Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
It just means that folks didn't plan ahead and didn't think up proper contingency plans. First off, apologies to Garrett, I'm not picking on you directly, but I kinda knew this would come up. The undeniable fact is that configure scripts in general have chosen to do things a certain way. Unfortunately for us (us being FreeBSD), we have now broken these conceptions by moving to a dual-digit major release. Emails have been passed around (somewhere starting around the 7.x series when it became obvious we would be hitting 10.x a lot sooner than expected). It is no-one's fault that 23,000+ third party applications couldn't be tweaked prior to a trivial change in /sys/conf/newvers.sh that resulted in this oops. The message I wanted to set across is that until such time as us ports folks have had a chance to really work out the damage, and start on fixing it, then for those running 10-CURRENT, things are likely to be non-linear for a while. Our primary responsibility right now is to ensure that a proper set of packages gets built for the impending 9.0-RELEASE. We haven't forgotten you bleeding edge folks, it's just that right now, you're somewhat down the food chain. Make no mistake. This move to a double-digit major version number is going to cause serious pain. We will do our best to fix, hack, slash, and whatever around it, but right now the focus is the last of our remaining single-digit releases. Until that is out the door, do not be expecting tree-wide commits to fix things. -aDe ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovett a...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random) assuming that FreeBSD would never jump to a double-digit major version number, and as such, various regexps for freebsd1* (ie: FreeBSD 1.1.x) are now matching freebsd10. [...] aDe, Could an entry to this effect be added to UPDATING (with a matching entry when ports/ is unbroken). Also mention a workaround, e.g. $ export UNAME_r='9.9-BLAH' ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On 27/09/2011, at 13:33, Ade Lovett wrote: That is to say, until 9.0-R happens, and for some considerable period afterwards, ya'll can pretty much expect ports/ to be non-functional on HEAD. PRs mentioning this will be gleefully closed referencing this message. I imagine you can work around it by setting UNAME_r=9.0-CURRENT before building stuff. -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C ___ 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
outside the box (Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT)
Ade Lovett a...@freebsd.org wrote: The undeniable fact is that configure scripts in general have chosen to do things a certain way. Unfortunately for us (us being FreeBSD), we have now broken these conceptions by moving to a dual-digit major release. I don't suppose REVISION=A.1 i.e. using a single hex digit instead of two decimal digits, would work any better :) (IIRC alphas do sort after numerics, at least in the C locale.) ___ 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: Current unassigned ports problem reports
Is the cups-base problem on the assigned list, being incompatible with the optional avahi (DNSSD)? The BROKEN message references http://www.avahi.org/ticket/303 -- look there for more information on why it's marked as such. Tom ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote: Kevin Obermankob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random) assuming that FreeBSD would never jump to a double-digit major version number, and as such, various regexps for freebsd1* (ie: FreeBSD 1.1.x) are now matching freebsd10. [...] aDe, Could an entry to this effect be added to UPDATING (with a matching entry when ports/ is unbroken). Also mention a workaround, e.g. $ export UNAME_r='9.9-BLAH' Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011, h h wrote: Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovett a...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random) assuming that FreeBSD would never jump to a double-digit major version number, and as such, various regexps for freebsd1* (ie: FreeBSD 1.1.x) are now matching freebsd10. [...] aDe, Could an entry to this effect be added to UPDATING (with a matching entry when ports/ is unbroken). Also mention a workaround, e.g. $ export UNAME_r='9.9-BLAH' Assuming that a script's detection algorithm is simple. Please see http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/current/2007-07/msg00597.html for a more complete masquerading algorithm.p -Garrett ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:28:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote: Kevin Obermankob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random) assuming that FreeBSD would never jump to a double-digit major version number, and as such, various regexps for freebsd1* (ie: FreeBSD 1.1.x) are now matching freebsd10. [...] aDe, Could an entry to this effect be added to UPDATING (with a matching entry when ports/ is unbroken). Also mention a workaround, e.g. $ export UNAME_r='9.9-BLAH' Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... At least there will be a long rest after the move to 10 is complete.. until FreeBSD 100. -- Anton Shterenlikht Room 2.6, Queen's Building Mech Eng Dept Bristol University University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944 Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423 ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
At 11:18 27/09/2011, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... At least there will be a long rest after the move to 10 is complete.. until FreeBSD 100. Or move to hexadecimal $ export UNAME_r='A.0-CURRENT' ___ 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: outside the box (Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT)
On 09/27/11 16:46, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org wrote: The undeniable fact is that configure scripts in general have chosen to do things a certain way. Unfortunately for us (us being FreeBSD), we have now broken these conceptions by moving to a dual-digit major release. I don't suppose REVISION=A.1 i.e. using a single hex digit instead of two decimal digits, would work any better :) ... it will only postpone the agony ... better to deal now than shifting it to the future ... ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On 27 September 2011 10:18, Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:28:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote: Kevin Obermankob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random) assuming that FreeBSD would never jump to a double-digit major version number, and as such, various regexps for freebsd1* (ie: FreeBSD 1.1.x) are now matching freebsd10. [...] aDe, Could an entry to this effect be added to UPDATING (with a matching entry when ports/ is unbroken). Also mention a workaround, e.g. $ export UNAME_r='9.9-BLAH' Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... At least there will be a long rest after the move to 10 is complete.. until FreeBSD 100. -- Anton Shterenlikht Room 2.6, Queen's Building Mech Eng Dept Bristol University University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944 Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423 ___ freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8) ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
Eduardo Morras nec...@retena.com writes:
At 11:18 27/09/2011, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for
their tenth version of their operating system ...
At least there will be a long rest after
the move to 10 is complete.. until FreeBSD 100.
Or move to hexadecimal
$ export UNAME_r='A.0-CURRENT'
Wouldn't this fail if version is parsed with regex?
# from mysql
ELSEIF(CMAKE_SYSTEM_NAME MATCHES FreeBSD)
STRING(REGEX MATCH [0-9]+\\.[0-9]+ VER ${CMAKE_SYSTEM_VERSION})
SET(DEFAULT_PLATFORM ${CMAKE_SYSTEM_NAME}${VER})
___
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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
krad writes: we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8) Wasn't that what people said about two-digit years? Robert Huff ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 08:22:54AM -0400, Robert Huff wrote: krad writes: we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8) Wasn't that what people said about two-digit years? Not quite. There they mostly said No way that this program will still be in use when two-digit years becomes a problem! -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
2011/9/27 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de: Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... FreeBSD XP anyone? ___ 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 -- 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On 27 September 2011 20:22, Robert Huff roberth...@rcn.com wrote: krad writes: we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8) Wasn't that what people said about two-digit years? Our children will be dealing with Y2038. :-) Adrian ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On 27 September 2011 13:57, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote: On 27 September 2011 20:22, Robert Huff roberth...@rcn.com wrote: krad writes: we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8) Wasn't that what people said about two-digit years? Our children will be dealing with Y2038. :-) I'm sure some of us old-timers will be looking for high-paid 2038 consultancy work to fund our lavish retirement plans... ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
Adrian Chadd writes: we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8) Wasn't that what people said about two-digit years? Our children will be dealing with Y2038. :-) Statistically, some of us will. Robert Huff ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 09:36:17AM -0400 I heard the voice of Robert Huff, and lo! it spake thus: Adrian Chadd writes: Our children will be dealing with Y2038. :-) Statistically, some of us will. Actually, I had to deal with it just last week... -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fulle...@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream. ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On 09/27/11 16:27, Matthew D. Fuller wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 09:36:17AM -0400 I heard the voice of Robert Huff, and lo! it spake thus: Adrian Chadd writes: Our children will be dealing with Y2038. :-) Statistically, some of us will. Actually, I had to deal with it just last week... I was there, tomorrow. ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On 27 September 2011 10:18, Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:28:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote: Kevin Obermankob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random) assuming that FreeBSD would never jump to a double-digit major version number, and as such, various regexps for freebsd1* (ie: FreeBSD 1.1.x) are now matching freebsd10. [...] aDe, Could an entry to this effect be added to UPDATING (with a matching entry when ports/ is unbroken). Also mention a workaround, e.g. $ export UNAME_r='9.9-BLAH' Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... At least there will be a long rest after the move to 10 is complete.. until FreeBSD 100. I'm afraid not; freebsd2*) We'll be just as screwed at 20. Hopefully we can fix that at the same time. Chris ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On Sep 27, 2011 10:04 AM, Chris Rees cr...@freebsd.org wrote: On 27 September 2011 10:18, Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:28:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote: Kevin Obermankob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random) assuming that FreeBSD would never jump to a double-digit major version number, and as such, various regexps for freebsd1* (ie: FreeBSD 1.1.x) are now matching freebsd10. [...] aDe, Could an entry to this effect be added to UPDATING (with a matching entry when ports/ is unbroken). Also mention a workaround, e.g. $ export UNAME_r='9.9-BLAH' Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... At least there will be a long rest after the move to 10 is complete.. until FreeBSD 100. I'm afraid not; freebsd2*) We'll be just as screwed at 20. Hopefully we can fix that at the same time. Chris Now is the moment we grab 'BSD', dropping the 'Free', and start fresh at a 1.x point... Rebrand and be more conservative with release numbering... Crazy right? Sorry for the noise... (Goes off to check the status of bsd.org) -Brandon ___ 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: USE_GCC and unnesessary RUN_DENEDS on gcc port (Was: Print +REQUIRED_BY as tree?)
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Lev Serebryakov wrote: Or, maybe automate this, as now port system warns user about possible network servers -- check all installed binaries and libraries for linkage with non-system-gcc libraries and add run dependency. But I'm not sure it is easy to do, as it should be done after installation, when, I afraid, adding RUN_DEPEND at this stage doesn't help, so this automatic should make all depends-related work (+REQUIRED_BY / +CONTENT) by hands. I think you have a good observation here. One way of addressing it, which would be simpler and less effort and risk, is to split the large lang/gcc ports into smaller bits, including a run-time port, once the work on this infrastructure (that Linux distributions have been using for more than ten years) is in place. In other words, have something like a gcc-runtime package that falls out of the lang/gcc port and covers all those needs. (That's not the minimum, assuming we still have something -- bet it GCC 4.2 or LLVM based in the base system -- but quite small.) Gerald ___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On (26/09/2011 23:03), Ade Lovett wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random) assuming that FreeBSD would never jump to a double-digit major version number, and as such, various regexps for freebsd1* (ie: FreeBSD 1.1.x) are now matching freebsd10. It's more exciting than that. FreeBSD = 10 is already seized by Apple :) http://www.google.com/codesearch#search/q=__FreeBSD__%5CW%2B10type=cs This is going to be some fairly fundamental breakage. However, until such time as 9.0-RELEASE is completely out of the door, with autotools hat on, I will _not_ be committing any changes to infrastructural ports to fix this. That is to say, until 9.0-R happens, and for some considerable period afterwards, ya'll can pretty much expect ports/ to be non-functional on HEAD. PRs mentioning this will be gleefully closed referencing this message. -aDe Reply-To set to me. Please honor it. ___ freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
On Sep 27, 2011, at 8:50 PM, Gleb Kurtsou wrote: On (26/09/2011 23:03), Ade Lovett wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random) assuming that FreeBSD would never jump to a double-digit major version number, and as such, various regexps for freebsd1* (ie: FreeBSD 1.1.x) are now matching freebsd10. It's more exciting than that. FreeBSD = 10 is already seized by Apple :) http://www.google.com/codesearch#search/q=__FreeBSD__%5CW%2B10type=cs That seems to be a FUSE-ism. __FreeBSD__ isn't defined anywhere on my OSX system.___ 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: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT
Hi-- On Sep 27, 2011, at 11:50 AM, Gleb Kurtsou wrote: It's more exciting than that. FreeBSD = 10 is already seized by Apple :) http://www.google.com/codesearch#search/q=__FreeBSD__%5CW%2B10type=cs MacOS X doesn't define __FreeBSD__ either in CPP macros or the system headers: % touch foo.h; cpp -dM foo.h | grep __FreeBSD__ % cpp --version i686-apple-darwin10-gcc-4.2.1 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Apple Inc. build 5666) (dot 3) Copyright (C) 2007 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. Regards, -- -Chuck ___ 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: Shared libs problem with ports under 10-CURRENT
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Rainer Hurling rhur...@gwdg.de wrote: This morning I tried to upgrade my ports after installing the new 10-CURRENT (amd64). There was a message about this on the list already. Does anyone else observes this behaviour? I would really appreciate some help. https://groups.google.com/group/muc.lists.freebsd.ports/msg/10c37925f4ee0341?dmode=sourceoutput=gplainnoredirect -- 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: ports/161089: [REPOCOPY] math/qhull -- math/qhull5
I am sending this to you because you maintain a port that depends upon math/qhull. I plan to move this to math/qhull5, because the new version of qhull is not necessarily compatible with the port(s) you maintain. This is the complete list. games/kdegames4, math/labplot, math/octave-devel, math/octave, and math/plplot. More details at: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=161089 ___ 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
