[46644] trunk/dports/security

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Feb 10, 2009, at 02:45, Lassi A. Tuura wrote:

>>> +homepage            http://www.logwatch.org
>>> +master_sites        ftp://ftp.kaybee.org/pub/linux
>>
>> Is there an http master site that could be added? Some users,  
>> including our own distfiles mirror, cannot fetch from ftp sites.
>
> Not that I know of.  A web search on the archive name returns 'hey  
> get files and ads from us' sites; do you trust such secondary file  
> sources?  The only other alternative I can think of is CVS checkout  
> using "rel7_3_6" tag, which lacks a few files but otherwise seems  
> like the tar ball (checkout misses "License" and  
> "logwatch-7.3.6.spec").

Ok, then we'll leave it.

I recall now that only Apple's mirror in California has this  
inability to fetch from ftp. We have two other mirrors now in other  
countries that can fetch from ftp. And all the mirrors are accessible  
via http. So that should be sufficient.


>>> +    # startup item
>>> +    file delete /Library/LaunchDaemons/org.macports.${name}.plist
>>
>> Why is the port removing a file that's outside of the destroot?
>
> The program is expected to be run daily as root.  If a launch item  
> in /Library is not an option, what would be the MacPorts  
> convention?  Linux would use /etc/cron.daily/logwatch.

There is no problem with the port installing a file in /Library/ 
LaunchDaemons; the problem is that it is not doing so as part of the  
destroot. The port should, in the destroot (or post-destroot) phase,  
put the file in ${destroot}/Library/LaunchDaemons so that during the  
install and activate phases MacPorts will automatically put it where  
it belongs in /Library/LaunchDaemons, just like it puts all the other  
files in the destroot where they belong under ${prefix}. This also  
enables MacPorts to uninstall the port's files when you "port  
uninstall logwatch". This is the purpose of putting files in the  
destroot.


> For other changes: thanks for your comments, I'd be happy to apply  
> to them, just am not sure which of us is supposed to respond --  
> this would be my first contributed port file.  I've only submitted  
> the port to trac (http://trac.macports.org/ticket/18021).

As the maintainer of the port, all changes must be run by you first  
for approval. You're a new maintainer and Jeremy is a new committer,  
so it's fine that you're not yet familiar with all the intricacies of  
portfile writing. And I'm a manager of MacPorts, so it's my job to  
point these things out and make sure we all are in the habit of  
following the same portfile writing conventions. If you're ok with  
the proposed changes, you could submit a diff and Jeremy or another  
committer could commit it.