Re: LICENSE documentation

[Dave Horsfall]

On Wed, 14 Sep 2016, Kurt Jaeger wrote:

> This interpretation is based on the hypothesis that the user is located 
> in a country that has this kind of legal rule.
> 
> This is not the case in every country, so your conclusion is not always 
> valid.

What percentage of countries are signatories to the Berne Convention?  
Last I looked, only nice friendly places such as China and North Korea 
were holding out (and USA was one of the last to sign, and even then with 
conditions).

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Google Code as an upstream is gone

[Mathieu Arnold]

Hello,

Google Code has been deprecated[1] since March 2015, and read-only since
August 2015, giving time to software developers to move their
development some place else. All the distribution files that still use
solely googlecode.com as their source have been marked BROKEN today in
r422140[2], as they are not fetchable.

Most software have moved to some other place (mostly on github), all you
have to do is figure out where and update your ports accordingly.

1: https://opensource.googleblog.com/2015/03/farewell-to-google-code.html
2: https://reviews.freebsd.org/rP422140

-- 
Mathieu Arnold




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: What exactly are slave ports?

[Mathieu Arnold]

Le 14/09/2016 à 21:03, abi a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> I want to add to existing port another one for the same program, but
> with different git branch and (possibly) with slightly different
> dependencies. Is this a good case for slave port ?
> Slave ports are not documented in porter handbook and I'm not sure how
> they work and when used.

It sure is documented:

https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-masterdir.html

-- 
Mathieu Arnold




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: What exactly are slave ports?

[Kevin Oberman]

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:03 PM, abi  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I want to add to existing port another one for the same program, but with
> different git branch and (possibly) with slightly different dependencies.
> Is this a good case for slave port ?
> Slave ports are not documented in porter handbook and I'm not sure how
> they work and when used.
>
> Thanks.
>

A slave port is a minor modification of the port to support different
functions. E.g. security/ssh-guard has slightly different builds, all from
a common source.  One for each of the commonly used firewalls; ipfw, pf,
null.

If the sources are different, a slave is not appropriate. Examples are the
various versions of postfix and clang.
--
Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer
E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com
PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

What exactly are slave ports?

[abi]

Hello,

I want to add to existing port another one for the same program, but 
with different git branch and (possibly) with slightly different 
dependencies. Is this a good case for slave port ?
Slave ports are not documented in porter handbook and I'm not sure how 
they work and when used.


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

Re: n00b problem installing postfix package

[olli hauer]

On 2016-09-14 19:11, Bryan C. Everly wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm trying to set up a new 10.3 server that includes postfix and
> majordomo for a BUG I'm trying to get off the ground.  I'm normally an
> OpenBSD guy but I thought I'd give it a try on FreeBSD.
> 
> Anyhow, I'm wanting to follow this guide:
> 
> http://www.area536.com/projects/complete-freebsd-mail-server/postfix-youve-got-incoming/
> 
> And I'm failing right out of the gate because I can't find postfix when I do:
> 
> # pkg install postfix
> 
> It says there isn't a package with that name.  When I check
> freshports, I see that there indeed is:
> 
> https://www.freshports.org/mail/postfix/
> 
> Is there something I have to do to get things pointed at the "right"
> package source like I do in OpenBSD (PKG_PATH)?  I was able to install
> apache and some other stuff just fine the way I currently have things
> configured FWIW.
> 
> Sorry in advance if this is a dumb question but I really could use the help.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bryan

Hi Bryan,

there was an issue with the port on the quarterly branch, and quarterly is also 
the default for pkg (see pkg -vv)

Looking at pkg.freebsd.org it seems postfix is missing but postfix211 and 
postfix-current are available.
Even the port is already fixed in quarterly, the build is already finished or 
running at the moment, so the port will be missing until the next run.

It should be no problem to install now postfix-current, and in a few days after 
the next build was running swap to postfix (simply run a pkg delete 
postfix-current and pkg install postfix, I'm doing this often to test new 
current versions)

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

Re: n00b problem installing postfix package

[Bryan C. Everly]

Thank you for the help!

On Sep 14, 2016 2:45 PM, "olli hauer"  wrote:

> On 2016-09-14 19:11, Bryan C. Everly wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to set up a new 10.3 server that includes postfix and
> > majordomo for a BUG I'm trying to get off the ground.  I'm normally an
> > OpenBSD guy but I thought I'd give it a try on FreeBSD.
> >
> > Anyhow, I'm wanting to follow this guide:
> >
> > http://www.area536.com/projects/complete-freebsd-
> mail-server/postfix-youve-got-incoming/
> >
> > And I'm failing right out of the gate because I can't find postfix when
> I do:
> >
> > # pkg install postfix
> >
> > It says there isn't a package with that name.  When I check
> > freshports, I see that there indeed is:
> >
> > https://www.freshports.org/mail/postfix/
> >
> > Is there something I have to do to get things pointed at the "right"
> > package source like I do in OpenBSD (PKG_PATH)?  I was able to install
> > apache and some other stuff just fine the way I currently have things
> > configured FWIW.
> >
> > Sorry in advance if this is a dumb question but I really could use the
> help.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Bryan
>
> Hi Bryan,
>
> there was an issue with the port on the quarterly branch, and quarterly is
> also the default for pkg (see pkg -vv)
>
> Looking at pkg.freebsd.org it seems postfix is missing but postfix211 and
> postfix-current are available.
> Even the port is already fixed in quarterly, the build is already finished
> or running at the moment, so the port will be missing until the next run.
>
> It should be no problem to install now postfix-current, and in a few days
> after the next build was running swap to postfix (simply run a pkg delete
> postfix-current and pkg install postfix, I'm doing this often to test new
> current versions)
>
> --
> olli
>
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: n00b problem installing postfix package

[Miroslav Lachman]

Bryan C. Everly wrote on 09/14/2016 19:11:

Hi,

I'm trying to set up a new 10.3 server that includes postfix and
majordomo for a BUG I'm trying to get off the ground.  I'm normally an
OpenBSD guy but I thought I'd give it a try on FreeBSD.

Anyhow, I'm wanting to follow this guide:

http://www.area536.com/projects/complete-freebsd-mail-server/postfix-youve-got-incoming/

And I'm failing right out of the gate because I can't find postfix when I do:

# pkg install postfix

It says there isn't a package with that name.  When I check
freshports, I see that there indeed is:

https://www.freshports.org/mail/postfix/

Is there something I have to do to get things pointed at the "right"
package source like I do in OpenBSD (PKG_PATH)?  I was able to install
apache and some other stuff just fine the way I currently have things
configured FWIW.

Sorry in advance if this is a dumb question but I really could use the help.


Try the following command and then let us know it it works for you:

pkg install mail/postfix

Or you can search your pkg repository by command

pkg search postfix

Can give you somthing like this:

% pkg search postfix
postfix-3.1.1,1Secure alternative to widely-used Sendmail
postfix-current-3.2.20160612,4 Experimental Postfix version
postfix-current-sasl-3.2.20160612,4 Experimental Postfix version
postfix-logwatch-1.40.03   Postfix MTA log parser
postfix-policyd-sf-1.82_1,1Anti-spam plugin for Postfix (written in C)
postfix-policyd-spf-perl-2.010_1 SPF policy service for Postfix written 
in Perl

postfix-policyd-weight-0.1.15.2_6 Weighted policy daemon for postfix
postfix-postfwd-1.35_1 Postfix firewall policy daemon
postfix-sasl-3.1.1,1   Secure alternative to widely-used Sendmail
postfix211-2.11.8,1Secure alternative to widely-used Sendmail
postfix211-sasl-2.11.8,1   Secure alternative to widely-used Sendmail
postfixadmin-2.93  PHP web-based management tool for Postfix 
virtual domains and users
py27-postfix-policyd-spf-python-1.3.2_1 Pure Python Postfix policy 
daemon for SPF checking

trac-email2trac-postfix-2.6.2  Convert email to trac tickets


Miroslav Lachman

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

n00b problem installing postfix package

[Bryan C. Everly]

Hi,

I'm trying to set up a new 10.3 server that includes postfix and
majordomo for a BUG I'm trying to get off the ground.  I'm normally an
OpenBSD guy but I thought I'd give it a try on FreeBSD.

Anyhow, I'm wanting to follow this guide:

http://www.area536.com/projects/complete-freebsd-mail-server/postfix-youve-got-incoming/

And I'm failing right out of the gate because I can't find postfix when I do:

# pkg install postfix

It says there isn't a package with that name.  When I check
freshports, I see that there indeed is:

https://www.freshports.org/mail/postfix/

Is there something I have to do to get things pointed at the "right"
package source like I do in OpenBSD (PKG_PATH)?  I was able to install
apache and some other stuff just fine the way I currently have things
configured FWIW.

Sorry in advance if this is a dumb question but I really could use the help.

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

Las 5´s de la Calidad Total Japonesa

[Las 5´s de la Calidad Total Japonesa]

 

En línea y en Vivo / Para todo su Equipo con una sola Conexión 

Las 5´s de la CALIDAD TOTAL JAPONESA 
Y cómo ponerlo en marcha HOY en su compañía
28 de septiembre - Online en Vivo - 10:00 a 13:00 y de 15:00 a 18:00 Hrs   
 
Conozca las cinco reglas japonesas que revolucionaron el concepto de la 
producción, las oficinas y los servicios, principios que le mostrarán cómo 
organizar todas las áreas de su compañía, siguiendo la filosofía TOYOTA, y 
descubra los beneficios de ser más organizado y más ordenado de manera 
permanente. 
TEMARIO: 


1. Las Cinco S de la calidad total.

2. Lean management.

3. Cómo saber que necesitamos las 5’s.

4. Antes de implementarlas.

5. Las 5’S.



...¡Y mucho más!


 
¿Requiere la información a la Brevedad?
responda este email con la palabra: 
Info - 5s.
centro telefónico: 018002129393
 

Lic. Pamela Rangel
Coordinador de Evento


 
¿Demasiados mensajes en su cuenta? Responda este mensaje indicando que solo 
desea recibir CALENDARIO y sólo recibirá un correo al mes. Si desea cancelar la 
suscripción, solicite su BAJA. 
 

 

 



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

Re: LICENSE documentation

[Kurt Jaeger]

Hi!

> On 2016-09-14 11:49, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> the license. If no license statement can be found in the sources or the
> >> website, then no permission is given, and it's technically illegal for
> >> anyone but the author(s) to use the software.

> > This is not the case in every country, so your conclusion is not
> > always valid.

> That's true. Still, the inclusion of the program in ports collection
> depends on author(s) giving their permission, otherwise users in
> majority of countries FreeBSD is used in will be disqualified from using
> it -- and FreeBSD would probably be liable for copyright infringement too.

Let's take a step back: That is why we do introduce the LICENSE framework,
but it was not a big problem the last 15+ years, so it's not that
the skies will fall tomorrow, if we have a few missing for the
foreseeable future.

-- 
p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 4 years to go !
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Mariadb101 does compile on i386 if use gcc

[Dewayne Geraghty]

While working through my ports' patches to revert the local changes for
libressl [Thanks to John Marino, your ssl commits are appreciated :) ], I
came across this for
/usr/ports/databases/mariadb101-server/Makefile

-NOT_FOR_ARCHS= i386
-NOT_FOR_ARCHS_REASON=  currently does not compile on i386, see \
-   https://mariadb.atlassian.net/browse/MDEV-9627
+#NOT_FOR_ARCHS=i386
+#NOT_FOR_ARCHS_REASON= currently does not compile on i386, see \
+#  https://mariadb.atlassian.net/browse/MDEV-9627
+USE_GCC=   any

This might help others using mariadb on i386.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: LICENSE documentation

[Vitaly Magerya]

On 2016-09-14 11:49, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>> My interpretation of this phrase is not that LICENSE variable is
>> mandatory (to which I would object on the basis that ports licensing
>> framework is vague, incomplete, and apparently used by noone too), but
>> rather that for the program to be freely distributable at all, it's
>> author(s) need to explicitly give their permission. That permission is
>> the license. If no license statement can be found in the sources or the
>> website, then no permission is given, and it's technically illegal for
>> anyone but the author(s) to use the software.
> 
> This interpretation is based on the hypothesis
> that the user is located in a country that has this kind of legal rule.
> 
> This is not the case in every country, so your conclusion is not
> always valid.

That's true. Still, the inclusion of the program in ports collection
depends on author(s) giving their permission, otherwise users in
majority of countries FreeBSD is used in will be disqualified from using
it -- and FreeBSD would probably be liable for copyright infringement too.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: LICENSE documentation

[Kurt Jaeger]

Hi!

> On 2016-09-14 10:19, Bob Eager wrote:
> > This port never did have LICENSE, and it had been updated recently with
> > no issues. However, I was told that "I don't see any mention of any
> > kind of license in the package or on the site, so it should be
> > LICENSE=  NONE. Note that without clear licensing terms it's impossible
> > to legally use and redistribute the code."
> 
> My interpretation of this phrase is not that LICENSE variable is
> mandatory (to which I would object on the basis that ports licensing
> framework is vague, incomplete, and apparently used by noone too), but
> rather that for the program to be freely distributable at all, it's
> author(s) need to explicitly give their permission. That permission is
> the license. If no license statement can be found in the sources or the
> website, then no permission is given, and it's technically illegal for
> anyone but the author(s) to use the software.

This interpretation is based on the hypothesis
that the user is located in a country that has this kind of legal rule.

This is not the case in every country, so your conclusion is not
always valid.

-- 
p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 4 years to go !
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: LICENSE documentation

[Vitaly Magerya]

On 2016-09-14 10:19, Bob Eager wrote:
> This port never did have LICENSE, and it had been updated recently with
> no issues. However, I was told that "I don't see any mention of any
> kind of license in the package or on the site, so it should be
> LICENSE=  NONE. Note that without clear licensing terms it's impossible
> to legally use and redistribute the code."

My interpretation of this phrase is not that LICENSE variable is
mandatory (to which I would object on the basis that ports licensing
framework is vague, incomplete, and apparently used by noone too), but
rather that for the program to be freely distributable at all, it's
author(s) need to explicitly give their permission. That permission is
the license. If no license statement can be found in the sources or the
website, then no permission is given, and it's technically illegal for
anyone but the author(s) to use the software. If this is the case, I
suggest you to contact the authors, explain the situation, and ask them
to include some sort of a license statement -- we'll be forced to remove
the program from ports collection otherwise.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: LICENSE documentation

[Kurt Jaeger]

Hi!

> I recently had a minor patch (to one of the ports I maintain) bounced
> because I hadn't specified a LICENSE.
> 
> This port never did have LICENSE, and it had been updated recently with
> no issues. However, I was told that "I don't see any mention of any
> kind of license in the package or on the site, so it should be
> LICENSE=  NONE. Note that without clear licensing terms it's impossible
> to legally use and redistribute the code."
> 
> (I did erroneously interpret that, initially, to be saying that there
> MUST be a real license specified, although I realise from the above
> that NONE is acceptable (and presumably meets the criteria for "clear
> licensing terms")).

Even the "NONE" is in discussion, if it should be UNDEFINED or UNKNOWN or...

> Let me make it absolutely clear that I am not criticising or
> questioning the committers; they are just doing their job.
> 
> However, I wonder if two things ought to be done:
> 
> 1) There should be something in the Porter's Handbook about LICENSE.
> There is little or none, merely material about licensing in a more
> general sense. I would produce an update myself, but given the above, I
> am probably not the best person!

There are two text drafts in discussion, some of them for a long time:

https://reviews.freebsd.org/D56

https://reviews.freebsd.org/D7849

> 2) portlint currently says: "WARN: Makefile: Consider defining LICENSE.
> 0 fatal errors and 1 warning found." This is not really correct if
> LICENSE is mandatory.

Yes, that's unfortunate 8-}

-- 
p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 4 years to go !
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://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

[portscout]

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
+-+
devel/py-tempora| 1.4 | 1.6
+-+


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
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

LICENSE documentation

[Bob Eager]

I recently had a minor patch (to one of the ports I maintain) bounced
because I hadn't specified a LICENSE.

This port never did have LICENSE, and it had been updated recently with
no issues. However, I was told that "I don't see any mention of any
kind of license in the package or on the site, so it should be
LICENSE=  NONE. Note that without clear licensing terms it's impossible
to legally use and redistribute the code."

(I did erroneously interpret that, initially, to be saying that there
MUST be a real license specified, although I realise from the above
that NONE is acceptable (and presumably meets the criteria for "clear
licensing terms")).

Let me make it absolutely clear that I am not criticising or
questioning the committers; they are just doing their job.

However, I wonder if two things ought to be done:

1) There should be something in the Porter's Handbook about LICENSE.
There is little or none, merely material about licensing in a more
general sense. I would produce an update myself, but given the above, I
am probably not the best person!

2) portlint currently says: "WARN: Makefile: Consider defining LICENSE.
0 fatal errors and 1 warning found." This is not really correct if
LICENSE is mandatory.

Thanks!

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