[MacPorts] #53750: patchfile for ftidy

[MacPorts]

#53750: patchfile for ftidy
----------------------------+----------------------
  Reporter:  gaming-hacker  |      Owner:
      Type:  update         |     Status:  new
  Priority:  Normal         |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports          |    Version:  2.4.1
Resolution:                 |   Keywords:  haspatch
      Port:  ftidy          |
----------------------------+----------------------
Changes (by ryandesign):

 * cc: ryandesign (added)
 * keywords:  patch,update => haspatch


Comment:

 Thanks, but there are many problems with your proposed changes.

 You've updated the port's version, but you haven't removed the revision
 line.

 md5 and sha1 checksums are no longer considered secure. You should replace
 the md5 and sha1 checksums with rmd160 and sha256 checksums (unless
 upstream provides md5 or sha1 checksums, in which case use those in
 addition to rmd160 and sha256 checksums).

 The biggest problem is that you've changed the version to 7.3, but the
 distfile is still called tidy72sc.zip. That can't possibly be right, can
 it? You've changed the homepage, but I assume you've only done that
 because the old homepage seems to have been deleted. The new homepage
 you've listed isn't the official homepage. We could use an
 [http://web.archive.org/web/20120905025547/http://www.unb.ca/fredericton/science/chem/ajit/tidy/
 archived copy of the original homepage].

 In fact, I don't believe version 7.3 exists. The tidy.zip file on the new
 homepage you linked to contains the same 1999 source code as the 7.2 file
 we were using, but is 4 times larger because it includes precompiled
 executables which we don't want.

 You've added build arguments, including optimization flags and arch flags.
 Optimization flags go in `configure.optflags`, but because the port
 doesn't use a configure phase, you'll then have to use that variable
 elsewhere. Arch flags are available in `configure.cc_archflags`. You
 shouldn't assume the arch is `x86_64` nor that SSE is available. (What if
 the user is on a PowerPC processor?) If the software doesn't support all 4
 Mac archs, then `supported_archs` should be used to indicate which archs
 are supported.

 You've removed the presumably functional gcc43, gcc44, gcc45, gcc46, gcc47
 variants and added a nonfunctional gcc4 variant which uses the nonexistent
 "macports-gcc-4" compiler. GCC changed its version numbering scheme with
 version 5. Previously, the major version included the first two digits of
 the version number (4.8, 4.9, etc.) As of version 5, only the first digit
 is the major version number.

 You haven't adjusted the code that selects which of the gcc variants to
 use by default, so you're still using the now-nonexistent gcc47 variant by
 default. You should use the latest stable version of gcc (currently gcc6)
 by default. You may even want to use the compilers 1.0 portgroup instead
 of creating the variants by hand, but I cannot advise on how to use that
 portgroup.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/53750#comment:1>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS