Re: some more non fetching recipes

[Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 02:51:24PM +0200, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> To clarify:
> Things that do not fetch because they require a manual download with
> accepting a license etc, I do not consider as broken.
> And of course we should keep these (I know the ixp4xx situation quite well).
> But how many of those do we have? I know about the ixp4xx and some ti
> ones. Maybe there are a few more that I missed but then again, most of
> the ~1000 recipes Martin mentioned and a lot of the recipes I listed
> above do not fall into this category but refer e.g. to a cvs server
> that is not there any more, to a version, tag or tarball that does not
> exist etc etc.
> 
> For me those recipes are broken. And if it is a recipe that is broken
> for a prolonged amount of time, there is apparently no interest in it,
> and personally I would like to have this indicated one way or another,
> or, even better, move these recipes into a dedicated folder(like
> nonworking). In that case the recipe is still there should somebody be
> interested in it, but it does not clutter up the main recipe dir.
> (and note again that I feel things like the ixp4xx and the ti codecs
> etc do not fall into this group).
> 
> And yes: we can also try to repair them by finding alternate sources
> etc (although this might be hard if someone changed from cvs to git).
> Then again if the recipe has been broken for a long time, without
> anyone taking action, filing a bug, reporting it on the list, I feel
> that there is not really interest in that recipe any more and
> personally I see it as a waste of time to try to repair them.

When I did this test, I've fixed those SRC_URI where I found new
location (usually moved to old subfolder etc.)

Then there was many recipes where original SRC_URI didn't work but I was 
able to find it with google ie 
http://familiar.handhelds.org/source/
was great source for really old releases, but I didn't change SRC_URIs
in this case because I don't know how long it will be there and it
doesn't feel like "proper" mirror. But because my main goal was to test
checksums I was moving to from checksums.ini to recipes it was enough
for me. And I didn't include those in my "download status" - but they
still cannot be downloaded (but at least I have them locally in
downloads dir).

Then there were other recipes where I wasn't able to find source
archive even with google (listed as 404 in status).

Some recipes with different checksums (then I kept checksums from
checksums.ini and noted that in status).

And worst case were recipes where original SRC_URI downloaded ie some
.html about domain no longer existing - which was detected as mismatched
checksums and needed manual check (those were also listed in status).

Regards,

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com