Pkgsrc problems [ was: lang/python24 build problems]

[Hasso Tepper]

Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> Using your #36978 example, if "pkgsrc" maintaines aren't "confident
> enough to commit patches", then please share upstream and try to get
> them to commit to official source.

The problem with this particular fix is that it's just tiny part of larger 
patchset. To submit this to upstream I have to submit most of these 
patches. And with all these usual pkgsrc problems - patches are not 
commented, patches modify generated files (configure script) directly or 
are just pkgsrc specific hacks (see how cpu_dragonfly.c is handled in 
net-snmp) - it's a big amount of work. I just haven't found timeslot for 
that for the library I need for one application.

I've submitted most of stuff I did for pkgsrc to upstream directly, but in 
this case it's just too much work for me to do all this submitting work 
that should have done by someone else.

> Please continue to send reminders to the pkgsrc list(s) and to
> maintainers and to gnats.
>
> > * Even if patches go into pkgsrc, they are not pushed to upstream.
> > While I know there are a lot of people out there who don't think
> > about it as important thing, it's extremely important IMHO.
>
> Yes, that is the pkgsrc rule. Please help by submitting patches
> upstream too (don't put all the burden on pkgsrc developers).

I do (well, mostly ;). But what I should do if upstream has all this, but 
package in pkgsrc isn't just updated (#36981)?

Note that I didn't want to discuss all these issues specific to pkgsrc at 
all here. My point was to direct attention to the issues WE (as DragonFly 
project) have and what we can do about this ... and of course to irritate 
people to do something ;). Having more human resources to send reminders 
to the maintainers would be good as well ;). But yes, regular builds with 
logs (ie. testing in the development phase) is most important we seem to 
lack at the moment.


-- 
Hasso Tepper