[ITP] rsync 3.2.6

[Jon Turney]

On 06/10/2022 02:29, Chad Dougherty wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> I've been using cygwin for a long time but this is my first attempt at 
> this process so please be gentle :)
> 
> I noticed that the current rsync package (3.2.3+20200903+git9f9240b-4) 
> is trailing on security updates and also still using the g-b-s method. I 
> pinged the listed maintainer directly last week asking if they were 
> planning to do any updates but have not heard back.  I hope this was not 
> a faux pas as I didn't read until later that it's best to raise the 
> issue on the list first.
> 
> I've attempted to update the port here:
> https://github.com/crd477/cygports/tree/main/rsync
> 
[...]
> This package also seemed to work OK with some casual real testing.
> 

Thanks for looking into updating this.  I'd like to give the existing 
maintainer first refusal, though.

Comments on this cygport:

> REQUIRES="libiconv2 libssl1.1 libxxhash0 libzstd1 liblz4_1"

You don't (and in fact, shouldn't, because you then need to remember to 
manually update them e.g. when soversions change) list here packages 
that cygport can automatically detect as dependencies.

> # Enable this function for releases that work without autoreconf
> src_compile()

You should only override the default src_compile if it doesn't work.

The fact that autoreconf isn't apparently necessary, doesn't mean it 
should be omitted, since that means that future fixes to the 
autoconfiguration machinery aren't automatically incorporated into the 
package, but will only appear when upstream updates the autotools used 
to generate the distributed autoconfiguration files.

(I think this topic is touched upon in the cygport reference manual in 
the section on cygautoreconf, but perhaps that could be clearer)

Comparing the contents of the packages this produced with the current 
package, there are various /usr/share/doc/rsync/*.{html,txt} files which 
are no longer packaged.  Is this intentional?