about keeping a checksums table in a separate file

[Marius Schamschula]

On Feb 1, 2016, at 4:13 PM, Daniel J. Luke <dluke at geeklair.net> wrote:

> On Feb 1, 2016, at 4:59 PM, Marius Schamschula <lists at schamschula.com> wrote:
>> I use a short python script to automatically update most checksums.
> 
> excellent.
> 
>> However, even the small number of ports I maintain (OK there 69 of them) and the no maintainer/slowmaintainer ports that I version bump from time to time, I have found a dozen that have multiple sets of checksums, e.g. bash that has a separate checksum for each patch, etc. For those, I just manually update the checksums.
> 
> ok, that's a different problem, though.
> 
> The bash patch checksums don't actually change, though, right? There are just new ones added or a different set are necessary when the bash version changes?

Correct.

> Common case is:
> - new version -> change version number, fetches a new single distfile, need to update single distfile checksums
> 
> Less common case #1 is:
> - new version -> change version number, fetches multiple new distfiles (possibly including patches), need to update multiple distfile checksums
> 
> Less common case #2 is:
> - portfile is extra complicated (does some craziness to generate a large number sub-ports)

Yup. Like mysql*, php, etc.

Then there are ports like sqlite3 that use a non-standard versioning scheme for the distfile, which causes my current script to fail.

> Maybe we can attack the common case and enhance it to cover additional cases?
> -- 
> Daniel J. Luke
> 
> 
> 

Marius
--
Marius Schamschula




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20160201/3b75bb92/attachment.html>