Alastair, are you still up to maintaining this port?
Sorry for not asking before committing.

Committed. Thank you for your contribution! :)

Approved.

Thank you, Alastair!
I hope our joint efforts may bring this port to the tree.

Done with review TODOs

@yuri: Could you, please, review this?

May commit?

Done with review TODOs

• Update 0.13 => 0.14

My first review here :)
Looks good to me.

Fucking hell, two platforms for the same thing is a waste of time: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=286225

Committed:
https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/commit/?id=fb9a10d1c7cfc0dcfbe3c3adf3b0dbd53de5168d

main-i386-default eventually passed.

In D47169#1114112, @diizzy wrote:

Submission to bugzilla is required for any policy defined my Porters Handbook to apply. I've asked this question before without getting any answer but do we have some kind of unified agreement that we're to accept PRs at all from GitHub from portmgr or people involved with ports?

do we have some kind of unified agreement that we're to accept PRs at all from GitHub from portmgr or people involved with ports?

Submission to bugzilla is required for any policy defined my Porters Handbook to apply. I've asked this question before without getting any answer but do we have some kind of unified agreement that we're to accept PRs at all from GitHub from portmgr or people involved with ports?

In D47169#1113528, @diizzy wrote:

Actually this is incorrect, they NEED to be submitted on bugzilla for timeouts etc to apply

Actually this is incorrect, they NEED to be submitted on bugzilla for timeouts etc to apply

Wording and spelling LGTM, with or without jrm's suggestion. I'm not a ports committer either, so I can't speak beyond that.

For this change you will want to tag it with:

Reviewed by: fernape
Approved by: fernape (ports)
Approved by: mhorne (mentor)

https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/commit/?id=ed915b6d812b4193a196a70603d8967342d918ee

LGTM

Another patch has been committed:
https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/www/newsraft

Has portlint, or similar, been run?

Has portlint, or similar, been run?

Update to 0.23.

poudriere-testport:
13.3-{amd64,i386}-release: OK
14.0-{amd64,i386}-release: OK
main-{amd64,i386}: OK

Already committed.

• Drop py-pip, it is not needed
• Improve DOC components

• Improve DOCS
• Include building the man page.

Add tests component

Fix Port tests component

In D43253#990385, @diizzy wrote:

Poudriere reports:

Error: mail/py-flask-mailman depends on nonexistent origin 'textproc/py-mkdocs-include-markdown-plugin'; Please contact maintainer of the port to fix this.

Poudriere reports:

Error: mail/py-flask-mailman depends on nonexistent origin 'textproc/py-mkdocs-include-markdown-plugin'; Please contact maintainer of the port to fix this.

Update to 5.0.23

Update to 5.0.32

In D42068#985819, @rene wrote:

In D42068#985744, @jbeich wrote:

Before landing it'd be nice to turn off 12.4 package builders. Otherwise, /latest and /quarterly will become empty while /release_* still work. The space can be later reclaimed by consistently removing all sets and removing FreeBSD:12:* references on https://pkg.freebsd.org/

This cleanup only affects main, not quarterly/2023Q4. There is a 12-eol tag on main so the pkg builders could stick to that?

On a different note jbeich is somewhat correct. If the builders were still started it would end up with an empty pkgset and the cluster pkgset would overwrite the pkg repos with an empty set being served. Although not exactly sure on how the builders are run so we disabled the pkgsync script and backed it up and have removed the pkgsets.

In D43253#985836, @minsoochoo0122_proton.me wrote:

In D43253#985801, @agh_riseup.net wrote:

In D43253#985787, @minsoochoo0122_proton.me wrote:

Please add ports group to reviewers, subscribers, and tag otherwise people won't be notified.

I have no idea what that entails. If I Edit Revision via the menu box at the top right, I can find the three fields you mention, however, when I type ports, a number of options are auto populated in a drop down list, none of which are ports.
Is this meant to be standard procedure too?

Try Contributor Reviewers (ports)

In D42068#985744, @jbeich wrote:

Before landing it'd be nice to turn off 12.4 package builders. Otherwise, /latest and /quarterly will become empty while /release_* still work. The space can be later reclaimed by consistently removing all sets and removing FreeBSD:12:* references on https://pkg.freebsd.org/

Before landing it'd be nice to turn off 12.4 package builders. Otherwise, /latest and /quarterly will become empty while /release_* still work. The space can be later reclaimed by consistently removing all sets and removing FreeBSD:12:* references on https://pkg.freebsd.org/

In D42068#985549, @jbeich wrote:

Many patches for missing <byteswap.h> and <endian.h> on FreeBSD < 13 can probably be dropped e.g.,

Many patches for missing <byteswap.h> and <endian.h> on FreeBSD < 13 can probably be dropped e.g.,

• audio/bespokesynth/files/patch-libs_link_include_ableton_platforms_linux_Linux.hpp
• audio/mixxx/files/patch-lib_kaitai_kaitaistream.cpp
• audio/umurmur/Makefile (BROKEN_*)
• audio/umurmur/files/patch-src_byteorder.h
• audio/webrtc-audio-processing/files/patch-powerpc64 (keep <altivec.h> part)
• audio/zita-alsa-pcmi/files/patch-source_zita-alsa-pcmi.cc
• biology/abyss/files/patch-Common_city.cc
• databases/redisdesktopmanager/files/patch-3rdparty_simdjson_singleheader_simdjson.h
• devel/chrpath/files/patch-protos.h (keep Elf_Ehdr part)
• devel/cityhash/files/patch-src_city.cc
• devel/dwarves/files/patch-lib_bpf_src_btf.c (the first 3 hunks, keep from compare_vsi_off onwards)
• devel/efivar/files/patch-src-efivar.h (keep __builtin_* part)
• devel/elfutils/files/patch-lib_byteswap.h
• devel/firmware-utils/files/patch-* (<endian.h> part, keep `"freebsd.h")
• devel/py-pysimdjson/files/patch-simdjson_simdjson.h
• graphics/igt-gpu-tools/files/patch-lib_igt_\_core.h (keep <signal.h> part)
• graphics/libemf/files/patch-libemf_libemf.cpp
• multimedia/dvb-apps/files/patch-lib_libucsi_endianops.h
• multimedia/ringrtc/files/patch-src_webrtc_src_rtc_\_base_byte_\_order.h
• multimedia/smpeg/files/patch-video_\_video.h
• net/mercury/Makefile (BROKEN)
• net/yate/files/patch-libs_yradio_radio.cpp
• security/pam_pwdfile/files/patch-md5.c
• sysutils/afflib/files/patch-lib_qemu_bswap.h
• sysutils/dd_rescue/files/patch-aes_\_c.c
• sysutils/lttng-tools/files/patch-src_bin_lttng-crash_lttng-crash.c
• sysutils/lttng-tools/files/patch-src_common_compat_endian.h
• sysutils/zbackup/files/patch-compression.cc
• sysutils/zbackup/files/patch-endian.hh
• www/envoy/files/patch-envoy_common_platform.h (keep ENVOY_MMSG_MORE part)
• www/mod_gnutls/files/patch-src_gnutls_\_sni.c
• www/qt5-webengine/files/patch-src_3rdparty_chromium_third_\_party_smhasher_src_City.cpp

Latest rebase and most probably the last one before the sunset.

More changes by @jbeich

In D42068#980655, @jbeich wrote:

In D42068#980602, @bofh wrote:

These are still not fixed. I've also noticed more cruft:

• devel/libffcall/files/patch-ffcall-abi.h

I think this patch is not related to sparc but aarch64.

aarch64 (arm64) has 2 "a" in the architecture name. sparc64 (64-bit sparc, or sparc V9) may not define __sparc64__ on non-BSDs thus required checking both __sparc__ and __arch64__.

Add more changes by @jbeich

In D42068#980602, @bofh wrote:

These are still not fixed. I've also noticed more cruft:

• devel/libffcall/files/patch-ffcall-abi.h

I think this patch is not related to sparc but aarch64.

These are still not fixed. I've also noticed more cruft:

• devel/libffcall/files/patch-ffcall-abi.h

I think this patch is not related to sparc but aarch64.

In D42068#980467, @jbeich wrote:

• shells/v7sh/files/Makefile (only ${OSREL:R} < 13)
• www/tor-browser/files/patch-third_\_party_libwebrtc_rtc_\_base_ip_\_address.cc

Update as per @jhale