Can you please close ports/184033 and ports/189749
Can you please close ports/184033 and ports/189749 as they have been superseded by Revision 354447. Alas I forgot to include [patch] in the subject or that I had tested under poudriere so they understandably got missed. Thanks for updating them, Alan ___ 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
[QAT] 354997: 4x leftovers
Stageify. Approved by:portmgr@ - Build ID: 20140524073800-54585 Job owner: vani...@freebsd.org Buildtime: 4 minutes Enddate: Sat, 24 May 2014 07:42:06 GMT Revision: 354997 Repository: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revisionrevision=354997 - Port:devel/nana 2.5 Buildgroup: 8.4-QAT/amd64 Buildstatus: LEFTOVERS Log: https://qat.redports.org//~vani...@freebsd.org/20140524073800-54585-336870/nana-2.5.log Buildgroup: 8.4-QAT/i386 Buildstatus: LEFTOVERS Log: https://qat.redports.org//~vani...@freebsd.org/20140524073800-54585-336871/nana-2.5.log Buildgroup: 9.2-QAT/amd64 Buildstatus: LEFTOVERS Log: https://qat.redports.org//~vani...@freebsd.org/20140524073800-54585-336872/nana-2.5.log Buildgroup: 9.2-QAT/i386 Buildstatus: LEFTOVERS Log: https://qat.redports.org//~vani...@freebsd.org/20140524073800-54585-336873/nana-2.5.log -- Buildarchive URL: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/20140524073800-54585 redports https://qat.redports.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: postfix-policyd-weight broken with p5-Net-DNS 0.75
On 2014-05-23 23:57, Herbert J. Skuhra wrote: Hi, after updating p5-Net-DNS from version 0.74 to 0.75 postfix-policyd-weight (0.1.15.2) stopped working. I get the below error on two systems: May 23 13:31:35 mx postfix/policyd-weight[1037]: child: spawned May 23 13:31:35 mx postfix/policyd-weight[1037]: warning: child: err: Undefined subroutine main::dn_expand called at /usr/local/bin/policyd-weight line 3590, GEN7 line 23. May 23 13:31:36 mx postfix/policyd-weight[908]: master: child 1037 exited I am using perl 5.16.3 on FreeBSD 8.4-RELEASE-p10 (amd64) and perl 5.18.2 on FreeBSD 10.0-STABLE (i386). Thanks for the notice, mail/postfix-policyd-weight was updated to use the new Net::DNS API. -- Regards, olli ___ 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
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 +-+ security/i2p| 0.9.11 | 0.9.13 +-+ 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 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
Re: Can you please close ports/184033 and ports/189749
On Sat, 24 May 2014 07:28:07 +0100 Alan Hicks wrote: Can you please close ports/184033 and ports/189749 as they have been superseded by Revision 354447. Alas I forgot to include [patch] in the subject or that I had tested under poudriere so they understandably got missed. The gmime2 and gmime24 parts of those patches are still valid. I'll have a look at them. ___ 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
run_depends for p5-Net-Netmask in Makefile
The security/ppars port currently has this statement
RUN_DEPENDS= p5-Net-Netmask=0:${PORTSDIR}/net-mgmt/p5-Net-Netmask
Here is the problem, if pkg install p5-Net-Netmask is done prier to
make install on the port, the port checks the hosts ports tree for
/net-mgmt/p5-Net-Netmask and recompiles it any way.
Is there any way to code RUN_DEPENDS to check if p5-Net-Netmask is
already installed?
___
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 ports which are currently scheduled for deletion
After a break for over a month due to connectivity issues and other RL crap, a followup appears... On Sunday 13 April 2014 20:36:58 John Marino wrote: On 4/13/2014 19:52, Matthew Rezny wrote: On Sunday 13 April 2014 18:16:15 John Marino wrote: On 4/13/2014 17:46, Matthew Rezny wrote: On this list I see cfv, which I've used for years, marked just because it's not maintained. It works great, it needs no changes. You want someone to bloat it with a useless non-feature to prove people still use it? I see there's a few other sfv checkers in ports tree, but then I have to go test all those, pick a suitable replacement, alter any scripts that call cfv to call the replacement, etc. Quickly looking at the options, all the others are less functional (two only do SFV, one does PAR, but not all the other formats cfv supports) and one of them is a GUI tool so useless for scripted invocation. No, that's not what maintenance means. Just building and apparently working doesn't mean it requires no maintainer either. MAINTAINER=po...@freebsd.org basically means it has nothing protecting it from removal -- it means it's unmaintained by the definition here. There are two different aspects that are being conflated. Some ports have a maintainer, but are marked for deprecation because upstream has not made changes in substantial time. That is what I was referring to here (example: cpupowerd). Er, cpupowerd is your example? It was deprecated by the maintainer! They are in the best position to judge when a port should be deprecated (yes, even more than a *random* user.) The long list of deprecations did not make it clear who deemed any of those as deprecated. If it was indeed the maintainer, that is a shame. If the maintainer doesn't have a use for it, he should put it up for adoption. To deprecate and delete just because he doesn't see a use for it personally is ridiculous. Everyone else using it is probably taken by surprise. Asserting the maintainer is in the best position, over all other users, to decide when it should be deprecated, is patently retarded. I could imagine you could find a better example, but look at the history to figure out if the maintainer was really active. I've found ports with listed maintainers where he didn't do squat (or even had a valid email account) for the better part of a decade. I do not believe ports with active maintainers were deprecated. Other ports don't have a maintainer, and have little to no upstream activity as they are essentially done. and since they continue to build fine the only need for maintenance is to deal with changes to the ports infrastructure, which can be done by any ports commiter. Okay, but I am a member of any ports committer, and I don't like it that you expect me to maintain these ports. In fact, all of these ports that you think work despite being maintained probably had constant maintenance by any ports committer for years. So these are a burden and I object to the concept that ports@ means maintained by everyone. There are even some committers that believe this, but for me ports@ means maintained by nobody and I will reject any responsibility thrust on me. I do maintain these ports occasionally, but only because I was in a good mood and I consider it a gift, not an obligation. I request from you that you don't consider it an obligation either. If you don't like it, then don't do it, but don't stand in the way of anyone else that does. Also, cut the crap. If maintainer is ports@, then what that literally means is the ports community as a whole is maintaining those ports. If they are not maintained by anyone, then the maintainer should be NULL. Using ports@ to mean NULL is extremely misleading. As long as the ports community continues to put ports@, I and others will continue to expect the ports committers to take some responsibility for those ports they have branded with their address. If you object to that, change the maintainer line. Ok, if you want to get personal, then I'll pull out the stops. I don't mind cracking skulls if that's what it takes... I'm not officially a maintainer on any ports for a few reasons. I have other areas where I consider spending my time more valuable, but if I have to waste it on port maintenance, I'll try to do so in the most efficient way. Well, you basically said you're more important than anybody that regularly reads this list, so good luck with that tact. No, that is not what I said, but perhaps I need to state it more clearly. There are other areas where I can contribute. I do not have infinite time. If I look at all areas where I can be useful, and then sort those by number of other people who could do the same, ports is not at the top if the heap. In fact, there are other people who can be more effective dealing with ports than I, people who have more
Re: FreeBSD ports which are currently scheduled for deletion
Hi! Matthew Rezny wrote: [...] If you don't like it, then don't do it, but don't stand in the way of anyone else that does. Also, cut the crap. If maintainer is ports@, then what that literally means is the ports community as a whole is maintaining those ports. If they are not maintained by anyone, then the maintainer should be NULL. From my point of view, having a way to express the difference is a valid open issue. There are many open issues, and time is really scarce. Also, I've done the steps of fix, stage, and claim maintership. The issue is honestly be the maintainer. How can I honestly call myself the maintainer when I can't actually do anything to the port myself. If you want to change things directly in the ports tree, you have to become a ports committer. For this, some committer or two need to be your mentors (I'm still being mentored, so...). All (most?) committers are very busy, that's the general problem. Sure, there's always disagreements, but part of keeping a functioning community depends on minimizing disagreement. I'm not saying staging should be dropped, but making it a requirement for commit just deters other bugs from getting fixed. Ooh, I could fix this, but then I have to stage it too... meh, fuck it. That's seldom the real problem. Finding time to fix anything is the problem, mostly. that were not handled, or were handled all the way up to the last step and then forgotten. i.e. ports/188784 @work. Building in poudriere right now. you already have the figures (~4700 ports), but here's a dynamic list: http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/notstaged.txt It's already down to 3446 right now. I had kept distance from getting involved in the ports side because it always looked like a cesspool. After long enough avoiding it, I made the mistake of stepping in. Knee deep in this shitmess, I have a choice to make. I agree that there was a lot of change in the ports tree recently. But: There is a reason for this: The ports tree has to be cleaner so that it can provide better automatic processes to the users. It's not easy, but it's getting there. Please add civility and patches/PRs to the process, this would help us tremendously. A long rant is sometimes helpful, but if it gets too angry, it alienates others. I can keep throwing patches at PRs and hope somebody might just commit them, or I can say screw it all and just fork the ports tree in a public repo. Provide PRs, send me a Cc: and I can have a look at them. -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! ___ 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
port maintainership of alpine?
Hi, My favorite mailer alpine has no port maintainer at the moment. Ports that have no maintainer and/or staging are at risk of being deleted from the portstree, and alpine is a port that I would definitely miss. So I was thinking of becoming a port maintainer. Although I'm using FreeBSD for 15 years now, I have no programming experience at all. So my first question is if it is possible for someone like me to become a maintainer for a port like alpine, or should I learn programming in C first? Regards, Marco -- The road to hell is paved with good intentions. And littered with sloppy analysis! ___ 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: port maintainership of alpine?
Hi! My favorite mailer alpine has no port maintainer at the moment. Ports that have no maintainer and/or staging are at risk of being deleted from the portstree, and alpine is a port that I would definitely miss. So I was thinking of becoming a port maintainer. Although I'm using FreeBSD for 15 years now, I have no programming experience at all. Do you have experience building software ? What is your background ? So my first question is if it is possible for someone like me to become a maintainer for a port like alpine, or should I learn programming in C first? Learning 'make' would probably more important to maintain the port. Given that the latest alpine release was around 2008, it looks like this software is not maintained even upstream! For this, you will definitly need C skills. Given the deadline for non-staged ports, it looks like a tight race. -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! ___ 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 ports which are currently scheduled for deletion
Before I say anything - tonight is a bottle of wine and a night off... ;-) Also, I've done the steps of fix, stage, and claim maintership. The issue is honestly be the maintainer. How can I honestly call myself the maintainer when I can't actually do anything to the port myself. If you want to change things directly in the ports tree, you have to become a ports committer. For this, some committer or two need to be your mentors (I'm still being mentored, so...). All (most?) committers are very busy, that's the general problem. Safe, but also a bottle neck (at the moment). Sure, there's always disagreements, but part of keeping a functioning community depends on minimizing disagreement. I'm not saying staging should be dropped, but making it a requirement for commit just deters other bugs from getting fixed. Ooh, I could fix this, but then I have to stage it too... meh, fuck it. That's seldom the real problem. Finding time to fix anything is the problem, mostly. Sorry going to pipe in define fixing ... just getting something to compile or fixing a whole slew of ports that are dependent on others... because the first shouldn't be an issue in *most* cases - there are special cases, but it's usually a quick look at the code, working out which header has changed etc.. (and most are Googleable).. In the latter .. if there are dependent and parent packages that create a whole slew of issues.. then there is a problem in general. that were not handled, or were handled all the way up to the last step and then forgotten. i.e. ports/188784 @work. Building in poudriere right now. you already have the figures (~4700 ports), but here's a dynamic list: http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/notstaged.txt It's already down to 3446 right now. They just need converting to a staged environment? If so if you'd like to take a look at: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=189880 and tell me if I did it right and tell me how I can choose something that no-one is working on I'll crack on with some of them. I had kept distance from getting involved in the ports side because it always looked like a cesspool. After long enough avoiding it, I made the mistake of stepping in. Knee deep in this shitmess, I have a choice to make. I agree that there was a lot of change in the ports tree recently. But: There is a reason for this: The ports tree has to be cleaner so that it can provide better automatic processes to the users. It's not easy, but it's getting there. However, breaking s**t whilst cleaning up is also a good way to alienate people .. breaking all builds on hosts pre 9.1 for example was not the best of things to do... fortunately for me - my build server is only running as far back as 9.0.. though I have production servers back to 6.1...!! (and I have trouble migrating/updating them because they 6/7 - 9.2 may/maynot work, but more than that I can't test against any of the new packages because I can't build .. so I can't tell if I upgrade the OS whether I will even have a useful/working system as I can't build test packages with the new versions on the old OS before upgrading... I know they have been EOLd (in some cases for years) but people are still running them, and in some cases the job of upgrading takes months of work per server... it shouldn't but it does... and to get 'oh that version of the OS has been EoL since 3 weeks ago' .. well that can generate frustration which weighs people away from helping (if you can't help me, why should I help you?) Please add civility and patches/PRs to the process, this would help us tremendously. A long rant is sometimes helpful, but if it gets too angry, it alienates others. +1 I can keep throwing patches at PRs and hope somebody might just commit them, or I can say screw it all and just fork the ports tree in a public repo. Provide PRs, send me a Cc: and I can have a look at them. I'm happy to help when I have time (today I could have probably got through 10 'easy' ones).. however having never done it before and no actual feedback of what I have done as I have now updated 2 (one new one, one add a patch to an existing one) .. I don't know if I'd even get it right... that said my poudriere VMs and jenkins are not complaining about what I have done (I patch auto-manually (scripted) after each portsnap) Michelle -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.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: port maintainership of alpine?
On Sat, 24 May 2014, the wise Kurt Jaeger wrote: My favorite mailer alpine has no port maintainer at the moment. Ports that have no maintainer and/or staging are at risk of being deleted from the portstree, and alpine is a port that I would definitely miss. So I was thinking of becoming a port maintainer. Although I'm using FreeBSD for 15 years now, I have no programming experience at all. Do you have experience building software ? What is your background ? Other than building ports, no. I don't have an IT background, but a finance and legal background so that's not helping me here :-). So my first question is if it is possible for someone like me to become a maintainer for a port like alpine, or should I learn programming in C first? Learning 'make' would probably more important to maintain the port. Given that the latest alpine release was around 2008, it looks like this software is not maintained even upstream! For this, you will definitly need C skills. The version in ports is old but alpine is still being developed and currently at version 2.11. Given the deadline for non-staged ports, it looks like a tight race. I know so that is why I'm interested. -- Have no friends not equal to yourself. -- Confucius ___ 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: port maintainership of alpine?
Hi! [maintaining mail/alpine] So I was thinking of becoming a port maintainer. Although I'm using FreeBSD for 15 years now, I have no programming experience at all. Do you have experience building software ? What is your background ? Other than building ports, no. I don't have an IT background, but a finance and legal background so that's not helping me here :-). The finance-background should help you getting the details 8-) How many ports did you already build yourself ? On which fbsd versions ? Did you sometimes fix ports to get them to build ? So my first question is if it is possible for someone like me to become a maintainer for a port like alpine, or should I learn programming in C first? Learning 'make' would probably more important to maintain the port. Given that the latest alpine release was around 2008, it looks like this software is not maintained even upstream! For this, you will definitly need C skills. The version in ports is old but alpine is still being developed and currently at version 2.11. Ah! Thanks for the pointer. Then you only need to get the 'make' stuff. How much 'make' did you take up on the side ? Given the deadline for non-staged ports, it looks like a tight race. I know so that is why I'm interested. I guess (very rough guess, I know) you need between 40 to 80 hours (!) to dig deep enough to get it done. You need to learn make. -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! ___ 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: port maintainership of alpine?
Marco Beishuizen wrote: On Sat, 24 May 2014, the wise Kurt Jaeger wrote: The version in ports is old but alpine is still being developed and currently at version 2.11. UW says the latest version is 2.00 .. Ubuntu released 2.02 a while back, Wikipedia says 2.11 .. but it also says UW has the latest - which says 2.00 .. feel free to point me at where 2.11 is and I'll take a shot at wrangling it... Given the deadline for non-staged ports, it looks like a tight race. I know so that is why I'm interested. Michelle -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.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: port maintainership of alpine?
Hi! The version in ports is old but alpine is still being developed and currently at version 2.11. UW says the latest version is 2.00 .. Ubuntu released 2.02 a while back, Wikipedia says 2.11 .. but it also says UW has the latest - which says 2.00 .. feel free to point me at where 2.11 is and I'll take a shot at wrangling it... http://patches.freeiz.com/alpine/release/ has a link. -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! ___ 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 ports which are currently scheduled for deletion
Hi! They just need converting to a staged environment? If so if you'd like to take a look at: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=189880 and tell me if I did it right and tell me how I can choose something that no-one is working on I'll crack on with some of them. I test-build the stuff you submitted and it looks fine. What's the reason there are so many different pgpool-II ports ? Can they be consolidated ? Provide PRs, send me a Cc: and I can have a look at them. I'm happy to help when I have time (today I could have probably got through 10 'easy' ones).. however having never done it before and no actual feedback of what I have done as I have now updated 2 (one new one, one add a patch to an existing one) .. I don't know if I'd even get it right... that said my poudriere VMs and jenkins are not complaining about what I have done (I patch auto-manually (scripted) after each portsnap) I think the pgpool one is fine! Have you've been in contact with the maintainer for pgpool-II, kuriyama@ ? -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! ___ 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: port maintainership of alpine?
Kurt Jaeger wrote: Hi! The version in ports is old but alpine is still being developed and currently at version 2.11. UW says the latest version is 2.00 .. Ubuntu released 2.02 a while back, Wikipedia says 2.11 .. but it also says UW has the latest - which says 2.00 .. feel free to point me at where 2.11 is and I'll take a shot at wrangling it... http://patches.freeiz.com/alpine/release/ has a link. Gonna be a long night .. site keeps going up and down .. don't have the source yet .. :/ Michelle -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.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: port maintainership of alpine?
On Sat, 24 May 2014, the wise Kurt Jaeger wrote: How many ports did you already build yourself ? On which fbsd versions ? Did you sometimes fix ports to get them to build ? Using FreeBSD since 4.0 (I think) as my main OS, and always used ports, so it must be hundreds? Problems I fixed myself after some googling or with help from the mailinglists. Ah! Thanks for the pointer. Then you only need to get the 'make' stuff. How much 'make' did you take up on the side ? I guess (very rough guess, I know) you need between 40 to 80 hours (!) to dig deep enough to get it done. You need to learn make. Hmm I think it would be best then to look into make first. -- Love thy neighbor as thyself, but choose your neighborhood. -- Louise Beal ___ 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: port maintainership of alpine?
Hi! http://patches.freeiz.com/alpine/release/ has a link. https://www.mpeters.org/mirror/alpine-2.11.tar.xz Gonna be a long night .. site keeps going up and down .. don't have the source yet .. :/ I've put it on http://people.freebsd.org/~pi/misc/alpine-2.11.tar.xz -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! ___ 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: port maintainership of alpine?
Hi! I guess (very rough guess, I know) you need between 40 to 80 hours (!) to dig deep enough to get it done. You need to learn make. Hmm I think it would be best then to look into make first. If Michelle is doing the port, she will be much faster, from what I can see 8-) But if you want to start digging into this in general, I can only encourage you to learn this. -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! ___ 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: port maintainership of alpine?
On Sat, 24 May 2014, the wise Kurt Jaeger wrote: I guess (very rough guess, I know) you need between 40 to 80 hours (!) to dig deep enough to get it done. You need to learn make. Hmm I think it would be best then to look into make first. If Michelle is doing the port, she will be much faster, from what I can see 8-) Yeah, she probably will :) But if you want to start digging into this in general, I can only encourage you to learn this. I'll definitely do this. Looking at the manpage of make as we speak. Thanks for the help, Regards, Marco -- I have a map of the United States. It's actual size. I spent last summer folding it. People ask me where I live, and I say, E6. -- Steven Wright ___ 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: port maintainership of alpine?
Hi all, since I'm a daily user.. On Sat, 24 May 2014, Kurt Jaeger wrote: I've put it on http://people.freebsd.org/~pi/misc/alpine-2.11.tar.xz Feel free to drop me a line too for help or time constraints. Just know I'll be evading the ncurses stuff ;-) -- Melvyn ___ 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: port maintainership of alpine?
Marco Beishuizen wrote: On Sat, 24 May 2014, the wise Kurt Jaeger wrote: I guess (very rough guess, I know) you need between 40 to 80 hours (!) to dig deep enough to get it done. You need to learn make. Hmm I think it would be best then to look into make first. If Michelle is doing the port, she will be much faster, from what I can see 8-) Yeah, she probably will :) Talking behind my back now? :P Ok, initial patch done (not staged atm) however I just realised I cannot test it... it will only work on 10.x (by default).. will need to add the dependancy of ports/security/openssl for anything prior.. and I can't test that (all my build servers are required to use openssl 0.9.x atm :/ ) I'll see what I can do about bringing up a new VM, for 10.x (and/or 9.x + security/openssl) but that's not going to happen tonight... sorry... But if you want to start digging into this in general, I can only encourage you to learn this. I'll definitely do this. Looking at the manpage of make as we speak. manpage? .. hmm.. make manpage may or may not help without knowledge of C and what the makefile is actually doing you're not going to get any useful info there... (sorry - but this port requires patches - which I have converted the original to newer/individual format (separate in files/*) and that's not easy unless you know what you are doing in C.) I'll continue along as far as I can and if it's only testing on a compatible version of the OS, I'll send a patch for you to try (though if it doesn't patch immediately you will have issues.) Regards, -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.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: FreeBSD ports which are currently scheduled for deletion
Kurt Jaeger wrote: Hi! They just need converting to a staged environment? If so if you'd like to take a look at: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=189880 and tell me if I did it right and tell me how I can choose something that no-one is working on I'll crack on with some of them. I test-build the stuff you submitted and it looks fine. Good I'm on the right track then.. that's the important thing - knew it built - but wasn't sure if it was 'correct' for staging etc.. (no build errors != right, just that it might be ok ;-) ) What's the reason there are so many different pgpool-II ports ? Can they be consolidated ? Don't know - I can understand 2.x and 3.x and a 3.x-devel - but no idea why so many otherwise. Provide PRs, send me a Cc: and I can have a look at them. I'm happy to help when I have time (today I could have probably got through 10 'easy' ones).. however having never done it before and no actual feedback of what I have done as I have now updated 2 (one new one, one add a patch to an existing one) .. I don't know if I'd even get it right... that said my poudriere VMs and jenkins are not complaining about what I have done (I patch auto-manually (scripted) after each portsnap) I think the pgpool one is fine! Have you've been in contact with the maintainer for pgpool-II, kuriyama@ ? No response so far - coming up on 2 weeks (bit more for 'official contact' I think.) Michelle -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.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: FreeBSD ports which are currently scheduled for deletion
Hi! I agree that there was a lot of change in the ports tree recently. But: There is a reason for this: The ports tree has to be cleaner so that it can provide better automatic processes to the users. It's not easy, but it's getting there. I found a presentation which really goes deep into the process and reasoning behind going to pkgng and staging: http://www.slideshare.net/VsevolodStakhov/new-solver-for-freebsd-pkg Very cool stuff. -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! ___ 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 ports which are currently scheduled for deletion
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Kurt Jaeger li...@opsec.eu wrote: Hi! I agree that there was a lot of change in the ports tree recently. But: There is a reason for this: The ports tree has to be cleaner so that it can provide better automatic processes to the users. It's not easy, but it's getting there. I found a presentation which really goes deep into the process and reasoning behind going to pkgng and staging: http://www.slideshare.net/VsevolodStakhov/new-solver-for-freebsd-pkg Very cool stuff. As far as avoiding breaking things on older versions that you no longer have available or newer ones you have yet to install anywhere, remember redports,org https://redports.org. I find it invaluable for testing ports in a variety of environments. It currently supports 8.4, 9.2, 10.0, and HEAD on amd64 and i386. https://redports.org -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com ___ 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
[QAT] 355107: 2x leftovers, 2x ???
Add a missing patch to fix build. - Build ID: 20140525033000-59676 Job owner: h...@freebsd.org Buildtime: 3 minutes Enddate: Sun, 25 May 2014 03:33:08 GMT Revision: 355107 Repository: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revisionrevision=355107 - Port:japanese/canna-server 3.7p3_10 Buildgroup: 8.4-QAT/amd64 Buildstatus: ??? Log: https://qat.redports.org//~h...@freebsd.org/20140525033000-59676-337350/ja-canna-server-3.7p3_10.log Buildgroup: 8.4-QAT/i386 Buildstatus: LEFTOVERS Log: https://qat.redports.org//~h...@freebsd.org/20140525033000-59676-337351/ja-canna-server-3.7p3_10.log Buildgroup: 9.2-QAT/amd64 Buildstatus: LEFTOVERS Log: https://qat.redports.org//~h...@freebsd.org/20140525033000-59676-337352/ja-canna-server-3.7p3_10.log Buildgroup: 9.2-QAT/i386 Buildstatus: ??? Log: https://qat.redports.org//~h...@freebsd.org/20140525033000-59676-337353/ja-canna-server-3.7p3_10.log -- Buildarchive URL: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/20140525033000-59676 redports https://qat.redports.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
[QAT] 355109: 4x leftovers
- Remove GlobalPrefs/.config. - Fix pkg-message. - Build ID: 20140525041000-12437 Job owner: h...@freebsd.org Buildtime: 4 minutes Enddate: Sun, 25 May 2014 04:14:05 GMT Revision: 355109 Repository: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revisionrevision=355109 - Port:print/acroread8 8.1.7_5 Buildgroup: 8.4-QAT/amd64 Buildstatus: LEFTOVERS Log: https://qat.redports.org//~h...@freebsd.org/20140525041000-12437-337358/acroread8-8.1.7_5.log Buildgroup: 8.4-QAT/i386 Buildstatus: LEFTOVERS Log: https://qat.redports.org//~h...@freebsd.org/20140525041000-12437-337359/acroread8-8.1.7_5.log Buildgroup: 9.2-QAT/amd64 Buildstatus: LEFTOVERS Log: https://qat.redports.org//~h...@freebsd.org/20140525041000-12437-337360/acroread8-8.1.7_5.log Buildgroup: 9.2-QAT/i386 Buildstatus: LEFTOVERS Log: https://qat.redports.org//~h...@freebsd.org/20140525041000-12437-337361/acroread8-8.1.7_5.log -- Buildarchive URL: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/20140525041000-12437 redports https://qat.redports.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
Is staging a port really this simple?
Some months ago, Baptiste Daroussin b...@freebsd.org wrote:
... if you need any help staging your ports I can provide reviews.
I have a couple of ports that need staging support added, and I've
finally managed to find time to look into it. Having read such
documentation as I could easily find using Google, and looked at
the ports, I am feeling as if I must have overlooked something
-- because the only changes that seem to be needed are to insert
${STAGEDIR} into a few lines in the Makefiles.
Granted these are not complex ports, but if it really is this easy
I have to wonder what all the uproar has been about :)
What-all have I missed?
--- misc/gtkfind/Makefile
+++ misc/gtkfind/Makefile-staged
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
${REINPLACE_CMD} -e s,-O2,${CFLAGS}, ${WRKSRC}/configure
${WRKSRC}/Makefile.in
do-install:
- ${INSTALL_PROGRAM} ${WRKSRC}/gtkfind ${PREFIX}/bin
- ${INSTALL_MAN} ${WRKSRC}/gtkfind.1 ${MANPREFIX}/man/man1
+ ${INSTALL_PROGRAM} ${WRKSRC}/gtkfind ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/bin
+ ${INSTALL_MAN} ${WRKSRC}/gtkfind.1 ${STAGEDIR}${MANPREFIX}/man/man1
.include bsd.port.mk
--- sysutils/diskcheckd/Makefile
+++ sysutils/diskcheckd/Makefile-staged
@@ -19,7 +19,6 @@
MAKEFILE= /usr/share/mk/bsd.prog.mk
MAKE_ARGS= PROG=diskcheckd MAN8=${MAN8}
-NO_STAGE= yes
do-extract:
@${MKDIR} ${WRKSRC}
.for f in diskcheckd.c diskcheckd.8
@@ -30,13 +29,14 @@
@${REINPLACE_CMD} -e
's|/usr/local/etc/diskcheckd.conf|${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf|g'
${WRKSRC}/diskcheckd.8
do-install:
- ${INSTALL_PROGRAM} ${WRKSRC}/diskcheckd ${PREFIX}/sbin
- ${INSTALL_DATA} ${FILESDIR}/diskcheckd.conf
${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf.sample
- ${INSTALL_MAN} ${WRKSRC}/diskcheckd.8 ${MAN8PREFIX}/man/man8
+ ${INSTALL_PROGRAM} ${WRKSRC}/diskcheckd ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/sbin
+ ${INSTALL_DATA} ${FILESDIR}/diskcheckd.conf \
+ ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf.sample
+ ${INSTALL_MAN} ${WRKSRC}/diskcheckd.8 ${STAGEDIR}${MAN8PREFIX}/man/man8
post-install:
- @[ -f ${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf ] \
- || ${CP} -p ${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf.sample \
- ${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf
+ @[ -f ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf ] \
+ || ${CP} -p ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf.sample \
+ ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/etc/diskcheckd.conf
.include bsd.port.mk
___
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
