New Port: net/czmq4: High-level C Binding for ZeroMQ (Version 4)

[joneum]

Summary

New Port: net/czmq4: High-level C Binding for ZeroMQ (Version 4)

PR: 223299
Submitted by: Kenji Rikitake <[e-mail]> (maintainer)

Test Plan

~...net/czmq4: portlint -AC [08:51:41]
looks fine.

poudriere testport:

10.3-amd64
10.3-i386
10.4-amd64
10.4-i386
11.1-amd64
11.1-i386
12.0-CURRENT r325045 amd64
12.0-CURRENT r325045 i386

[tcberner]

net/czmq4/Makefile

22 ↗

(On Diff #34812)

^ you can drop this

27 ↗

(On Diff #34812)

^ just add it to above USES=

net/czmq4/pkg-descr

4 ↗

(On Diff #34812)

^ that seems non-standard

[tcberner]

net/czmq4/Makefile

31 ↗

(On Diff #34812)

looking at the plist, also _INSTALL.

[tcberner]

Is there a reason to add the port, rather than update net/czmq?

[joneum]

Update

[joneum]

net/czmq4/Makefile

31 ↗

(On Diff #34812)

What / how exactly do you mean that?

[tcberner]

net/czmq4/Makefile

31 ↗

(On Diff #34812)

^ that should have gone below CONFLICSTS_BUILD :)

https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/conflicts.html

[tcberner]

net/czmq4/Makefile

26 ↗

(On Diff #34813)

I meant, not like this, I meant to append it to USES=autoreconf libtool pkgconfig

[joneum]

net/czmq4/Makefile

31 ↗

(On Diff #34812)

ah, thx. i will change to CONFLICTS_BUILD

[joneum]

update

[joneum]

net/czmq4/Makefile

26 ↗

(On Diff #34813)

I'm confused. What is correct and what is wrong?

[tcberner]

net/czmq4/Makefile

26 ↗

(On Diff #34813)

look at the output of make -VUSES as it is now :) -- does this seem like what you want?

[joneum]

net/czmq4/Makefile

26 ↗

(On Diff #34813)

That only shows me "shebangfix" - but nothing more.

[tcberner]

net/czmq4/Makefile

26 ↗

(On Diff #34813)

... and does that seem correct ?

[joneum]

update

[tcberner]

net/czmq4/Makefile

23 ↗

(On Diff #34816)

^= not +=

[joneum]

ups, that was not intentional

[tcberner]

net/czmq4/Makefile

17 ↗

(On Diff #34817)

^ you can sort these while you're here :)

29 ↗

(On Diff #34817)

^ I think you want a globbed PKGNAME, not port :)

[tcberner]

net/czmq4/Makefile

1 ↗

(On Diff #34817)

^ ... I would not add this to new ports.

[joneum]

net/czmq4/Makefile

1 ↗

(On Diff #34817)

why?

29 ↗

(On Diff #34817)

Please, I do not want to guess riddles! What is wrong???

[joneum]

Update

[tcberner]

net/czmq4/Makefile

1 ↗

(On Diff #34817)

https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/book.html#porting-makefile

Note:

In some cases, the Makefile of an existing port may contain additional lines in the header, such as the name of the port and the date it was created. This additional information has been declared obsolete, and is being phased out.

29 ↗

(On Diff #34817)

Conflicts:

If the package cannot coexist with other packages (because of file conflicts, runtime incompatibilities, etc.), list the other package names in CONFLICTS_INSTALL. Use shell globs like * and ? here. Enumerate package names in there, not port names or origins. Please make sure that CONFLICTS_INSTALL does not match this port's package itself. Otherwise enforcing its installation with FORCE_PKG_REGISTER will no longer work. CONFLICTS_INSTALL check is done after the build stage and prior to the install stage.

[joneum]

Update

[joneum]

Update

[koobs]

In D12965#269103, @tcberner wrote:

Is there a reason to add the port, rather than update net/czmq?

ZeroMQ projects maintains multiple concurrent stable release branches. See Also: net/libzmq* ports, for which these czmq* ports are related and relevant

[kenji_k2r.org]

+1, and allowing multiple ports should be beneficial to the CZMQ users.

In D12965#269246, @koobs wrote:

In D12965#269103, @tcberner wrote:

Is there a reason to add the port, rather than update net/czmq?

ZeroMQ projects maintains multiple concurrent stable release branches. See Also: net/libzmq* ports, for which these czmq* ports are related and relevant

[tcberner]

In D12965#269879, @kenji_k2r.org wrote:

+1, and allowing multiple ports should be beneficial to the CZMQ users.

In D12965#269246, @koobs wrote:

In D12965#269103, @tcberner wrote:

Is there a reason to add the port, rather than update net/czmq?

ZeroMQ projects maintains multiple concurrent stable release branches. See Also: net/libzmq* ports, for which these czmq* ports are related and relevant

Sure, thanks for clearing that up :)

[tcberner]

I have to figure out why it fails to configure for me though :)

• it seems I can no longer reproduce the issues I had.

[joneum]

Here is a current update. Port builds fine. No problmes with net/czmq

I think he is ready to land

current logs:
http://joneumbox.org/data/10amd64-ports/2017-11-11_19h55m05s/logs/czmq4-4.0.2.log
http://joneumbox.org/data/10i386-ports/2017-11-11_19h55m05s/logs/czmq4-4.0.2.log
http://joneumbox.org/data/104amd64-ports/2017-11-11_19h55m44s/logs/czmq4-4.0.2.log
http://joneumbox.org/data/104i386-ports/2017-11-11_19h55m46s/logs/czmq4-4.0.2.log
http://joneumbox.org/data/11-1-AMD64-ports/2017-11-11_19h56m22s/logs/czmq4-4.0.2.log
http://joneumbox.org/data/11-1-i386-ports/2017-11-11_19h56m25s/logs/czmq4-4.0.2.log
http://joneumbox.org/data/12amd64-ports/2017-11-11_19h57m03s/logs/czmq4-4.0.2.log
http://joneumbox.org/data/12i386-ports/2017-11-11_19h57m07s/logs/czmq4-4.0.2.log

[tcberner]

You should move the USES up above the USE_GITHUB. Otherwise, it is fin.e

[joneum]

pet portlint