Re: checksum mismatch devel/pear
Am 26.07.2013 um 09:31 schrieb Sergey V. Dyatko sergey.dya...@gmail.com: On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 05:47:55 +0800 Martin Wilke m...@bsdhash.org wrote: Hi, Remove /usr/ports/distfiles/ and the problem will go away. rm /distfiles/pear-1.9.4.tar.bz2 Thanks! Also to miwi for solving this :) ___ 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: python 2 and 3 modules
2013/7/28 Daniel Braniss da...@cs.huji.ac.il:
Hi,
I need to be able to have both (2.7 and 3.2) modules.
setting PYTHON_VERSION=3.2 in /etc/make.conf compiles properly,
but make install, insists that that the 2.7 version is installed!
after deinstalling, it will install the 3.2 version in the correct directory:
/usr/local/lib/python3.2/site-path
but now I lost the 2.7 version.
the same happens if I try to install the 2.7 version, it will complain
that the 3,2 version is installed.
BTW, the comments in ports/Mk/bsd.python.mk are very confusing and
some are wrong:
# PYTHON_VERSION- Version of the python binary in your ${PATH}, in the
# format python2.0. Set this in your
makefile in case you
# want to build extensions with an
older binary.
# default: depends on the version of
your python binary
setting it to python3.2 produces errors in the make, while 3.2 is ok
is there any fix?
thanks,
danny
For the moment its pretty difficult to install python 2.7 and 3.3 at
the same time. However, if you plan to install python 3.3, you need to
set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION to python3.3 and not PYTHON_VERSION.
Cheers,
--
Demelier David
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
lang/mono: Makefiles sed patch incomplete
It seems there are some small typos in lang/mono Makefile:
--- Makefile.orig 2013-07-29 09:41:35.0 +0200
+++ Makefile2013-07-29 09:49:08.0 +0200
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
COMMENT= An open source implementation of .NET Development Framework
BUILD_DEPENDS= p5-XML-Parser=0:${PORTSDIR}/textproc/p5-XML-Parser \
- bash:${PORTSDIR}/shells/bash
+ bash:${PORTSDIR}/shells/bash
USE_BZIP2= yes
USES= bison pathfix gettext gmake
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@
${WRKSRC}/mcs/class/Mono.WebBrowser/build-csproj2k5
@${FIND} ${WRKSRC} -name '*.sh' | ${XARGS} ${REINPLACE_CMD} \
-e 's|^#!/bin/bash|#!/bin/sh|g'
- @${REPLACE_CMD} 's/(1)/(1.0)/g' ${WRKSRC}/configure
+ @${REINPLACE_CMD} -e 's/(1)/(1.0)/g' ${WRKSRC}/configure
tests: build
@${ECHO_MSG} === Running mono regression tests
Thanks for fixing the math problem,
Rainer Hurling
___
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: python 2 and 3 modules
On 29/07/2013 5:46 PM, David Demelier wrote:
2013/7/28 Daniel Braniss da...@cs.huji.ac.il:
Hi,
I need to be able to have both (2.7 and 3.2) modules.
setting PYTHON_VERSION=3.2 in /etc/make.conf compiles properly,
but make install, insists that that the 2.7 version is installed!
after deinstalling, it will install the 3.2 version in the correct directory:
/usr/local/lib/python3.2/site-path
but now I lost the 2.7 version.
the same happens if I try to install the 2.7 version, it will complain
that the 3,2 version is installed.
BTW, the comments in ports/Mk/bsd.python.mk are very confusing and
some are wrong:
# PYTHON_VERSION- Version of the python binary in your ${PATH}, in the
# format python2.0. Set this in your
makefile in case you
# want to build extensions with an
older binary.
# default: depends on the version of
your python binary
setting it to python3.2 produces errors in the make, while 3.2 is ok
is there any fix?
thanks,
danny
For the moment its pretty difficult to install python 2.7 and 3.3 at
the same time. However, if you plan to install python 3.3, you need to
set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION to python3.3 and not PYTHON_VERSION.
Cheers,
David,
python@ would love to get a better idea (ideally a list) of where and
what the choke-points hurdles users are coming across trying to
achieving this.
Id be happy to document these in the wiki as we start looking forward to
best-practice FreeBSD/Python packaging for when the
setuptools/distribute merge commotion settles down
The FreeBSD Python team can be found on FreeNode IRC (#freebsd-python)
if anyone wants to get the ball rolling.
koobs
___
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: python 2 and 3 modules
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com:
2013/7/28 Daniel Braniss da...@cs.huji.ac.il:
Hi,
I need to be able to have both (2.7 and 3.2) modules.
setting PYTHON_VERSION=3.2 in /etc/make.conf compiles properly,
but make install, insists that that the 2.7 version is installed!
after deinstalling, it will install the 3.2 version in the correct
directory:
/usr/local/lib/python3.2/site-path
but now I lost the 2.7 version.
the same happens if I try to install the 2.7 version, it will complain
that the 3,2 version is installed.
BTW, the comments in ports/Mk/bsd.python.mk are very confusing and
some are wrong:
# PYTHON_VERSION- Version of the python binary in your
${PATH}, in the
# format python2.0. Set
this in your
makefile in case you
# want to build extensions with an
older binary.
# default: depends on the version of
your python binary
setting it to python3.2 produces errors in the make, while 3.2 is ok
is there any fix?
thanks,
danny
For the moment its pretty difficult to install python 2.7 and 3.3 at
the same time. However, if you plan to install python 3.3, you need to
set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION to python3.3 and not PYTHON_VERSION.
No, it is not.
cd /usr/ports/lang/python27 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python32 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python33 make install clean
works like a charm. If you however want to use Python modules, it might become
more difficult. It was discussed some time ago on the freebsd-python
mailing list
without an applicable result.
If you need to have the same Python module for different versions
around, I would
recommend to use virtualenv in favour of the ports infrastructure, since
make -DPYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module- or -
make -DPYTHON_VERSION=xxx python-module - or -
make -DPYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module
might mess up previous installations for a different python version.
Cheers
Marcus
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: lang/mono: Makefiles sed patch incomplete
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 09:54:43AM +0200, Rainer Hurling wrote:
It seems there are some small typos in lang/mono Makefile:
--- Makefile.orig 2013-07-29 09:41:35.0 +0200
+++ Makefile 2013-07-29 09:49:08.0 +0200
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
COMMENT= An open source implementation of .NET Development Framework
BUILD_DEPENDS= p5-XML-Parser=0:${PORTSDIR}/textproc/p5-XML-Parser \
- bash:${PORTSDIR}/shells/bash
+ bash:${PORTSDIR}/shells/bash
USE_BZIP2= yes
USES=bison pathfix gettext gmake
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@
${WRKSRC}/mcs/class/Mono.WebBrowser/build-csproj2k5
@${FIND} ${WRKSRC} -name '*.sh' | ${XARGS} ${REINPLACE_CMD} \
-e 's|^#!/bin/bash|#!/bin/sh|g'
- @${REPLACE_CMD} 's/(1)/(1.0)/g' ${WRKSRC}/configure
+ @${REINPLACE_CMD} -e 's/(1)/(1.0)/g' ${WRKSRC}/configure
tests: build
@${ECHO_MSG} === Running mono regression tests
Thanks for fixing the math problem,
Rainer Hurling
Fixed, sorry about the typo.
regards,
Bapt
pgplqF2GmDHj0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date
Dear port maintainer, The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more of your ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity to check each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate, submit/commit an update. If any ports have already been updated, you can safely ignore the entry. You will not be e-mailed again for any of the port/version combinations below. Full details can be found at the following URL: http://portscout.freebsd.org/po...@freebsd.org.html Port| Current version | New version +-+ www/xpi-pentadactyl | 20130407| 20130729 +-+ If any of the above results are invalid, please check the following page for details on how to improve portscout's detection and selection of distfiles on a per-port basis: http://portscout.freebsd.org/info/portscout-portconfig.txt If wish to stop receiving portscout reminders, please contact portsc...@freebsd.org Thanks. ___ 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
multimedia/x264 help understand gcc error
multimedia/x264 build fails on ia64 (PR 180456). With default OS gcc the error is: gcc -Wshadow -O3 -ffast-math -O2 -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -I. -I. -O2 -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing -fPIC -I/usr/local/include -std=gnu99 -fPIC -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-tree-vectorize -c -o x264.o x264.c In file included from common/osdep.h:60, from common/common.h:88, from x264.c:33: /usr/include/math.h:236: error: expected ')' before '/' token /usr/include/math.h:320: error: expected ')' before '/' token gmake: *** [x264.o] Error 1 but with lang/gcc48, the error is different: gcc48 -Wshadow -O3 -ffast-math -O2 -pipe -Wl,-rpath=/usr/local/lib/gcc48 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -I. -I. -O2 -pipe -Wl,-rpath=/usr/local/lib/gcc48 -fno-strict-aliasing -fPIC -I/usr/local/include -std=gnu99 -fPIC -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-tree-vectorize -c -o x264.o x264.c In file included from common/common.h:88:0, from x264.c:33: common/osdep.h:40:24: error: expected ')' before '/' token #define log2(x) (log(x)/0.693147180559945) ^ common/osdep.h:39:26: error: expected ')' before '/' token #define log2f(x) (logf(x)/0.693147180559945f) Has the diagnostics improved in gcc48? Anyway, what is this error telling me, I'm not sure. Thanks Anton ___ 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: python 2 and 3 modules
2013/7/29 Marcus von Appen m...@freebsd.org:
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com:
2013/7/28 Daniel Braniss da...@cs.huji.ac.il:
Hi,
I need to be able to have both (2.7 and 3.2) modules.
setting PYTHON_VERSION=3.2 in /etc/make.conf compiles properly,
but make install, insists that that the 2.7 version is installed!
after deinstalling, it will install the 3.2 version in the correct
directory:
/usr/local/lib/python3.2/site-path
but now I lost the 2.7 version.
the same happens if I try to install the 2.7 version, it will complain
that the 3,2 version is installed.
BTW, the comments in ports/Mk/bsd.python.mk are very confusing and
some are wrong:
# PYTHON_VERSION- Version of the python binary in your ${PATH},
in the
# format python2.0. Set this in
your
makefile in case you
# want to build extensions with
an
older binary.
# default: depends on the version
of
your python binary
setting it to python3.2 produces errors in the make, while 3.2 is ok
is there any fix?
thanks,
danny
For the moment its pretty difficult to install python 2.7 and 3.3 at
the same time. However, if you plan to install python 3.3, you need to
set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION to python3.3 and not PYTHON_VERSION.
No, it is not.
cd /usr/ports/lang/python27 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python32 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python33 make install clean
works like a charm. If you however want to use Python modules, it might
become
more difficult. It was discussed some time ago on the freebsd-python mailing
list
without an applicable result.
If you need to have the same Python module for different versions around, I
would
recommend to use virtualenv in favour of the ports infrastructure, since
make -DPYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module- or -
make -DPYTHON_VERSION=xxx python-module - or -
make -DPYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module
might mess up previous installations for a different python version.
Cheers
Marcus
Of course from ports it will work. I've told about binary packages.
When you bulk build a package for python 2.7 and python 3.3 the
/usr/local/bin/python will be included in both versions. Because bulk
building python 3 modules will requires to set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION
and PYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION to the python 3.3 interpreter.
Then the poudriere bulk will generate python 2.7 and python 3.3
pkg-plist including for both /usr/local/bin/python and all of the
non-versioned files I've already told above.
You may now think who cares? it build from ports. I would say no,
binary packages will be used more and more in the future.
If we install the /usr/local/bin/python symlink by testing its
presence instead of the default version the problem will be fixed.
Regards,
--
Demelier David
___
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: python 2 and 3 modules
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com:
2013/7/29 Marcus von Appen m...@freebsd.org:
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com:
2013/7/28 Daniel Braniss da...@cs.huji.ac.il:
Hi,
I need to be able to have both (2.7 and 3.2) modules.
setting PYTHON_VERSION=3.2 in /etc/make.conf compiles properly,
but make install, insists that that the 2.7 version is installed!
after deinstalling, it will install the 3.2 version in the correct
directory:
/usr/local/lib/python3.2/site-path
but now I lost the 2.7 version.
the same happens if I try to install the 2.7 version, it will complain
that the 3,2 version is installed.
BTW, the comments in ports/Mk/bsd.python.mk are very confusing and
some are wrong:
# PYTHON_VERSION- Version of the python binary in your ${PATH},
in the
# format python2.0. Set this in
your
makefile in case you
# want to build extensions with
an
older binary.
# default: depends on the version
of
your python binary
setting it to python3.2 produces errors in the make, while 3.2 is ok
is there any fix?
thanks,
danny
For the moment its pretty difficult to install python 2.7 and 3.3 at
the same time. However, if you plan to install python 3.3, you need to
set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION to python3.3 and not PYTHON_VERSION.
No, it is not.
cd /usr/ports/lang/python27 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python32 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python33 make install clean
works like a charm. If you however want to use Python modules, it might
become
more difficult. It was discussed some time ago on the freebsd-python mailing
list
without an applicable result.
If you need to have the same Python module for different versions around, I
would
recommend to use virtualenv in favour of the ports infrastructure, since
make -DPYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module- or -
make -DPYTHON_VERSION=xxx python-module - or -
make -DPYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module
might mess up previous installations for a different python version.
Cheers
Marcus
Of course from ports it will work. I've told about binary packages.
When you bulk build a package for python 2.7 and python 3.3 the
/usr/local/bin/python will be included in both versions. Because bulk
building python 3 modules will requires to set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION
and PYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION to the python 3.3 interpreter.
Then the poudriere bulk will generate python 2.7 and python 3.3
pkg-plist including for both /usr/local/bin/python and all of the
non-versioned files I've already told above.
You may now think who cares? it build from ports. I would say no,
binary packages will be used more and more in the future.
I would not, either. This however is a problem with the package builder
and ports infrastructure, which would need some install hooks to allow
a check at installation time.
Cheers
Marcus
___
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: python 2 and 3 modules
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:26:24PM +0200, Marcus von Appen wrote:
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com:
2013/7/29 Marcus von Appen m...@freebsd.org:
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com:
2013/7/28 Daniel Braniss da...@cs.huji.ac.il:
Hi,
I need to be able to have both (2.7 and 3.2) modules.
setting PYTHON_VERSION=3.2 in /etc/make.conf compiles properly,
but make install, insists that that the 2.7 version is installed!
after deinstalling, it will install the 3.2 version in the correct
directory:
/usr/local/lib/python3.2/site-path
but now I lost the 2.7 version.
the same happens if I try to install the 2.7 version, it will complain
that the 3,2 version is installed.
BTW, the comments in ports/Mk/bsd.python.mk are very confusing and
some are wrong:
# PYTHON_VERSION- Version of the python binary in your ${PATH},
in the
# format python2.0. Set this in
your
makefile in case you
# want to build extensions with
an
older binary.
# default: depends on the version
of
your python binary
setting it to python3.2 produces errors in the make, while 3.2 is ok
is there any fix?
thanks,
danny
For the moment its pretty difficult to install python 2.7 and 3.3 at
the same time. However, if you plan to install python 3.3, you need to
set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION to python3.3 and not PYTHON_VERSION.
No, it is not.
cd /usr/ports/lang/python27 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python32 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python33 make install clean
works like a charm. If you however want to use Python modules, it might
become
more difficult. It was discussed some time ago on the freebsd-python
mailing
list
without an applicable result.
If you need to have the same Python module for different versions around, I
would
recommend to use virtualenv in favour of the ports infrastructure, since
make -DPYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module- or -
make -DPYTHON_VERSION=xxx python-module - or -
make -DPYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module
might mess up previous installations for a different python version.
Cheers
Marcus
Of course from ports it will work. I've told about binary packages.
When you bulk build a package for python 2.7 and python 3.3 the
/usr/local/bin/python will be included in both versions. Because bulk
building python 3 modules will requires to set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION
and PYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION to the python 3.3 interpreter.
Then the poudriere bulk will generate python 2.7 and python 3.3
pkg-plist including for both /usr/local/bin/python and all of the
non-versioned files I've already told above.
You may now think who cares? it build from ports. I would say no,
binary packages will be used more and more in the future.
I would not, either. This however is a problem with the package builder
and ports infrastructure, which would need some install hooks to allow
a check at installation time.
That is totally wrong, that is a python bug (python is not the only one in that
case).
The ports have only be design for source installation, problem is when you are
buidling packages properly each packages are being done in a cleanroom aka a
jail without anything installed in it that makes python 3.3 port think it is
becoming the default because no other python are installed at that time.
This result in all python port defining bin/python, and thus they _do_ conflict
with each other. While this was/is silent with pkg_install, pkgng yell about it.
A fun thing you can do with pkg_install (in binary mode only no compilation from
sources and with packages built in a cleanroom)
# pkg_add -r python27
default is now python27
# pkg_add -r python33
default is now python33
# pkg_delete python27
hey I have no default python anymore.
Java is solving the problem by using a javawrapper. There is 3 possible way to
solve the situation with python, move the symlink dancing into a post install
script. Have a javawrapper like thing.
I would love to see a generic alternative/eselect/javawrapper-like thing appear
that can handle all of this what ever the kind of port is.
To be back to the subject this is really a ports problem, because noone was
until now really using the binary only packages, and the one doing it have never
analyzed what they really do once installed.
regards,
Bapt
pgpjOPpH0ulr6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: python 2 and 3 modules
Baptiste Daroussin b...@freebsd.org:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:26:24PM +0200, Marcus von Appen wrote:
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com:
2013/7/29 Marcus von Appen m...@freebsd.org:
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com:
2013/7/28 Daniel Braniss da...@cs.huji.ac.il:
Hi,
I need to be able to have both (2.7 and 3.2) modules.
setting PYTHON_VERSION=3.2 in /etc/make.conf compiles properly,
but make install, insists that that the 2.7 version is installed!
after deinstalling, it will install the 3.2 version in the correct
directory:
/usr/local/lib/python3.2/site-path
but now I lost the 2.7 version.
the same happens if I try to install the 2.7 version, it will complain
that the 3,2 version is installed.
BTW, the comments in ports/Mk/bsd.python.mk are very confusing and
some are wrong:
# PYTHON_VERSION- Version of the python binary in your ${PATH},
in the
# format python2.0.
Set this in
your
makefile in case you
# want to build extensions with
an
older binary.
# default: depends on
the version
of
your python binary
setting it to python3.2 produces errors in the make, while 3.2 is ok
is there any fix?
thanks,
danny
For the moment its pretty difficult to install python 2.7 and 3.3 at
the same time. However, if you plan to install python 3.3, you need to
set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION to python3.3 and not PYTHON_VERSION.
No, it is not.
cd /usr/ports/lang/python27 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python32 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python33 make install clean
works like a charm. If you however want to use Python modules, it might
become
more difficult. It was discussed some time ago on the
freebsd-python mailing
list
without an applicable result.
If you need to have the same Python module for different
versions around, I
would
recommend to use virtualenv in favour of the ports infrastructure, since
make -DPYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module- or -
make -DPYTHON_VERSION=xxx python-module - or -
make -DPYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module
might mess up previous installations for a different python version.
Cheers
Marcus
Of course from ports it will work. I've told about binary packages.
When you bulk build a package for python 2.7 and python 3.3 the
/usr/local/bin/python will be included in both versions. Because bulk
building python 3 modules will requires to set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION
and PYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION to the python 3.3 interpreter.
Then the poudriere bulk will generate python 2.7 and python 3.3
pkg-plist including for both /usr/local/bin/python and all of the
non-versioned files I've already told above.
You may now think who cares? it build from ports. I would say no,
binary packages will be used more and more in the future.
I would not, either. This however is a problem with the package builder
and ports infrastructure, which would need some install hooks to allow
a check at installation time.
That is totally wrong, that is a python bug (python is not the only
one in that
case).
It is not wrong. You just misunderstood me.
The ports have only be design for source installation, problem is
when you are
buidling packages properly each packages are being done in a cleanroom aka a
jail without anything installed in it that makes python 3.3 port think it is
becoming the default because no other python are installed at that time.
This result in all python port defining bin/python, and thus they
_do_ conflict
with each other. While this was/is silent with pkg_install, pkgng
yell about it.
On the port level, yes, with the IF_DEFAULT conditional.
We have lang/python, which acts as wrapper; what conditional in
the package builder triggers either port of lang/pythonXX to install itself
as default (except for the current default version defined in bsd.python.mk,
which uses _PYTHON_PORTBRANCH for that)? If I closely follow the port logic,
only lang/python27 should be picked as default, if no specific flags are
provided. Or I'm missing something obvious in the bsd.python.mk logic.
A fun thing you can do with pkg_install (in binary mode only no
compilation from
sources and with packages built in a cleanroom)
# pkg_add -r python27
default is now python27
# pkg_add -r python33
default is now python33
# pkg_delete python27
hey I have no default python anymore.
If that is really the case (I can only confirm that for lang/python27),
let's get it fixed on the bsd.python.mk and lang/pythonXX level and let
lang/python do the magic, which it is supposed to do.
Java is solving the problem by using a javawrapper. There is 3
possible way to
solve the situation with python, move the symlink dancing into a post install
script. Have a javawrapper like thing.
The post-install script is what I was talking about above. So we
Current unassigned ports problem reports
(Note: an HTML version of this report is available at http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr-summary.cgi?category=ports .) The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. S Tracker Resp. Description o ports/180919pci not working with freeBSD o ports/180915monotone missing from 9-stable i386 o ports/180914broken: packages-8-stable o ports/180909[MAINTAINER] devel/allegro: Remove conflict with alleg o ports/180908[MAINTAINER] devel/allegro-devel: Update to 5.0.9, rem f ports/180905[PATCH] Update finance/trytond from 2.4.5 to 2.4.8 f ports/180898update dns/dnscrypt-proxy to 1.3.2 o ports/180887New Port: databases/php5-mongodb o ports/180882[MAINTAINER-UPDATE][PATCH] please update math/openblas o ports/180875[MAINTAINER] dns/powerdns: update to 3.3 f ports/180845package creation fails for sysutils/bacula-bat o ports/180841[MAINTAINER] databases/jrrd: update to 1.0.6_1 f ports/180832New version of news/nzbget (11.0) o ports/180828[MAINTAINER] russian/MT: update to 5.2.7,1 o ports/180813[MAINTAINER] net-p2p/libtorrent-rasterbar-16-python: F o ports/180809[MAINTAINER] net-p2p/libtorrent-rasterbar-16: Cleanup f ports/180799[PATCH] mail/dovecot2 without-ssl make package error f ports/180786lang/lua52 lacks a pkgconfig file o ports/180773[Maintainer update] sysutils/qjail Bug fix. o ports/180757[MAINTAINER] cad/repsnapper: update to 2.2.0b1 f ports/180753[PATCH] devel/ocaml-opam: fix build error of util.ml o ports/180747[MAINTAINER] www/mitmproxy: Update to 0.9.1 f ports/180739ports/sysutils/ezjail patch f ports/180736net/torsocks: aclocal-1.14: error: couldn't open direc f ports/180734games/iourbanterror: broken o ports/180668japanese/mutt-devel update to 1.5.21-ja.2 o ports/180665[new port] secturiy/rngtest: TRNG/PRNG test tool o ports/180664checksum mismatch in biology/tinker o ports/180654[NEW PORT] devel/linux-f10-hal-libs: HAL libs (Linux F f ports/180651net/scribe won't build with automake update to 1.14 f ports/180647www/cherokee: build fails f ports/180645Update devel/openocd to 0.7.0 f ports/180642[PATCH] astro/gpsman: update to 6.4.4.1 f ports/180634security/ipsec-tools: ipsec-tools doesnt create contro o ports/180626[patch] install missing files in sysutils/syslinux o ports/180611[patch] update cad/feappv f ports/180607sysutils/zfsnap: grammar error(s) in pkg-descr o ports/180602[NEW PORT] multimedia/xjadeo: A synced video player fo o ports/180595unable to build net-p2p/mldonkey-core on i386 using cl f ports/180584[patch] net-mgmt/wmi-client: Point to one working MAST f ports/180564multimedia/mplayer compilation error with Clang (runni o ports/180536Monotone is missing from ports/i386/packages-8-stable/ o ports/180524games/crack-attack crashes o ports/180492problem with /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.ldap.mk o ports/180475audio/freeswitch-sounds: volume reduced to 20% of orig o ports/180452New Port: devel/libbson: library providing useful rout o ports/180446New port: print/p910nd A small printer daemon o ports/180409ports/math/scilab trying to use F77 o ports/180408ports/math/scilab missing a file to be installed o ports/180407x11-fm/dolphin in kde-4.10.5 will cause reboot f ports/180389[PATCH] net/rabbitmq: update to 3.1.3 o ports/180387[MAINTAINER-UPDATE] www/mawstats: set EXPIRATION_DATE o ports/180351new port: ftp/u1ftp f ports/180350textproc/sigil build problems when libzip installed f ports/180345[patch] sysutils/gdisk: update to version 0.8.6 and so o ports/180338devel/opencl: new hashes (distinfo), minor changes f ports/180337devel/tnt: tnt_sparse_matrix_csr.h:97:3: error: no mat o ports/180335print/transfig: Can't find png header pngpriv.h f ports/180334Port upgrade: devel/git-review from 1.21 to 1.22 o ports/180256NEW PORT: www/twig-php which is a PHP template engine o ports/180237[new port] devel/radare2-devel: Tools to disasm, debug o ports/180228russian/fortuneru: port upgrade o ports/180216[NEW PORT] x11-fonts/alfont: Wrapper around the freety o ports/180206[NEW PORT] audio/dumb-allegro-devel: build dumb-allegr o
Re: python 2 and 3 modules
2013/7/28 Daniel Braniss da...@cs.huji.ac.il:
Hi,
I need to be able to have both (2.7 and 3.2) modules.
setting PYTHON_VERSION=3.2 in /etc/make.conf compiles properly,
but make install, insists that that the 2.7 version is installed!
after deinstalling, it will install the 3.2 version in the correct
directory:
/usr/local/lib/python3.2/site-path
but now I lost the 2.7 version.
the same happens if I try to install the 2.7 version, it will complain
that the 3,2 version is installed.
BTW, the comments in ports/Mk/bsd.python.mk are very confusing and
some are wrong:
# PYTHON_VERSION- Version of the python binary in your ${PATH}, in
the
# format python2.0. Set this in
your
makefile in case you
# want to build extensions with an
older binary.
# default: depends on the version of
your python binary
setting it to python3.2 produces errors in the make, while 3.2 is ok
is there any fix?
thanks,
danny
For the moment its pretty difficult to install python 2.7 and 3.3 at
the same time. However, if you plan to install python 3.3, you need to
set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION to python3.3 and not PYTHON_VERSION.
the joke on sysadmin/programes (im one of them) is that we give a correct
answer
to the wrong qwestion :-)
the problem is not compiling modules(*), that works fine, it's the install.
there is a bug somewhere, where the check if installed is WRONG, so
it deinstalls the LAST installed module, but installes the correct version!
my workaround was to tar lib/python2.7/site-packages, install the 3.2 modules
(which deinstalls the 2.7) and when done, untar the 2.7.
the virtualenv is a nogo here, we have several hundred users!
the bsd.python.mk needs urgent cleanup, it's most confusing
cheers,
danny
*: make PYTHON_VERSION=3.2 clean {de,re}install
PS: keep me in the CC, I'm not subscrided to ports.
___
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: python 2 and 3 modules
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 01:05:40PM +0200, Marcus von Appen wrote:
Baptiste Daroussin b...@freebsd.org:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:26:24PM +0200, Marcus von Appen wrote:
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com:
2013/7/29 Marcus von Appen m...@freebsd.org:
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com:
2013/7/28 Daniel Braniss da...@cs.huji.ac.il:
Hi,
I need to be able to have both (2.7 and 3.2) modules.
setting PYTHON_VERSION=3.2 in /etc/make.conf compiles properly,
but make install, insists that that the 2.7 version is installed!
after deinstalling, it will install the 3.2 version in the correct
directory:
/usr/local/lib/python3.2/site-path
but now I lost the 2.7 version.
the same happens if I try to install the 2.7 version, it will complain
that the 3,2 version is installed.
BTW, the comments in ports/Mk/bsd.python.mk are very confusing and
some are wrong:
# PYTHON_VERSION- Version of the python binary in your
${PATH},
in the
# format python2.0.
Set this in
your
makefile in case you
# want to build extensions
with
an
older binary.
# default: depends on
the version
of
your python binary
setting it to python3.2 produces errors in the make, while 3.2 is ok
is there any fix?
thanks,
danny
For the moment its pretty difficult to install python 2.7 and 3.3 at
the same time. However, if you plan to install python 3.3, you need to
set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION to python3.3 and not PYTHON_VERSION.
No, it is not.
cd /usr/ports/lang/python27 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python32 make install clean
cd /usr/ports/lang/python33 make install clean
works like a charm. If you however want to use Python modules, it might
become
more difficult. It was discussed some time ago on the
freebsd-python mailing
list
without an applicable result.
If you need to have the same Python module for different
versions around, I
would
recommend to use virtualenv in favour of the ports infrastructure, since
make -DPYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module- or -
make -DPYTHON_VERSION=xxx python-module - or -
make -DPYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION=xxx python-module
might mess up previous installations for a different python version.
Cheers
Marcus
Of course from ports it will work. I've told about binary packages.
When you bulk build a package for python 2.7 and python 3.3 the
/usr/local/bin/python will be included in both versions. Because bulk
building python 3 modules will requires to set PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION
and PYTHON3_DEFAULT_VERSION to the python 3.3 interpreter.
Then the poudriere bulk will generate python 2.7 and python 3.3
pkg-plist including for both /usr/local/bin/python and all of the
non-versioned files I've already told above.
You may now think who cares? it build from ports. I would say no,
binary packages will be used more and more in the future.
I would not, either. This however is a problem with the package builder
and ports infrastructure, which would need some install hooks to allow
a check at installation time.
That is totally wrong, that is a python bug (python is not the only
one in that
case).
It is not wrong. You just misunderstood me.
The ports have only be design for source installation, problem is
when you are
buidling packages properly each packages are being done in a cleanroom aka a
jail without anything installed in it that makes python 3.3 port think it is
becoming the default because no other python are installed at that time.
This result in all python port defining bin/python, and thus they
_do_ conflict
with each other. While this was/is silent with pkg_install, pkgng
yell about it.
On the port level, yes, with the IF_DEFAULT conditional.
We have lang/python, which acts as wrapper; what conditional in
the package builder triggers either port of lang/pythonXX to install itself
as default (except for the current default version defined in bsd.python.mk,
which uses _PYTHON_PORTBRANCH for that)? If I closely follow the port logic,
only lang/python27 should be picked as default, if no specific flags are
provided. Or I'm missing something obvious in the bsd.python.mk logic.
A fun thing you can do with pkg_install (in binary mode only no
compilation from
sources and with packages built in a cleanroom)
# pkg_add -r python27
default is now python27
# pkg_add -r python33
default is now python33
# pkg_delete python27
hey I have no default python anymore.
If that is really the case (I can only confirm that for lang/python27),
let's get it fixed on the bsd.python.mk and lang/pythonXX level and let
[editors/libreoffice] missing dependencies for pkgng
# pkg upgrade Updating repository catalogue pkg: Missing dependency matching 'x11-fonts/liberation-fonts-ttf' pkg: Error while trying to install/upgrade packages, as there are unresolved dependencies: editors/libreoffice: x11-fonts/liberation-fonts-ttf, x11-fonts/gentium-basic -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info ___ 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
[devel/openocd] who wants to takeover maintenance?
Hello :-) If there are any people that want to take over the devel/OpenOCD project port, its free to take. I got some disagreement with OpenOCD developers and started my own project, so if anyone has some time to put into this port feel free to do so :-) Best regards, Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info ___ 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: [editors/libreoffice] missing dependencies for pkgng
2013/7/29 CeDeROM cede...@tlen.pl: # pkg upgrade Updating repository catalogue pkg: Missing dependency matching 'x11-fonts/liberation-fonts-ttf' pkg: Error while trying to install/upgrade packages, as there are unresolved dependencies: editors/libreoffice: x11-fonts/liberation-fonts-ttf, x11-fonts/gentium-basic Can you please give more information? Which repository do you use? Also FreeBSD does not currently provide official repository for pkgng. -- Demelier David ___ 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: [editors/libreoffice] missing dependencies for pkgng
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:36 PM, David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/7/29 CeDeROM cede...@tlen.pl: # pkg upgrade Updating repository catalogue pkg: Missing dependency matching 'x11-fonts/liberation-fonts-ttf' pkg: Error while trying to install/upgrade packages, as there are unresolved dependencies: editors/libreoffice: x11-fonts/liberation-fonts-ttf, x11-fonts/gentium-basic Can you please give more information? Which repository do you use? Also FreeBSD does not currently provide official repository for pkgng. -- Demelier David Hello David :-) Here goes some more information :-) # cat /usr/local/etc/pkg.conf packagesite: http://mirror.exonetric.net/pub/pkgng/freebsd:9:x86:64/latest # uname -a FreeBSD mercury.rd.tp.pl 9.1-RELEASE-p4 FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE-p4 #2: Thu Jul 18 16:48:34 CEST 2013 r...@mercury.rd.tp.pl:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CeDeROM_FreeBSD_9.1 amd64 Best regards :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info ___ 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
ports/179722: [patch] graphics/gifsicle: update to 1.71
Hi committers, PR ports/179722 reached maintainer timeout. Can someone please take care of it? Thank you! Best wishes, Alexander ___ 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/179722: [patch] graphics/gifsicle: update to 1.71
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Alexander Milanov a...@amilanov.com wrote: Hi committers, PR ports/179722 reached maintainer timeout. Can someone please take care of it? Done Thanks -- William Grzybowski -- Curitiba/PR - Brasil ___ 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: Freeocl build but doesn't work
On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:51:06 +0200 lbartoletti wrote: Le Thu, 25 Jul 2013 11:36:23 +0200, Tijl Coosemans a écrit : On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 09:17:56 +0200 lbartoletti wrote: I try to work with opencl via Freeocl but it doesn't work. When i build a test, it's ok (except with gcc46), but when i run it, it doesn't work : : version GLIBCXX_3.4.11 required by /usr/local/lib/libOpenCL.so.1 not found here some logs and the source code for test. Compiling C++ code with gcc ports is a little tricky because they insist on using their own runtime libraries (/usr/local/lib/gcc46/libstdc++.so.6) instead of the base system libraries (/usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6). So try to compile your test with gcc46 -Wl,-rpath=/usr/local/lib/gcc46. It doesn't work. I tried it with FreeBSD amd64 9.1 and 10.0 and FreeOCL / OpenCL require GLIBCXX_3.4.11 into libstdc++... Then one of the dependencies must be using the base system libstdc++.so (I'm guessing math/gmp). What you could do is create /etc/libmap.conf and add the following line to always use the gcc46 libstdc++.so: libstdc++.so.6 gcc46/libstdc++.so.6 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[patch] various pkg audit issues
Hi,
periodic/410.pkg-audit produces inconsistent output depending on if the
database has been fetched or not. Since the default db expiry is two
days this produces alternating output, e.g.:
Day 1:
Checking for packages with security vulnerabilities:
subversion-1.7.10
Day 2:
Checking for packages with security vulnerabilities:
Database fetched: Sun Jul 28 03:02:06 UTC 2013
subversion-1.7.10 is vulnerable:
subversion -- remotely triggerable Assertion failed DoS vulnerability
or read overflow.
WWW:
http://portaudit.FreeBSD.org/2ae24334-f2e6-11e2-8346-001e8c75030d.html
1 problem(s) in your installed packages found.
Day 3:
Checking for packages with security vulnerabilities:
subversion-1.7.10
And so on.
The attached patch (also available at [1]) fixes this by running pkg
audit a second time in case a vulnerability has been found on the first
(fetching) run.
This is merely a workaround, IMHO it would be best to provide a fetch
only option to pkg audit and do fetching and checking in two separate
invocations.
The default of two days for daily_status_security_pkgaudit_expiry
seems not a good choice, I would suggest to change it to one day, so
that the periodic job always uses the latest version of the audit
database (you don't want to loose an extra day learning about that
remote exploitable vulnerability - anything one day should be the
exception and not the rule at this point).
I seems like pkg audit doesn't validate the signature of auditfile
after fetching it. I originally introduced this signature to
portaudit to mitigate a remote command execution vulnerability (see
[2]). The potential for remote code execution is lower compared to
ports-mgmt/portaudit, since auditfile is not processed by shell scripts
directly - even though its output might be processed by users, not
that uncommon. Regardless, checking the signature would be reasonable to
ensure that auditfile has not been tampered with, especially since it's
fetched using plain http and could get faked quite easily (e.g. DNS
spoofing or transparent proxying).
It also seems like pkg audit doesn't check the CREATED header of
auditfile, therefore it won't complain in case an outdated auditfile is
used. This could be used in a malicious way or simply happen by
accident in setups where machines, which are not directly connected
to the internet, access a copy on the local network that might have
stopped receiving updates.
By implementing both features, signature and creation timestamp
checking, pkg audit would ensure that always a recent and authoritative
vulnerability database is used.
Michael
[1]http://blog.grem.de/0001-Ensure-pkg-audit-periodic-output-consistency.patch
[2]http://vuxml.freebsd.org/freebsd/6d329b64-6bbb-11e1-9166-001e4f0fb9b1.html
--
Michael Gmelin
From 7c0f54f48ce411450e5855203c002262c351b45c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michael Gmelin free...@grem.de
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 20:00:54 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Ensure pkg audit periodic output consistency.
---
scripts/periodic/410.pkg-audit.in | 5 -
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/scripts/periodic/410.pkg-audit.in b/scripts/periodic/410.pkg-audit.in
index bfcb20e..82f617a 100755
--- a/scripts/periodic/410.pkg-audit.in
+++ b/scripts/periodic/410.pkg-audit.in
@@ -61,7 +61,10 @@ case ${daily_status_security_pkgaudit_enable:-YES} in
if [ $rc -ne 0 -o \
$(( 86400 \* ${daily_status_security_pkgaudit_expiry:-2} )) \
-le $(( ${now} - ${then} + 600 )) ]; then
- ${pkgcmd} audit -Fq || { rc=$?; [ $rc -lt 3 ] rc=3; }
+ ${pkgcmd} audit -Fq /dev/null || { rc=$?; [ $rc -lt 3 ] rc=3; }
+ if [ $rc -eq 3 ]; then
+${pkgcmd} audit || { rc=$?; [ $rc -lt 3 ] rc=3; }
+ fi
else
echo -n 'Database fetched: '
date -r ${then} || rc=3
--
1.8.2.3
___
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: www/chromium
- Original Message - On 07/20/13 12:10, Lawrence K. Chen, P.Eng. wrote: While it compilesit doesn't run very well... Certain pages/sitessome or all of the links will be unclickable. For examplein Zimbra web interface, I could not reply to this message until I reverted back to previous version of chromium. While I could navigate folders and such, the message bar buttons would workreply button wouldn't work. In nagiosnone of the links could be clicked at all (made it hard to acknowledge a downed service) Lawrence Can you provide any public URLs? I'm not having any issues so far. Thanks. Well, the first place that I ran into the problem was any search result page using bing.com -- Who: Lawrence K. Chen, P.Eng. - W0LKC - Senior Unix Systems Administrator For: Enterprise Server Technologies (EST) -- SafeZone Ally Snail: Computing and Telecommunications Services (CTS) Kansas State University, 109 East Stadium, Manhattan, KS 66506-3102 Phone: (785) 532-4916 - Fax: (785) 532-3515 - Email: lkc...@ksu.edu Web: http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~lkchen - Where: 11 Hale Library ___ 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: www/chromium
- Original Message -
On 21 July 2013 04:10, Lawrence K. Chen, P.Eng. lkc...@ksu.edu
wrote:
While it compilesit doesn't run very well...
Certain pages/sitessome or all of the links will be
unclickable.
For examplein Zimbra web interface, I could not reply to this
message until I reverted back to previous version of chromium.
While I could navigate folders and such, the message bar buttons
would workreply button wouldn't work.
In nagiosnone of the links could be clicked at all (made it
hard to acknowledge a downed service)
The behaviour you're seeing is because you've run out of
shared-memory. Chromium doesn't reliably release the IPC resources
when it exits or dies. If you log out and do a ipcs, you'll see
shared-memory segments still assigned to you. Removing the segments
will restore chromium's ability to display web-pages.
I regularly check shm usage to see what chromium is up to...to the point where
I have an alias that identifies unattached segments and tallies up usage stats.
I think I've posted it before, but here it is again:
alias lsshm 'ipcs -mob | awk '\''NR 2 { if ( $5 == user $7 == 0 ) {
sum += $8; cnt++; } { tcnt++; total += $8; print $0 } } END { if (cnt 0)
print count = cnt / tcnt using = sum ( sum/1048576 MB) out of
total ( total/1048576 MB); else print total = tcnt using = total
( total/1048576 MB) }'\'''
also have aliases to removedidn't help.
___
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: Ardour 3.x
Bump!! Is there anyway that i can help with this port? On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Super Bisquit superbisq...@gmail.comwrote: What else needs to be tested? On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Super Bisquit superbisq...@gmail.comwrote: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/180171 Late reply. Apologies. On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Mark Felder f...@feld.me wrote: On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:43:50 -0500, Super Bisquit superbisq...@gmail.com wrote: Has it been accepted into the ports tree as of yet along with the dependencies? Do you have a list of PRs? ___ 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
