Re: [FreeBSD-Ports-Announce] Time to bid farewell to the old pkg_ tools
On 06/02/14 13:58, Rick Miller wrote: On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Daniel Nebdal dneb...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 2:59 AM, Big Lebowski spankthes...@gmail.com wrote: The ability to install certain package version, instead of installing simply the latest one. Please, please, pretty please! :) I echo this sentiment, but I would like to take it a step further and say a certain version or greater. I suspect he meant a certain version, and *not* newer - sometimes you might want to hold back a package. Correct. My wish is the functionality be extended further to mean a certain version *or* newer, encompassing both features. Thus, allowing him to say port-1.1, while I say port-1.4 or newer or even port-1.0 or newer. Python's pip has a nice syntax for this, for example: somepackage=1.6,=1.8 Something like this could be adopted. (Disregarding the discussion if this is technically feasible ATM, I'm sure it will be eventually). -- I guess the Little League is even littler than we thought. -- D. Cavett signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [FreeBSD-Ports-Announce] Time to bid farewell to the old pkg_ tools
On 08/02/14 14:04, Julian H. Stacey wrote: Michel Talon wrote: So how to interact with local.sqlite? Thanks Michel, Noted. Further, if you really want to debug and inspect with text tools you can simply do $ sqlite3 local.sqlite .dump dump.sql or $ sqlite3 -csv local.sqlite .dump dump.csv From there, I'm sure an impressive pipeline to do just about anything you want can be constructed, if that's what you need. You can also do any kind of additional SQL in that last parameter (.dump is just an sqlite specific SQL meta command) with semicolon separated statements. -- Contestants have been briefed on some questions before the show. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Massive ports update?
On 04/02/14 08:12, Xin Li wrote: Hi, On 2/3/14, 10:22 PM, Xin Li wrote: On 2/3/14, 9:59 PM, Nikola Pavlović wrote: Was there a *huge* update to ports tree tonight between around 00:20 and 06:30 CET? Portsnap just fetched 24720 patches (this is more or less every port I guess), but I can't find anything in http://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/ that would correspond to this. I'm a bit worried. :) This may be related to my upgrade operation on the portsnap builder, which happened around UTC midnight, right after a new snap snapshot is taken. I'll do a full tree audit just in case. I've compared and can now confirm that the portsnap tree matches from a SSH checkout of svn tree. Great, thanks for the info and for the effort! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Massive ports update?
On 04/02/14 09:44, Colin Percival wrote: On 02/03/14 22:22, Xin Li wrote: On 2/3/14, 9:59 PM, Nikola Pavlović wrote: Was there a *huge* update to ports tree tonight between around 00:20 and 06:30 CET? Portsnap just fetched 24720 patches (this is more or less every port I guess), but I can't find anything in http://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/ that would correspond to this. I'm a bit worried. :) This may be related to my upgrade operation on the portsnap builder, which happened around UTC midnight, right after a new snap snapshot is taken. I'm pretty sure this resulted from changes to libarchive / bsdtar. With them generating different tarballs for the same input, the portsnap build thinks that everything has changed. ... there's actually code on the portsnap builder to revert such changes, but I don't think delphij knew about it and I didn't realize he was upgrading the portsnap builder until too late. I see, thanks. This sounds like mystery solved, but I can't be the only one who's seen this, so just to be sure---has anyone else had the same thing happen? (Unfortunately, I don't have another FreeBSD machine at hand, unrelated to the one from the first post, to check.) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Massive ports update?
On 04/02/14 18:37, Vincent Hoffman wrote: I had a huge list when I updated at approx 6am GMT. I did initially wonder why there wasn't much to update considering this but the explanation seems reasonable enough to me. Vince OK, great, thanks! Peace of mind restored. :) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Massive ports update?
Was there a *huge* update to ports tree tonight between around 00:20 and 06:30 CET? Portsnap just fetched 24720 patches (this is more or less every port I guess), but I can't find anything in http://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/ that would correspond to this. I'm a bit worried. :) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Vim and Vim-lite ports broken options
Hello, Is it just me, or did the last revision[*] of editors/vim break options for both it and editors/vim-lite? When I try to update vim-lite optional dependencies from vim are forced on this port, so I get mandatory Python, Lua, Ruby... with vim-lite. :) I only ever install vim-lite, so just out of curiosity I tried make config in vim, and it said there are no options to configure, so something is definitely wrong with that. Yesterday I upgraded vim-lite on the same machine (in a different jail, and outside) and it worked fine. I couldn't spot the error immediately, and I'm not really up to date with OptionsNG ATM to tinker. [*] http://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revisionrevision=322016 -- Big M, Little M, many mumbling mice Are making midnight music in the moonlight, Mighty nice! ___ 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: netpbm-10.35.80_2
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 08:20:28AM -0700, David Wolfskill wrote: On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:49:12AM -0400, Jerry wrote: The netpbm-10.35.80_2 port won't build. There is a notation that the previous version has to be removed first. I saw something here a few days ago regarding that problem. Is the recommended method to do a make deinstall make reinstall to get the updated port installed? I know that portupgrade chocks on the port if a previous version is installed. As (I) documented in ports/156577, what worked for me was: pkg_delete -f netpbm-10.26.64_4 portmaster graphics/netpbm I subsequently heard from one person who reported that this did not work for him. For convenince: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=156577. Yes, there was an error in the makefile. I had to leave the machine and didn't have time to investigate further, but it was fixed later that day[1][2], and the deinstall/install procedure worked fine after that. [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=156598 [2] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/graphics/netpbm/Makefile.diff?r1=1.195;r2=1.196;f=h -- Hark ye, Clinker, you are a most notorious offender. You stand convicted of sickness, hunger, wretchedness, and want. -- Tobias Smollet ___ 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
