Re: Zoneminder update: looking for a committer
On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 3:05 AM abi via freebsd-ports wrote: > > Hello, > > looking for a committer for > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250234 > > @lwhsu had pointed me to some issues, however he didn't reply after I > fixed them. Committed. Sorry that it got missed in my inbox, and thanks for notifying again. Li-Wen ___ 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"
Zoneminder update: looking for a committer
Hello, looking for a committer for https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250234 @lwhsu had pointed me to some issues, however he didn't reply after I fixed them. ___ 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: Donation to Foundation for Poudriere /opt builds! (Bounty?)
On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 03:47:06PM +0900, Tatsuki Makino wrote: > The rewriting there is done by function update_version_env in file > /your_localbase/share/poudriere/jail.sh, so if you want to automate it, > you need to change it. Hrm. I added sed -e "s/:path=/&\/opt /" before the cap_mkdb, but that seemed not to modify the existing file in the jail. I modified it by hand and I see the modification still in place after another broken build, so I assume that's correct. The file now appears has this: :path=/opt/bin /opt/sbin /sbin /bin /usr/sbin /usr/bin /usr/local/sbin /usr/local/bin ~/bin:\ I have LOCALBASE set in poudriere.conf. I get a different break if I set PREFIX in that file. I'd love to see someone's positive test result of such a build, as I'm starting to suspect it's simply not possible without some bug correction. The bit that makes me uncertain is that it's documented as working. -- Mason Loring Bliss ma...@blisses.orghttp://blisses.org/ For more enjoyment and greater efficiency, consumption is being standardized. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: What are the benefits of NO_ARCH?
On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 01:41:54PM +0100, Mateusz Piotrowski wrote: > On 11/3/20 11:24 AM, Mateusz Piotrowski wrote: > > On 11/2/20 3:50 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 03:48:34PM +0100, Stefan Esser wrote: > > > > Am 02.11.20 um 15:33 schrieb Mateusz Piotrowski: > > > > > I wonder if setting NO_ARCH=yes brings any significant benefits to how > > > > > our ports collection works. I'd be grateful if you could shed some > > > > > light > > > > > on the importance of setting NO_ARCH whenever possible. > > > > NO_ARCH means that there is no need to build packages for each of the > > > > supported architectures, e.g. for pure interpreted scripts or data files > > > > that do not depend on byte-order and word-size (e.g. many font file > > > > formats). > > > > > > > > The result is reduced resources spent on building the packages, network > > > > traffic, disk space on mirrors and on distribution media. > > > Yes that is the goal, in practice it is not yet the case, so it is purely > > > informational, but that what we are aiming at yes. > > > > Thanks! > > > I've added a note to the porter's handbook based on the information you > provided: > > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/doc?view=revision=54671 > I think you have been a little too fast. The point of no arch is not only that. pkg checks if a package is a valid ABI for the system it will install to. This is done via globing on the ABI variable. When a package is set to NO_ARCH: you end up this is line: "FreeBSD:13:*" meaning the package can actually be installed on any freebsd 13 system. so it is already useful as of today. what Stefan describe is other things we might benefit one day thanks to have the NO_ARCH packages already in the futur. best regards, Bapt signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: What are the benefits of NO_ARCH?
On 11/3/20 11:24 AM, Mateusz Piotrowski wrote: On 11/2/20 3:50 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 03:48:34PM +0100, Stefan Esser wrote: Am 02.11.20 um 15:33 schrieb Mateusz Piotrowski: I wonder if setting NO_ARCH=yes brings any significant benefits to how our ports collection works. I'd be grateful if you could shed some light on the importance of setting NO_ARCH whenever possible. NO_ARCH means that there is no need to build packages for each of the supported architectures, e.g. for pure interpreted scripts or data files that do not depend on byte-order and word-size (e.g. many font file formats). The result is reduced resources spent on building the packages, network traffic, disk space on mirrors and on distribution media. Yes that is the goal, in practice it is not yet the case, so it is purely informational, but that what we are aiming at yes. Thanks! I've added a note to the porter's handbook based on the information you provided: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/doc?view=revision=54671 ___ 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: What are the benefits of NO_ARCH?
On 11/2/20 3:50 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 03:48:34PM +0100, Stefan Esser wrote: Am 02.11.20 um 15:33 schrieb Mateusz Piotrowski: I wonder if setting NO_ARCH=yes brings any significant benefits to how our ports collection works. I'd be grateful if you could shed some light on the importance of setting NO_ARCH whenever possible. NO_ARCH means that there is no need to build packages for each of the supported architectures, e.g. for pure interpreted scripts or data files that do not depend on byte-order and word-size (e.g. many font file formats). The result is reduced resources spent on building the packages, network traffic, disk space on mirrors and on distribution media. Yes that is the goal, in practice it is not yet the case, so it is purely informational, but that what we are aiming at yes. 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"
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 +-+ math/wxmaxima | 20.04.0 | version-20.11.0 +-+ 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"
