Issues found with existing distfiles:
distfiles/eclipse-sourceBuild-srcIncluded-3.0.1.zip
distfiles/fortran-utils-1.1.tar.gz
distfiles/ivykis-0.39.tar.gz
distfiles/enum-1.11.tar.gz
distfiles/pvs-3.2-libraries.tgz
distfiles/pvs-3.2-linux.tgz
distfiles/pvs-3.2-solaris.tgz
distfiles/pvs-3.2-system.tgz
No changes made to these distinfo files.
Otherwise, existing SHA1 digests verified and found to be the same on
the machine holding the existing distfiles (morden). All existing
SHA1 digests retained for now as an audit trail.
- Add LICENSE= artistic-2.0 (See More.pm file)
(upstream)
- Update to 1.14
1.14 Wed Oct 31 11:37:04 CDT 2012
[ENHANCEMENTS]
Added assert_undefined() for Ben Hengst.
Added assert_unlike().
[FIXES]
assert_nonblank() wasn't using the correct message. Thanks to
Leland Johnson.
assert_nonempty() wouldn't work on blessed arrays and refs.
Now it will.
Do it for all packages that
* mention perl, or
* have a directory name starting with p5-*, or
* depend on a package starting with p5-
like last time, for 5.18, where this didn't lead to complaints.
Let me know if you have any this time.
a) refer 'perl' in their Makefile, or
b) have a directory name of p5-*, or
c) have any dependency on any p5-* package
Like last time, where this caused no complaints.
to trigger/signal a rebuild for the transition 5.10.1 -> 5.12.1.
The list of packages is computed by finding all packages which end
up having either of PERL5_USE_PACKLIST, BUILDLINK_API_DEPENDS.perl,
or PERL5_PACKLIST defined in their make setup (tested via
"make show-vars VARNAMES=..."), minus the packages updated after
the perl package update.
sno@ was right after all, obache@ kindly asked and he@ led the
way. Thanks!
to trigger/signal a rebuild for the transition 5.8.8 -> 5.10.0.
The list of packages is computed by finding all packages which end
up having either of PERL5_USE_PACKLIST, BUILDLINK_API_DEPENDS.perl,
or PERL5_PACKLIST defined in their make setup (tested via
"make show-vars VARNAMES=...").
developer is officially maintaining the package.
The rationale for changing this from "tech-pkg" to "pkgsrc-users" is
that it implies that any user can try to maintain the package (by
submitting patches to the mailing list). Since the folks most likely
to care about the package are the folks that want to use it or are
already using it, this would leverage the energy of users who aren't
developers.
