Differential D17710
[new ports] net-mgmt/rubygem-riemann-client etc.: new dependent ports to get to riemann-tools Authored by dch on Oct 26 2018, 1:51 AM. Tags None Referenced Files
Subscribers None
Details
portlint & poudriere matrix are happy wrt moving rubygem-mtrc I see what you mean; one of the examples in the repo is a classic URL benchmarking/metrics tool, but the library is a generic metrics & histogram tool. I checked when making the port, and most of the stats/histogrammy stuff already in ports are either in math/finance or are logfile related, in sysutils & devel. So this seems like a reasonable home; I can add benchmarks as a 2nd category. Sounds reasonable?
Diff Detail
Event TimelineComment Actions Excellent idea! I don't know where rimann-tools are installed, but if the location "makes sense", maybe they can stay there and we could just ship a bunch of rc scripts to manage the services? I will be AFK for a month, so may not follow up on this, but this is a really cool initiative.
Comment Actions merge PR feedback + new plist
Comment Actions include via sed an upstreamed patch that cleans process name as seen via ps we should hide sensitive parameters from casual view. Any suggestions on an alternative? Comment Actions You could try adding textproc/gsed to PATCH_DEPENDS or maybe this untested snipped will allow you to do it with our sed. post-patch:
# hide sensitive command-line parameters from casual users
${SED} -i -e $$'/^#!.*ruby.*/a\\\nProcess.setproctitle($$0)\n' \
${WRKSRC}/bin/riemann-*Comment Actions thanks, that sed goop works a treat. I'll doublecheck some more functionality tomorrow but I think this is ready to land now. How best to commit it? 1 single svn commit, same as this arc patch, or should I do it stepwise port by port? Comment Actions
Comment Actions Ideally pkg-descr would have more than one sentence. I know this is a pain when upstream doesn't bother. I think the logs look better when each port is committed individually, but I will leave that up to you.
Comment Actions For the longer descriptions in pkg-descr, see 3.2.1. pkg-descr of the Porter's Handbook. In particular, it says, "...the content of pkg-descr must be longer than the COMMENT line from the Makefile. It must explain in more depth what the port is all about."
Comment Actions
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||