Wonderful!
Thank you for taking the PR in.
So, I uploaded a new patch to the GIT repo to bugzilla. One that contains the USES=gnome line. And I ran a "make install" on a freshly installed FreeBSD system with a freshly checked out freebsd-ports repository overnight. There were a few hickups whilst building the dependencies, but my port itself was good.
Code:
root@freebsd:/usr/ports/audio/d11amp # make test
===> Testing for d11amp-0.59
mkdir -p /tmp/d11amp/
./d11amp --dir=/tmp/d11amp/ --gui.theme.dumpdefault=/tmp/d11amp/
if [ "`cat /tmp/d11amp//cc-0-10.txt | sha256 | awk -F' ' '{ print $1; }' - `" = "28e22bf9721e3ac3b9cd59836b215b45e96e1bf31e2d0170896d4b2b501db4a4" ] ; then echo "check OK" ; else echo "check failed" ; exit 1 ; fi
check OK
REGARDING THE PATCHES: I took a closer look at both of them. One removed a typo in the manpage, the second one was actually a patch to make the build process compatible with your port system. Thus, I would respectfully request that I may be allowed to keep this technique in the future. I can guarantee you that they will decrease in size, but it will never go away, since I am also creating ports for other Operating Systems as well.
(Btw: The code itself was not patched, really just the Makefile)
I mean, a new minor release won't hurt, would it?
Haha. Yes, it does.
Releasing is a MANUAL, laborious process for me at this point.
I will automate it in the future, BUT FIRST I need to know if the general way I am writing FreeBSD ports is good or not.
A simple YES/NO from you would suffice.
TO SUM UP:
1. YOU tell me if my general grasp on FreeBSD ports is a solid one, or if I can improve it.
2. I will then start working on Release 0.60, but that might take some time.
3. It will include the concerns you have raised, but the FreeBSD port for it might (MIGHT!) still contain patches to make it more compatible with the ports system. (Though not as severe as it is at the moment).
Sounds good?