Alright. I will do that. — Antoine
> On 21 Jul 2023, at 12:46, Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> wrote: > > On 2023/07/20 18:19, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 01:47:42PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: >>> On 2023/07/20 14:27, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 10:24:10AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: >>>>> portroach doesn't reliably use the site handler for cpan, various ports >>>>> (notably those with Foo-Bar-v1.23 format distfile names) fallback to >>>>> directory listing. For example see the "L" instead of "S" for >>>>> p5-Sys-Virt in >>>>> https://portroach.openbsd.org/antoine%20jacoutot%20%3cajacou...@openbsd.org%3E.html >>>>> >>>>> Also the "is this site handled by this" regex doesn't cover some URL >>>>> formats (though afaict as long as one of the various MASTER_SITES >>>>> entries matches, it looks like it does pick it up anyway). >>>>> >>>>> I think this diff should help but it's not tested. Is there any good way >>>>> to test portroach without setting up a full installation and having it >>>>> fetch a list of URLs the size of 45 aardvarks? >>>> >>>> I can put this on portroach.openbsd.org if you want? >>> >>> If it's not likely to mess anything up too badly for the database, yes >>> please - I don't think it can make things much worse anyway :) >> >> Running with it. >> portroach.openbsd.org has been updated with the latest ports with this patch >> if you want to check. > > It didn't fix existing ones on portroach.openbsd.org but I've done a > quick install on a machine here and it is correctly using the right site > handler during a fetch with debug enabled, and doesn't show incorrect > "new" versions for p5-* things where I know there was a problem (e.g. > p5-Calendar-Simple listed for ports@), so I think the diff is good. > > I suspect portroach isn't overwriting an entry where it already thinks > it has a "new" version, so clearing the db should help fix those. >
