From nobody@FreeBSD.org  Thu Mar 18 08:30:14 2004
Return-Path: <nobody@FreeBSD.org>
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CF4016A4D0
	for <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:30:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from www.freebsd.org (www.freebsd.org [216.136.204.117])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1689343D41
	for <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:30:14 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from nobody@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from www.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by www.freebsd.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2IGUD72075688
	for <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:30:13 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from nobody@www.freebsd.org)
Received: (from nobody@localhost)
	by www.freebsd.org (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i2IGUDaJ075687;
	Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:30:13 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from nobody)
Message-Id: <200403181630.i2IGUDaJ075687@www.freebsd.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:30:13 -0800 (PST)
From: tom hensel <tom@replic8.net>
To: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: netatalk-1.6.4 has many flaws with MacOS X
X-Send-Pr-Version: www-2.3

>Number:         64425
>Category:       ports
>Synopsis:       [NEW PORT]: net/netatalk-devel
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    freebsd-ports-bugs
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          change-request
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Thu Mar 18 08:40:19 PST 2004
>Closed-Date:    Tue Jun 08 02:11:51 GMT 2004
>Last-Modified:  Tue Jun 08 02:11:51 GMT 2004
>Originator:     tom hensel
>Release:        5.2-RELENG
>Organization:
>Environment:
FreeBSD filebox.rpdnet.com 5.2.1-RELEASE-p1 FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE-p1 #5: Fri Mar  5 08:26:52 CET 2004     root@filebox.rpdnet.com:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/FILEBOX  i386
>Description:
upcoming netatalk-2.0 brings a whole bunch of fixes for MacOS X clients as well as many overall enhancements. it supports AFPv3 calls now.
netatalk-2.0a1 and a2 releases do not compile without some nasty patches.


>How-To-Repeat:
try to use a (more or less bug-free) implementation of CNID in netatalk-1.6.4. don't try, there is none. same for AFPv3. try to use files larger than 2mb on your new firewire storage and fail.
>Fix:
use recent netatalk2-devel port provided here for testing:

http://hannover.ccc.de/~e-moth/ports_net_netatalk2-devel.tar.gz

please comment and review, i'd be glad to see this in base

>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:

From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com>
To: tom hensel <tom@replic8.net>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/64425: netatalk-1.6.4 has many flaws with MacOS X
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 17:45:57 +0100

 tom hensel wrote:
 
  
 > http://hannover.ccc.de/~e-moth/ports_net_netatalk2-devel.tar.gz
 > 
 > please comment and review, i'd be glad to see this in base
 
 portlint -A is your friend. Please post ports as shar files if they
 are not too big, or provide an md5 checksum if the are on external
 servers.
 
 -Oliver
State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback 
State-Changed-By: eik 
State-Changed-When: Thu Mar 18 18:22:13 CET 2004 
State-Changed-Why:  
asked submitter to check the port with portlint 

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=64425 

From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com>
To: tom@replic8.net
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/64425: [NEW PORT]: net/netatalk-devel
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:00:11 +0100

 tom@replic8.net wrote:
 
 > updated port, fixing many issues, made 'portlint -A' my friend.
 > 
 > new version is here (old one removed):
 > http://hannover.ccc.de/~e-moth/ports_net_netatalk-devel.tar.gz
 > http://hannover.ccc.de/~e-moth/ports_net_netatalk-devel.tar.gz.md5
 > 
 > MD5 (ports_net_netatalk-devel.tar.gz) = 8e60bbb33f5e7bb5df67d4f8b5ba0519
 > 
 > please comment, thank you very much!
 
 I still get FATAL errors with portlint -A.
 
 README.html is a generated file and not part of a port.
 
 Why don't you simply download 2.0 alpha2? Please use fixed snapshots
 when possible. If you want to add extra patches, you can add them
 as PATCHFILES, possibly conditionalized on WITH_CUPS_PATCH or
 WITHOUT_CUPS_PATCH.
 
 You should change the PKGNAMESUFFIX accordingly.
 
 You might want to convert files/netatalk.sh to a rcNG script, which
 should be easy if you are used to pkgsrc.
 
 The WANT_AUTO* variables are somewhat deprecated, please use the
 USE_AUTO equivaltents. Do you really need all those tools? Normally
 packages contain a pregenerated configure script, so that only
 GNU_CONFIGURE is necessary. Otherwise patching the configure
 script doesn't make sense. You should not need to patch ltmain.sh
 if you USE_LIBTOOL from the ports.
 
 Where is it that you use perl?
 
 I know that "See Netatalk's Makefile for more details on some of these
 options." is from marcus@ port, but I don't consider this very helpful.
 
  share/nls/POSIX
  share/nls/en_US.US-ASCII
 are not generated by your port, and shouldn't be part of the packing list.
 
 There are still manpages in the packing list.
 
 You should not remove user-editable configuration files, at least not
 if they are edited by the user.
 
 Please refer to the FreeBSD Porter's Handbook:
   <http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/index.html>
 
 -Oliver
 
State-Changed-From-To: feedback->suspended 
State-Changed-By: eik 
State-Changed-When: Fri Mar 19 14:54:29 CET 2004 
State-Changed-Why:  
The submitter states that there is still some work to do. 

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=64425 

From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com>
To: tom hensel <tom@replic8.net>, freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: ports/64425: [NEW PORT]: net/netatalk-devel
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:53:54 +0100

 tom hensel wrote:
 
 > hi,
 > 
 >>I still get FATAL errors with portlint -A.
 > 
 > i'm doing kinda incremental updates :)
 
 Please, do not send-pr unfinished ports. GNATS is not a good
 development platform.
 
 Subscribe to ports@ and ask questions there until you get
 things straightened out:
   <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>
 
 >>README.html is a generated file and not part of a port.
 > 
 > going to remove it.
 
 good.
 
 >>Why don't you simply download 2.0 alpha2? Please use fixed snapshots
 >>when possible. If you want to add extra patches, you can add them
 >>as PATCHFILES, possibly conditionalized on WITH_CUPS_PATCH or
 >>WITHOUT_CUPS_PATCH.
 > 
 > simple answer, it just doesn't build (without ugly hacks).
 > the snapshots from CVS have a lot of fixes, especially for
 > BSDs. see the discussion on the sourceforge forums.
 
 Seduce them to publish dated CVS snapshots. It is hard to guarantee
 that the next CVS version won't break things again or break your
 patches. Besides, it makes support a nightmare.
 
 >>You should change the PKGNAMESUFFIX accordingly.
 > 
 > sorry, how?
 
   <http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/makefile-naming.html#AEN553>
 
 >>You might want to convert files/netatalk.sh to a rcNG script, which
 >>should be easy if you are used to pkgsrc.
 > 
 > yes, good idea :)
 
 Nice. Maybe you could submit this as an update to net/netatalk too.
 
 >>The WANT_AUTO* variables are somewhat deprecated, please use the
 >>USE_AUTO equivaltents. Do you really need all those tools? Normally
 >>packages contain a pregenerated configure script, so that only
 >>GNU_CONFIGURE is necessary. Otherwise patching the configure
 >>script doesn't make sense. You should not need to patch ltmain.sh
 >>if you USE_LIBTOOL from the ports.
 > 
 > i could not get it to build without using WANT_AUTO_*.
 > to be honest, i don't know why.
 
 Find out, you want to maintain this port, you are supposed to know.
 
 >>Where is it that you use perl?
 > 
 > most of the things you point out come from the original netatalk-port,
 > i'm just keeping some things (like perl) for now.
 > maybe the netatalk-port needs some update, too.
 
 This is not really true, which of the issues above apply to net/netatalk?
 So, why do you need perl?
 
 >>I know that "See Netatalk's Makefile for more details on some of these
 >>options." is from marcus@ port, but I don't consider this very helpful.
 > 
 > i agree.
 
 ok.
 
 >> share/nls/POSIX
 >> share/nls/en_US.US-ASCII
 >>are not generated by your port, and shouldn't be part of the packing list.
 > 
 > hm, i used a script to automagically generate pkg-plist. just don't know
 > where these come from, going to remove them.
 
 generating packing lists automatically is not easy and needs manual editing.
 You are supposed to test `make package', pkg_add and pkg_delete to be sure
 the packing list is right.
 
 >>There are still manpages in the packing list.
 > 
 > thought i removed them all, sigh.
 
 Nope. Test packaging.
 
 >>You should not remove user-editable configuration files, at least not
 >>if they are edited by the user.
 > 
 > i did not intend this. again it's just like the netatalk-port.
 
 Not true. Look into net/netatalk/pkg-plist
 
 > <http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/index.html>
 > 
 > aight, forgot about it.
 
 It is referenced on <http://www.freebsd.org/ports/>.
 
 > many thanks for your detailled comments! some work to do...
 
 I'll mark this PR as suspended until the port is ready.
State-Changed-From-To: suspended->closed 
State-Changed-By: linimon 
State-Changed-When: Tue Jun 8 02:09:53 GMT 2004 
State-Changed-Why:  
Since this PR was submitted, marcus has created a netatalk-devel 
port based on a repocopy and update from netatalk.  Although 
slightly different (it is not a snapshot and does not have the 
CNID knobs), since it is now in the source base, any other changes 
should probably be submitted in a new PR as suggested diffs against 
that port. 

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=64425 
>Unformatted:
