New port: audio/drumstick: MIDI libraries for Qt5/C++

[yuri]

Summary

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221459

[tcberner]

audio/drumstick/Makefile

18 ↗

(On Diff #34926)

^ buildtools_build qmake_build

51 ↗

(On Diff #34926)

^ I would add patches for the CMakeLists.txt/*.cmake ones at least -- also looks upstreamable :)
[i.e. create a patch for upstream, and add it as a patch to files/ -- that way, you have to change one thing (remove the patch) once the fixed release appears, and not scratch your head about "do I still need this?" ^^]

59 ↗

(On Diff #34926)

a nicer way is to patch in an OPTION DOCS to the CMakeLists.txt and add an if (WITH_DOCS) or just a simple if (BUILD_DOCS) around the add_subdirectory which you pass with DOCS_CMAKE_BOOL=BUILD_DOCS

64 ↗

(On Diff #34926)

^ why not tell cmake to not install it?
if (ALSA_FOUND) ...

[mat]

audio/drumstick/Makefile

31–34 ↗

(On Diff #34926)

I know these kind of long sed lines are fun to write, but they are unmaintainable in the long term, it is better to patch the file with a real patch. (And then, you have a patch you can upstream.)
Only sed when you replace things with variables, like ${PREFIX} or such.

[yuri]

audio/drumstick/Makefile

31–34 ↗

(On Diff #34926)

I left only those that require variables.

[yuri]

Requested changes.

[tcberner]

Thanks for converting this to patches :)

audio/drumstick/Makefile

27 ↗

(On Diff #34976)

Looking at the files installed by the DOCS option, maybe MANPAGES would be more appropriate.

[yuri]

MANPAGES

[yuri]

.

[tcberner]

audio/drumstick/Makefile

20 ↗

(On Diff #35074)

^ sorry, spotted that just now -- this is a Qt port

[yuri]

Rm INSTALLS_ICONS

[tcberner]

Looks good now.

[mat]

head/audio/drumstick/Makefile

22

MANPAGES should be added to OPTIONS_DEFAULT, this is FreeBSD, not Linux, we provide man pages by default.

[yuri]

MANPAGES added to OPTIONS_DEFAULT.

[tcberner]

In D12999#271516, @yuri wrote:

MANPAGES added to OPTIONS_DEFAULT.

You need to bump PORTREVISION when doing it.

[yuri]

Tobias,

Sorry for this misunderstanding!

So, should I bump PORTREVISION now?

[tcberner]

In D12999#271590, @yuri wrote:

Tobias,

Sorry for this misunderstanding!

So, should I bump PORTREVISION now?

No worries :)

PORTREVISION

PORTREVISION must be increased each time a change is made to the port that changes the generated package in any way. That includes changes that only affect a package built with non-default options.

by enabling MANPAGES you did exactly that.

So, yes, please give it a bump :)