sourceforge

Feel free to talk about anything and everything in this board.
nahun
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 3
Joined: January 2nd, 2017, 8:40 pm

Re: sourceforge

Post by nahun »

safihre wrote:Clearly you skipped over mine, JCFP's and @nahun's first advice:
Use the official tarball releases.

Why would you possibly be pulling from the develop branch for a port/package? ???

If you keep insisting to go against our advice of using the official releases that everything you need inside, you should use the master branch and of course not the develop branch.
In the master branch we only put stable releases and the version info is set.
The FreeBSD ports systems uses tags when pulling down the source code from github. Since the PORTVERSION in the Makefile is set to 1.2.0 it is using that as the tag name. This is the full URL the ports system is using to download the tarball:

Code: Select all

https://codeload.github.com/sabnzbd/sabnzbd/tar.gz/1.2.0?dummy=/sabnzbd-sabnzbd-1.2.0_GH0.tar.gz
I know the version.py still shows it as develop, but is using the tag name not a good idea for sabnzbd?

Using the official tarball releases would be great, but unfortunately the FreeBSD ports system has no built-in way to download those.

User avatar
safihre
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4056
Joined: April 30th, 2015, 7:35 am
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Re: sourceforge

Post by safihre »

Just use the master branch, we only push there in case of a new stable release. Indeed the tags are on develop, without the version set.
The ports system must be able to just wget or curl a file? Not just git tags?
If you like our support, check our special newsserver deal or donate at: https://sabnzbd.org/donate

nahun
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 3
Joined: January 2nd, 2017, 8:40 pm

Re: sourceforge

Post by nahun »

safihre wrote:Just use the master branch, we only push there in case of a new stable release. Indeed the tags are on develop, without the version set.
The ports system must be able to just wget or curl a file? Not just git tags?
You can set just a URL to download from using MASTER_SITES, but I think the FreeBSD devs prefer using the github integration when possible.

Looks like the best option is to use the specific commit hash so that it pulls from master and for that specific version. Easy one line change to the Makefile and frequently done in the ports system.

Code: Select all

--- Makefile    2017-02-23 12:29:08.300615000 -0800
+++ Makefile.new        2017-02-23 12:30:36.195816000 -0800
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
 USE_GITHUB=    yes
 GH_ACCOUNT=    sabnzbd
 GH_PROJECT=    sabnzbd
+GH_TAGNAME=    494e72a

 USES=          python:2.7


josh4trunks
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 30
Joined: August 25th, 2011, 10:32 am

Re: sourceforge

Post by josh4trunks »

safihre wrote:Clearly you skipped over mine, JCFP's and @nahun's first advice:
Use the official tarball releases.

Why would you possibly be pulling from the develop branch for a port/package? ???

If you keep insisting to go against our advice of using the official releases that everything you need inside, you should use the master branch and of course not the develop branch.
In the master branch we only put stable releases and the version info is set.
I didn't skip it, I proposed it here but once nahun figured out how to build the locale files that is what was accepted.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_ ... 214768#c13

I was not trying to pull from the develop branch just using the tag.
safihre wrote:Just use the master branch, we only push there in case of a new stable release. Indeed the tags are on develop, without the version set.
The ports system must be able to just wget or curl a file? Not just git tags?
Yes, it can fetch any URL we specify like I proposed here.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attac ... ction=diff
I'm just trying to make things as maintainable as possible. Using built in functions, like the one for github, means I don't need to worry about future URL changes since the ports system handles it.

josh4trunks
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 30
Joined: August 25th, 2011, 10:32 am

Re: sourceforge

Post by josh4trunks »

nahun wrote:
safihre wrote:Just use the master branch, we only push there in case of a new stable release. Indeed the tags are on develop, without the version set.
The ports system must be able to just wget or curl a file? Not just git tags?
You can set just a URL to download from using MASTER_SITES, but I think the FreeBSD devs prefer using the github integration when possible.

Looks like the best option is to use the specific commit hash so that it pulls from master and for that specific version. Easy one line change to the Makefile and frequently done in the ports system.

Code: Select all

--- Makefile    2017-02-23 12:29:08.300615000 -0800
+++ Makefile.new        2017-02-23 12:30:36.195816000 -0800
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
 USE_GITHUB=    yes
 GH_ACCOUNT=    sabnzbd
 GH_PROJECT=    sabnzbd
+GH_TAGNAME=    494e72a

 USES=          python:2.7

Thanks! We can get this change in when 1.2.1 is official.

josh4trunks
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 30
Joined: August 25th, 2011, 10:32 am

Re: sourceforge

Post by josh4trunks »

safihre wrote:Just use the master branch, we only push there in case of a new stable release. Indeed the tags are on develop, without the version set.
The ports system must be able to just wget or curl a file? Not just git tags?
Any reason the releases can't reference the master branch?
That way anyone can just pull the tagname and get the expected source.

josh4trunks
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 30
Joined: August 25th, 2011, 10:32 am

Re: sourceforge

Post by josh4trunks »

I see version 1.2.2 on the release page, but dont see any related commits on master.

Can we get that so we can package version 1.2.2?

User avatar
safihre
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4056
Joined: April 30th, 2015, 7:35 am
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Re: sourceforge

Post by safihre »

It's a Windows-only fix of 1.2.1. Not important for other platforms.
Will merge it to master, but doesn't change anything.
If you like our support, check our special newsserver deal or donate at: https://sabnzbd.org/donate

Post Reply