 years ago as I do today, I
 might still have it there though.)