Re: qt5-qmake failed update

2018-01-06 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld 

Could be solved with set GSTREAMER=on

or

remove
files/extrapatch-no-gstreamer
and this line in the Makefile:

GSTREAMER_EXTRA_PATCHES_OFF= ${FILESDIR}/extrapatch-no-gstreamer

seems is forgotten to remove.

___
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: py27 ports always show "new version available"

2018-01-06 Thread Tatsuki Makino 
Hello.

Are your portmaster outputting the following message?

make: "/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk" line 1067: FLAVOR may not be passed empty as 
a make argument.

When I tried portmaster -i cmake, portmaster always tries to update 
textproc/py-sphinx.
It seems that it occurred because function iport_from_origin returned 1.
I surveyed with grep -r -e textproc/py-sphinx --include '*/Makefile*' 
/usr/ports. textproc/py-sphinx, textproc/py-sphinx@${FLAVOR}, and 
textproc/py-sphinx@${PY_FLAVOR} are mixed in the variable of *_DEPENDS. cmake 
is textproc/py-sphinx.

These are just hints because I don't understand FLAVOR yet.
I'm sorry when that is a different problem.

Thank you.
___
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: qt5-qmake failed update

2018-01-06 Thread Danilo Egêa Gondolfo 
On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 12:28 AM, Walter Schwarzenfeld <
w.schwarzenf...@utanet.at> wrote:

> Another different error:
>
> ===>  Patching for qt5-multimedia-5.9.3
> ===>  Applying extra patch /usr/ports/multimedia/qt5-mult
> imedia/files/extrapatch-no-gstreamer
> No such line 17 in input file, ignoring
> 1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to qtmultimedia.pro.rej
> *** Error code 1
>
> Stop.
> make[1]: stopped in /usr/ports/multimedia/qt5-multimedia
> *** Error code 1
>
>
> ___
> 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"
>

It's probably related to this change
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision=458293
___
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: qt5-qmake failed update

2018-01-06 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld 

I solved it for the moment with /etc/make.conf and put in:

CC=clang40
CXX=clang++40
CPP=clang-cpp40

(means clang40 for all, you can comment out it after update - if you want).

___
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: qt5-qmake failed update

2018-01-06 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld 

Another different error:

===>  Patching for qt5-multimedia-5.9.3
===>  Applying extra patch 
/usr/ports/multimedia/qt5-multimedia/files/extrapatch-no-gstreamer

No such line 17 in input file, ignoring
1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to qtmultimedia.pro.rej
*** Error code 1

Stop.
make[1]: stopped in /usr/ports/multimedia/qt5-multimedia
*** Error code 1

___
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: qt5-qmake failed update

2018-01-06 Thread Rob Belics 
Same here for a lot of qt5-*

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 7:22 PM, Walter Schwarzenfeld <
w.schwarzenf...@utanet.at> wrote:

> same qt5-network.
>
> ___
> 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@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: qt5-qmake failed update

2018-01-06 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld 

same qt5-network.

___
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"

qt5-qmake failed update

2018-01-06 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld 

with

===>  Applying FreeBSD patches for qt5-qmake-5.9.3
/usr/bin/sed -i "" -e "/DEFAULT_LIBDIRS=/ 
s,\"n,n/usr/local/lib&," 
/ram/usr/ports/devel/qt5-qmake/work/qtbase-opensource-src-5.9.3/configure

===>   qt5-qmake-5.9.3 depends on package: pkgconf>=1.3.0_1 - found
===>  Configuring for qt5-qmake-5.9.3
/bin/mkdir -p 
/ram/usr/ports/devel/qt5-qmake/work/qtbase-opensource-src-5.9.3
echo 'CMAKE_MODULE_TESTS = -' > 
/ram/usr/ports/devel/qt5-qmake/work/qtbase-opensource-src-5.9.3/.qmake.cache
echo 'QMAKE_LIBDIR_FLAGS = 
-L/ram/usr/ports/devel/qt5-qmake/work/qtbase-opensource-src-5.9.3/lib' 
>> 
/ram/usr/ports/devel/qt5-qmake/work/qtbase-opensource-src-5.9.3/.qmake.cache

Syntax error: ")" unexpected (expecting "then")
*** Error code 2

Stop.
make: stopped in /usr/ports/devel/qt5-qmake

===>>> make build failed for devel/qt5-qmake
===>>> Aborting update


only compiles with

make CC=clang40 CXX=clang++40 CPP=clang-cpp40

___
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: portmaster version "mismatch"

2018-01-06 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld 

Stefan Esser is very quick =>

https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision=458299

___
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"

If the port is designed to have a Motif version, a GTK version, and a NOGUI version, can these be made into flavors, instead of options?

2018-01-06 Thread Yuri 
The port can be built to have the exact same UI but alternatively based 
on Motif, GTK, or no GUI at all. In each case, the plist is exactly the 
same.



Can these be made into flavors: FLAVORS=nogui motif gtk ?

My opinion: this is a good idea. The package is originally designed to 
have 2 UI incarnations, and flavors beautifully match this polymorphism.


Is there any reason that flavors shouldn't be used in this case?


Thanks,

Yuri


___
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"

portmaster version "mismatch"

2018-01-06 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld 

Only info, I have already mailed the maintainer:

Portmaster should have 3.18_8. Makefile shows 3.18_7.

portmaster --version 3.18_6.

___
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: Ruby version question

2018-01-06 Thread Yuri 

On 01/06/18 14:17, Kevin Oberman wrote:
You seem to assume that Ubuntu and FreeBSD both have the same version 
of Ruby installed. The current version in FreeBSD is  2.4.3.  2.3 is 
still available as lang/ruby23, but should only be used when some code 
won't work with 2.4. The Ubuntu system is still running 2.3. Have you 
checked for available upgrades?



No, I don't assume that FreeBSD and Ubuntu have the same version.

I assume that this command should return the version in the same format. 
Currently, it doesn't.



Yuri

___
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: Ruby version question

2018-01-06 Thread Kevin Oberman 
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 1:41 PM, Yuri  wrote:

> In order to get a Ruby version, I run this command:
>
> > $ ruby -r rbconfig -e 'C = RbConfig::CONFIG' -e 'puts C["ruby_version"]'
>
> > 2.4
>
>
> However, on Ubuntu 17.10 the same command returns 2.3.0 (with the minor
> version of zero).
>
>
> My question is which one is correct, or "more correct"? Should it rather
> be 2.4.0? Or both are correct?
>
>
> I recommended one upstream maintainer to get the current ruby version
> using this command, and then to use 'pkg-config ruby-${THIS_VERSION}
> --libs', but he says that Ubuntu prints it in a different format.
>
>
> 2.4 matches .pc file on FreeBSD, and doesn't on Ubuntu.
>
> Is this a bug on Ubuntu? On FreeBSD?
>
>
> Yuri
>

You seem to assume that Ubuntu and FreeBSD both have the same version of
Ruby installed. The current version in FreeBSD is  2.4.3.  2.3 is still
available as lang/ruby23, but should only be used when some code won't work
with 2.4. The Ubuntu system is still running 2.3. Have you checked for
available upgrades?

On FreeBSD you can get the current version of an installed package with the
command "pkg info -E ruby". The trailing ",1" indicates that at some point
ruby was rolled back for some reason, but it is not really a part of the
version number.
--
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"

Ruby version question

2018-01-06 Thread Yuri 

In order to get a Ruby version, I run this command:

> $ ruby -r rbconfig -e 'C = RbConfig::CONFIG' -e 'puts C["ruby_version"]'

> 2.4


However, on Ubuntu 17.10 the same command returns 2.3.0 (with the minor 
version of zero).



My question is which one is correct, or "more correct"? Should it rather 
be 2.4.0? Or both are correct?



I recommended one upstream maintainer to get the current ruby version 
using this command, and then to use 'pkg-config ruby-${THIS_VERSION} 
--libs', but he says that Ubuntu prints it in a different format.



2.4 matches .pc file on FreeBSD, and doesn't on Ubuntu.

Is this a bug on Ubuntu? On FreeBSD?


Yuri

___
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: gnucash port won't install: ".../xml-generator.go:No such file or directory" [solved]

2018-01-06 Thread Graham Menhennitt 

On 29/12/2017 07:51, Graham Menhennitt wrote:

Hello all,

I'm attempting to upgrade the finance/gnucash port from 2.6.18 to 
2.6.19 and I'm getting errors on the installation stage. I've read the 
entry in UPDATING which says that I'm building the guile2 flavour by 
default. I could try switching to guile1, but I suspect that just 
delays the problem.


The errors I'm getting are all of the form:

    pkg-static: Unable to access file 
/usr/ports_build/usr/data/FreeBSD/ports/finance/gnucash/work-guile2/stage/usr/local/%%GUILE2%%lib/gnucash/scm/ccache/2.0/build-config.go:No 
such file or directory


and there are a hundred or so of them. The full build log is below. 
Does anybody have any clues, please?



Following up my own post...

If I explicitly say "make install FLAVOR=guile2", it works. I thought 
that this would be unnecessary since guile2 is the default, but leaving 
the FLAVOR= bit out causes it to fail.


Graham
___
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: Puppet SSL-related problems after updating Ruby

2018-01-06 Thread Romain Tartière 
Hello

On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 07:01:39PM -0500, Josh Endries wrote:
> I recently updated packages on a 11.0 machine, which upgraded Ruby from
> 2.3.5 to 2.3.6 (I think), and my Puppet install broke. It is logging
> SSL-related issues with this message:
> 
> SSL_read: decryption failed or bad record mac

Please see:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=224623

While we do not have a solution for your case yet, be informed that:
  - The rack based puppet master seems to perform well (I am using this
currently);
  - The sysutils/puppetserver / sysutils/puppetserver5 should work OK

-- 
Romain Tartière   http://people.FreeBSD.org/~romain/
pgp: 8234 9A78 E7C0 B807 0B59  80FF BA4D 1D95 5112 336F (ID: 0x5112336F)
(plain text =non-HTML= PGP/GPG encrypted/signed e-mail much appreciated)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature