[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: libreswan 4.7 for wip
On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 at 05:09, Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:
> Andrew Cagney <andrew.cagney%gmail.com@localhost> writes:
> something to get the discussion started
> > [2. text/x-patch; 0001-libreswan-add-libreswan-4.7.patch]...
> - It's not actually in wip (did you just not push?).
hmm, write access, hmm
> - There is no COMMIT_MSG (for use when committing the cvs add).
Would it be possible for url2pkg to generate a stub for this file and
pkglint to, er, lint it when present?
(credit where credit is due: url2pkg did a pretty good job)
> - HOMEPAGE seems wrong.
The contents of DESCR. which url2pkg cribbed from somewhere, are also
wrong. I need to find "somewhere" and get it fixed.
But this brings up a question. How should I document limitations such
> - patch to mandir is not really about NetBSD so much as pkgsrc. patch
> should have a patch comment, not pasted in git commit message, and if
> this is entirely adjusting to pkgsrc norms, an explanation that it
> doesn't belong upstream (in lieu of the otherwise required URL to
> upstream bug report or merge request).
It was cherry-picked from upstream so from Libreswan's POV it is
correct. I'll add a PKGSRC cover note, something like "Backported
Also pkglint wanted the patch broken down into individual files. Here
the tweak was small so accommodating that requirement was easy but
that isn't true in general. What should happen when the change-set is
Also, is there a way to package mainline (aka unstable) in parallel?
Or would that mean a separate libreswan-unstable package? Anyone
reporting a problem to upstream libreswan will likely, eventually, be
asked to test libreswan's mainline.
> Those are all minor comments of course. Thanks for doing this; I had
> lost track of *SWAN entirely.
I suspect the files that end up in */etc still need some work.
Thanks for the feedback.
Main Index |
Thread Index |