Re: Substitute for git-package.mk in pkgsrc proper?

[pin <voidpin%protonmail.com@localhost>]

On Tuesday, December 5th, 2023 at 3:11 PM, Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:

> Paul Ripke stix%stix.id.au@localhost writes:
> 
> > I'm looking at cleaning up wip/prusaslicer and dependencies for promotion
> > into pkgsrc, and I'm stuck on wip/opencascade-git, where the fetch options
> > are password protected download URL, or fetch via git.
> 
> 
> As Martin says, not having a release tarball is an upstream bug.
> 
> If this is really open source, you/we/? could host a copy, which is icky
> but doesn't require extra code.
> 
> It is an interesting question how much accomodation for bad upstream
> disttributions should be migrated from wip -- where packaging things
> that aren't releases is much more ok -- to pkgsrc proper.
> 
> Generally, pkgsrc wants a "distfile" which has checksum and can be
> mirrored. A "there is no distfile; you have to run git" is not
> consistent with that, and I note there are not checksums for the code in
> wip/opencascade-git.

As a work around one can use git tag or commit hash.
Doing so allows at least to have a checksum.