Amitai Schleier
@schmonz@schmonz.com
My fault assuming the existence of a published 1.5 tarball meant it was fully cooked. (I also saw FreeBSD Ports using it, so my fault accepting social proof as sufficient, too.) But also it's generally troublesome for packagers when published tarballs change size/checksum/etc. in place. Better to not publish until the URL contents can be stable, and/or publish new changes under new URLs.
Also, I was surprised to see your build wanting to know how to generate its own binary package. I guess that's typical for Debian and others, but unusual for pkgsrc and I imagine other ports-style trees. No harm done, of course, but I've given pkgsrc that part of the job.
I'm curious how knowledge of the 1.5 source archive even reached any packagers.
That was not listed on the WWW pages at all but only on a GOPHER site that's explicitly for people to get bonus content such as access to in-development source, and comes with an explicit warning in the GOPHER menu.
The published source archives listed on the WWW, as well as the GitHub snapshot, were still at 1.4. I had only just ticked them over to 1.5 when I sent that nudge out. (-:
It has always been capable of building its own packages, by the way. (And since it's slashpackage, one can by design just package/compile it self-contained and not do the subsequent packaging step.)
https://jdebp.uk/FGA/slashpackage.html#OSPackaging
It's not a Debian thing. Quite the opposite. For a long time no-one packaged any of this at all, so I made packages for people myself. Even now, no-one at all packages djbwares and there is only one that packages nosh.
I think that you possibly hadn't noticed before because it wasn't NetBSD; but now I've ported all three of #redo, #djbwares, and #nosh to NetBSD (testing on a non-amd64 architecture, no less!), as you've probably seen over the past few months. So now there's a system for building #NetBSD packages alongside Debian's, FreeBSD's, and OpenBSD's.
I actually looked for contact details for Po-Chuan Hsieh, for the FreeBSD port, so that I could let xem know how messed up that port was; as I noted before. But there's only a wildly (a decade) out of date LinkedIn listing and an opaque FreeBSD account.
The Parabola packaging of redo is several versions out of date, and has the pre-pre-Brexit URLs. Arch is on 1.4 at least but using the pre-Brexit URLs.
I don't even know about Void, Hyperbola, et al.
![[?]](https://schmonz.com/snac/schmonz/s/506a4e5be3c4eba4d0539c833aea957a.jpg)
![[?]](https://d35e9bfo1msux2.cloudfront.net/accounts/avatars/109/535/770/898/980/239/original/6841a27af2c37e48.png)
debian/ packaging automation alongside code, but not accustomed to seeing upstreams ship BSD packaging automation. As a packager, my experience of pkg_create is indirect. Very cool that you wrestled it into submission. Have you seen folks use your supplemental BSD package repositories?(I intend in the fullness of time to package nosh, and to figure out what to do with djbwares -- possibly treat it as the new upstream for all its constituent packages. But @notqmail@social.notqmail.org is also in dire need of a fresh batch of my attention.)
You may have seen my request for better pkg_create doco. (-:
I don't track the logs, and the repositories were down for a long time as the machine hosting them vanished.
That said, when I brought them back up just recently, aside from all of the search engine spiders immediately jumping on there was one machine that stood out dutifully checking the Debian repository every day. It seems to belong to some kind of housing collective in #Tokyo. They are in for a surprise. (-: