security/rkhunter: Remove www/wget dependency

[ultima]

Summary

• Add fetch function to rkhunter
• Remove wget as a dependency
• Added NO_ARCH
• Fixed portlint items

PR\: 219825
Sumitted by\: Helge Oldach <[e-mail]>
Reviewed by\: lifanov (mentor), matthew (mentor)
Approved by\: Lukasz Wasikowski <[e-mail]> (maintainer), lifanov (mentor), matthew (mentor)
Differential Revision\: https://reviews.freebsd.org/DXXXXX

Test Plan

poudriere:
103i386
103amd64
110i386
110amd64
12i386
12amd64

[matthew]

Looks like this port could be marked as architecture independent.

=======================<phase: package        >============================
===>  Building package for rkhunter-1.4.2_4
pkg-static: DEVELOPER_MODE: Notice: arch "FreeBSD:11:amd64" -- no architecture specific files found:
**** could this package use a wildcard architecture?
file sizes/checksums    [42]: . done
packing files           [42]: . done
packing directories      [7]: . done

Apart from that, everything looks good.

[lifanov]

Looks good to me.

[ultima]

In D11168#231151, @matthew wrote:

Looks like this port could be marked as architecture independent.

=======================<phase: package        >============================
===>  Building package for rkhunter-1.4.2_4
pkg-static: DEVELOPER_MODE: Notice: arch "FreeBSD:11:amd64" -- no architecture specific files found:
**** could this package use a wildcard architecture?
file sizes/checksums    [42]: . done
packing files           [42]: . done
packing directories      [7]: . done

Apart from that, everything looks good.

Is maintainer approval required for adding NO_ARCH=yes?

[matthew]

In D11168#231256, @ultima wrote:

In D11168#231151, @matthew wrote:

Looks like this port could be marked as architecture independent.

=======================<phase: package        >============================
===>  Building package for rkhunter-1.4.2_4
pkg-static: DEVELOPER_MODE: Notice: arch "FreeBSD:11:amd64" -- no architecture specific files found:
**** could this package use a wildcard architecture?
file sizes/checksums    [42]: . done
packing files           [42]: . done
packing directories      [7]: . done

Apart from that, everything looks good.

Is maintainer approval required for adding NO_ARCH=yes?

I think this should be checked with the maintainer. Technically there are portmgr blanket approvals for infrastructure type changes (but
setting NO_ARCH=yes is pretty borderline though.) It's always good to check back with the maintainer even if you don't have to.

[mat]

You absolutely do not need to ask the maintainer to add NO_ARCH.

Please read section [[ http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-maintainer.html | 5.5. MAINTAINER ]] of the Porter's Handbook. Especially the:

We reserve the right to modify the maintainer's submission to better match existing policies and style of the Ports Collection without explicit blessing from the submitter or the maintainer.

Of course, if you want to ask permission for a change, you can, you just do not have to.

[ultima]

• added NO_ARCH
• Fixed portlint items

[matthew]