Re: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 12:02:03PM +1000, Kubilay Kocak wrote: On 3/07/2014 3:43 AM, Daniel Ryslink wrote: Hello, I was quite seriously ill for some time, and I have only now noticed these messages. I am the maintainer of the games/gnarr port. Please give me one week to update the port according to your specifications, I will surely get it done, because I don't want it to disappear. I will read through the porter's handbook and do whatever is necessary. The port is very simple, so it should not be a problem Thank you for your understanding. Regards Daniel, Just in case, I suggest creating an issue in Bugzilla with summary: [maintainer] games/gnarr: Enable STAGE support Any port with an open issue (especially one created by the maintainer) for staging will not be marked deprecated in the short term. Having said that, do your best to get stage support sorted out as soon as is practical For you information games/gnarr has already been staged 2 weeks ago by vanilla@ regards, Bapt pgpdHJPTiIjlg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 07:43:17PM +0200, Daniel Ryslink wrote: I was quite seriously ill for some time, and I have only now noticed these messages. I am the maintainer of the games/gnarr port. Please take care of yourself. Fixing ports should be secondary. mcl ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
Hello, I was quite seriously ill for some time, and I have only now noticed these messages. I am the maintainer of the games/gnarr port. Please give me one week to update the port according to your specifications, I will surely get it done, because I don't want it to disappear. I will read through the porter's handbook and do whatever is necessary. The port is very simple, so it should not be a problem Thank you for your understanding. Regards -- Daniel Ryšlink System Administrator Dial Telecom a. s. Křižíkova 36a/237 186 00 Praha 3, Česká Republika Tel.:+420.226204627 daniel.rysl...@dialtelecom.cz --- www.dialtelecom.cz Dial Telecom, a.s. Jednoduše se připojte --- On 05/10/2014 05:33 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote: You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. In September 2013, the Ports framework learned how to Stage ports. On June 31st, all unstaged ports will be marked DEPRECATED and have their MAINTAINER reset. On August 31st, all unstaged ports will be removed from the ports tree. Read on for more details. Staging is when the port installs into the work directory instead of into /. From here a package can be created without ever installing into / and often as a user without root. This also gives us abilities to improve quality of packages and opens up opportunities for sub-packages in the future. With staging we have had the ability to add in-tree testing of plists which in the past required a tool such as porttools, Tinderbox or Poudriere. A guide for converting your port to Staging can be found at: https://wiki.freebsd.org/ports/StageDir Staging is also mentioned throughout the Porters Handbook. You can test your plist with: Add DEVELOPER=yes to /etc/make.conf # make stage # make check-plist However, Poudriere should be used to test staging conversions as it is much more strict than the in-tree checks currently. It will detect if something installs outside of the STAGEDIR. Poudriere 3.0.16 (just released) should be used for this testing, or the latest -devel version. Out of the more than 24,000 ports there remains 4,170 ports not yet staged. Staging is not optional. We must have all staged to progress with the framework, new features, and automated testing. We recently granted blanket approval to committers to stage ports without maintainer approval and then also blocked updates to unstaged ports in the hopes that this would force more ports to be converted. However with so many ports remaining unstaged at this point it is unknown if these ports are actually being maintained. So we will be DEPRECATING and resetting maintainer on all unstaged ports on June 31st. These ports will be set to EXPIRE on August 31st and will then be removed from the tree. They will not be restored unless someone stages them as well. This decision was not easy, but if a port is not being staged after almost a year, we wonder if the ports are actually maintained and updated for releases and security issues. If you have an unstaged port you will begin to receive email notifications informing you of this until it is staged or maintainer is reset. If you have a port that is unstaged, please stage it. If you do not have interest in maintaining it anymore then please release it. If you are using ports that are not staged please step up and send a PR today to stage the port and keep it. A guide for submitting patches is here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/porting-submitting.html If you already have PR needing to be committed please let us know and we will try to get on them ASAP. ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 07:43:17PM +0200, Daniel Ryslink wrote: Hello, I was quite seriously ill for some time, and I have only now noticed these messages. I am the maintainer of the games/gnarr port. Please give me one week to update the port according to your specifications, I will surely get it done, because I don't want it to disappear. I will read through the porter's handbook and do whatever is necessary. The port is very simple, so it should not be a problem Thank you for your understanding. Regards Sure regards, Bapt pgpLRrVi8kze3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On 3/07/2014 3:43 AM, Daniel Ryslink wrote: Hello, I was quite seriously ill for some time, and I have only now noticed these messages. I am the maintainer of the games/gnarr port. Please give me one week to update the port according to your specifications, I will surely get it done, because I don't want it to disappear. I will read through the porter's handbook and do whatever is necessary. The port is very simple, so it should not be a problem Thank you for your understanding. Regards Daniel, Just in case, I suggest creating an issue in Bugzilla with summary: [maintainer] games/gnarr: Enable STAGE support Any port with an open issue (especially one created by the maintainer) for staging will not be marked deprecated in the short term. Having said that, do your best to get stage support sorted out as soon as is practical -- koobs ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On 13/05/2014 4:49 AM, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: On Mon, 12 May 2014, John Marino wrote: I commit PR patches that are 6 to 18 months old fairly frequently. There is obviously a huge backlog but many PRs are processed daily. The PRs that aren't getting processed quickly are [NEW PORT] PRs (and apparently anything mentioning fuse-fs for some reason). A staging PR is going to jump the line; it has a higher priority. Why would you even entertain the idea that a staging PR will fall between the cracks? Perhaps the better question is: what are the factors that will make committers shy away from a PR, even if it's summary contains stage? [1] Maybe we (maintainers) can do better? That *is* a great question Melvyn, and one I imagine many maintainers have thought about. We have a ways to go in developing a proactive coaching mentoring culture in FreeBSD, and with that in mind to start a conversation, here's a few things that come to mind that show me a PR might warrant special attention given limited time resources: - A PR with a patch, with [patch] prefixed in the summary These are easy to identify when skimming with little effort, and shows intent and initiative from the submitter. - Build logs or URL's (eg: poudriere, redports) showing build OK This shows the submitter groks the effort required at the other end, and again initiative in arming a committer with the information they might need to get it done. These prelim QA steps also identify easy issues early in the process, helping to up-skill the submitter, developing them for greater contributions, and ultimately saves time in any potential back and forth. - porttools, portlint, port test, test port, stage, DEV_MODE = OK (even just showing these steps have been run) Again, basic proactive QA. Shows an understanding of the tools and steps involved, and a regard for quality over quantity or personal benefit only. Seeing that these steps have been already been run makes it easier to choose one PR over another that hasn't, even if we're going to run them again anyway. - Proposed commit log with explanations of non-obvious changes. This provides an insight and information to help assess/review your changes with additional context, to ensure that what you intended to do is what you actually achieved. It also opens the door for exposing the submitter to conventions or process changes within the Project they may not yet be aware of. It also means we don't need to write it. - Be vocal. Follow-up, Ask questions, Don't wait. Don't give up. The question is always What's left before this can be committed? and What would I need to see if I were to take on this work? Help answer those questions and you position your contributions in the best light for action. ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
Hello, Baptiste. You wrote 19 мая 2014 г., 3:10:14: One of my ports: sysutils/geom5 install GEOM class and need to creater HARD link from /sbin/geom to /sbin/graid5. I don't understand, how could I stagefy THAT. Any ideas? BD This kind of things cannot be package at all even from prior stage. Yes, I know. It is marked as NO_PACKAGE and I could say more: it could not be packaged because it needs kernel sources to be built, and, ideally, sources of used kernel (opts.h from it). Anyway, ACTION REQUIRED message was about ALL ports, not only packageable-ones :) BD Another question is why installing in base when it could work from local base? BD /usr/local/lib/geom/geom_raid.so BD and the glabel might become a simple script: BD /usr/local/sbin/glabel: BD GEOM_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib BD /sbin/geom label $@ I like this idea. -- // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov l...@freebsd.org ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 11:20:34PM +0400, Lev Serebryakov wrote: Hello, Bryan. You wrote 10 мая 2014 г., 19:33:52: BD You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. BD In September 2013, the Ports framework learned how to Stage ports. BD On June 31st, all unstaged ports will be marked DEPRECATED and have BD their MAINTAINER reset. BD On August 31st, all unstaged ports will be removed from the ports tree. I've tried to discuss this problem on ports@ some timne ago, but whthout any feedback. One of my ports: sysutils/geom5 install GEOM class and need to creater HARD link from /sbin/geom to /sbin/graid5. I don't understand, how could I stagefy THAT. Any ideas? This kind of things cannot be package at all even from prior stage. Because the generated package would have ignored the hardlink and when the package would have been reinstalled from binary package then you would have ended up with not hardlink. That said you can just use a symlink that works as well and can be staged easily. Another question is why installing in base when it could work from local base? /usr/local/lib/geom/geom_raid.so and the glabel might become a simple script: /usr/local/sbin/glabel: GEOM_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib /sbin/geom label $@ Last is cannot it be integrated directly into base for the futur? regards, Bapt pgpvZPMrYrTp2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:31:06AM +1000 I heard the voice of andrew clarke, and lo! it spake thus: A short script I threw together to show any ports installed that are marked as unstaged in the above list: Alternately, to check against the local ports tree: % pkg query -a '%o' | xargs -n1 -I% sh -c 'if make -C /usr/ports/% -V NO_STAGE | grep -v '^\$' /dev/null ; then echo % ; fi' -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fulle...@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream. ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On 10/05/2014 17:33, Bryan Drewery wrote: You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. In September 2013, the Ports framework learned how to Stage ports. On June 31st, all unstaged ports will be marked DEPRECATED and have their MAINTAINER reset. On August 31st, all unstaged ports will be removed from the ports tree. That's hardly fair with maintainer-updates not being committed for months. I usually stop updating my ports when that happens and resume my activity when my confidence that stuff has a chance of being committed is restored. I.e. when all my old updates have been committed. -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On 5/12/2014 10:01, Dominic Fandrey wrote: On 10/05/2014 17:33, Bryan Drewery wrote: You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. In September 2013, the Ports framework learned how to Stage ports. On June 31st, all unstaged ports will be marked DEPRECATED and have their MAINTAINER reset. On August 31st, all unstaged ports will be removed from the ports tree. That's hardly fair with maintainer-updates not being committed for months. I would have thought it to be obvious, but ports with valid and applicable PRs are excluded. No unstaged port with a pending PR to stage it is going to be removed, the PR will get processed instead. I usually stop updating my ports when that happens and resume my activity when my confidence that stuff has a chance of being committed is restored. I.e. when all my old updates have been committed. I commit PR patches that are 6 to 18 months old fairly frequently. There is obviously a huge backlog but many PRs are processed daily. The PRs that aren't getting processed quickly are [NEW PORT] PRs (and apparently anything mentioning fuse-fs for some reason). A staging PR is going to jump the line; it has a higher priority. Why would you even entertain the idea that a staging PR will fall between the cracks? John ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Bryan Drewery bdrew...@freebsd.org wrote: You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. Clearly you have a list that identifies these ports. Would it be possible to share it so we can easily find which if our ports are still affected? 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Vick Khera vi...@khera.org wrote: On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Bryan Drewery bdrew...@freebsd.org wrote: You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. Clearly you have a list that identifies these ports. Would it be possible to share it so we can easily find which if our ports are still affected? Thanks! The list is available here: http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/notstaged.txt ___ 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 ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Sat, 10 May 2014 10:33:52 -0500 Bryan Drewery bdrew...@freebsd.org wrote: You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. [...] If you already have PR needing to be committed please let us know and we will try to get on them ASAP. I've added ports/189682 to add staging support to print/cups-pdf (which have no maintainer ATM): http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/189682 -- Matthieu Volat ma...@alkumuna.eu signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Mon, 12 May 2014, John Marino wrote: I commit PR patches that are 6 to 18 months old fairly frequently. There is obviously a huge backlog but many PRs are processed daily. The PRs that aren't getting processed quickly are [NEW PORT] PRs (and apparently anything mentioning fuse-fs for some reason). A staging PR is going to jump the line; it has a higher priority. Why would you even entertain the idea that a staging PR will fall between the cracks? Perhaps the better question is: what are the factors that will make committers shy away from a PR, even if it's summary contains stage? [1] Maybe we (maintainers) can do better? [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr-summary.cgi?category=portsseverity=priority=class=maintainer-updatestate=opensort=nonetext=responsible=multitext=stageoriginator=release= -- Melvyn ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On 5/12/2014 20:49, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: On Mon, 12 May 2014, John Marino wrote: I commit PR patches that are 6 to 18 months old fairly frequently. There is obviously a huge backlog but many PRs are processed daily. The PRs that aren't getting processed quickly are [NEW PORT] PRs (and apparently anything mentioning fuse-fs for some reason). A staging PR is going to jump the line; it has a higher priority. Why would you even entertain the idea that a staging PR will fall between the cracks? Perhaps the better question is: what are the factors that will make committers shy away from a PR, even if it's summary contains stage? [1] Maybe we (maintainers) can do better? [1] Heh, 54 out of 2000+ PRs isn't too bad. :) I doubt most cases are people intentionally passing over an ugly PR. I am sure it happens but staging is generally straightforward so the PR itself isn't going to scare someone off. John ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
Hi! Perhaps the better question is: what are the factors that will make committers shy away from a PR, even if it's summary contains stage? [1] Mostly lack of time. Maybe we (maintainers) can do better? By becoming committers yourself 8-) and sharing the burden 8-) -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
Hi, On Mon, 12 May 2014, John Marino wrote: On 5/12/2014 20:49, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: On Mon, 12 May 2014, John Marino wrote: I commit PR patches that are 6 to 18 months old fairly frequently. There is obviously a huge backlog but many PRs are processed daily. The PRs that aren't getting processed quickly are [NEW PORT] PRs (and apparently anything mentioning fuse-fs for some reason). A staging PR is going to jump the line; it has a higher priority. Why would you even entertain the idea that a staging PR will fall between the cracks? Perhaps the better question is: what are the factors that will make committers shy away from a PR, even if it's summary contains stage? [1] Maybe we (maintainers) can do better? [1] Heh, 54 out of 2000+ PRs isn't too bad. :) Ok..2000 ports PR's open at given time on how many committers? Starting to look like Kurt has the right idea here. I doubt most cases are people intentionally passing over an ugly PR. I am sure it happens but staging is generally straightforward so the PR itself isn't going to scare someone off. Well, mine (ports/188901) I can see why someone walks around it, cause the patch is 1MB and needs to be downloaded. The bulk is of course the giant plist introduced by staging (and we can blame Zend for a file-intensive boilerplate heavy framework, but that's another topic). However, I don't see a way to make it more attractive, which is why I asked. -- Melvyn ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Sat, May 10, 2014 11:33 am, Bryan Drewery wrote: You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. This decision was not easy, but if a port is not being staged after almost a year, we wonder if the ports are actually maintained and updated for releases and security issues. In my case, I missed the call to convert *all ports* to staging, as my pants have been bankrupt for about a year (working on restarting the upstream of the port I'm maintainer for). This may have been exacerbated by an interaction of greylisting and duplicate elimination that I just realized occurs - messages get past greylisting faster through the list than direct, so for messages that are sent both to the list and directly to me the copy that gets put in the list folder gets kept instead of the one that would go into my inbox. I will have a very hard time finishing converting to staging in three months - A. I have a day job. B. This port's current configuration (inherited from the previous maintainer) is sufficiently kludgy that I will probably have to rewrite it from scratch. (I've been trying over the weekend to hack it into shape but am realizing that I have to give up and rewrite the whole mess.) Jim Trigg Maintainer, mail/ecartis ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Sun, 11 May 2014 10:22:58 +0200 John Marino wrote: On 5/11/2014 04:02, Montgomery-Smith, Stephen wrote: I have noticed that make all now includes the staging as well as building. That is to say, it looks like there is a rather wholesale reordering of how ports build and install. From this I conclude it is becoming harder to include the legacy NO_STAGE code, which presumably must stick to the old way of doing things. I don't understand this paragraph. I never use make all at the ports level. make install will do 2 steps: install into the staging area and then install onto the system. If you just want to install in the staging area, you use make stage target. By definition all is do everything, so that's not a surprise that's not a surprise. Maybe stop using all? A lone make is equivalent to make build, so just use that perhaps? He was referring to this in bsd.port.mk: .if !target(all) . if defined(NO_STAGE) all: build . else all: stage . endif .endif ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On 05/11/2014 03:22 AM, John Marino wrote:
On 5/11/2014 04:02, Montgomery-Smith, Stephen wrote:
On 05/10/2014 08:48 PM, Jonathan Chen wrote:
On 11 May 2014 03:33, Bryan Drewery bdrew...@freebsd.org wrote:
[...]
I have noticed that make all now includes the staging as well as
building. That is to say, it looks like there is a rather wholesale
reordering of how ports build and install. From this I conclude it is
becoming harder to include the legacy NO_STAGE code, which presumably
must stick to the old way of doing things.
I don't understand this paragraph. I never use make all at the ports
level. make install will do 2 steps: install into the staging area
and then install onto the system. If you just want to install in the
staging area, you use make stage target. By definition all is do
everything, so that's not a surprise that's not a surprise. Maybe stop
using all? A lone make is equivalent to make build, so just use
that perhaps?
When you type make by itself, you are implicitly meaning make all.
(You can see this by looking at bsd.port.mk.)
It used to be that when you typed make, it would build the sources.
Then make install would create a staging area, and then directly copy
the staged stuff it to ${PREFIX}.
But now, when you type make, it builds the source, AND installs the
stuff into the staging area. All make install does is copy the staged
stuff to ${PREFIX}.
___
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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Sat, 10 May 2014 10:47:42 -0500 Bryan Drewery bdrew...@freebsd.org wrote: On 5/10/2014 10:33 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. You can see the full list here: http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/notstaged.txt -- Regards, Bryan Drewery Regarding graphic/darktable, there have been for months an update proposal that included stage support: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/186979 (while I don't agree on enforcing the entirely optionnal ninja as cmake bakend). -- Matthieu Volat ma...@alkumuna.eu signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On 11/05/2014 1:47 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: On 5/10/2014 10:33 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. You can see the full list here: http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/notstaged.txt Thanks for sharing the list of 3851 ports in nonstaged.txt. It is a little disconcerting that 759 maintainers have decided to either not convert to staging or decided to walk away. # cat notstaged.txt | cut -d: -f2 | sort | uniq | cut -d@ -f1 | uniq | wc -l 759 John alluded to a plan for ports, of which staging is a prerequisite, is there a current plan available to be shared? It might help some maintainers to buy-in to the staging paradigm and continue their valuable contribution to the FreeBSD project. The prospect of freezing my ports tree, at end of June, and cherry-picking ports isn't pleasant. Dewayne. ___ 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: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM, andrew clarke m...@ozzmosis.com wrote:
On Sat 2014-05-10 10:47:42 UTC-0500, Bryan Drewery (bdrew...@freebsd.org)
wrote:
On 5/10/2014 10:33 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote:
You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you
maintain.
You can see the full list here:
http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/notstaged.txt
A short script I threw together to show any ports installed that are
marked as unstaged in the above list:
#!/bin/sh
pkg info -oa | awk '{ print $2 }' | sort /tmp/installed.list
fetch -o - http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/notstaged.txt | awk -F: '{
print $1 }' | sort | uniq /tmp/notstaged.list
cat /tmp/installed.list /tmp/notstaged.list | sort | uniq -d
rm -f /tmp/installed.list /tmp/notstaged.list
Output on my system:
- 100% of 139 kB 162 kBps
00m01s
editors/uemacs
lang/spidermonkey17
mail/dovecot
misc/jive
misc/zoneinfo
multimedia/mediainfo
net/istgt
net/torsocks
security/xinetd
sysutils/rename
Regards
Andrew
Many thanks!
Boy, do I have a LOT of port, many very important (to me) that are on the
list. I won't put it out here, but it's 72 ports long.
Guess I need to sit sown and fix many of them. Some may be more than I can
deal with, especially the Gnome ones, but I'll be ditching those shortly,
anyway. Hopefully most of the remainder are fairly straight forward,
--
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
E-mail: rkober...@gmail.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
