Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

Restore update-drive-db functionality
ClosedPublic

Authored by samm on Sat, Feb 20, 7:09 PM.

Details

Summary

This patch restoring update-smart-drivedb removed in the D23101 and installing drivedb.h using @sample macro.

Some objections why we need it:

  1. drivedb.h despite the name is configuration file. User can modify it, e.g. to add some missing devices or change existing.
  2. It is updating frequently, few times per month. I do not have any resources to update package every time, not giving the fact that this is a useless work.
  3. Updating entire package due to one db file change to me looks like a bad design. Also it will enforce user to rebuild package from ports, as pkg will not be up to speed, especially on non amd64/i386 arches.
  4. With @sample if user not touching it (manually or using updater) it will be automatically updated with port.
  5. File is updated from https and by default is validated using gpg.
  6. Same way is used in other OS.
Test Plan

Diff Detail

Repository
rP FreeBSD ports repository
Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable.
Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.

Event Timeline

samm requested review of this revision.Sat, Feb 20, 7:09 PM
samm edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)

Adding @daniel.engberg.lists_pyret.net and @jrm. Going to commit this is there are no strong objections against it.

use DATADIR in post-install

Remove CP from post-patch

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state Needs Review.Sat, Feb 20, 7:40 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

I don't see the point in adding us if you're going to commit it within 30 minutes.
Anyhow, if you insist on adding this functionality mat suggested an alternative solution which involves using @rmtry instead and not adding drivedb.h to plist .

@daniel.engberg.lists_pyret.net thank you for suggestion. I was thinking about rmtry approach but decided to use @sample as it will not destroy locally changed drivedb and will allow user to revert to the clean file if needed. So if there are no strong objections i would prefer to leave things as is.