Bug 196233
Last month I spoke with the maintainer of mail/postfixadmin and they agreed to let me take maintainership since, citing lack of time. I put in a bug[1] for it, but he hasn't answered the maintainer CC yet. Can someone please follow this up and commit the change so I can put in the updates to follow? 1: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196233 ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Discrepancy in postgresql entry in UPDATING
On 12/16/2014 2:51 AM, Francois Tigeot wrote: With pg_upgrade, I found the best method to be: - locally build the two postgres versions you're interested in from the Postgres distfiles. - run pg_upgrade from one of them and don't bother with the packages. I hadn't thought about that. I could just build them in the ports tree and leave them staged. Thanks! ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Discrepancy in postgresql entry in UPDATING
The entry reads: 20141208: AFFECTS: users of databases/postgresql??-(server|client) AUTHOR: mar...@freebsd.org PostgreSQL version 9.3 is now the default. To upgrade from a version lower than 9.3, follow the instructions on the PostgreSQL.org website. http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/interactive/upgrading.html Please note that the pg_upgrade program is installed by the databases/postgresql93-contrib port When using binary packages, if you only use the client port, you can issue the following command to follow the default version: # pkg set -o databases/postgresql92-client:databases/postgresql93-client The problem is pg_upgrade requires both the old and new versions be installed concurrently--something pkg/ports can't do. So how are we supposed to upgrade? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Unbound/NSD rc startup order
On 12/11/2014 11:53 PM, Matt Smith wrote: Somebody has let me know that I made an obvious mistake in the above. I meant that the default rcorder is to run Unbound first followed by NSD. So to clarify I think in the default situation Unbound starts first, contacts NSD and gets no answer because it hasn't been started yet and then fails in some way. Whereas if NSD is running first then Unbound is happy. Unbound requires SERVERS, but nsd requires LOGIN, a much later checkpoint. The fix would be adding an rcorder override mechanism whereby one could specify additional constraints (like unbound REQUIRE nsd). If there's interest for this, I can see about a patch. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: How to create a port with uncompressed distfile?
On 11/27/2014 4:41 AM, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote:
Hello,
i'm nearly done with the new port. But i have a last problem.
In short the installation procedure:
- downloading the .phar file
- copying the .phar file into stagedir (because its the complete programm)
- renaming the file from phpunit-$version.phar to phpunit (without
suffix)
- setting +x rights to phpunit
The last one i did not get right. I believe i have to use
${INSTALL_PROGRAM} but i make something wrong. Can somebody help?
Add STRIP= as a line after the NO_BUILD line, then in the do-install
target:
${INSTALL_PROGRAM} ${WRKSRC}/${DISTNAME}${EXTRACT_SUFX} \
${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/bin/phpunit
The stage dir is created for you.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Reducing the size of the ports tree (brainstorm v2)
On 11/6/2014 8:35 PM, Freddie Cash wrote: I know there was talk about it in the recent past, but has the export the svn revision of the ports tree used to build packages feature been added to the repo metadata? That would eliminate a lot of the issues associated with mixing ports and packages, as one could use the same ports tree locally as was used to build official packages. Seconded. Please, PLEASE implement this. It would mean that I could run poudrerie off the same ports tree as the public repo and overlay customized packages without worrying about dependency version conflicts. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Reducing the size of the ports tree (brainstorm v2)
On 11/4/2014 2:28 PM, Chris H wrote: On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 13:21:31 -0800 Chris H bsd-li...@bsdforge.com wrote gpart(8) -a gives you what you need. If it's truly as bad as all that, mounting the ports tree on a 512k aligned slice will reduce the slack ahem... that was s/512k/512b/g The issue of 512b sector storage media going underlies this discussion. 4k drives are the new typical. Flash uses even larger block sizes. Using an alignment of less than one sector yields significant performance penalties when doing small reads or writes. The on-disk size of the ports tree more than doubles when using 4k blocks because all those files use 4k to store what often fits in 512b. Cutting down the number of files has wide-reaching performance gains with subversion as well. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Reducing the size of the ports tree (brainstorm v2)
On 11/1/2014 2:20 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: However, I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to create one file which includes all of the other bits of port infrastructure. This should be a text format that people can read easily and manipulate with a text editor or standard unix tools. Something like UCL might be a good choice. That sounds dangerously close to reinventing SRPM. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Reducing the size of the ports tree (brainstorm v2)
On 10/31/2014 11:56 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
tijl@ spotted an interesting point, distinfo and pkg-descr files files
convenient are taking a lot of space for free, we can reduce the size of the
while ports tree by a factor 2 by simply merging them into one of the other
files (Makefile and/or pkg-plist) from my testing it really devides
significantly the size of the tree.
Ideas I got so far only concerns pkg-descr:
Adding an entry in the Makefile for the WWW:
WWW= bla
or an entry in the plist: @www http...
I really do like
DESCR=Some relatively short amount of text that describes the port \
in more detail than COMMENT can do. This could be multiple \
sentences and broken across lines.
We have multi-line entries all over the place with things like long
commands in pre- and post-install targets. Since pkg-descr tends to be
a write-once file, I think it's a pretty tiny amount of pain for shaving
off that many files. If you're really are worried about making
maintainers do non-natural line breaks for readability, add a make
reflowdescr target or add something to porttools that does it for us.
The reason I like having this stuff in the Makefile is that you can do
something like this:
# make -C /usr/ports/foo/bar -V DESCR
Concerning the distinfo I have no idea.
Could we do something similar to dependency lists? For example:
DISTINFO= example1.tbz:size:{SHA256}hash \
example2.tar.gz:size:{SHA256}hash
In the simple case where DISTFILES is one generated filename:
DISTINFO= ${DISTFILES}:size:{SHA256}hash
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Tor web browser
On 7/27/2014 12:30 PM, Jerry wrote: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 15:24:21 -0400 Is there a port of the Tor web browser https://www.torproject.org/ available? The site lists one for BSD, but I would prefer to get it via the port's system I think the reason it isn't in ports is because it's literally just a portable Firefox with a premade profile. You can replicate it using parts already in ports and a few minutes work creating a Firefox profile. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Keeping my ports tree in sync with the public pkg repo
On 6/12/2014 6:42 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 06:11:13AM -0700, Darren Pilgrim wrote: Is there a way to determine the ports tree revision used for the current public pkg repo? Right now you have no way but knowing that we take a snapshot of the ports tree at 1am UTC every wednesday and build on it I'll cron the svn update to coincide. That should make the race window narrow enough to be mostly avoided. With pkg 1.3 we will add some metadata to the repo specifying the revision used We also to plan to add a ports package so pkg install ports will install the ports tree used to build the packages Oh nice! Exposing the revision number would be a really useful bit of info. I could easily grab that and feed it to svn. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Keeping my ports tree in sync with the public pkg repo
Is there a way to determine the ports tree revision used for the current public pkg repo? Like any moderately complex system, I have a mix of stock and custom packages. When I go to update stuff, I'll check out the current ports tree and fire off poudrerie to build what I need. There's a race condition: if more than a day or two elapse between when the public pkg repo was last refreshed and when I check out the ports tree, there's a good chance the version in ports and version of the available package don't match. This is particularly true right now because of all the movement from staging and other recent framework changes. The result is portmaster gives me hell. I'll go to rebuild, say, perl or php using portmaster and it will tell me something I've installed from pkgs needs to be updated. I then go check pkg update and it says it's up to date. There are workarounds, but pkg lock shell games are fragile and I really dislike having stock builds of libxml, numerous build tools, vim-lite, etc. in my private repos. If I could check out the same ports tree the package building cluster used, I'd avoid the issue entirely. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RELEASE_x_y_EOL ports tags [Was: Re: Who was the mental genius]
On 6/5/2014 6:05 PM, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 15:09:53 -0500
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
That decided it was a good idea to completely break ports to force
people to upgrade? You couldn't come up with a warning system
instead of outright breaking ports? The idiots are apparently
running the asylum. {{sigh}}
this is the reason why I am asking for versions on the ports tree since
a decade. Ok, we have the revision now. Just go back in the revision
until it works. It is a good practice to make a note of the revision of
the running ports tree you have before updating it.
We do have that. We have RELEASE_X_EOL tags that identify the last
known-good ports tree for a given major branch. Unfortunately, this
time the break happened in the middle of the 8.x lifespan, so there is
no handy EOL tag.
Perhaps a RELEASE_x_y_EOL tag would be a useful thing to add whenever
there is a break like this? It certainly would be an easier mnemonic to
say check out the RELEASE_8_3_EOL tag instead of check out R112358.
Hell, the prior's even self-documenting if someone happened to stumble
across http://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/tags/.
We already have tags going back through 20 years of releases (just in
case you want a ports tree that works with release 2.0.5) and an
established policy of tagging for last known good at the major level.
I don't think a few more tags are going to hurt if it saves someone
the hassle of dancing up to the line of an API/ABI break.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: [FreeBSD-Announce] FreeBSD bug tracking moves from GNATS to Bugzilla
On 6/3/2014 7:50 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: On 6/3/14, 5:16 AM, David Chisnall wrote: On 3 Jun 2014, at 13:09, Vitaly Magerya vmage...@gmail.com wrote: It doesn't seem to be possible to post comments (or bugs) without creating an account and logging in. That is correct. The current leaning is towards not providing such functionality as: - It makes spamming easy - If someone can't be bothered to make an account, they are unlikely to provide the feedback required to correctly diagnose the bug. I don't know that this decision is final, but it's certainly unlikely to be high up the priority list to implement it. For FreeBSD 11, we'd like to have an HTTP-based send-pr replacement, which will not be able to enforce a valid email address, but which will at least request one. Although, again, we'll have to be careful to prevent it from being used as a spam tool (send a pr claiming to be from a different email address with a spam message and that person gets notified) and so it will likely add the bug to a private queue where it can be checked for spam before appearing in the main db. Volunteers to be spam filters welcome... I think a bunch of this can be solved by using oauth or something like it. aka: login via github or facebook/twitter. No, no, no, no, no, no. Also, hell no, and good god, man, are you daft? Requiring oauth will literally guarantee me and a whole bunch of other people will never have bugzilla accounts. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: mail/dovecot2-pigeonhole does not fetch
This is still the case. It looks like Dovecot updated to 2.2.13 and pigeonhole to 0.4.3, and they took down the 0.4.2 distfile. Can we get the 0.4.2 distfile hosted on ftp.freebsd.org until the maintainer updates the ports? On 5/15/2014 8:12 PM, Darren Pilgrim wrote: I'm trying to update to v0.4.2, but I get: # make === License LGPL21 accepted by the user === dovecot-pigeonhole-0.4.2_3 depends on file: /usr/local/sbin/pkg - found = dovecot-2.2-pigeonhole-0.4.2.tar.gz doesn't seem to exist in /usr/ports/distfiles/. = Attempting to fetch http://www.rename-it.nl/dovecot/2.2/dovecot-2.2-pigeonhole-0.4.2.tar.gz fetch: http://www.rename-it.nl/dovecot/2.2/dovecot-2.2-pigeonhole-0.4.2.tar.gz: Not Found = Attempting to fetch http://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/distfiles/dovecot-2.2-pigeonhole-0.4.2.tar.gz fetch: http://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/distfiles/dovecot-2.2-pigeonhole-0.4.2.tar.gz: Not Found = Couldn't fetch it - please try to retrieve this = port manually into /usr/ports/distfiles/ and try again. *** Error code 1 Stop. make: stopped in /usr/ports/mail/dovecot2-pigeonhole -- Lasko Printing, Inc. 503.232.6208 phone 503.232.7295 fax 110 N Page St Portland OR, 97227 www.laskoprinting.com ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ports requiring OpenSSL not honouring OpenSSL from ports
On 4/30/2014 12:48 PM, Michael Grimm wrote: [CC'd to freebsd-ports] On 28.04.2014, at 00:50, Jamie Landeg-Jones ja...@dyslexicfish.net wrote: Scot Hetzel swhet...@gmail.com wrote: Here's a list of some that link against /lib/libcrypto.so.7 and/or /lib/libssl.so.7 [...] devel/android-tools-adb net-p2p/transmission-cli net-p2p/transmission-daemon net/socat net/svnup ports-mgmt/pkg security/john security/scrypt security/trousers sysutils/tarsnap + www/nginx Nginx respects WITH_OPENSSL_PORT. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ports/182985 maintainer timeout
On 3/7/2014 4:52 AM, Mark Felder wrote:
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014, at 1:49, Scot Hetzel wrote:
Darren is correct, the intent of bsd.openssl.mk is to build using the
security/openssl port when WITH_OPENSSL_PORT is defined in
/etc/make.conf by the local administrator. What the www/nginx port
does is it forces the build to always use the base version when
${OSVERSION} = 128 by setting WITH_OPENSSL_BASE. The port should
not be doing this.
Correct, but I did not cover that scenario as he did not initially
indicate he was setting WITH_OPENSSL_PORT in his make.conf :-)
Now that this is clear we should be able to get this resolved.
I hate to nag about this, but can we get this fixed sometime soon? In
the three weeks since Mark's email, osa updated the port to 1.4.7, but
didn't bother fixing this issue. What happened to this being a
showstopper in a major port?
Regards,
Darren Pilgrim
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: freebsd-update wants to update to version I'm running
On 3/9/2014 6:43 PM, LuKreme wrote: # uname -a FreeBSD ns1.covisp.net 8.4-RELEASE-p7 FreeBSD 8.4-RELEASE-p7 #0: Sat Jan 11 01:45:47 UTC 2014 root@amd64-builde r.daemonology.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 # freebsd-update -r 9.0-RELEASE fetch Looking up update.FreeBSD.org mirrors... 5 mirrors found. Fetching metadata signature for 8.4-RELEASE from update2.freebsd.org... done. Fetching metadata index... done. Inspecting system... done. Preparing to download files... done. The following files will be updated as part of updating to 8.4-RELEASE-p7: ^C I get the same when I try without a -r setting as well. The -r flag only applies to the 'upgrade' command. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ports/182985 maintainer timeout
Can someone please look at this and commit the fix? I've had no
response and the issue means the nginx is broken for the best practices
case.
On 2/28/2014 3:09 PM, Darren Pilgrim wrote:
A recent change to the www/nginx Makefile broke the port for the case
where you have the OpenSSL port installed on FreeBSD 10. The breakage
is due to incorrectly setting WITH_OPENSSL_BASE and the fix is to remove
two lines in the Makefile:
--- Makefile.old2014-01-30 02:01:51.0 -0800
+++ Makefile2014-02-06 16:02:21.385735156 -0800
@@ -850,8 +850,6 @@
.if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MSPDY}
.if ${OSVERSION} 128
WITH_OPENSSL_PORT= yes
-.else
-WITH_OPENSSL_BASE= yes
.endif
.endif
.endif
Osa didn't reply to my email back on February 6 and there hasn't been
any reponse at all to the issue when it was raised in the PR almost two
months ago. Would some kind commiter please push this fix?
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ports/182985 maintainer timeout
On 3/6/2014 3:07 PM, Mark Felder wrote: Hi Darren, I'm trying to understand exactly what we're looking at here. Is the problem: nginx always builds against OpenSSL in base (for FreeBSD 10+?) ? If so, that's correct; it should not build against OpenSSL from ports just because the version from ports happens to be installed. No, actually, that's exactly what it should do. If I install OpenSSL from ports and set WITH_OPENSSL_PORT in /etc/make.conf, the express intent is to require all OpenSSL-using ports to link to the ports version. Nginx with SPDY needs NPN, which means OpenSSL 1.0.1 or later. Thus for 9.x and earlier we need to set WITH_OPENSSL_PORT. For 10.0 and later, both versions will work, so the correct behaviour for nginx is to say it does not specifically require either by not setting either WITH_OPENSSL_* variable. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
ports/182985 maintainer timeout
A recent change to the www/nginx Makefile broke the port for the case
where you have the OpenSSL port installed on FreeBSD 10. The breakage
is due to incorrectly setting WITH_OPENSSL_BASE and the fix is to remove
two lines in the Makefile:
--- Makefile.old2014-01-30 02:01:51.0 -0800
+++ Makefile2014-02-06 16:02:21.385735156 -0800
@@ -850,8 +850,6 @@
.if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MSPDY}
.if ${OSVERSION} 128
WITH_OPENSSL_PORT= yes
-.else
-WITH_OPENSSL_BASE= yes
.endif
.endif
.endif
Osa didn't reply to my email back on February 6 and there hasn't been
any reponse at all to the issue when it was raised in the PR almost two
months ago. Would some kind commiter please push this fix?
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
pkgng: Unable to find catalogs, packages are Not Found or failed checksum from repository
I'm running into pkgng errors on all of my systems: # pkg update -f Updating repository catalogue digests.txz 100% 1081KB 1.1MB/s 1.1MB/s 00:00 packagesite.txz 100% 5037KB 4.9MB/s 4.9MB/s 00:01 Incremental update completed, 23128 packages processed: 2654 packages updated, 226 removed and 523 added. pkg: Unable to find catalogs If I tell pkg install to skip the catalog update, I get: # pkg install -yU devel/subversion The following 6 packages will be installed: Installing gdbm: 1.10 Installing db42: 4.2.52_5 Installing sqlite3: 3.8.0.2 Installing apr: 1.4.8.1.5.3 Installing serf: 1.3.2_1 Installing subversion: 1.8.5 The installation will require 33 MB more space 5 MB to be downloaded pkg: http://pkg.FreeBSD.org/freebsd:9:x86:32/latest/All/gdbm-1.10.txz: Not Found On a system that happens to already have some of those dependencies installed: # pkg install -yU devel/subversion The following 4 packages will be installed: Installing apr: 1.4.8.1.5.3 Installing sqlite3: 3.8.0.2 Installing serf: 1.3.2_1 Installing subversion: 1.8.5 The installation will require 18 MB more space 3 MB to be downloaded apr-1.4.8.1.5.3.txz 100% 385KB 385.1KB/s 385.1KB/s 00:00 pkg: apr-1.4.8.1.5.3 failed checksum from repository I've tried multiple ports and they all do the same (not found or failed checksum). One of the systems is 9.1-p6 amd64, the other four are 9.2-R amd64. All of the systems have pkg-1.2.4_1 installed. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Seeking new maintainer for sysutils/3dm
I just retired the last of my 3ware hardware and as such can no longer do the basic functionality testing required. The port has special distfiles I host. I can continue to host them indefinitely, but it would likely be easier if the new maintainer took over hosting them. Is there someone out there who wants to take over maintainership of this port? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On 11/16/2013 8:25 AM, Eitan Adler wrote: On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Melvyn Sopacua mel...@magemana.nl wrote: 2) If meta-information is moved to pkg-descr, it might be worthwhile to add some knowledge about formats and restrictions to portlint. If we go this route I would *strongly* prefer that we do not invent our own format. We should use an existing format. (I don't care which one: YAML, JSON, ...) ? Which both require parsing libraries. We don't need that and neither does anything else that might want to read the ports tree and extract this information. This is easily implemented with simple keywords: We have WWW: in pkg-descr. So add License:, Vendor:, etc. to pkg-descr. That's parseable using the regex or literal matching built into every scripting language, most programming languages, and your average human. If you want to carry on about using an existing format, the above is CSV (character-separated values)--one of the most well-established and well-supported file formats in existence. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On 11/16/2013 2:08 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Darren Pilgrim list_free...@bluerosetech.com wrote: On 11/16/2013 8:25 AM, Eitan Adler wrote: That's parseable using the regex or literal matching built into every scripting language, most programming languages, and your average human. Sure, but it requires extra tooling to make it work. I don't care which file the data are stored in, I just (a) don't want it to be free form (b) want it to be in some standard format. If you want to carry on about using an existing format, the above is CSV (character-separated values)--one of the most well-established and well-supported file formats in existence. Eh, the format proposed does not even come close to RFC 4180 (CSV). Heh. Pre-coffee brain failure. :) It is, however, the same format used for headers is pretty much everything. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Determining file size of port source
On 11/13/2013 3:15 PM, Joe Nosay wrote: ls -lh -D Byte does not give me the exact byte size of the archive. What is the correct command? The makesum target will create distinfo for you. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
pkgng: How do I upgrade a single package?
Now that we have a repo, I want to start using binary packages for the numerous dependencies I have to install on pretty much every system: autotools, ca_root_nss, cmake-modules, gettext, glib, libtool, m4, etc. But `pkg upgrade` only asks me to upgrade everything at once. This absolutely won't work on any of my systems because I need non-default options on a few ports and therefore must compile those. But I don't want to compile everything from source. For example, of the 193 ports installed my home server, I set non-default options on only 15 of them. Everything else I can install as a binary package and save myself a HUGE amount of time. How do update individual ports from pkgng packages? Can I just install the new version over top of the old one? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
ports/182357: Delete mail/squirrelmail-postfixadmin-plugin port
Would someone commit this please? Thanks ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: [RELEASE - 83amd64-default][mail/squirrelmail-postfixadmin-plugin] Build failed for squirrelmail-postfixadmin-plugin-2.3.0_3 during run-depends
On 9/11/2013 1:01 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: A quick fix here is to mark squirrelmail as not package friendly for now. Do you want me to do that? # make -C /usr/ports/mail/squirrelmail maintainer ad...@freebsd.org You're asking the wrong person. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: setting the password of a automatically created account
On 9/5/2013 9:00 PM, Aryeh Friedman wrote: related questions: 1. How do I add the user to wheel (has it's own group but needs to be in wheel for reason number #2)? 2. How do I modify (in the safest possible way) an other port's installed config file(s) (namely I need to in the case of this port modify /usr/local/etc/sudoers to allow the no password option for wheel members)? The answer to both is you don't. Include documentation telling the admin exactly what needs special access or elevated priveleges and let the admin make that happen. If you think something needs root because it needs to open something in /dev, tell the admin it needs to do something with /dev/foo. Devd and other mechanisms can provide that without root access. The same idea applies to almost all of what people typically think requires root access. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: setting the password of a automatically created account
On 9/5/2013 6:52 PM, Aryeh Friedman wrote: I have a port that needs to create a a user of a given name and a given default password... I found in the porters guide how to make the account but not set the password Because you must not do that. You can't even reliably do that. There are many cases where setting the password via any locally-available method will not work. Some examples: - The site uses LDAP, AD, etc. and the local system does not have the PAM configuration to feed back password changes; - Passwd, pw, etc. are disabled and users may only change their password at a secure portal; - Users may not change their passwords at all; - The system doesn't use user passwords at all. That last is common in in internet-facing servers, where login access is keys-only ssh and/or root-only console as a countermeasure against dictionary attacks. Your port can't detect these policies and can't work around them. The best you can do is include documentation stating what needs access above a login-disabled pseudouser. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
I got poudriere PHP port build errors, but the error isn't in my port
My port: mail/squirrelmail-postfixadmin-plugin
Over the last two days I have received five Build failed messages from
pkg-fallout, one each for {83,91}{amd64,i386} and head. The messages
are quite long, but the juicy bits are below. The [...] indicates a
gap in the log.
===phase: run-depends
=== squirrelmail-postfixadmin-plugin-2.3.0_3 depends on package:
ZendFramework=1.9.0 - not found
=== Installing existing package /packages/All/ZendFramework-1.12.0_1.txz
[...]
Installing php5-5.4.19...done
Zend pulls in PHP 5, but grabs the default PHP 5.4 instead of PHP 5.3,
(what squirrelmail needs).
=== Returning to build of squirrelmail-postfixadmin-plugin-2.3.0_3
=== squirrelmail-postfixadmin-plugin-2.3.0_3 depends on file:
/usr/local/www/squirrelmail/index.php - not found
===Verifying install for /usr/local/www/squirrelmail/index.php in
/usr/ports/mail/squirrelmail
=== Installing existing package /packages/All/squirrelmail-1.4.22_3.txz
Installing squirrelmail-1.4.22_3...
Installing php53-session-5.3.27...
Installing php53-5.3.27...
pkg: php53-5.3.27 conflicts with php5-5.4.19 (installs files into the
same place).
Problematic file: /usr/local/bin/php
So PHP is already present, but rather that use it or throw an error
about it being the wrong version, it tries to install 5.3. That seems
broken.
Is there something I need to fix in my port or the squirrelmail
maintainer needs to fix in theirs?
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Growing list of required(ish) ports
On 2013-04-08 08:26, Freddie Cash wrote: The really hard part is coming up with a migration path for those who upgrade via source builds. It already exists: 1. Update to release that doesn't include $thing; 2. make -C /usr/src delete-old delete-old-libs; 3. Install $thing or $thing_alternative from ports if you need it. Step 3 can be done before steps 1 and 2 thanks to FreeBSD having a sane filesystem hierarchy. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Growing list of required(ish) ports
On 2013-04-08 10:22, Florent Peterschmitt wrote: Yep, OpenSSH is tiny enought to keep it in base system. It would be a big loss not to have it by default, securely installed in the base system. I really wish it wasn't. Having OpenSSH (and thus OpenSSL) in the base means FreeBSD has an outdated version installed by default. You have to install openssl from ports in order to have modern cipher support, TLS v1.1/1.2, DTLS, etc. This puts two sets of openssl libs on the system and creates recurrent headaches with builds where the autoconfiguration selects the wrong set of libs. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
pkgng info command: -d overrides -r?
With pkg_info, I can get a list of ports requiring and depended on by a given port by doing `pkg_info -rR`. In pkgNG, the equivalent would be `pkg info -dr`, but there appears to be a problem giving -d and -r at the same time. For example: # pkg info -r postgresql-client-9.2.3 postgresql-client-9.2.3 is required by: postgresql-server-9.2.3 # pkg info -d postgresql-client-9.2.3 postgresql-client-9.2.3 depends on: pkgconf-0.8.9 libiconv-1.14 libxml2-2.7.8_5 gettext-0.18.1.1 So the output of -dr should be something like this: # pkg info -dr postgresql-client-9.2.3 postgresql-client-9.2.3 depends on: pkgconf-0.8.9 libiconv-1.14 libxml2-2.7.8_5 gettext-0.18.1.1 postgresql-client-9.2.3 is required by: postgresql-server-9.2.3 But instead I get this: # pkg info -dr postgresql-client-9.2.3 postgresql-client-9.2.3 depends on: pkgconf-0.8.9 libiconv-1.14 libxml2-2.7.8_5 gettext-0.18.1.1 # pkg info -rd postgresql-client-9.2.3 postgresql-client-9.2.3 depends on: pkgconf-0.8.9 libiconv-1.14 libxml2-2.7.8_5 gettext-0.18.1.1 It looks like pkg ignores -r if -d is given, but the two shouldn't be exclusive. Am I missing something? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Would someone please commit ports/176156?
It was approved by the maintainer a week ago, but hasn't been committed yet. If someone would pick this one up soon it would be appreciated, thanks. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: State of pkgng?
On 2013-02-20 19:08, andrew clarke wrote: On Wed 2013-02-20 17:45:52 UTC-0800, Darren Pilgrim (list_free...@bluerosetech.com) wrote: Reading the pkgng page on the wiki: As a consequence of the security incident on 11th November 2012, for the time being pre-compiled packages for pkgng are not available from any official FreeBSD repository. [...] Target dates for when service may be resumed have not been released. Is that still the case? Is pkgng presently a non-starter? Just to be clear, pkgng is not broken. You can still use it with the Ports tree or use it to install locally-built packages. I wasn't clear on that point. Thanks. No, pkgng integrates perfectly with Ports. I have WITH_PKGNG=yes on almost all of my systems. I was following up about the package repo, which is still empty. I do like the speed increase of pkg-version over pkg_version. What can the lowly sysadmin do to speed up getting the pkgng package repo? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
State of pkgng?
Setting up a new server tonight, decided to do it up with pkgng from the start: 1. portsnapped a tree 2. installed pkg just fine from ports 3. added WITH_PKGNG=yes to /etc/make.conf 4. cp /usr/local/etc/pkg.conf.sample /usr/local/etc/pkg.conf Then it broke: # pkg update Updating repository catalogue pkg: http://pkg.freebsd.org/freebsd:9:x86:64/latest/repo.txz: No address record Reading the pkgng page on the wiki: As a consequence of the security incident on 11th November 2012, for the time being pre-compiled packages for pkgng are not available from any official FreeBSD repository. [...] Target dates for when service may be resumed have not been released. Is that still the case? Is pkgng presently a non-starter? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: State of pkgng?
On 2013-02-20 18:19, meta wrote: Probably, the repository is pkgbeta.freebsd.org currently. You just type `pkg` before installing pkg from ports pkg bootstrap runs. If you install pkg in this way, 'pkgbeta.freebsd.org' is written in pkg.conf . pkgbeta just has pkg and poudriere in it, though. Ah well, back to pkg:TOS for me. :) ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: When was the last ports tree that worked with RELENG_6?
On 2013-02-16 08:06, Chris Rees wrote: I think you may have some luck installing an up to date make(1) and dialog(1) (or set NO_DIALOG=yes in make.conf) from stable/9 or similar; many of the problems on 6 are caused by missing variable modifiers. I built and installed make from a RELENG_8_3 src tree. Getting dialog was a bit harder because it requires libdialog and libncurses. I built a static-linked dialog on an RELENG_8_3 box and dropped that in place. Seems to all be working fine now (updating ports to . as we speak). Thanks! ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: When was the last ports tree that worked with RELENG_6?
On 2013-02-18 16:22, Darren Pilgrim wrote: On 2013-02-16 08:06, Chris Rees wrote: I think you may have some luck installing an up to date make(1) and dialog(1) (or set NO_DIALOG=yes in make.conf) from stable/9 or similar; many of the problems on 6 are caused by missing variable modifiers. I built and installed make from a RELENG_8_3 src tree. Getting dialog was a bit harder because it requires libdialog and libncurses. I built a static-linked dialog on an RELENG_8_3 box and dropped that in place. Actually it appears the dialog binary doesn't work at all because I forgot the 6.x can't run an 8.x binary. Without a working dialog binary, the ports system silently fails. I did a make config on a port and it just gave me options unchanged and completed the config target without giving an error. Make (even with an 8.3 make) complains of malformed conditionals in the src/gnu subtree, so I'm stuck on that one until I have time to dig. Reverting /usr/bin/dialog to the RELENG_6 binary makes config dialogs in ports work just fine. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
When was the last ports tree that worked with RELENG_6?
I have an old 6.4-R machine which I can take as far as RELENG_6, but no further due to a hardware-support issue (special hardware, third party driver). The hardware needs to live a while yet, so I'd like to try to get the installed ports as up to date as possible. The current ports tree doesn't work on 6.x, so I need to find the last version of the ports tree that does work. The ports tree on the box is *newer* than the one tagged RELEASE_6_EOL, so it's not that simple. The current tree was pulled 2012-Feb-21 10:38 UTC and I know it works. It looks like the RELEASE_8_3_0 tree (2012-March-7) also works based on some very basic testing. Does anyone when the ports tree broke for 6.x? Alternately, if someone knows what it was that (first) broke the tree for 6.x, I can easily hunt down commits and find a predated tree that works. Was it the optionsNG stuff? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: When was the last ports tree that worked with RELENG_6?
On 2013-02-16 08:06, Chris Rees wrote: I'm pretty certain that ports on 6.X was broken with OPTIONSng (r297660), but I seem to remember that other compatibility was ripped out before then; perhaps Mark can clarify. r259629 specifically talks about removing 6.3 shims, but that is way before. 259629 is long before ports trees I know work and a quick read of the commit says it's about 6.3-R and older only. I think you may have some luck installing an up to date make(1) and dialog(1) (or set NO_DIALOG=yes in make.conf) from stable/9 or similar; many of the problems on 6 are caused by missing variable modifiers. I'll try this, thanks. Wisdom gained to follow. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Skype 4.0
On 2012-06-15 14:25, Robert Simmons wrote: On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rich Neeser.ne...@gmail.com wrote: I just wish skype would get off their buts and make a bsd version. time to break code and make a opensource version That's not the answer. Really, everyone needs to move away from Skype altogether. Use Blink. It is a superior client and it uses SIP rather than Skype's network. Making a FreeBSD port of it has been on my list of things to do for quite a while, I just haven't had the time. Skype supports video calls. According to AG Projects' website, Blink is a VoIP app with IM features added, no video. Is this not the case? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: mail/postfix-policy-spf-perl Server configuration problem
On 2011-11-04 10:32, David Southwell wrote: If the following lines appear in main.cf check_policy_service unix:private/policyd-spf spf-policyd_time_limit = 3600s In the following context smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks,reject_unauth_destination check_policy_service unix:private/policyd-spf spf-policyd_time_limit = 3600s You don't define spf-policyd_time_limit as part of the restriction, it's a separate setting. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: This construction doesn't work
Paul Schmehl wrote:
I'm working on a port update for one of the ports that I maintain, and I've run
into a problem that I can't seem to solve.
I use this construction to ensure that the port doesn't overwrite the conf
file, if one exists:
.for f in barnyard2.conf
${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/etc/${f} ${PREFIX}/etc/${f}-sample
[ -f ${PREFIX}/etc/${f} ] || \
${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/etc/${f} ${PREFIX}/etc/${f}
.endfor
But it gets overwritten anyway. What am I doing wrong? I thought this worked
before, but I can't be sure. Testing proves that it does not work now. I
tried to changing to an if [ ! -f construction, but that didn't do a thing.
Instead of doing this in Makefile, do it in pkg-plist:
@unexec if cmp -s %D/etc/barnyard2.conf.sample %D/etc/barnyard2.conf;
then rm -f %D/etc/barnyard2.conf; fi
etc/barnyard2.conf.sample
@exec if [ ! -f %D/etc/barnyard2.conf ] ; then cp -p %D/%F
%D/etc/barnyard2.conf chmod 600 %D/etc/barnyard2.conf; fi
Relevant section of the Porter's Handbook:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/plist-config.html
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Call for testers: sysutils/3dm
I need testers for an update to the sysutils/3dm port. If you want to help test the patch, begin by downloading it from here: http://vivi.cat.pdx.edu/3dm2/sysutils_3dm.patch.txt You can apply the patch by issuing the command: cd /usr/ports/sysutils/3dm patch /path/to/sysutils_3dm.patch.txt The updated port should install v2.11.00.009 on 7.x and earlier and v2.09.01.004 on 8.x and later. Please test the port installs, runs and functions correctly. When reporting, please include the following information: - RAID controller model - FreeBSD version (be specific, uname -r output is good) - OS architecture (i386 or amd64) - Outcome of test If you're reporting a problem, please include complete logging/output of the error message(s). ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
How to port something requiring different versions depending on OSVERSION?
I maintain the sysutils/3dm port. The port installs a binary-only package provided by 3ware (now LSI). The binary provided is a 5.4-R, static-linked binary which requires KSE. Because it's static-linked, there is no legacy KSE support workaround. Yes, LSI is aware of the problem. No, they haven't fixed it yet (they don't officially support 8.0). No, I can't get source. Yes, the port is currently marked BROKEN for RELENG_8 and later. Here's my dilemna: If I install the latest version of 3dm2, the port won't run on RELENG_8 and later. If I install v2.01.09.004 (the last version that doesn't require KSE), the port will run on all versions of FreeBSD but lack proper support for current-model cards--the 9690 and 9750 series. Option 1: Detect the OS version, install the latest version if running 8.x and install 2.01.09.004 if =8.x. I can't find anything in the Porter's Handbook that explicitly says NOT to do this. Wesley Shields (wxs) says this seems like a bad idea without further qualification. The only thing I could think of is the automated ports QA and packaging; however, those are moot because LSI requires pre-download agreement to a license which prohibits redistribution. Option 2: A regular 3dm2 port marked BROKEN for =8.0 that follows the latest version and a 3dm2-legacy port kept at v2.01.09.004. When LSI manages to rework whatever it is 3ware decided requires KSE, I'll unBROKEN 3dm2 and retire 3dm2-legacy. That seems like lot of work for what will (hopefully) be a short-lived workaround just to avoid the first option. It also creates two ports for the same piece of software--a solution that seems inelegant. So, which approach should I take? I'm fine with option 2 if someone explains why option 1 is a bad idea. If I get no response, I'll do option 1. For those of you with excellent memories, yes, this was mentioned before (the prior thread's subject is Installing a different PORTVERSION based on OSVERSION?). ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: How to port something requiring different versions depending on OSVERSION?
Wesley Shields wrote: On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 04:51:04PM -0700, Darren Pilgrim wrote: Detect the OS version, install the latest version if running 8.x and install 2.01.09.004 if =8.x. I can't find anything in the Porter's Handbook that explicitly says NOT to do this. Wesley Shields (wxs) says this seems like a bad idea without further qualification. The only thing I could think of is the automated ports QA and packaging; however, those are moot because LSI requires pre-download agreement to a license which prohibits redistribution. That does eliminate a lot of my concern. I didn't really have a hard-line stance on this. It just struck me as the kind of thing you want would to do as a last resort only. Is there any way that libmap.conf can help here? Sadly no. Libmap only applies to dynamic-linked binaries. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Installing a different PORTVERSION based on OSVERSION?
Wesley Shields wrote:
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 07:26:39PM -0800, Darren Pilgrim wrote:
I'm working on a revision to a port where the current version doesn't
work on 8.0-R; however, an older version does. Rather than roll the
entire port back to an older version, I'd like to have the newer version
available to 7.x and older and the older version available to 8.x and
newer. Is it appropriate to install different versions of a port based
on ${OSVERSION}? If so, do I just set the necessary variables after
including bsd.port.pre.mk?
This seems like a bad idea to me. How much effort would it take to fix
the port on 8.x and newer?
The port contains a static-linked binary from the vendor--not something
I can patch.
The other option is to mark it broken on 8.x and newer.
The port currently sets BROKEN if OSVERSION = 80.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Installing a different PORTVERSION based on OSVERSION?
Garrett Cooper wrote: Vendor provided binaries are a fun ball of wax to deal with because you need to have all dependencies come from the same generic pool as the package [/ port] itself, as any This sounds trivial, but it requires changes to pkg_add (for fetching / installing a particular revision of the code, as well as `slotting' the packages themselves), determining elf-version, ld modifications, as well as a few other things. It's been implemented at my work [Ironport] from what I've been told, but 1) I'm not sure how complete it is, 2) I'm not sure how tested it is, and 3) it hasn't been reviewed yet and I'm not sure how much would be put back in the community at large to be honest... Or you can take the vendor's approach and make a static binary with all the dependencies (i.e., libraries) compiled in. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Installing a different PORTVERSION based on OSVERSION?
I'm working on a revision to a port where the current version doesn't
work on 8.0-R; however, an older version does. Rather than roll the
entire port back to an older version, I'd like to have the newer version
available to 7.x and older and the older version available to 8.x and
newer. Is it appropriate to install different versions of a port based
on ${OSVERSION}? If so, do I just set the necessary variables after
including bsd.port.pre.mk?
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
How to determine (in a port Makefile) if KSE is present?
I have a port which uses a static-linked 5.4 binary. This is broken in 8.0 due to KSE removal. I need to create a test and limit installation to only those versions on which it will run. Looking at the heads-up message for KSE removal from March 2008, I don't see a change to sys/sys/param.h, so I don't think __FreeBSD_version was bumped. Looking at the commit log for param.h and lining up timestamps, I think 800024 would be the last version with KSE support. Is it therefore prudent to allow install only if 504000 = OSVERSION = 800024 or should I test for KSE another way? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Call for testers: sysutils/3dm patch
I've updated the 3dm port and need people with 32- and 64-bit 7.x and 8.x systems to test the new version. A 3ware RAID controller is required, of course. Reply to me privately and I will email the patch. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Source-upgrading FreeBSD breaks postfix+dovecot?
Xin LI wrote: Darren Pilgrim wrote: Tonight I source-upgraded a FreeBSD system from i386 6.3p5 to i386 6.4-R. I have postfix 2.5.5 and dovecot 1.1.7 installed with postfix using dovecot for SASL and dovecot LDA for mailbox delivery. After installing 6.4-R, postfix refused to work until I recompiled and reinstalled both it and dovecot. Dovecot itself (i.e., the IMAP server) worked fine. Postfix worked fine if I set smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=no and defer_transports=dovecot, effectively preventing postfix from using any dovecot bits. Examples of the logged errors: Before reinstalling anything: postfix/pipe[36617]: fatal: get_service_attr: unknown group: vmail Sounds like that you have did something really bad during mergemaster? (i.e. installed /etc/group without actually doing merge) and in turn the group gets removed... The only change to /etc/group was the CVS ID tag. Group resolution worked for other programs--ls showed vmail rather than the numeric gid, chown worked with :vmail, etc. I verified libraries matched with another 6.4-R system. I power cycled the system thinking there may have been stale libraries or some mysterious form of cache corruption in memory; however, the problem persisted. The problem didn't go away until I rebuilt the ports. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
What happened to devel/php5-pcre?
I updated my ports tree today and pkg_version tells me: php5-pcre-5.2.6_2 succeeds index (index has 5.2.5) Which was caused by an out-of-date index. When I run make index: Generating INDEX-6 - please wait..pear-File_Archive-1.5.4: /data/sys/ports/devel/php5-pcre non-existent -- d ependency list incomplete === archivers/pear-File_Archive failed *** Error code 1 1 error reporting notice omitted for brevity's sake *** Error code 1 Stop in /data/sys/ports. *** Error code 1 Stop in /data/sys/ports. Searching cvs-all shows a commit by ale on 2008-12-07 11:54:36 UTC in which: Log: Update to 5.2.7 release. Revision ChangesPath 1.5 +0 -14 ports/devel/php5-pcre/Makefile (dead) 1.2 +0 -13 ports/devel/php5-pcre/files/patch-php_pcre.c (dead) However, the commit log doesn't indicate why this was done. The release notes for PHP 5.2.7 and don't mention anything about PCRE other than it was updated to v7.8 to fix CVE-2008-2371. I cvsup'ed ports-all twice, so I'm fairly sure my tree is sound. How do I fix this? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: What happened to devel/php5-pcre?
Wesley Shields wrote:
Take a look at UPDATING, specifically the 20081211 entry.
Yeah. What's funny is, I habitually read {src,ports}/UPDATING. Must be
too much egg nog. :) Thanks.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting. There have been a number of serious attempts and in depth research into various ports system issues (I still need to wade through a rather long one sent to me privately)... an other question did you read the preamble to this thread at all? (where it says I have volunteered to do the heavy lifting for anything that comes out this discussion [two others privately asked to also be involved]) What he's saying is that there have been many before you who have said and promised the same. Ideas get hashed out and we build amazing bike-sheds, but there has seldom been real product. What you have yet to do is distinguish yourself from history. In short, patches please. Until then, don't expect enthusiastic encouragement. -- Darren Pilgrim ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Would someone please look at ports/114994?
The PR is regarding sysutils/3dm, a port for which I'm the maintainer. After working with Craig (the PR submitter), I've submitted a follow-up to the PR containing a commitable version of the suggested changes plus a few of my own. If someone with a commit bit would be so kind, that would be great, thanks. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD Port: linux-gspca-kmod-1.0.12.1
Andriy Babiy wrote: I wanted to try making the port, but faced a problem: The requested URL /spca50x/Download/gspcav1-20070110.tar.gz was not found on this server. Apache/ProXad [Apr 14 2007 12:48:55] Server at mxhaard.free.fr This is what I get when I try downloading the source. Of course, I tried installing the driver through the port, but the gspcav1-20070110.tar.gz file couldn't be found in either location, including that mentioned above. The Download link from the port gives http://cvsweb.freebsd.org/ports/multimedia/linux-gspca-kmod/linux-gspca-kmod.tar.gz?tarball=1 which is different file. Am I doing anything wrong? Or should I build the port from the source? Please, give me your advice. Thank you very much in advance. It looks like a new version was released a week ago and the 20070110 source tarball was moved to an archival directory. You can temporarily unbreak your port and install the older version by editing the port Makefile and changing line 11 to: MASTER_SITES= http://mxhaard.free.fr/spca50x/Download/oldrelease/ Otherwise, submit an update PR for the port or wait for Luigi to update the port. HTH ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mail/maildrop marked as broken
KIMURA Yasuhiro wrote: From: Vizion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: mail/maildrop marked as broken Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 11:33:59 -0700 As title for information New today: portupgrade -a reports: FAM system mismatch: gamin is imstalled and desired FAM system is fam AFAIK Courier products work only with fam and not with gamin. But I not certain this is still the case now. Does anyone know if latest gamin is compatible with Courier products? As of Monday (March 19), courier-imap crashes when compiled with gamin. -- Darren Pilgrim ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Backing up old installed files?
Alejandro Pulver wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 13:27:42 -0800
Darren Pilgrim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm writing a port for a script that stores the configuration data in
the same file as the program code itself. The long-term solution is to
move the configuration data to another file, of course; however, that's
proving to be a far slower process than originally expected.
Other than delaying the submission until the configuration data is split
from the script, what can/should I do?
Hello.
You can install the original script in ${PREFIX}/libexec and a wrapper
script in ${PREFIX}/bin, that would copy it to the user's home
directory if not exists and run it from there.
That wouldn't work in this case. The script is a daemon (postfix policy
service), not a user program.
The best I've come up with so far is to install the script to
${PREFIX}/share/${PORTNAME}, then add a note to pkg-message to have the
user copy the script to runnable location (i.e., the postfix config
directory), edit the internal config and set the path in /etc/rc.conf.
This means a manual step to install/upgrade and an orphan when the port
is deinstalled, but it's the least-evil solution I've come up with.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Backing up old installed files?
I'm writing a port for a script that stores the configuration data in the same file as the program code itself. The long-term solution is to move the configuration data to another file, of course; however, that's proving to be a far slower process than originally expected. Other than delaying the submission until the configuration data is split from the script, what can/should I do? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD Port: iwi-firmware-2.4_7
Joey Mingrone wrote: I'm trying to get an INTEL 2200 wireless card working, but when I try to install either the iwi-firmware-kmod or the iwi-firmware port I have a problem: portinstall iwi-firmware-kmod ** Port marked as IGNORE: net/iwi-firmware-kmod: needs fresh iwi(4), install net/iwi-firmware instead portinstall iwi-firmware ** Port marked as IGNORE: net/iwi-firmware: is configured with iwi(4) support which you don't need I'm running 6.0-RELEASE-p7 Any suggestions? Re net/iwi-firmware-kmod: Don't use the iwi-firmware-kmod port, it's deprecated. Re net/iwi-firmware: cd /usr/ports/net/iwi-firmware make config Uncheck the MODULE option. Re-run the portinstall command. -- Darren Pilgrim ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD Port: iwi-firmware-2.4_7
Florent Thoumie wrote: On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 13:35 -0700, Darren Pilgrim wrote: Re net/iwi-firmware-kmod: Don't use the iwi-firmware-kmod port, it's deprecated. Not really, it's the one to use with HEAD and fresh RELENG_6. Sorry, yeah, I missed the MIN6OSVERSION and MIN7OSVERSION defines and just read the Makefile for its parent. Just the same, RELENG_6_0 predates firmware(9). -- Darren Pilgrim ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
