Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[feature request] Generate pkg-plist or pkg-plist diff during testport. #659

Open
davidchisnall opened this issue Jan 14, 2019 · 5 comments

Comments

@davidchisnall
Copy link
Member

Poudriere can tell me what changes I need to make to my pkg-plist file, but the output is not in any machine-readable form. I'd estimate that around 20-30% of the time that I spend on updating a port is manually going and doing what poudiere tells me to do to fix the output. Having it spit out a diff that I could review and apply to fix the port would dramatically improve productivity (not having the pkg-plist file at all would be even better, but that's not a poudriere issue).

@mat813
Copy link
Member

mat813 commented Jan 14, 2019

I wanted to open this issue for so long, even simply having the new plist saved in /tmp/new-plist in the jail would allow to simply do something like this:

vim -d /usr/local/poudriere/data/.m/*/ref/tmp/new-plist pkg-plist

@bdrewery
Copy link
Member

bdrewery commented Feb 5, 2019

Spitting out a diff implies the output is 100% correct. If that were the case then why not use automatic plists? (Portmgr decided against it.)
I like @mat813's idea but it should save to the logs dir probably like portlint output does.

@davidchisnall
Copy link
Member Author

Spitting out a diff implies the output is 100% correct.

I don't understand this argument. It's already telling me the changes that I probably need to make, it's just wasting my time making them harder to apply. With a diff, given a constant amount of my time to work on ports, I can spend more time checking the contents of the diff and less time on manually turning the diff into something I can apply.

If that were the case then why not use automatic plists? (Portmgr decided against it.)

Why not use automatic plists for any port that doesn't want to explicitly exclude things created by the install step? Again, making port maintainers do trivially automatable work doesn't really help in keeping the ports tree well maintained.

@bdrewery
Copy link
Member

For the record I support something like AUTO_PLIST but gave up on that argument in Ports. I just don't like the idea of a diff here. I'm all for generating the plist and saving it with the logs and making it easily accessible.

@bdrewery
Copy link
Member

Also similar to #641 we may be lacking a hook here for this and should support it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants