On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 12:20:31PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2022/03/11 11:28, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 07:54:55AM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > On 2022/03/10 19:38, Andrew Hewus Fresh wrote: > > > > > > > > The only other thing is that I wish it would compare > > > > `perl ppport.h --version` to > > > > `perl -MDevel::PPPort -E 'say Devel::PPPort->VERSION'` > > > > and only update if ours is newer, since I don't watch that closely. > > > > I suppose it's fairly unlikely that it will invisibly break something > > > > though. > > > > > > The ppport.h in a distribution may have been stripped, in which case > > > --version is unavailable. > > > > > > This might be simpler if Devel::PPPort itself could check the version. > > > > I have no strong opinion on that. Do what is feasible. > > I think we can ignore that for now and look into it later if we need to. > > > > > With those things considered, > > > > OK afresh1@ > > > > > > I would like it to not be invisible, and to have a way to disable it. > > > How about this? > > > > If something breaks the porter can set the variable. As it is most > > likely during update, this forkflow is fine for me. > > Exactly. > > > OK bluhm@ > > > > > Did it go through a bulk build already? > > > > I guess not. My question was hidden deep in a mail thread. > > > > The ports I am testing passed a while ago. > > http://bluhm.genua.de/portstest/results/latest.html > > It found two offenders that have ppport.h in a different directory. > > The still display warnings. They can be fixed later. > > I am running a bulk with it now, if there are no problems I'll commit > it at the weekend.
Thanks. I just did a ports test run, no problems. And the logfile is readable again. http://bluhm.genua.de/portstest/results/2022-03-11T10%3A30%3A04Z/test.log
