portbump: improve checksum matching and handling

[herbygillot]

Drop sed(1) entirely from portbump. Instead, read the Portfile into a
line list and use three new procs for targeted modifications:

• replace_checksums: match on unique hash values rather than regex
  patterns, so only the correct lines are modified even with multiple
  subports, conditional branches, or variant-scoped checksums.

• find_revision_line: two-phase strategy — first check for an inline
  revision on the subport declaration line (e.g. llvm pattern), then
  fall back to the nearest standalone revision line, excluding lines
  inside subport { } blocks when bumping the parent port.

• reset_revision: simple regsub to set revision to 0, preserving
  indentation and surrounding text.

Fixes a bug where both_checksums was reset on each distfile iteration,
causing only the last distfile's checksums to be updated in Portfiles
with multiple distfiles (e.g. git with git-manpages and git-htmldocs).

Also fixes a bug where patch mode applied file attributes to the
Portfile instead of the patch file.

Removes dead code left over from the sed-based implementation.

Adds comprehensive test suite covering real-world Portfile patterns
(git, go, llvm-16, gradle), including tests for size field replacement,
subport blocks with nested braces, multiple distfiles, and the
no-revision-line code path.

Closes: https://trac.macports.org/ticket/65601
Closes: https://trac.macports.org/ticket/73593

[fhgwright]

On a somewhat related note, the traditional approach (pasting some output from port -v checksum into the Portfile) would be more convenient if the suggested checksum lines duplicated the indentations of the existing lines. That's probably less important as port bump improves, but it's also probably fairly easy given what you've already done for port bump.

[herbygillot]

On a somewhat related note, the traditional approach (pasting some output from port -v checksum into the Portfile) would be more convenient if the suggested checksum lines duplicated the indentations of the existing lines. That's probably less important as port bump improves, but it's also probably fairly easy given what you've already done for port bump.

Here's a PR that will do the right thing in regards to formatting for port checksum: #398

[jmroot]

You're not always going to get a review as quickly as you would like. MacPorts is not anybody's day job and there has been a lot going on recently. I'm not going to do a major release without going through the pending PRs.

[herbygillot]

You're not always going to get a review as quickly as you would like. MacPorts is not anybody's day job and there has been a lot going on recently. I'm not going to do a major release without going through the pending PRs.

Yes, I certainly understand that.