PR ports/152169

2010-11-13 Thread Jake Smith

Hello Marco,

I am just wondering if you (or anyone else) can clarify if I created a 
duplicate PR patch for ossec-hids. I notice we both have a PR submitted 
to update the freebsd port to 2.5.1 (ports/152169 and ports/152170), and 
both have the same arrival date, to the second.
What are the chances that would happen :) or is there something I don't 
understand about how PRs work?


Jake
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: cvs commit: ports/audio/rsynth Makefile

2010-11-13 Thread QAT
The Restless Daemon identified a gcc4 error while trying to build:
 rsynth-2.0_3 maintained by po...@freebsd.org
 Makefile ident: $FreeBSD: ports/audio/rsynth/Makefile,v 1.28 2010/11/13 
15:15:33 dinoex Exp $

Excerpt from http://QAT.TecNik93.com/logs/8-STABLE-NPD/rsynth-2.0_3.log :

checking for -lICE... no
checking for -ldnet... no
checking for -ldnet_stub... no
checking for -lnsl... no
checking for -lsocket... no
checking for -lsocket... (cached) no
checking for -lnsl... (cached) no
checking for -lX11... yes
checking for audio/audiolib.h... -I.: not found
grep: conftest.out: No such file or directory
yes
checking for -laudio... yes
checking whether cc needs -traditional... no
checking return type of signal handlers... int
checking for GNU make... no
updating cache ./config.cache
creating ./config.status
creating Makefile
creating config.h
linking ./config/freebsdplay.c to hplay.c
===  Building for rsynth-2.0_3
cc -O2 -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing -I. -I.  -I/usr/local/include 
-DDICT_DIR=\/usr/local/lib/dict\ -c -o say.o say.c
In file included from say.c:43:
/usr/include/stdio.h:57: error: two or more data types in declaration specifiers
In file included from ./useconfig.h:19,
 from say.c:45:
/usr/include/malloc.h:3:2: error: #error malloc.h has been replaced by 
stdlib.h
say.c: In function 'say_phones':
say.c:189: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function 
'malloc'
say.c: In function 'concat_args':
say.c:332: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function 
'strlen'
say.c:333: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function 
'malloc'
*** Error code 1

Stop in /work/a/ports/audio/rsynth/work/rsynth-2.0.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /a/ports/audio/rsynth.

build of /usr/ports/audio/rsynth ended at Sat Nov 13 15:24:22 UTC 2010

The tarballed WRKDIR can be found here:
http://QAT.TecNik93.com/wrkdirs/8-STABLE-NPD/rsynth-2.0_3.tbz

PortsMon page for the port:
http://portsmon.freebsd.org/portoverview.py?category=audioportname=rsynth

The build which triggered this BotMail was done under
tinderbox-3.3_3; dsversion: 3.2.1 on RELENG_8 on amd64, kern.smp.cpus: 8
with tinderd_flags=-nullfs -plistcheck -onceonly and ccache support, with the
official up-to-date Ports Tree, with the following vars set:
NOPORTDOCS=yes,  NOPORTEXAMPLES=yes, NOPORTDATA=yes, FORCE_PACKAGE=yes.

A description of the testing process can be found here:
http://T32.TecNik93.com/FreeBSD/QA-Tindy/


Thanks for your work on making FreeBSD better,

--
QAT - your friendly neighborhood Daemon,
preparing  a heck of an error trapping system:
 - HMC and EOI?
 - Halt, Melt and Catch fire or Execute Operator Immediately.

___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: [www/chromium] Illegal instruction: 4 on Pentium3

2010-11-13 Thread Konstantin Tokarev

 Chromium requires sse2 normally, as detailed in this bug report:

 http://crbug.com/9007

This bug report is related to Chromium 2, but I've run Chromium 4 on PIII
on Linux without problems


-- 
Regards,
Konstantin
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: PR ports/152169

2010-11-13 Thread Sahil Tandon
On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 13:20:56 +, Jake Smith wrote:

 I am just wondering if you (or anyone else) can clarify if I created a
 duplicate PR patch for ossec-hids. I notice we both have a PR
 submitted to update the freebsd port to 2.5.1 (ports/152169 and
 ports/152170), and both have the same arrival date, to the second.
 What are the chances that would happen :) or is there something I
 don't understand about how PRs work?

It looks like a small GNATS quirk at the time your PRs were processed.
You both submitted via the web form, and Marco's PR preceded yours by
about seven minutes.

-- 
Sahil Tandon sa...@freebsd.org
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: PR ports/152169

2010-11-13 Thread Eitan Adler
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Jake Smith j...@avenue22.net wrote:
 Hello Marco,

 I am just wondering if you (or anyone else) can clarify if I created a
 duplicate PR patch for ossec-hids. I notice we both have a PR submitted to
 update the freebsd port to 2.5.1 (ports/152169 and ports/152170), and both
 have the same arrival date, to the second.

It looks like both of you sent separate PRs at the same time.

 What are the chances that would happen

Given the large numbers of PRs sent it is quite likely that at least
once something like this would happen
-- 
Eitan Adler
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: xorg-server 1.7.7

2010-11-13 Thread Mark Linimon
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 05:11:41PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
 Oh, forgot a need to simply bump port revisions of all xorg driver ports.
 That's perhaps a little bit laborious, but doesn't require any special skills.
 Or did you have something else in mind?

There's this whole testing thing :-)

xorg seems to have an amazing ability to introduce regressions, especially
in edge cases/older hardware.  Each of the last N updates has been preceded
by a lot of staging/testing, and even so, created a lot of work to clean
everything up.

So, in theory, it's easy, but in practice, it requires someone(s) with a lot
of time and dedication.

We certainly need one or more such people right now!

mcl
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: [www/chromium] Illegal instruction: 4 on Pentium3

2010-11-13 Thread Ruben

On 11/13/2010 16:58, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:

Chromium requires sse2 normally, as detailed in this bug report:

http://crbug.com/9007


This bug report is related to Chromium 2, but I've run Chromium 4 on PIII
on Linux without problems
That distro was probably manually removing those flags to support older 
hardware, but until the OP confirms that this was the fix, doesn't matter.

___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: xorg-server 1.7.7

2010-11-13 Thread Andriy Gapon
on 13/11/2010 21:25 Mark Linimon said the following:
 There's this whole testing thing :-)

So, I thought taht I contributed one test report already :-)

 xorg seems to have an amazing ability to introduce regressions, especially
 in edge cases/older hardware.  Each of the last N updates has been preceded
 by a lot of staging/testing, and even so, created a lot of work to clean
 everything up.

I think that you refer to upgrades of the Xorg bundle as a whole.
Not sure if we've had any problems like that when upgrading between minor
versions of a single module, even such as xorg server.

 So, in theory, it's easy, but in practice, it requires someone(s) with a lot
 of time and dedication.
 
 We certainly need one or more such people right now!

I agree, but I am not sure how in the ports land we do an application testing in
general.  That is, I am sure there will be a lot of testers if the port update
is actually committed :-) but I am not sure how to test it in advance (given all
the possible hardware and software configurations).


-- 
Andriy Gapon
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


MySQL HandlerSocket plugin port

2010-11-13 Thread xpa...@gmail.com
Hi.

I've made port for plugin, but after two days plugin stoped loading in MySQL.

http://host129.rax.ru/ports/handlersocket-mysql51-plugin.tar.bz2

Please, test this port on MySQL 5.1. Now it's building from github and
doesn't have stable version.

Thanks to Sahil Tandon for workaround with mysql sources.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: PR ports/152169

2010-11-13 Thread Sahil Tandon
On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 12:34:46 -0500, Eitan Adler wrote:

 On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Jake Smith j...@avenue22.net wrote:
  Hello Marco,
 
  I am just wondering if you (or anyone else) can clarify if I created a
  duplicate PR patch for ossec-hids. I notice we both have a PR submitted to
  update the freebsd port to 2.5.1 (ports/152169 and ports/152170), and both
  have the same arrival date, to the second.
 
 It looks like both of you sent separate PRs at the same time.

It may appear that way based on the Arrival-Date:, but it is not true.

-- 
Sahil Tandon sa...@freebsd.org
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: [www/chromium] Illegal instruction: 4 on Pentium3

2010-11-13 Thread MIHIRA Sanpei Yoshiro
H.

Finally, I removed -mss3 and -mpentium4(changed to -msse and
-mpentium3). I could compile and execute chromium on Pentium3
without problem.

@@ -884,8 +884,8 @@
 'conditions': [
   ['branding==Chromium', {
 'cflags': [
-  '-march=pentium4',
-  '-msse2',
+  '-march=pentium3',
+  '-msse',
   '-mfpmath=sse',
 ],
   }],

  From chromium mailing list archive discussion, some Athlon CPU
does not have SSE2. So I thought default compile option was -msse or
remove -msse( and remove -mfpmath=sse). and could set by CFLAGS value

Best Regards,
---
MIHIRA, Sanpei Yoshiro
Tokyo, Japan.

___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD Port: python27-2.7.0_1

2010-11-13 Thread John Hein
John Hein wrote at 15:55 MDT on Oct 30, 2010:
  Maxim Khitrov wrote at 15:42 -0400 on Oct 30, 2010:
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Sylvain Garrigues syl...@gmail.com 
  wrote:
 Hello,

 I am using FreeBSD 8.1 and I would like to know the reasons
 why it has been decided that the default Python installation
 is 2.6 and not 2.7.

 Thanks in advance.

Add PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=python2.7 to /etc/make.conf.

To answer Sylvain's original query, 2.7 is fairly new still.  When a
sufficent amount of testing has occurred that indicates 2.7 has no
regressions, then someone will throw the switch.  Of course, what
constitutes a sufficient amount of testing is somewhat subjective.  So
the more use it gets by early adopters (such as yourself presumably),
the higher the confidence in being able to update the default.

I've been using python27 for a couple months now without any problems.
To help get the default switched from 2.6 to 2.7, request it and
report any successes (and problems) here and/or submit PRs.

A search in the PR database for python27 doesn't turn up any
significant problems.

It will also probably require at least one full ports test build.  I
don't know if one has been requested.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Conflict between netpipes-4.2 and timelimit-1.7

2010-11-13 Thread jhell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


The above two listed ports have a conflict with the installed binary
'/usr/local/bin/timelimit' but do not list each-other as a conflict and
should be adjusted to reflect the conflict with one-another.

$ pkg_info -qW /usr/local/bin/timelimit
pkg_info: both netpipes-4.2 and timelimit-1.7 claim to have installed
/usr/local/bin/timelimit

This could also be said for its manual pages as well.

After removing the timelimit-1.7 package and then upgrading netpipes-4.2

=== Creating a backup package for old version netpipes-4.2
tar: man/man1/timelimit.1.gz: Cannot stat: No such file or directory
tar: bin/timelimit: Cannot stat: No such file or directory
tar: Error exit delayed from previous errors.
pkg_create: make_dist: tar command failed with code 256
=== Package creation failed for netpipes-4.2!


Though the functionality provided by both timelimit commands are
fundamentally the same, timelimit-1.7 offers quite a bit more control
over the one that ships with netpipes-4.2 without the need to install
files like 'faucet' that may act as a network server. Would it be
possible to install the netpipes version of timelimit binary as
timelimit-4.2 instead ? or maybe another name so these can coexist ?

***
As well, timelimit-1.7 would be a great candidate for import into world
since it is your e-std 2 clause BSD license and a 3 file compile. ;) And
if noone else wants to maintain it in tree then ill volunteer.
***

Regards,

- -- 

 jhell,v
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJM323hAAoJEJBXh4mJ2FR+nyAH/AiCStRku/gxLP9urxN1txov
JaR7KgaMEiVuuUk5pt/9lOr5sY1tdRmX16CgPzwKfr5pZpC/BBkYpsYHH/QLJ1MC
dgUubQoEowe50QmgFFhDDnAnnZ1FEnEWnknPZErKcNAF/td59xeMAzxN7lFZ40dC
k1GTozKo7gx6pgYeFcpxCu14ve4LXsEkKfy3lhjMVunbgyjVSMT3NuwKlrYyEIGq
+KUknTcaP5VEEg6tM//HS904WGPAtd6sbc62q6TowzYx2DEFx4I8Uf+NRoAjwJaZ
KM0HYtwjjE7IRWk2d7CjN9O60tCVbZbzpr5Y9MFzaip4Wk6gLFJw94XpENOobFE=
=aywI
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD Port: python27-2.7.0_1

2010-11-13 Thread wen heping
I think we shall update python2.7 as PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION
at least after python-2.7.1 and FreeBSD-8.2 release.

wen




2010/11/14 John Hein jh...@symmetricom.com:
 John Hein wrote at 15:55 MDT on Oct 30, 2010:
   Maxim Khitrov wrote at 15:42 -0400 on Oct 30, 2010:
     On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Sylvain Garrigues syl...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
      Hello,
     
      I am using FreeBSD 8.1 and I would like to know the reasons
      why it has been decided that the default Python installation
      is 2.6 and not 2.7.
     
      Thanks in advance.
    
     Add PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=python2.7 to /etc/make.conf.

 To answer Sylvain's original query, 2.7 is fairly new still.  When a
 sufficent amount of testing has occurred that indicates 2.7 has no
 regressions, then someone will throw the switch.  Of course, what
 constitutes a sufficient amount of testing is somewhat subjective.  So
 the more use it gets by early adopters (such as yourself presumably),
 the higher the confidence in being able to update the default.

 I've been using python27 for a couple months now without any problems.
 To help get the default switched from 2.6 to 2.7, request it and
 report any successes (and problems) here and/or submit PRs.

 A search in the PR database for python27 doesn't turn up any
 significant problems.

 It will also probably require at least one full ports test build.  I
 don't know if one has been requested.
 ___
 freebsd-pyt...@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-python
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-python-unsubscr...@freebsd.org




-- 
真理从来没有战胜过谬误,真理只有在坚持谬误的人死去后才成为真理。
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org