From linimon@lonesome.com  Wed May 19 08:34:57 2004
Return-Path: <linimon@lonesome.com>
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9FF6A16A4CE; Wed, 19 May 2004 08:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 65BC043D1F; Wed, 19 May 2004 08:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: from lonesome.lonesome.com (cs242743-143.austin.rr.com [24.27.43.143])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 50E5F141DF; Wed, 19 May 2004 10:34:34 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from lonesome.lonesome.com (localhost.lonesome.com [127.0.0.1])
	by lonesome.lonesome.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4JFVa0S036301;
	Wed, 19 May 2004 10:31:36 -0500 (CDT)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.lonesome.com)
Received: (from linimon@localhost)
	by lonesome.lonesome.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i4JFVZCp036300;
	Wed, 19 May 2004 10:31:35 -0500 (CDT)
	(envelope-from linimon)
Message-Id: <200405191531.i4JFVZCp036300@lonesome.lonesome.com>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 10:31:35 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
Reply-To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Cc: portmgr@freebsd.org, dan@langille.org
Subject: possible bug in philosophy of ports/MOVED
X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.113
X-GNATS-Notify:

>Number:         66892
>Category:       ports
>Synopsis:       possible bug in philosophy of ports/MOVED
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       low
>Responsible:    portmgr
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          change-request
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Wed May 19 08:40:20 PDT 2004
>Closed-Date:    Fri Jan 27 19:41:23 GMT 2006
>Last-Modified:  Fri Jan 27 19:41:23 GMT 2006
>Originator:     Mark Linimon
>Release:        FreeBSD 4.9-PRERELEASE i386
>Organization:
Lonesome Dove Computing Services
>Environment:
System: FreeBSD lonesome.lonesome.com 4.9-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 4.9-PRERELEASE #3: Thu Jan 22 20:41:05 CST 2004 root@lonesome.lonesome.com:/usr/src/sys/compile/MULTIMEDIA i386
>Description:
	portsmon relies on the MOVED file to determine when it considers
	a port to be obsolete.  Currently, it considers devel/linux_devtools
	to be obsolete -- but it isn't.

	Here's the history:

devel/linux_devtools/Makefile:
revision 1.35
date: 2003/04/17 11:38:43;  author: edwin;  state: dead;  lines: +1 -1
It seemed that devel/linux_devtools was repocopied to linux_develtools-6
and linux_devtools-7, but that the original directory never was
removed. Finished this action and update dependencies.

MOVED:
revision 1.100
date: 2003/04/17 11:38:42;  author: edwin;  state: Exp;  lines: +2 -1
devel/linux_devtools|devel/linux_devtools-6|2003-04-17|finished repocopy

devel/linux_devtools/Makefile:
revision 1.36
date: 2003/10/12 05:47:42;  author: trevor;  state: Exp;  lines: +61 -82
Add linux_devtools 8.0.

	So as of 2003/04/17, portsmon is happy to report that the new
	location of devel/linux_devtools is devel/linux_devtools6.  And
	so it remains to this day.
>How-To-Repeat:
	(n/a)
>Fix:
	I guess I can work around this in portsmon ... somehow.  But
	shouldn't there be some kind of notation added to MOVED when
	something gets reintroduced?  (I can imagine this problem
	affecting FreshPorts as well).
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:

From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com>
To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org, dan@langille.org,
	portmgr@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/66892: possible bug in philosophy of ports/MOVED
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 18:15:06 +0200

 Mark Linimon wrote:
 
 > 	I guess I can work around this in portsmon ... somehow.  But
 > 	shouldn't there be some kind of notation added to MOVED when
 > 	something gets reintroduced?  (I can imagine this problem
 > 	affecting FreshPorts as well).
 
 Yep. I don't know what to check for in MOVEDlint, and I'm not sure what
 the proper semantics are: has OpenLDAP 2.0 moved to OpenLDAP 2.1, or
 is it simply deleted?
 
 We have to clarify that for MOVED to be useful for automated tools.
 
 -Oliver
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->portmgr 
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon 
Responsible-Changed-When: Wed May 19 09:36:56 PDT 2004 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  
Ports meta-issue. 

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=66892 

Adding to audit trail from misfiled PR ports/66895:

 I just checked http://www.freshports.org/devel/linux_devtools/ and it
 reports:
 
 Port Moves
 port moved to devel/linux_devtools-6 on 2003-04-17
 REASON: finished repocopy
 
 And that is all.
 
 FWIW, FreshProts determines that a port no longer exists when the Makefile
 is explicitly removed via a commit.  Therefore, this port is not marked as
 deleted.  That is one of the limitations of FreshPorts with respect
 to repocopies.
 
 -- 
 Dan Langille - BSDCan: http://www.bsdcan.org/

From: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org>
To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, linimon@lonesome.com
Cc:  
Subject: Re: ports/66892: possible bug in philosophy of ports/MOVED
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:49:29 +0100

 As the most prominent consumer of MOVED file, portupgrade, does not grok
 well the state when port is listed in MOVED but still present in the
 tree, and people are coming up with "wtf?" in regular interval,
 I propose to sweep the MOVED file and remove such lines (there is 28
 instances at the moment).
 
 I'll do that, unless I hear a "stop!" from Mark/portmgr.
 
 -- 
 Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz>
               <pav@FreeBSD.org>
 
 lofi> My _sympathetic_ opinion about kdevelop is that it's a huge pile
 of shit that might at least work okay if used in Linux.
 lofi> My neutral opinion is that it's just a huge pile of shit.

From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon)
To: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, linimon@lonesome.com
Subject: Re: ports/66892: possible bug in philosophy of ports/MOVED
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:13:45 -0600

 On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 07:49:29PM +0100, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
 > As the most prominent consumer of MOVED file, portupgrade, does not grok
 > well the state when port is listed in MOVED but still present in the
 > tree, and people are coming up with "wtf?" in regular interval,
 > I propose to sweep the MOVED file and remove such lines (there is 28
 > instances at the moment).
 
 My own personal opinion is that this is a bug in portupgrade, OTOH
 what's already happened is that the "history" in MOVED has already been
 erased to some degree, leaving it half with "history" and half with
 "reflects current tree".  Since we're already halfway there we should
 finish the job and you should go ahead and commit these changes and close
 this PR.  The downside (possible misattribution of old PRs) does not
 justify actual users getting bitten by this.
 
 We'll just need to document that MOVED reflects the most current state
 of the tree.
 
 mcl
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed 
State-Changed-By: pav 
State-Changed-When: Fri Jan 27 19:39:47 UTC 2006 
State-Changed-Why:  
This was solved by removing all resurrected ports from the file, 
and stating a new policy in the header. 

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=66892 
>Unformatted:
