[NEW]: rb21-fontcustom with dependent rb21 ports

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

New Port rb21-fontcustom with this new rb21- dependent ports:

rb21-celluloid
rb21-ffi
rb21-fontcustom
rb21-hitimes
rb21-listen
rb21-rb-fsevent
rb21-rb-inotify
rb21-thor
rb21-timers

Note: This port needs Port eot-utils, which I submitted in ticket #45814

Lint report:

port lint --nitpick rb21*
--->  Verifying Portfile for rb21-celluloid
--->  0 errors and 0 warnings found.
--->  Verifying Portfile for rb21-ffi
--->  0 errors and 0 warnings found.
--->  Verifying Portfile for rb21-fontcustom
--->  0 errors and 0 warnings found.
--->  Verifying Portfile for rb21-hitimes
--->  0 errors and 0 warnings found.
--->  Verifying Portfile for rb21-listen
--->  0 errors and 0 warnings found.
--->  Verifying Portfile for rb21-rb-fsevent
--->  0 errors and 0 warnings found.
--->  Verifying Portfile for rb21-rb-inotify
--->  0 errors and 0 warnings found.
--->  Verifying Portfile for rb21-thor
--->  0 errors and 0 warnings found.
--->  Verifying Portfile for rb21-timers
--->  0 errors and 0 warnings found.

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

rb21-fontconfig port and dependent new rb21 ports

[mf2k (Frank Schima)]

In the future, please use WikiFormatting.

[mf2k (Frank Schima)]

It is generally better to submit one port per ticket.

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

I've explicitely asked on IRC and was told that it is ok to send all in one: ​http://echelog.com/logs/browse/macports/1415401200 [12:46:56]

[mf2k (Frank Schima)]

That link does not work for me. Nevertheless, while you certainly can do it, I think it makes it less likely to get committed, at least by me.

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

ok. Then I know for the future. Should I open submission tickets per port for them?

[mf2k (Frank Schima)]

It's up to you. Maybe the person on IRC is willing to look at this ticket? Otherwise, from my point of view, it would at least be better if you individually attach each Portfile to this ticket so they can be viewed and commented on without downloading a tarball.

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

rb21-fontcustom Portfile

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

rb21-timers

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

rb21-thor Portfile

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

rb21-rb-inotify

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

rb21-rb-fsevent Portfile

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

rb21-listen Portfile

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

rb21-hitimes Portfile

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

rb21-ffi Portfile

[robertoschwald (Robert Oschwald)]

rb21-celluloid Portfile

[mf2k (Frank Schima)]

Thanks. For all of the ports:

• Use ​rmd160 and sha256 checksums. md5 and sha1 are obsolete and should only be included if provided upstream.

For rb21-fontcustom - same as above plus:

• Remove the python26 variant since all pythons except 2.7 and 3.4 are being phased out of Macports.
• For the python27 variant:
  • The description does not describe what is happening when this variant is selected. Something like "Build with python 2.7 fontforge bindings" would be better if that is what is happening.
  • You must do more than simply add a dependency on fontforge +python27, What happens if the user has fontforge +python27 installed but does not select this variant? Usually a configure argument(s) should be set to use python or not.
• Change "depends_lib" to "depends_lib-append" to not overwrite the portgroup dependencies. In this case, you should remove the ruby21 dependency since the ruby portgroup will add that for you.

[chrstphrchvz (Christopher Chavez)]

Ruby 2.1 has been EOL since 2017. Are these ports still desirable for newer Ruby versions?