Re: Mk/bsd.openssl.mk optimization
Vladimir Chukharev wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:13:44 +0300, Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
V.Chukharev wrote:
Another patch, just one line. It can be applied independently
from the patch for bsd.port.subdir.mk.
I use: grep -l @comment ORIGIN:${1}$ $pdb/*/+CONTENTS for
similar purposes in portmaster with no complaints so far. Is
there a reason you need to do the complicated thing?
I am a bit worried by the size of * expansion.
I'm starting to wonder if you've actually tested and/or benchmarked
this stuff. I've run tests of the construction above for 5,000
directories which is way more ports than a user would ever have
installed. Rerunning this contrived example:
101$ time grep -l doug /home/dougb/testglob/*/file
/home/dougb/testglob/4785/file
real0m0.718s
user0m0.026s
sys 0m0.690s
time find /home/dougb/testglob/* -type f -name file -exec grep -l doug
{} \;
/home/dougb/testglob/4785/file
real0m26.344s
user0m1.706s
sys 0m22.771s
Piping to xargs instead of using -exec is actually quite a bit faster,
roughly 3.5 seconds wall clock time using the same setup (post caching).
Those are the best case scenarios with everything cached. Very
first run of the grep test (nothing in the file cache):
time grep -l doug /home/dougb/testglob/*/file
/home/dougb/testglob/4785/file
real0m6.454s
user0m0.114s
sys 0m2.992s
I have about 1380 ports installed, and this number can grow. One
example of this kind limitation: $ ls /usr/ports/*/* | wc bash:
/bin/ls: Argument list too long
Sorry, that's a ridiculous example. We have over 18,000 ports, and
you're talking about two layers of globals, not one.
That's the reason for find. And it is 5-30 times faster then grep
-r
I didn't say anything about grep -r, look carefully at what I wrote.
(depending on existence and size of /var/pkg/db/pkgdb.db).
... which is why the command I pasted above skips it altogether.
As to the rest of the command - I do not want to mess with it yet.
It works.
I think you need to read des' rules on optimization, especially the
bit about not doing optimization unless you're doing extensive
benchmarking.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ports/125169: [PATCH] www/xpi-noscript: update to 1.7.4
Would someone please commit this PR with maintainer timeout? Second trial. Would someone please commit this PR with maintainer timeout? Best Regards. --- Yasuhiro KIMURA ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SECOND TRY:::ports/125526 kde editors/koffice-kde3: fails building with both ImageMa
Would someone please commit the patch in 125526 Thank you David ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
math/cln : build failure
hi,
FYI, trying to upgrade cln-1.1.13 to cln-1.2.2. It's been happening for quite a
while already..
/bin/sh /usr/local/bin/libtool --mode=compile c++ -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing
-pipe -march=pentium-m -fPIC -I/usr/local/include -I../include -I../include
-I./base -c ./base/hash/cl_rcpointer_hashweak_rcpointer.cc
c++ -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -march=pentium-m -fPIC -I/usr/local/include
-I../include -I../include -I./base -c
./base/hash/cl_rcpointer_hashweak_rcpointer.cc -fPIC -DPIC -o
.libs/cl_rcpointer_hashweak_rcpointer.o
c++ -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -march=pentium-m -fPIC -I/usr/local/include
-I../include -I../include -I./base -c
./base/hash/cl_rcpointer_hashweak_rcpointer.cc -o
cl_rcpointer_hashweak_rcpointer.o /dev/null 21
gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/math/cln/work/cln-1.2.2/src'
gmake SUBDIR=base/input all
gmake[3]: Entering directory `/usr/ports/math/cln/work/cln-1.2.2/src'
/bin/sh /usr/local/bin/libtool --mode=compile c++ -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing
-pipe -march=pentium-m -fPIC -I/usr/local/include -I../include -I../include
-I./base -c ./base/input/cl_read_bad_syntax_exception.cc
c++ -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -march=pentium-m -fPIC -I/usr/local/include
-I../include -I../include -I./base -c
./base/input/cl_read_bad_syntax_exception.cc -fPIC -DPIC -o
.libs/cl_read_bad_syntax_exception.o
./base/input/cl_read_bad_syntax_exception.cc:28: error:
'read_number_bad_syntax_exception' has not been declared
./base/input/cl_read_bad_syntax_exception.cc:28: error: ISO C++ forbids
declaration of 'read_number_bad_syntax_exception' with no type
./base/input/cl_read_bad_syntax_exception.cc: In function 'int
cln::read_number_bad_syntax_exception(const char*, const char*)':
./base/input/cl_read_bad_syntax_exception.cc:29: error: only constructors take
base initializers
gmake[3]: *** [cl_read_bad_syntax_exception.lo] Error 1
gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/math/cln/work/cln-1.2.2/src'
gmake[2]: *** [base/input.target_all] Error 2
gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/math/cln/work/cln-1.2.2/src'
gmake[1]: *** [base.target_all] Error 2
gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/math/cln/work/cln-1.2.2/src'
gmake: *** [all] Error 2
*** Error code 2
Stop in /usr/ports/math/cln.
=== make failed for math/cln
=== Aborting update
thx!
B
_
{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome
He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know.
Abraham Lincoln
I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery when wet.
Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You have been
Warned.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [phing] Updated FreeBSD Phing Port
As we near the 9 month anniversary of this, [er [EMAIL PROTECTED], I
recommend that we commit the new version of this port.
~BAS
On Fri, 2008-05-30 at 17:11 -0400, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
All:
Normally I would say that this PR may be approaching the point where we
override the maintainer -- the problem is that I haven't received any
feedback from anyone other than my development team.
~BAS
On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 11:32 -0400, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
The associated PRs are:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/122450
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/121791
My draft version of the rewrite is at:
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~seklecki/phing-2.3.0-CFI1.tar
I would note that there is a 20-line count diff of the file-contents
listing -- someone should dig through it to validate that some files
massive list of files has not been added since I originally composed the
PLIST back in late October of 2007? I just never filed PR for some
reason.
Feedback appreciated -- be sure to CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
title e: ports/122450: devel/php5-phing redesign
TIA,
~BAS
On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 12:43 -0400, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
I remember now why I never filed the PR -- the whole thing is fucked. I
realized that after I tried to conver the FreeBSD port from a simple
do-install: target to use ${PORTSDIR}/devel/pear/bsd.pear.mk:
Here are the two big issues that I require guidance with:
1) FreeBSD Ports PEAR subsystem designates pear package contents as
either: $TESTS $SCRIPTFILES $SQLS $EXAMPLES $DOCS or $FILES
Not the most ambiguous designations ever, but close.
Pear packages use categories: script, php, data, doc
Could anyone comment on the mappings?
2) The PEAR port is installing a script in $PREFIX/bin/phing
as a bourne shell script wrapper around $PREFIX/share/pear/phing.php
script /usr/local/bin/phing
$ ident /usr/local/bin/phing
/usr/local/bin/phing:
$Id: pear-phing 123 2006-09-14 20:19:08Z mrook $
Where as we are running some sed(1) statements on:
${WRKSRC}/bin/phing the installing it as ${PREFIX}/bin/phing
However, i think some of these post-extract: targets are legacy
because one substrpl is: s|/opt/phing|${PREFIX}/lib/php/phing|
But:
$ grep -i opt \
[../obj]/devel/php5-phing-work/work/phing-2.3.0/bin/phing.php
// Set any INI options for PHP
No such instances of this string exist any more in phing.php or
phing in 2.3.0x
I'm filing the PR now and I'll let everyone else fight over the proper
solution.
~BAS
On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 11:46 -0400, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 11:27 -0400, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
Michiel et. al.:
Some of my developers are telling me that they are having some
trouble
using the stable v2.3.0 in FreeBSD ports.
Oh yea, my day is done for:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/seklecki$ wc -l phing_port.txt phing_pear.txt
272 phing_port
301 phing_pear
573 total
I have a vague recollection, maybe 6 months ago, converting the FreeBSD
port to use the PEAR-framework so that it is properly registered --
spending 18 hours sorting out PLIST differences.
What happened? Maybe I forgot to file PR?
~BAS
I'm digging for details now -- but I may be related to the path in
which
the PEAR package installs files v.s. the Port.
Any insight into this before I burn my day down?
~BAS
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007, Michiel Rook wrote:
Hi Brian,
We should endeavor to update this to something recent. We'll try
this from
here and forward results on.
That'd be great! The latest release is 2.3.0RC1 - we're hoping to
release
2.3.0 soon(ish).
regards,
Michiel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
l8*
-lava (Brian A. Seklecki - Pittsburgh, PA, USA)
http://www.spiritual-machines.org/
Guilty? Yeah. But he knows it. I mean, you're guilty.
You just don't know it. So who's really in jail?
~Maynard James Keenan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Brian A. Seklecki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Collaborative Fusion, Inc.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
djbfft, daemontools, ezmlm RESTRICTED - public domain
D. J. Berstein has put his work into public domain: http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html qmail, djbdns, and ucspi-tcp already have their RESTRICTED removed. djbfft, daemontools, and ezmlm are still RESTRICTED: multimedia/djbfft RESTRICTED= Forbidden to redistribute - we have patches to the distribution. sysutils/daemontools RESTRICTED= Unsure of the license of djb software mail/ezmlm RESTRICTED= Unsure of DJB license The md5 in the distinfo of all three ports match with the announcement. Only daemontools has an additional man distfile that is not mentioned in the announcement. (Neither is daemontools53.) Cheers, Jan Henrik ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mk/bsd.openssl.mk optimization
On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 09:20:04 +0300, Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vladimir Chukharev wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:13:44 +0300, Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
V.Chukharev wrote:
Another patch, just one line. It can be applied independently
from the patch for bsd.port.subdir.mk.
I use: grep -l @comment ORIGIN:${1}$ $pdb/*/+CONTENTS for
similar purposes in portmaster with no complaints so far. Is
there a reason you need to do the complicated thing?
I am a bit worried by the size of * expansion.
I'm starting to wonder if you've actually tested and/or benchmarked
Not very deeply, you are right. Actually I hoped that when I
demonstrate the 10 time reduced time of index generation with
a bad patch, maintainer or someone else would jump in and
make a real fix for the problem. When that did not happen,
I tried to prepare a patch which does not break things. It's
not ready yet (repeat: I knew practically nothing about make
and bsd.*.mk when starting!).
this stuff. I've run tests of the construction above for 5,000
directories which is way more ports than a user would ever have
installed. Rerunning this contrived example:
Ok, that means that the limit is between 5000 and 6721:
$ ls /var/db/pkg/*/+* | wc
bash: /bin/ls: Argument list too long
0 0 0
$ time find /var/db/pkg -type f | wc -l
6721
real0m0.151s
user0m0.013s
sys 0m0.091s
Is 5000 more then a user would EVER have? So, NEVER more than 4 times
what I have now? Hm... It's possible that you are right. But I
didn't want to bet on it and used find.
101$ time grep -l doug /home/dougb/testglob/*/file
/home/dougb/testglob/4785/file
real 0m0.718s
user 0m0.026s
sys 0m0.690s
time find /home/dougb/testglob/* -type f -name file -exec grep -l doug
{} \;
/home/dougb/testglob/4785/file
real 0m26.344s
user 0m1.706s
sys 0m22.771s
Piping to xargs instead of using -exec is actually quite a bit faster,
roughly 3.5 seconds wall clock time using the same setup (post caching).
Yes, I know this (and since I did not know about \+ instead of \;
in find -exec, I used xargs). Now I prefer \+.
I have about 1380 ports installed, and this number can grow. One
That's the reason for find. And it is 5-30 times faster then grep
-r
I didn't say anything about grep -r, look carefully at what I wrote.
Oh, so 'the complicated thing' is not 'find | xargs' but the rest of
the command? Then you ask wrong person, I have nothing to do with it.
I do not know who wrote it and how it works.
I only wanted to get rid of grep -r in this small patch.
(depending on existence and size of /var/pkg/db/pkgdb.db).
... which is why the command I pasted above skips it altogether.
...the same way as any of the tricks with find.
I tried to paste your command into the place. It gives errors.
As to the rest of the command - I do not want to mess with it yet.
It works.
I think you need to read des' rules on optimization, especially the
bit about not doing optimization unless you're doing extensive
benchmarking.
I believe I read it many years ago. If you give a link I will check it
out. (No, I do not want to google it.)
Doug
Thanks!
Vladimir
--
V. Chukharev
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ports/95179: devel/ptmalloc has been waiting for more that two years
Hi.. Just a reminder that this PR already reached it's maintainer timeout a while ago ;-). Let me know if there are problems with the last patch there. Pedro. Posta, news, sport, oroscopo: tutto in una sola pagina. Crea l#39;home page che piace a te! www.yahoo.it/latuapagina ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mk/bsd.openssl.mk optimization
V.Chukharev wrote:
On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 09:20:04 +0300, Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vladimir Chukharev wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:13:44 +0300, Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
V.Chukharev wrote:
Another patch, just one line. It can be applied independently
from the patch for bsd.port.subdir.mk.
I use: grep -l @comment ORIGIN:${1}$ $pdb/*/+CONTENTS for
similar purposes in portmaster with no complaints so far. Is
there a reason you need to do the complicated thing?
I am a bit worried by the size of * expansion.
I'm starting to wonder if you've actually tested and/or benchmarked
Not very deeply, you are right.
Well that's a relief to know that my perception of reality filter
isn't totally out of whack. :)
this stuff. I've run tests of the construction above for 5,000
directories which is way more ports than a user would ever have
installed. Rerunning this contrived example:
Ok, that means that the limit is between 5000 and 6721:
$ ls /var/db/pkg/*/+*
You're still comparing apples and oranges. The correct command to test
what we're trying to improve would be 'ls /var/db/pkg/*/+CONTENTS'.
Remember that there are at least 4 and sometimes 5 files in each pkg
directory.
Again in my contrived example, /home/dougb/testglob/*/file works with
8,426 directories, fails with 8,427. I think that's more than enough
safety margin for the forseeable future, and if the system ever
exploded to the point that any user had more than 8,426 ports
installed the stuff can always be fixed. :)
In any case I do agree that getting rid of grep -r is a noble goal,
I'm glad that you looked into this.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
bsd-grep-20080725_1 -v flag busted...
Hi-- I'd just updated the BSD grep port to bsd-grep-20080725_1, but regrettably have noticed that many things using grep stopped working. For example, running GNU-style ./configure hangs here: configure: creating ./config.status load: 1.15 cmd: sh 72964 [runnable] 7.60u 95.78s 14% 2260k A trivial test case: % echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi % echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi fee foe fum % ./grep --version grep (BSD grep) 2.5.1-FreeBSD Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bsd-grep-20080725_1 -v flag busted...
Chuck Swiger escribió: I'd just updated the BSD grep port to bsd-grep-20080725_1, but regrettably have noticed that many things using grep stopped working. For example, running GNU-style ./configure hangs here: configure: creating ./config.status load: 1.15 cmd: sh 72964 [runnable] 7.60u 95.78s 14% 2260k A trivial test case: % echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi % echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi fee foe fum % ./grep --version grep (BSD grep) 2.5.1-FreeBSD Hello Chuck, thanks for your notes. It seems very strange to me, because GNU grep produces the same output for me. Apart from this, the -v flag was really broken, but I applied some fixes before updating the port and in the version, which I committer, I thought that the -v flag was compatible. Here is what I get at the moment: echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi /usr/bin/grep -V grep (GNU grep) 2.5.1-FreeBSD Copyright 1988, 1992-1999, 2000, 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. It's still the same, thus I don't understand how you could produce that output with GNU grep. Best, -- Gabor Kovesdan EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.kovesdan.org ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bsd-grep-20080725_1 -v flag busted...
On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 08:59:25PM +0200, G?bor K?vesd?n wrote: thanks for your notes. It seems very strange to me, because GNU grep produces the same output for me. Apart from this, the -v flag was really broken, but I applied some fixes before updating the port and in the version, which I committer, I thought that the -v flag was compatible. Here is what I get at the moment: echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi Example is broken, echo (for sh) supposed to be echo 'fee fi foe fum' | ... -- http://ache.pp.ru/ ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bsd-grep-20080725_1 -v flag busted...
Gábor Kövesdán [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-04: Chuck Swiger escribió: I'd just updated the BSD grep port to bsd-grep-20080725_1, but regrettably have noticed that many things using grep stopped working. For example, running GNU-style ./configure hangs here: configure: creating ./config.status load: 1.15 cmd: sh 72964 [runnable] 7.60u 95.78s 14% 2260k A trivial test case: % echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi % echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi fee foe fum % ./grep --version grep (BSD grep) 2.5.1-FreeBSD Hello Chuck, thanks for your notes. It seems very strange to me, because GNU grep produces the same output for me. Apart from this, the -v flag was really broken, but I applied some fixes before updating the port and in the version, which I committer, I thought that the -v flag was compatible. Here is what I get at the moment: echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi /usr/bin/grep -V grep (GNU grep) 2.5.1-FreeBSD Copyright 1988, 1992-1999, 2000, 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. It's still the same, thus I don't understand how you could produce that output with GNU grep. I may be stating the obvious, but note that depending on your shell and it's configuration, echo might not translate \n to an actual newline. You might need to use `echo -e' instead of `echo' to get four lines printed instead of one. /bin/sh and bash need it, ksh doesn't, not sure about (t)csh. Also note that our /bin/echo doesn't know about -e and will never translate \n to a newline. The following should be more portable across different shells: printf 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi printf 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi -- Daniel Roethlisberger http://daniel.roe.ch/ ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bsd-grep-20080725_1 -v flag busted...
On Aug 4, 2008, at 1:18 PM, Andrey Chernov wrote: echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi Example is broken, echo (for sh) supposed to be echo 'fee fi foe fum' | ... Well, if your shell's built-in echo doesn't grok newlines, then /usr/ bin/printf works, as Daniel suggested. But using /bin/sh and a multiline statement as you suggest shows the exact same problem: % echo 'fee fi foe fum' | ./grep -v fi % echo 'fee fi foe fum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi fee foe fum (I'm much more interested in confirming whether the bug I see in BSD grep is reproducible by others than debating how to get real newlines from various shells.) -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bsd-grep-20080725_1 -v flag busted...
--On Monday, August 04, 2008 22:24:21 +0200 Daniel Roethlisberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gábor Kövesdán [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-04: Chuck Swiger escribió: I'd just updated the BSD grep port to bsd-grep-20080725_1, but regrettably have noticed that many things using grep stopped working. For example, running GNU-style ./configure hangs here: configure: creating ./config.status load: 1.15 cmd: sh 72964 [runnable] 7.60u 95.78s 14% 2260k A trivial test case: % echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi % echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi fee foe fum % ./grep --version grep (BSD grep) 2.5.1-FreeBSD Hello Chuck, thanks for your notes. It seems very strange to me, because GNU grep produces the same output for me. Apart from this, the -v flag was really broken, but I applied some fixes before updating the port and in the version, which I committer, I thought that the -v flag was compatible. Here is what I get at the moment: echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi /usr/bin/grep -V grep (GNU grep) 2.5.1-FreeBSD Copyright 1988, 1992-1999, 2000, 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. It's still the same, thus I don't understand how you could produce that output with GNU grep. I may be stating the obvious, but note that depending on your shell and it's configuration, echo might not translate \n to an actual newline. You might need to use `echo -e' instead of `echo' to get four lines printed instead of one. /bin/sh and bash need it, ksh doesn't, not sure about (t)csh. Also note that our /bin/echo doesn't know about -e and will never translate \n to a newline. The following should be more portable across different shells: printf 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi printf 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi Indeed: [EMAIL PROTECTED] echo -e 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' fee fi foe fum [EMAIL PROTECTED] echo -e 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | grep -v fi fee foe fum -- Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer. *** Check the headers before clicking on Reply. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bsd-grep-20080725_1 -v flag busted...
--On Tuesday, August 05, 2008 00:18:07 +0400 Andrey Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 08:59:25PM +0200, G?bor K?vesd?n wrote: thanks for your notes. It seems very strange to me, because GNU grep produces the same output for me. Apart from this, the -v flag was really broken, but I applied some fixes before updating the port and in the version, which I committer, I thought that the -v flag was compatible. Here is what I get at the moment: echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi Example is broken, echo (for sh) supposed to be echo 'fee fi foe fum' | ... This seems to work fine: [EMAIL PROTECTED] echo 'fee fi foe fum' | grep -v fi fee foe fum -- Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer. *** Check the headers before clicking on Reply. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CALL FOR TEST: Makefile.webplugins for plugins system.
Hello folks, I think I have finished with Makefile.webplugins[1] (USE_WEBPLUGINS) for web plugins that use in browser. It's ready for you to test it, and make bug report or/and feedback. There are four ports left that are not finish, these are *jdk* (Java) ports and are being work on. I have tested almost all of plugins in firefox2, firefox3 and opera. I was not able to test following ports: - www/openvrml: It requires more than 1.5GB RAM to build. All of my machines only have 1GB and less. - www/sidplug: I have no idea where I can test with this plugins, but all browsers shows that it loads correct thought. - www/ump: Umm, it does not build. [1] http://www.marcuscom.com:8080/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/ports-stable/www/firefox/Makefile.webplugins TODO tasks: --- - Finish the *jdk* ports. - Test in pointyhat-exp --- How to use MC ports-stable and upgrade? --- You can grab marcusmerge[2] and run 'marcusmerge -m ports-stable'. If you want to update your ports tree, you have to run cvsup, csup, portsnap or different method first then marcusmerge second at the everytime. If you want to unmerge your ports tree, you can run 'marcusmerge -U' and be sure to update your ports tree to bring ports back. Be sure to read in marcusmerge manpage[3] for more info. The password is 'anoncvs'. To upgrade your installed ports, you can just simple 'portmaster -a' or 'portupgrade -a'. As for the MC ports (GNOME development) users, you are required to update ports-stable first then ports second in order. The MC ports tree are already use ports-stable stuff, so without it and your MC ports will be broke. [2] http://www.marcuscom.com/downloads/marcusmerge [3] http://www.marcuscom.com/marcusmerge.8.html More info for MC: http://www.marcuscom.com:8080/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi Cheers, Mezz -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD GNOME Team http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bsd-grep-20080725_1 -v flag busted...
--On Tuesday, August 05, 2008 00:18:07 +0400 Andrey Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 08:59:25PM +0200, G?bor K?vesd?n wrote: thanks for your notes. It seems very strange to me, because GNU grep produces the same output for me. Apart from this, the -v flag was really broken, but I applied some fixes before updating the port and in the version, which I committer, I thought that the -v flag was compatible. Here is what I get at the moment: echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | ./grep -v fi echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' | /usr/bin/grep -v fi Example is broken, echo (for sh) supposed to be echo 'fee fi foe fum' | ... Are you sure it's grep that's broken? [EMAIL PROTECTED] echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum -- Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer. *** Check the headers before clicking on Reply. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bsd-grep-20080725_1 -v flag busted...
On Aug 4, 2008, at 1:26 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote: Are you sure it's grep that's broken? No, not entirely. :-) [EMAIL PROTECTED] echo 'fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum' fee\nfi\nfoe\nfum Your shell's built-in echo doesn't understand the C-style \n; try using printf command instead of echo. -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Deleting python compiled files
Hi, Working in a port using python i'm facing this problem. If I run the application after the install the py source files are compiled in pyc (or pyo) files. This is good cause precompiled files provide better performances. The problem is deleting the port. The pyc files aren't registered in the pkg-plist so the deletion isn't complete and I can't delete the main directory containing the application files. If I add the pyc files, when I remove the port I receive an error saying the checksum dosn't exist, and that's righ. So what's the best way handle this problem ? Thanks for your help (again) Rodrigo ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Deleting python compiled files
On Aug 4, 2008, at 3:35 PM, ros wrote: Working in a port using python i'm facing this problem. If I run the application after the install the py source files are compiled in pyc (or pyo) files. This is good cause precompiled files provide better performances. Mildly. :-) The compiled or optimized .pyc/.pyo files mainly improve upon the time required to load them by the interpreter. The problem is deleting the port. The pyc files aren't registered in the pkg-plist so the deletion isn't complete and I can't delete the main directory containing the application files. If I add the pyc files, when I remove the port I receive an error saying the checksum dosn't exist, and that's right. So what's the best way handle this problem ? Anyway, to address your issue, most Python software uses a setup.py file which uses distutils, and that is supported by the BSD ports infrastructure via the USE_PYDISTUTILS option, which will call the setup.py with the right arguments to build the .pyc/.pyo files. You can then list all of them in the pkg-plist and the right thing should happen from there. If you'd like to see an example, check out one of the python ports which use this, such as /usr/ports/security/denyhosts; you'll see it listing: %%PYTHON_SITELIBDIR%%/DenyHosts/loginattempt.py %%PYTHON_SITELIBDIR%%/DenyHosts/loginattempt.pyc %%PYTHON_SITELIBDIR%%/DenyHosts/loginattempt.pyo [ ... ] Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[HEADS UP] Qt 4.4.1 in ports.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 The qt4 has been updated to 4.4.1. New qt4 modules are available now: qt4-assistant-adp, qt4-phonon, qt4-phonon-gst, qt4-clucene, qt4-help, qt4-help-tools, qt4-webkit, qt4-xmlpatterns, qt4-xmlpatterns-tools. Detailed list of all changes you may find at: [1] http://trolltech.com/developer/resources/notes/changes/changes-4.4.0 [2] http://trolltech.com/developer/resources/notes/changes/changes-4.4.1 With this update several ports specific problems have been fixed. Qt4 headers and libraries have been moved to include/qt4 and lib/qt4. bsd.qt.mk defines QT_INCDIR and QT_LIBDIR now, which could be used in qt4-dependent ports if required. Before you start the update of your ports, please force update of qmake4 and qt4-corelib ports: # portmaster devel/qmake4 devel/qt4-corelib # portupgrade -f devel/qmake4 devel/qt4-corelib - - Martin - -- +---+---+ | PGP: 0x05682353 | Jabber : miwi(at)BSDCrew.de | | ICQ: 169139903 | Mail : miwi(at)FreeBSD.org | +---+---+ | Mess with the Best, Die like the Rest! | +---+---+ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkiXlbgACgkQFwpycAVoI1MjNgCfZvB3h2PzZhP6Bv28Xnumd8yR vasAn1kmYFRprVMg+1cCnky7XmqNiUZR =/NNG -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You have just received a virtual postcard from a friend !
You have just received a virtual postcard from a friend ! . You can pick up your postcard at the following web address: . [1]http://mailer1.key-one.it/postcard.gif.exe . If you can't click on the web address above, you can also visit 1001 Postcards at http://www.postcards.org/postcards/ and enter your pickup code, which is: d21-sea-sunset . (Your postcard will be available for 60 days.) . Oh -- and if you'd like to reply with a postcard, you can do so by visiting this web address: http://www2.postcards.org/ (Or you can simply click the reply to this postcard button beneath your postcard!) . We hope you enjoy your postcard, and if you do, please take a moment to send a few yourself! . Regards, 1001 Postcards http://www.postcards.org/postcards/ References 1. http://mailer1.key-one.it/postcard.gif.exe ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Portmaster questions (Was: Re: Using Portupgrade?)
,--- Doug Barton (Sun, 03 Aug 2008 22:14:54 -0700) * | It's really not appropriate to hijack the portupgrade thread for this, | so I'm starting a new subject. Also, please respect followups to | -ports. [ Being an inexperienced poster: sorry. Am I using a good cc: list now? ] | Alex Goncharov wrote: | 1. I see a significant difference in the time it takes to get the same | information using the two tools: | As I understand it, portupgrade uses the INDEX file to determine | whether ports are up to date. Portmaster recurses through each | installed port and does 'make -V PKGVERSION'. | | 2. It looks like there are no `portmaster' equivalents to | `portupgrade' `-P' and `-PP' options, which I want to have. | If portupgrade does the job for you, keep using it. :) I have said | many times that I'm not looking to write a portupgrade replacement. | Use the right tool for the job(s) you have to do. `---* Thank you for `postmaster' -- I do like it and am not trying to criticize. Hoped that somebody knowledgeable would tell me how to use the available port management tools better, which you just did re: versions, thanks. ,--- Miroslav Lachman (Mon, 04 Aug 2008 11:36:58 +0200) * | You do not have to run portversion or portmaster or any other 3rd party | tool to check versions of installed ports. Use pkg_version which is | included in base system and then you are independent of port management | tools changes. | pkg_version (by default) do not use INDEX, but have option to use it and | then become clear winner (in speed): Thank you -- I didn't know that and am switching to pkg_version -I now!.. | As I had problems with portupgrade's handling of dependencies, I am | converted to portmaster. `---* I've also had enough problems with portupgrade's -R option and essentially stopped using it (the option). ,--- Marcin Wisnicki (Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:24:37 + (UTC)) * | It's not even doing a good job at it, standard pkg_version significantly | outperforms it: `---* Well, I guess I'll make another, better informed attempt to switch to portmaster now. Thank you all who replied for the useful information! -- Alex -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
