java/openjdk7 update fails to build
Hi, The latest update to java/openjdk7 on 8-Mar to 7u251 is currently failing with: echo Linking launcher... Linking launcher... cc -m64 -Xlinker -O1 -Xlinker -z -Xlinker noexecstack -m64 -Xlinker -export-dynamic -L`pwd` -o gamma launcher/java_md.o launcher/jli_util.o launcher/wildcard.o launcher/java.o -ljvm -lm -pthread ld: error: undefined symbol: JNI_CreateJavaVM >>> referenced by java_md.c:752 >>> (/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1/hotspot/src/os/posix/launcher/java_md.c:752) >>> launcher/java_md.o:(LoadJavaVM) ld: error: undefined symbol: JNI_GetDefaultJavaVMInitArgs >>> referenced by java_md.c:753 >>> (/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1/hotspot/src/os/posix/launcher/java_md.c:753) >>> launcher/java_md.o:(LoadJavaVM) cc: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation) gmake[7]: *** [/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1/hotspot/make/bsd/makefiles/launcher.make:102: gamma] Error 1 gmake[7]: Leaving directory '/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1/build/bsd-amd64/hotspot/outputdir/bsd_amd64_compiler2/product' gmake[6]: *** [/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1/hotspot/make/bsd/makefiles/top.make:129: the_vm] Error 2 gmake[6]: Leaving directory '/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1/build/bsd-amd64/hotspot/outputdir/bsd_amd64_compiler2/product' gmake[5]: *** [/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1/hotspot/make/bsd/Makefile:292: product] Error 2 gmake[5]: Leaving directory '/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1/build/bsd-amd64/hotspot/outputdir' gmake[4]: *** [Makefile:203: generic_build2] Error 2 gmake[4]: Leaving directory '/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1/hotspot/make' gmake[3]: *** [Makefile:158: product] Error 2 gmake[3]: Leaving directory '/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1/hotspot/make' gmake[2]: *** [make/hotspot-rules.gmk:128: hotspot-build] Error 2 gmake[2]: Leaving directory '/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1' gmake[1]: *** [Makefile:251: build_product_image] Error 2 gmake[1]: Leaving directory '/construction/xports/java/openjdk7/work/jdk7u-jdk7u251-b02.1' *** Error code 1 Cheers. -- Jonathan Chen ___ 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: amdgpu panics
On 2020-03-10 00:03, Grzegorz Junka wrote: I've upgraded my system to 12.1. I have recompiled all ports with poudriere using jail 12.1. As soon as "amdgpu" kernel module is loaded the system panics. Tried with both, "drm-kmo" and "drm-fbsd12.0-kmod". Any ideas? Are the kernel sources in the jail matched with your system? --HPS ___ 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"
amdgpu panics
I've upgraded my system to 12.1. I have recompiled all ports with poudriere using jail 12.1. As soon as "amdgpu" kernel module is loaded the system panics. Tried with both, "drm-kmo" and "drm-fbsd12.0-kmod". Any ideas? Grzegorzj ___ 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"
2020Q1 and firefox/thunderbird
Hi all, There are no firefox/thunderbird ports at the quarterly repository. Is there any ETA to fix this? -- WBR, bsam ___ 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"
level/py-setuptools failing
===> Checking if py37-setuptools is already installed ===> Registering installation for py37-setuptools-44.0.0 Installing py37-setuptools-44.0.0... pkg-static: py37-setuptools-44.0.0 conflicts with py36-setuptools-41.2.0 (installs files into the same place). Problematic file: /usr/local/bin/easy_install *** Error code 70 Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications j...@via.net 650-207-0372 cell 650-213-1302 office 650-969-2124 fax ___ 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: [RFC] Adding a Rados block driver to bhyve
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020, Miroslav Lachman wrote: There are some ports (for example sysutils/lsof) which need kernel sources to build. [...] Kernel sources, or just the headers? -- Dave ___ 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: [RFC] Adding a Rados block driver to bhyve
On 9-3-2020 12:38, Miroslav Lachman wrote: Willem Jan Withagen wrote on 2020/03/09 11:31: [...] 3) Create a bhyve-rbd port. Problem with that is that it will require the FreeBSD source tree for the bhyve sources, but there is no Ports option for that? Or bhyve sources are manually copied into the port. And then try to keep these sources up to date. Then compile and install a bhyve-rbd into /usr/local/sbin There are some ports (for example sysutils/lsof) which need kernel sources to build. So this can be a way too. I cannot say if this is the best way or not. Yes, there seems a flag for kernel sources... But not for world-sources.?? --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: [RFC] Adding a Rados block driver to bhyve
Willem Jan Withagen wrote on 2020/03/09 11:31: [...] 3) Create a bhyve-rbd port. Problem with that is that it will require the FreeBSD source tree for the bhyve sources, but there is no Ports option for that? Or bhyve sources are manually copied into the port. And then try to keep these sources up to date. Then compile and install a bhyve-rbd into /usr/local/sbin There are some ports (for example sysutils/lsof) which need kernel sources to build. So this can be a way too. I cannot say if this is the best way or not. [...] Kind regards 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"
[RFC] Adding a Rados block driver to bhyve
Hi all, And sorry for crosspoing three groups, but the answer can/could be a mix of things to do in these three areas. I have a prototype of bhyve running on Rados/Ceph working: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/pull/426 But there are a few catches on how to get it in the FreeBSd sources... 1) Easiest would be to just compile it in with the code of the current bhyve. That will require librados/librbd libraries... Ceph of this purpose is LGPL2/3 and could go into contrib. In this case bhyve will hold the rbd-driver by default and a user does not need to do anything by himself But I have the feeling that this is the most unwanted scenario 2) User first installs a Ceph package and FreeBSD sources, and then recompiles bhyve with the option BHYVE_RBD. And then reinstalls this new version as bhyve or bhyve-rbd in /usr/sbin 3) Create a bhyve-rbd port. Problem with that is that it will require the FreeBSD source tree for the bhyve sources, but there is no Ports option for that? Or bhyve sources are manually copied into the port. And then try to keep these sources up to date. Then compile and install a bhyve-rbd into /usr/local/sbin 4) Create a bhyve-blockrbd port. This is much like 3) but instead of building a bhyve-rbd executable, it delivers a libblockrbd.so that is dynamically loadable by the standaard bhyve that comes with base. For this bhyve needs to be extended with dynamic loadable driver modules. This is reasonably doable, but is this acceptable for the bhyve maintainers? For building the port, the bhyve-blockrbd code will only need a limited set of files from /usr/src/usr.bin/bhyve thus limiting the chance of running out sequence with the bhyve from base. Looking over these 4 options, I think that 4 is the most desirable one? But 2 would parhaps be workable for users as well, but the project might think otherwise. Are there other options? And/or is 4 the best way to go, with 2 as a nice intermediate? 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"
