FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date
Dear port maintainer, The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more of your ports appears to be out of date.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 +-+ multimedia/shotcut | 19.12.31| v20.02.17 +-+ 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 Reported by:portscout! ___ 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: amd64->{armv7,aarc64} cross builds of devel/llvm10 (via poudriere-devel): failed in package stage for missing libarcher* files
On 2020-Feb-17, at 09:56, Mark Millard wrote: > On 2020-Feb-17, at 09:53, Mark Millard wrote: > >> [The native arm64 build worked fine. But the cross builds >> got . . .] >> >> The builds failed with: >> >> > Compressing man pages (compress-man) >> ===> Installing ldconfig configuration file >> === >> === >> ===> Building package for llvm10-10.0.0.r1_1 >> pkg-static: Unable to access file >> /wrkdirs/usr/ports/devel/llvm10/work/stageusr/local/llvm10/lib/libarcher.so:No >> such file or directory >> pkg-static: Unable to access file >> /wrkdirs/usr/ports/devel/llvm10/work/stageusr/local/llvm10/lib/libarcher_static.a:No >> such file or directory >> *** Error code 1 >> >> Stop. >> make: stopped in /usr/ports/devel/llvm10 >> =>> Cleaning up wrkdir >> ===> Cleaning for llvm10-10.0.0.r1_1 >> >> >> head -r3577979 based system source; head -r536339 based ports tree. >> > > I forgot to list: > > ===> The following configuration options are available for llvm10-10.0.0.r1_1: > BE_AMDGPU=on: AMD GPU backend (required by mesa) > CLANG=on: Build clang > DOCS=on: Build and/or install documentation > EXTRAS=on: Extra clang tools > LIT=on: Install lit and FileCheck test tools > LLD=on: Install lld, the LLVM linker > LLDB=on: Install lldb, the LLVM debugger > LLD_LINK=on: Link ld.lld as ld to clang uses it > PYCLANG=off: Install python bindings to libclang > > Options available for the single BACKENDS: you have to select exactly > one of them > BE_FREEBSD=off: Backends for FreeBSD architectures > BE_NATIVE=on: Backend(s) for this architecture (ARM) > BE_STANDARD=off: All non-experimental backends > llvm10-10.0.0.r2 gets the same. I was curious what the libarcher* files would be tied to and found that libarcher is a tool library for an llvm openmp tool. But openmp does not seem to be available for armv7 or aarch64 so the file is not expected to be present for installation, much like libgomp.so , liniomp5.so , libomp.so , and libomptarget.so . Looks like a %%OPENMP%% prefix is needed in llvm10/pkg-plist for each of the two libarcher lines. === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com ( dsl-only.net went away in early 2018-Mar) ___ 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: Why is pkg version taking so long?
Never mind. I had a corrupt /usr/ports/Makefile. -- Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683 On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 9:19 AM Kevin Oberman wrote: > Today I ran "pkg version -vl\<" to see what ports had been updated. This > usually ran in a few seconds. Today it had provided no output after a much > longer time and I noticed it was running a "make flavors-package-names" on > a large number of the ports installed; perhaps all of them. It ran for over > 2 minutes. > > Did I clobber a cache of some sort? Can it be fixed? Is this a bug? > -- > 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"
Re: amd64->{armv7,aarc64} cross builds of devel/llvm10 (via poudriere-devel): failed in package stage for missing libarcher* files
On 2020-Feb-17, at 09:53, Mark Millard wrote: > [The native arm64 build worked fine. But the cross builds > got . . .] > > The builds failed with: > > > Compressing man pages (compress-man) > ===> Installing ldconfig configuration file > === > === > ===> Building package for llvm10-10.0.0.r1_1 > pkg-static: Unable to access file > /wrkdirs/usr/ports/devel/llvm10/work/stageusr/local/llvm10/lib/libarcher.so:No > such file or directory > pkg-static: Unable to access file > /wrkdirs/usr/ports/devel/llvm10/work/stageusr/local/llvm10/lib/libarcher_static.a:No > such file or directory > *** Error code 1 > > Stop. > make: stopped in /usr/ports/devel/llvm10 > =>> Cleaning up wrkdir > ===> Cleaning for llvm10-10.0.0.r1_1 > > > head -r3577979 based system source; head -r536339 based ports tree. > I forgot to list: ===> The following configuration options are available for llvm10-10.0.0.r1_1: BE_AMDGPU=on: AMD GPU backend (required by mesa) CLANG=on: Build clang DOCS=on: Build and/or install documentation EXTRAS=on: Extra clang tools LIT=on: Install lit and FileCheck test tools LLD=on: Install lld, the LLVM linker LLDB=on: Install lldb, the LLVM debugger LLD_LINK=on: Link ld.lld as ld to clang uses it PYCLANG=off: Install python bindings to libclang > Options available for the single BACKENDS: you have to select exactly one of them BE_FREEBSD=off: Backends for FreeBSD architectures BE_NATIVE=on: Backend(s) for this architecture (ARM) BE_STANDARD=off: All non-experimental backends === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com ( dsl-only.net went away in early 2018-Mar) ___ 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"
amd64->{armv7,aarc64} cross builds of devel/llvm10 (via poudriere-devel): failed in package stage for missing libarcher* files
[The native arm64 build worked fine. But the cross builds got . . .] The builds failed with: > Compressing man pages (compress-man) ===> Installing ldconfig configuration file === === ===> Building package for llvm10-10.0.0.r1_1 pkg-static: Unable to access file /wrkdirs/usr/ports/devel/llvm10/work/stageusr/local/llvm10/lib/libarcher.so:No such file or directory pkg-static: Unable to access file /wrkdirs/usr/ports/devel/llvm10/work/stageusr/local/llvm10/lib/libarcher_static.a:No such file or directory *** Error code 1 Stop. make: stopped in /usr/ports/devel/llvm10 =>> Cleaning up wrkdir ===> Cleaning for llvm10-10.0.0.r1_1 head -r3577979 based system source; head -r536339 based ports tree. === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com ( dsl-only.net went away in early 2018-Mar) ___ 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"
Why is pkg version taking so long?
Today I ran "pkg version -vl\<" to see what ports had been updated. This usually ran in a few seconds. Today it had provided no output after a much longer time and I noticed it was running a "make flavors-package-names" on a large number of the ports installed; perhaps all of them. It ran for over 2 minutes. Did I clobber a cache of some sort? Can it be fixed? Is this a bug? -- 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"
Re: Starting with poudriere
On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 07:55:25AM -0800, George Hartzell wrote: > Baptiste Daroussin writes: > > > > You should really have a look at overlays which are supported in > > poudriere-devel, it will allow you to get rid of portshaker with your use > case: > > > > https://reviews.freebsd.org/rP510950 > > > > in poudriere an overlay is just a "regular ports tree" appended via -O > during > > the bulk. > > Neat, thanks for pointing that out! > > How much of a "regular ports tree" does it need to be? Can it just > include my local ports or does it need other elements of the tree > (e.g. it's own index files or )? > It can be your actual ports tree :D plus the SUBDIR Best regards, Bapt signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Starting with poudriere
Baptiste Daroussin writes: > > You should really have a look at overlays which are supported in > poudriere-devel, it will allow you to get rid of portshaker with your use > case: > > https://reviews.freebsd.org/rP510950 > > in poudriere an overlay is just a "regular ports tree" appended via -O during > the bulk. Neat, thanks for pointing that out! How much of a "regular ports tree" does it need to be? Can it just include my local ports or does it need other elements of the tree (e.g. it's own index files or )? g. ___ 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"
Bug 244099 - [PATCH] net/ceph14: upgrade to 14.2.7 with dashboard
Can one of the commiters please pickup this update? Thanx, --WjW ___ 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: Starting with poudriere
On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 10:18:33AM -0800, George Hartzell wrote: > Dan McGrath writes: > > [...] I am not sure about repo priorities, or how you would deal > > with conflicts with build options that pull in common ports. It is > > something I have been meaning to look into, sorry! Perhaps someone else > > here can give some advice? > > > > One way to solve this is via "portshaker", which can layer a "thin" > ports tree on top of the standard tree. > > Here's a [perhaps not entirely graceful, but It Works For Me] example > where I layer a couple of ports onto the standard tree. > > https://github.com/hartzell/freebsd-ports > > I use the resulting tree for poudriere builds and populate jails with > e.g. my LMS audio system. > You should really have a look at overlays which are supported in poudriere-devel, it will allow you to get rid of portshaker with your use case: https://reviews.freebsd.org/rP510950 in poudriere an overlay is just a "regular ports tree" appended via -O during the bulk. Best regards, Bapt signature.asc Description: PGP signature
