Re: ports-mgmt/portmaster question
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Mel wrote:
On Wednesday 24 December 2008 03:35:07 Matthew Seaman wrote:
B. Cook wrote:
Is there a way to pass make args (other than -m) for each port?
If you want options that only apply to specific ports, then you can use
a construct like this:
.if ${.CURDIR:M*/databases/mysql*}
WITH_CHARSET=utf8
WITH_XCHARSET=none
WITH_COLLATION=utf8_unicode_ci
WITH_OPENSSL=yes
BUILD_OPTIMIZED=yes
WITH_INNODB=yes
WITH_ARCHIVE=yes
WITH_FEDERATED=yes
WITH_NDB=yes
WITH_CSV=yes
WITH_SPHINXSE=yes
.endif
Or, so you don't have one blobby make.conf that needs to be read for
everything that uses FreeBSD's make, you can make a file called
Makefile.local in the port's directory and set these.
There are only a few special cases in which this won't work, because
it is included at the bottom of the port's Makefile, but then you
can resort to /etc/make.conf.
Yep. That's true. Unfortunately though if you use freebsd-update to
update your ports tree it will blow away any additional files like
that. csup(1) users will not have that problem.
There is also a nice port ports-mgmt/portconf which adds some snippet to
/etc/make.conf which allows you to add your options in a neat way to
/usr/local/etc/ports.conf.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: *.ko.symbols files in /boot/kernel
Wojciech Puchar wrote: turn it off: makeoptions DEBUG=-g# Build kernel with gdb(1) debug symbols Thank you. I just figured that out experimenatlly about an hour ago. I was quite sure that this string was uncommented in my 6.4 KERNCONF and there were no any *.symbols there but I may be wrong of course. Besides I was confused by the fact that it was uncommented in GENERIC and also missed the comment to DEBUG option firstly. On Sun, 28 Dec 2008, Sergey Kovalev wrote: I've decided to upgrade from 6.4-p1 to 7.1-RC2 on my home desktop pc. Somewhat during this procedure triggered building and installing of *.ko.symbols and kernel.symbols files. Here are my upgrade commands cd /usr/src env -i make buildworld env -i make buildkernel KERNCONF=KOCA env -i make installkernel KERNCONF=KOCA After that I get errors because my / patrition is only 128M in size. And /boot/kernel gets filled with *.symbols files. What could trigger their building and installation? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
*.ko.symbols files in /boot/kernel
I've decided to upgrade from 6.4-p1 to 7.1-RC2 on my home desktop pc. Somewhat during this procedure triggered building and installing of *.ko.symbols and kernel.symbols files. Here are my upgrade commands cd /usr/src env -i make buildworld env -i make buildkernel KERNCONF=KOCA env -i make installkernel KERNCONF=KOCA After that I get errors because my / patrition is only 128M in size. And /boot/kernel gets filled with *.symbols files. What could trigger their building and installation? And how I should cleanly rebuild/reinstall kernel in this case without rebuilding the world. I know the right path to rebuild everything cleanly, but never faced such difficulties. My /etc/make.conf: http://kovalev.com.ru/make.conf My kernel config: http://kovalev.com.ru/KOCA Please CC me cause I'm subscribed to the list. PS I've mistyped address and first posted to freebsd-us...@freebsd.org. Sorry if I posted to the same list twice. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FB on 3BSD
Graham Bentley пишет:
So if you rebuild your fluxbox port with the default settings,
transparency should work fine.
And that is exactlyt why I am asking - it doesnt!
As reported issuing a plain make results in fluxbox -info
output of -RENDER ie. it is NOT included !!!
Of course the first thing I did before my posts was to test
transparency which didnt work which led me to the list!
Any more suggestions appreciated though :)
Try
make -V CONFIGURE_ARGS
and watch if there are any strange options.
Default output from this command should be
--enable-imlib2 --enable-nls --enable-remember --enable-slit
--enable-toolbar --enable-xrender --disable-gnome
--x-libraries=/usr/local/lib --x-includes=/usr/local/include
--prefix=/usr/local ${_LATE_CONFIGURE_ARGS}
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7.2.0 Release
Garrett Cooper wrote: (sorry for cross-posting, but this is relevant to ports@ too) Please be aware that the portsnap snapshot hasn't been updated yet to include the X.org 7.2 addition, if you use portsnap. I need to try cvsup as well to see if the modifications outstanding with the cvsup servers too. I'm going to try upgrading ports tree via portsnap tomorrow. I wonder is it safe to fetch changes via portsnap since I don't exactly know if there is great difference between csup and portsnap from Xorg upgrade perspective. Sorry for my english. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem with enabling soft-updates via tunefs
Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: As a side-note, softupdates on / is a bad idea, just as bad as a single large / It is just our client's will not mine. I just want to have an opportunity to enable soft-updates remotely if somebody asks me to do so. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problem with enabling soft-updates via tunefs
Several weeks ago I tried enabling soft-updates on / partition of active file system in multi-user mode via tunefs -n enable /dev/ar0s1a having remounted it read-only. After that I just rebooted the system and according to mount soft-updates were enabled. (I tried remounting / partition to RW w/o rebooting but mount showed soft-updates were disabled). I was rather satisfied that it is possible w/o making newfs, but today I the same actions didn't work on another system (almost the same hardware except MB). (I even tried them on the first one, but there everything still worked fine). On second system I got an error something like: /dev/ar0s1a: can't write superblock information (to my regret I can't remember exactly but I can repeat if necessary) Differences between system: I. 1) / partition is the first on disk (256 Mb) 2) FreeBSD-5.4-RELEASE-p8 (with patch fixing soft-updates' problem with inodes); link to patch http://kovalev.com.ru/softupdates-5.4R-p8.diff.txt 3) Custom kernel (i can provide kernel configuration if necessary) II. 1) / partition was the only partition on disk (approximately 65 Gb); there was also second 2 Gb swap partition 2) FreeBSD-6.0-RELEASE 3) GENERIC kernel Is there a possibility to enable soft-updates on large / partitions at all or there may be something else? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 6.1-BETA 4 stable for normal use?
Rakhesh Sasidharan wrote: Hi, I'd like to try out FreeBSD and was wondering whether I should start with 6.1-BETA4 or 6.0? Its just for home use anyways, more as a way to fool around with FreeBSD a bit, so was wondering if 6.1-BETA4 would suffice for the purpose ... is it stable enough or would it give me issues? Also, suppose I were to go with 6.0, is there some way I can update to the 6.1 release when its released, *without* downloading the CDs etc? Maybe give some command which would download the required parts over the Internet? I think you better install 6.0 so you can later upgrade it to 6.1 when it would be released and tested several weeks. The upgrade procedure is not so simple and requires much attention, but it is pretty good described in FreeBSD Handbook, and you can get valueble expirience in upgrading. You won't need to download CDs. Besides I think security patches for 6.0 would be provided until 6.2 version of FreeBSD will be released. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
