Re: after pkgng update, daily run still using pkg_info
On 30/09/2013 06:09, Gary Aitken wrote: On 09/28/13 10:52, Gary Aitken wrote: After switching to pkgng, I noticed that my daily run output constantly complains about the installed packages being corrupt, e.g.: pkg_info: the package info for package 'asciidoc-8.6.8_1' is corrupt The problem is with etc/periodic/daily/490.status-pkg-changes which is still using pkg_info instead of pkg info Was this script supposed to be automatically updated as part of the conversion? What's the right way to upgrade this on a 9.1 release system? Or should I just edit the script by hand and be done with it? On 09/28/13 13:57, Mark Felder wrote: Run pkg_info. If there is anything listed you have not fully converted to pkgng and have some old broken/corrupt packages. You'll want to clean this up. What does clean this up mean, and how does one go about it, given the system is converted to using pkgng? There is no /var/db/pkg/pkgdb.db Some of the packages reported as corrupt were installed *after* the conversion to pkgng, so why is pkg_info even noticing them? pkg info reports 705 packages installed, and installs and re-installs using portmaster seem to be working. pkg_info reports 14 good packages and 658 corrupt packages. If pkg_info is picking up packages installed after the conversion, why doesn't the sum of good and corrupt packages equal the number pkg reports? It was my understanding that after switching to pkgng, the pkg_* cmds should no longer be used. If that's the case, shouldn't the daily script have been modified by the upgrade process? Hi, Gary, Yes, you're correct that the pkg_info command should no longer be used after pkgng-ifying your system. Not because it's harmful or lead to any sort of breakage but simply because it won't return any meaningful information. Ideally, there shouldn't really be any of the old style package metadata left in /var/db/pkg after running pkg2ng but the conversion process may occasionaly stumble over the odd port or two. (In which case force the port in question to re-install. If you're using a package repository, that's 'pkg install -f pkgname' -- otherwise, just use the normal portmaster / portupgrade command you'ld have used pre-pkgng.) If you are a portmaster user be aware that it does store various bits to do with managing distfiles in /var/db/pkg/pkgname-ver/ subdirectories. These shouldn't be confused with old style pkg_install metadata -- the distinguishing feature is if they contain a +CONTENTS file. As to why pkg2ng doesn't disable pkg_install related periodic jobs -- pretty much because no one has implemented that. pkg comes with it's own set of periodic job scripts which should give you the equivalent set of reports via the pkg local database, so all we'd need to do is turn off any old pkg_install script and turn on the pkg equivalent. I've just created a new issue on github for that: https://github.com/freebsd/pkg/issues/599 Patches -- or even better, pull requests -- are welcome. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: after pkgng update, daily run still using pkg_info
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013, at 23:09, Gary Aitken wrote: Some of the packages reported as corrupt were installed *after* the conversion to pkgng, so why is pkg_info even noticing them? The only way this is possible is if they are in the old package format. Did you happen to convert your packages to pkgng and then install some software from ports without putting WITH_PKGNG=YES in your make.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: after pkgng update, daily run still using pkg_info
On 09/30/13 07:15, Mathew Seaman wrote: On 09/28/13 10:52, Gary Aitken wrote: After switching to pkgng, I noticed that my daily run output constantly complains about the installed packages being corrupt, e.g.: pkg_info: the package info for package 'asciidoc-8.6.8_1' is corrupt The problem is with etc/periodic/daily/490.status-pkg-changes which is still using pkg_info instead of pkg info Was this script supposed to be automatically updated as part of the conversion? What's the right way to upgrade this on a 9.1 release system? Or should I just edit the script by hand and be done with it? On 09/28/13 13:57, Mark Felder wrote: Run pkg_info. If there is anything listed you have not fully converted to pkgng and have some old broken/corrupt packages. You'll want to clean this up. What does clean this up mean, and how does one go about it, given the system is converted to using pkgng? There is no /var/db/pkg/pkgdb.db Some of the packages reported as corrupt were installed *after* the conversion to pkgng, so why is pkg_info even noticing them? pkg info reports 705 packages installed, and installs and re-installs using portmaster seem to be working. pkg_info reports 14 good packages and 658 corrupt packages. If pkg_info is picking up packages installed after the conversion, why doesn't the sum of good and corrupt packages equal the number pkg reports? It was my understanding that after switching to pkgng, the pkg_* cmds should no longer be used. If that's the case, shouldn't the daily script have been modified by the upgrade process? Yes, you're correct that the pkg_info command should no longer be used after pkgng-ifying your system. Not because it's harmful or lead to any sort of breakage but simply because it won't return any meaningful information. Ideally, there shouldn't really be any of the old style package metadata left in /var/db/pkg after running pkg2ng but the conversion process may occasionaly stumble over the odd port or two. (In which case force the port in question to re-install. If you're using a package repository, that's 'pkg install -f pkgname' -- otherwise, just use the normal portmaster / portupgrade command you'ld have used pre-pkgng.) thanks. I was a bit confused; the ones that need to be reinstalled are the ones which pkg_info does *not* complain about. So now the daily/490.status-pkg-changes script will complain about all of them :-) Consistency is good. If you are a portmaster user be aware that it does store various bits to do with managing distfiles in /var/db/pkg/pkgname-ver/ subdirectories. These shouldn't be confused with old style pkg_install metadata -- the distinguishing feature is if they contain a +CONTENTS file. As to why pkg2ng doesn't disable pkg_install related periodic jobs -- pretty much because no one has implemented that. pkg comes with it's own set of periodic job scripts which should give you the equivalent set of reports via the pkg local database, so all we'd need to do is turn off any old pkg_install script and turn on the pkg equivalent. I've just created a new issue on github for that: https://github.com/freebsd/pkg/issues/599 Patches -- or even better, pull requests -- are welcome. Thanks for the clarification. Bit of a delay responding because something's screwed up with my mail service. It's been a while since I converted, so I'm fuzzy on what pkg2ng actually did. However, $ which pkg /usr/sbin/pkg $ pkg info pkg pkg-1.1.4_6 $ pkg which /usr/sbin/pkg /usr/sbin/pkg was not found in the database I was trying to find the set of pkg's own periodic job scripts but I don't see them, and I'm not really sure what to look for. I tried grepping for similarly numbered 490.status and similarly named status-pkg-changes and came up empty, although I see the file 490.status-pkg-changes.in in the distfile. Questions: 1. Is there some reason pkg which doesn't find itself? 2. Where is pkg supposed to install its own set of periodic job scripts and what do the names look like? 3. After reinstalling the ports reported by pkg_info as ok, one of them, x11-toolkits/wxgtk28 reinstalls fine but when done /var/db/pkg/wxgtk2-2.8.12_2 still contains old format files: -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 45 Aug 26 22:43 +COMMENT -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 3609 Aug 26 22:43 +CONTENTS -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel178 Aug 26 22:43 +DESC -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 17553 Aug 26 22:43 +MTREE_DIRS -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel137 Sep 30 13:54 distfiles Is it safe to simply delete the first four? Wasn't sure whether to file a bug on this or not, so I haven't. Gary ___ 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: after pkgng update, daily run still using pkg_info
On 09/28/13 10:52, Gary Aitken wrote: After switching to pkgng, I noticed that my daily run output constantly complains about the installed packages being corrupt, e.g.: pkg_info: the package info for package 'asciidoc-8.6.8_1' is corrupt The problem is with etc/periodic/daily/490.status-pkg-changes which is still using pkg_info instead of pkg info Was this script supposed to be automatically updated as part of the conversion? What's the right way to upgrade this on a 9.1 release system? Or should I just edit the script by hand and be done with it? On 09/28/13 13:57, Mark Felder wrote: Run pkg_info. If there is anything listed you have not fully converted to pkgng and have some old broken/corrupt packages. You'll want to clean this up. What does clean this up mean, and how does one go about it, given the system is converted to using pkgng? There is no /var/db/pkg/pkgdb.db Some of the packages reported as corrupt were installed *after* the conversion to pkgng, so why is pkg_info even noticing them? pkg info reports 705 packages installed, and installs and re-installs using portmaster seem to be working. pkg_info reports 14 good packages and 658 corrupt packages. If pkg_info is picking up packages installed after the conversion, why doesn't the sum of good and corrupt packages equal the number pkg reports? It was my understanding that after switching to pkgng, the pkg_* cmds should no longer be used. If that's the case, shouldn't the daily script have been modified by the upgrade process? Gary ___ 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: after pkgng update, daily run still using pkg_info
On 09/28/13 10:52, Gary Aitken wrote: After switching to pkgng, I noticed that my daily run output constantly complains about the installed packages being corrupt, e.g.: pkg_info: the package info for package 'asciidoc-8.6.8_1' is corrupt The problem is with etc/periodic/daily/490.status-pkg-changes which is still using pkg_info instead of pkg info Was this script supposed to be automatically updated as part of the conversion? What's the right way to upgrade this on a 9.1 release system? Or should I just edit the script by hand and be done with it? On 09/28/13 13:57, Mark Felder wrote: Run pkg_info. If there is anything listed you have not fully converted to pkgng and have some old broken/corrupt packages. You'll want to clean this up. What does clean this up mean, and how does one go about it, given the system is converted to using pkgng? There is no /var/db/pkg/pkgdb.db Some of the packages reported as corrupt were installed *after* the conversion to pkgng, so why is pkg_info even noticing them? pkg info reports 705 packages installed, and installs and re-installs using portmaster seem to be working. pkg_info reports 14 good packages and 658 corrupt packages. If pkg_info is picking up packages installed after the conversion, why doesn't the sum of good and corrupt packages equal the number pkg reports? It was my understanding that after switching to pkgng, the pkg_* cmds should no longer be used. If that's the case, shouldn't the daily script have been modified by the upgrade process? Gary ___ 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
after pkgng update, daily run still using pkg_info
After switching to pkgng, I noticed that my daily run output constantly complains about the installed packages being corrupt, e.g.: pkg_info: the package info for package 'asciidoc-8.6.8_1' is corrupt The problem is with etc/periodic/daily/490.status-pkg-changes which is still using pkg_info instead of pkg info Was this script supposed to be automatically updated as part of the conversion? What's the right way to upgrade this on a 9.1 release system? Or should I just edit the script by hand and be done with it? Gary ___ 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: after pkgng update, daily run still using pkg_info
Run pkg_info. If there is anything listed you have not fully converted to pkgng and have some old broken/corrupt packages. You'll want to clean this up. ___ 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: PKGNG
On 09/20/13 05:05, Ethan W. House wrote:
What is the status of pkgng. The handbook says to use it but else were it
says that the repos are empty due to a security incident last November.
Are there beta repos hidden somewhere that can be used? The reason I ask is
I want to install packages like Gimp and LibreOffice which will take a
fortnight on my laptop to compile. I tried pkg_add but that broke
everything when I updated to 9.2.
pkgng is in rude health. It's certainly usable -- you can enable it on
your systems and use it with the ports (portmaster, portupgrade style)
or you can try various repos which are available online.
The systems that will be the official FreeBSD pkg repo are on-line and
available for testing with:
% cat /usr/local/etc/pkg/repos/pkg-test.conf
---
pkg-test:
URL: http://pkg-test.freebsd.org/pkg-test-${ABI}/latest
ENABLED: YES
MIRROR_TYPE: SRV
This doesn't have package signatures yet, but otherwise it's pretty much
what will be the official pkg repository for 10.0-RELEASE.
There are other publicly available pkg repos, such as the one provided
by Exonetric which is at
http://mirror.exonetric.net/pub/pkgng/${ABI}/latest
Cheers,
Matthew
___
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: PKGNG
On 09/20/13 10:59, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
The following links are not accessible ( at least from Turkey ) :
http://pkg-test.freebsd.org/
http://pkg-test.freebsd.org/pkg-test-amd64/
http://pkg-test.freebsd.org/pkg-test-i386/
pkg-test.freebsd.org is a SRV record, not an A record[*]. pkg(8) will
be able to find the repo given the information I showed.
Also ${ABI} in pkg.conf expands to a string like freebsd:9:x86:64 which
includes more than just the CPU architecture.
Cheers,
Matthew
[*] This usage is not in compliance with RFC 2616 so the URL will need
to be changed at some point. See https://github.com/freebsd/pkg/issues/550
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: PKGNG
Thanks, that was exactly the information I was looking for.
Ethan House
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Matthew Seaman
m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
On 09/20/13 05:05, Ethan W. House wrote:
What is the status of pkgng. The handbook says to use it but else were it
says that the repos are empty due to a security incident last November.
Are there beta repos hidden somewhere that can be used? The reason I ask
is
I want to install packages like Gimp and LibreOffice which will take a
fortnight on my laptop to compile. I tried pkg_add but that broke
everything when I updated to 9.2.
pkgng is in rude health. It's certainly usable -- you can enable it on
your systems and use it with the ports (portmaster, portupgrade style)
or you can try various repos which are available online.
The systems that will be the official FreeBSD pkg repo are on-line and
available for testing with:
% cat /usr/local/etc/pkg/repos/pkg-test.conf
---
pkg-test:
URL: http://pkg-test.freebsd.org/pkg-test-${ABI}/latest
ENABLED: YES
MIRROR_TYPE: SRV
This doesn't have package signatures yet, but otherwise it's pretty much
what will be the official pkg repository for 10.0-RELEASE.
There are other publicly available pkg repos, such as the one provided
by Exonetric which is at
http://mirror.exonetric.net/pub/pkgng/${ABI}/latest
Cheers,
Matthew
___
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
___
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
PKGNG
What is the status of pkgng. The handbook says to use it but else were it says that the repos are empty due to a security incident last November. Are there beta repos hidden somewhere that can be used? The reason I ask is I want to install packages like Gimp and LibreOffice which will take a fortnight on my laptop to compile. I tried pkg_add but that broke everything when I updated to 9.2. Thanks, Ethan House ___ 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: pkgng problem
must be code unrot On 19 August 2013 16:13, Michael W. Lucas mwlu...@michaelwlucas.com wrote: For the archives: I left the problem alone for a few days, with no changes on my side. Came back Monday. Tried again. Everything worked on the affected machines. ==ml -- Michael W. Lucas - mwlu...@michaelwlucas.com, Twitter @mwlauthor http://www.MichaelWLucas.com/, http://blather.MichaelWLucas.com/ Absolute OpenBSD 2/e - http://www.nostarch.com/openbsd2e coupon code ILUVMICHAEL gets you 30% off helps me. ___ 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 ___ 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: pkgng problem
For the archives: I left the problem alone for a few days, with no changes on my side. Came back Monday. Tried again. Everything worked on the affected machines. ==ml -- Michael W. Lucas - mwlu...@michaelwlucas.com, Twitter @mwlauthor http://www.MichaelWLucas.com/, http://blather.MichaelWLucas.com/ Absolute OpenBSD 2/e - http://www.nostarch.com/openbsd2e coupon code ILUVMICHAEL gets you 30% off helps me. ___ 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
pkgng problem
Hi, I'm sure someone has had this before, but I can't find any reference to it. # pkg upgrade Updating repository catalogue digests.txz 100% 997KB 997.1KB/s 997.1KB/s 00:00 packagesite.txz 100% 5530KB 1.8MB/s 3.2MB/s 00:03 pkg: Invalid manifest format: mapping values are not allowed in this context Incremental update completed, 0 packages processed: 0 packages updated, 0 removed and 22568 added. pkg: No digest falling back on legacy catalog format packagesite repository catalogue is up-to-date, no need to fetch fresh copy Nothing to do This is from a machine freshly converted to pkgng. Any suggestions? Thanks, ==ml -- Michael W. Lucas - mwlu...@michaelwlucas.com, Twitter @mwlauthor http://www.MichaelWLucas.com/, http://blather.MichaelWLucas.com/ Absolute OpenBSD 2/e - http://www.nostarch.com/openbsd2e coupon code ILUVMICHAEL gets you 30% off helps me. ___ 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: pkgng problem
On 16/08/2013 13:43, Michael W. Lucas wrote: Hi, I'm sure someone has had this before, but I can't find any reference to it. # pkg upgrade Updating repository catalogue digests.txz 100% 997KB 997.1KB/s 997.1KB/s 00:00 packagesite.txz 100% 5530KB 1.8MB/s 3.2MB/s 00:03 pkg: Invalid manifest format: mapping values are not allowed in this context Incremental update completed, 0 packages processed: 0 packages updated, 0 removed and 22568 added. pkg: No digest falling back on legacy catalog format packagesite repository catalogue is up-to-date, no need to fetch fresh copy Nothing to do This is from a machine freshly converted to pkgng. Any suggestions? What repositories are you using? Please show us the result of: pkg -vv | sed -ne '/Repositories/,$p' I'd hazard a guess that the repository either had a bit of a flail when creating the catalogue, or it's running some ancient version of pkg. mapping values are not allowed in this context is an error message from libyaml, so you've got a +MANIFEST file (or the partial copy of it that gets incorporated into the repository catalogue) which it thinks contains a mapping ( a sequence of key : value pairs ) when the YAML parser was expecting an array or whatever. Cheers, Matthew ___ 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: pkgng problem
Thanks, Matt. # pkg -vv | sed -ne '/Repositories/,$p' Repositories: packagesite: url: http://pkg-test.freebsd.org/pkg-test-freebsd:9:x86:32/latest key: enabled: yes mirror_type: SRV Also: # pkg -v 1.1.4 ==ml -- Michael W. Lucas - mwlu...@michaelwlucas.com, Twitter @mwlauthor http://www.MichaelWLucas.com/, http://blather.MichaelWLucas.com/ Absolute OpenBSD 2/e - http://www.nostarch.com/openbsd2e coupon code ILUVMICHAEL gets you 30% off helps me. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: pkgng problem
On 16/08/2013 16:02, Michael W. Lucas wrote: Thanks, Matt. # pkg -vv | sed -ne '/Repositories/,$p' Repositories: packagesite: url: http://pkg-test.freebsd.org/pkg-test-freebsd:9:x86:32/latest key: enabled: yes mirror_type: SRV Also: # pkg -v 1.1.4 Well, looks like both of those are up-to-date versions. I wonder if the pkg-test build system threw a wobbly at all on it's i386 builder? Bapt is on holiday or I'd ask him. Cheers, Matthew ___ 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: pkgng problem
Matt, Another data point on this: Machines converted to pkgng a couple weeks ago can install new packages just fine despite showing the same error. And it looks like they download the new repo information: # pkg install sysrc Updating repository catalogue digests.txz 100% 997KB 997.1KB/s 997.1KB/s 00:00 packagesite.txz 100% 5530KB 1.4MB/s 1.9MB/s 00:04 pkg: Invalid manifest format: mapping values are not allowed in this contex Incremental update completed, 0 packages processed: 8292 packages updated, 1115 removed and 129 added. pkg: No digest falling back on legacy catalog format packagesite repository catalogue is up-to-date, no need to fetch fresh copy The following 1 packages will be installed: Installing sysrc: 5.2 The installation will require 39 kB more space 15 kB to be downloaded Proceed with installing packages [y/N]: y sysrc-5.2.txz 100% 16KB 15.8KB/s 15.8KB/s 00:00 Checking integrity... done [1/1] Installing sysrc-5.2... done Machines upgraded to pkgng this week, using the same script as I used a couple weeks ago, cannot install packages. # pkg install sysrc Updating repository catalogue digests.txz 100% 997KB 997.1KB/s 997.1KB/s 00:00 packagesite.txz 100% 5530KB 2.7MB/s 1.5MB/s 00:02 pkg: Invalid manifest format: mapping values are not allowed in this context Incremental update completed, 0 packages processed: 0 packages updated, 0 removed and 22568 added. pkg: No digest falling back on legacy catalog format packagesite repository catalogue is up-to-date, no need to fetch fresh copy pkg: No packages matching 'sysrc' has been found in the repositories Not sure if this supports the bad repo theory, but it's interesting. Thanks, ==ml -- Michael W. Lucas - mwlu...@michaelwlucas.com, Twitter @mwlauthor http://www.MichaelWLucas.com/, http://blather.MichaelWLucas.com/ Absolute OpenBSD 2/e - http://www.nostarch.com/openbsd2e coupon code ILUVMICHAEL gets you 30% off helps me. ___ 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: pkgng problem
Have you done a pkg update first, just in case you needed to pull in a pkgng update? -adrian ___ 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: pkgng problem
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 11:23:41AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: Have you done a pkg update first, just in case you needed to pull in a pkgng update? Yep, tried that. ==ml -- Michael W. Lucas - mwlu...@michaelwlucas.com, Twitter @mwlauthor http://www.MichaelWLucas.com/, http://blather.MichaelWLucas.com/ Absolute OpenBSD 2/e - http://www.nostarch.com/openbsd2e coupon code ILUVMICHAEL gets you 30% off helps me. ___ 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
Is pkgng supposed to upgrade a dependency of a locked package?
I am using pkgng 1.1.4_1 on RELENG_9 (r252725), operating on a local repo I maintain using poudriere 3.0.4. Recently, I wanted to upgrade all packages on a client except two whose update I want to defer for now as they potentially impact locally-developed applications. I figured I would use the pkgng lock functionality on those two packages (apache-solr and py27-Jinja2) to prevent them from being updated. I ran pkg upgrade on the client and, as expected, the locked packages weren't upgraded. However, I was surprised to see that packages upon which the locked packages depended were upgraded. Unless I'm misunderstanding something, the man page for pkg-lock states this should not happen: = The impact of locking a package is wider than simply preventing modifica- tions to the package itself. Any operation implying modification of the locked package will be blocked. This includes: [[...]] o Deletion, up- or downgrade of any package the locked package depends upon, either directly or as a consequence of installing or upgrading some third package. = In my case, the following dependencies of apache-solr were updated, even though apache-solr is locked: java-zoneinfo: 2013.c - 2013.d; libXi: 1.7.1_1,1 - 1.7.2,1; libXrender: 0.9.7_1 - 0.9.8; and openjdk: 7.21.11 - 7.25.15. In the case of the locked py27-Jinja2, these dependencies were updated: gettext: 0.18.1.1_1 - 0.18.3; and py27-MarkupSafe: 0.15 - 0.18. Dependency information in the two locked packages was updated to reflect these new, upgraded dependencies. Is this a bug, or am I misreading the man page? Cheers, Paul. ___ 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: Is pkgng supposed to upgrade a dependency of a locked package?
On 18/07/2013 13:42, Paul Mather wrote: I am using pkgng 1.1.4_1 on RELENG_9 (r252725), operating on a local repo I maintain using poudriere 3.0.4. Recently, I wanted to upgrade all packages on a client except two whose update I want to defer for now as they potentially impact locally-developed applications. I figured I would use the pkgng lock functionality on those two packages (apache-solr and py27-Jinja2) to prevent them from being updated. I ran pkg upgrade on the client and, as expected, the locked packages weren't upgraded. However, I was surprised to see that packages upon which the locked packages depended were upgraded. Unless I'm misunderstanding something, the man page for pkg-lock states this should not happen: = The impact of locking a package is wider than simply preventing modifica- tions to the package itself. Any operation implying modification of the locked package will be blocked. This includes: [[...]] o Deletion, up- or downgrade of any package the locked package depends upon, either directly or as a consequence of installing or upgrading some third package. = In my case, the following dependencies of apache-solr were updated, even though apache-solr is locked: java-zoneinfo: 2013.c - 2013.d; libXi: 1.7.1_1,1 - 1.7.2,1; libXrender: 0.9.7_1 - 0.9.8; and openjdk: 7.21.11 - 7.25.15. In the case of the locked py27-Jinja2, these dependencies were updated: gettext: 0.18.1.1_1 - 0.18.3; and py27-MarkupSafe: 0.15 - 0.18. Dependency information in the two locked packages was updated to reflect these new, upgraded dependencies. Is this a bug, or am I misreading the man page? That's a bug, definitely. The way the man page describes the effect of locking is what should happen -- nothing a locked package depends on should be modified by pkg without some extra input from the administrator to allow the change to happen. Cheers, Matthew ___ 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
[PKGNG] i386-wine-1.6.r4
Hi,
Pkgng packages are available for i386-wine-1.6.r4 [1] at local-distfiles [2].
Currently packages are available for FreeBSD 8 and 9 [3]. For previous
version of i386-wine replace 'latest' with the version number.
To install the port try one of the following options:
Method 1 (Quick and easy)
=
If wine already installed:
# pkg delete i386-wine
For FreeBSD 8 (as root):
# pkg add http://alturl.com/ih93t
For FreeBSD 9 (as root):
# pkg add http://alturl.com/opzyj
Method 2 (Multi-repo mode: secure, preferred)
=
To setup the repo and do initial port install (as root):
# mkdir -p /usr/local/etc/pkg/repos
# fetch -o /usr/local/etc/pkg/repos \
http://people.freebsd.org/~dbn/repos/wine.conf
# fetch -o /usr/local/etc/pkg/repos \
http://people.freebsd.org/~dbn/repos/wine.cert
# pkg update
# pkg install -r wine i386-wine
Please consider editing /usr/local/etc/pkg/repos/wine.conf to use one of the
many available mirrors[2]. To install an older version of wine change the
suffix latest to a version listed on the wiki[1].
To update already installed port (as root)
# pkg upgrade -r wine
Regards
David
[1] See the wiki for more details: http://wiki.FreeBSD.org/i386-Wine
[2] See your local FreeBSD mirror under ports/local-distfiles/dbn/i386-wine-
devel/${ABI}/latest where ABI=freebsd:X:x86:64 for X in {8, 9}. For a list of
mirrors please see
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/mirrors-ftp.html
[3] Packages are built from FreeBSD 8.3 and 9.1 respectively.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Fwd: [PKGNG] i386-wine-1.6.r2
Hi,
Pkgng packages are available for i386-wine-1.6.r2 [1] at local-distfiles [2].
Currently packages are available for FreeBSD 8 and 9 [3][4]. For previous
version of i386-wine replace 'latest' with the version number.
To install the port try one of the following options:
- Method 1 (Quick and easy)
For FreeBSD 8 (as root)
# pkg add http://alturl.com/ih93t
For FreeBSD 9 (as root)
# pkg add http://alturl.com/opzyj
- Method 2 (Repo)
This method will only be fully supported with pkgng v1.1.
Regards
David
P.S. I'll be available on Saturday to address any issues / questions.
[1] See the wiki for more details: http://wiki.FreeBSD.org/i386-Wine (WIP)
[2] See your local FreeBSD mirror under ports/local-distfiles/dbn/i386-wine-
devel/${ABI}/latest where ABI=freebsd:X:x86:64 for X in {8, 9}.
[3] Packages are built from FreeBSD 8.3 and 9.1 respectively.
[4] Packaging for FreeBSD 10 will be resumed in due course.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
pkgng dependencies change / update
Hi, I am trying to figure out how to change / update the dependencies on a package. I have a postfix package which comes from a server where mysql-client is in version 5.1 And I would like to install the same package on a server where mysql-client is in version 5.6 I am not sure if this is feasible. Of course when I try to install this package on the server, it tells me : jail: ns3 15:03:57 /home/gregober # pkg add postfix-2.10.0,1.txz Installing postfix-2.10.0,1...missing dependency mysql-client-5.1.68 Failed to install the following 1 package(s): postfix-2.10.0,1.txz I have tried to set the dependency to an updated version of the port : jail: ns3 15:04:16 /home/gregober # pkg set -o databases/mysql51-client:databases/mysql56-client Change origin from databases/mysql51-client to databases/mysql56-client for all dependencies? [y/N]: y But no luck !! Any idea how to do that ? «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ Your provider of OpenSource Appliances www.osnet.eu «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ PGP ID -- 0x1BA3C2FD ___ 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: pkgng dependencies change / update
On 31/05/2013 16:26, b...@todoo.biz wrote: Hi, I am trying to figure out how to change / update the dependencies on a package. I have a postfix package which comes from a server where mysql-client is in version 5.1 And I would like to install the same package on a server where mysql-client is in version 5.6 I am not sure if this is feasible. Of course when I try to install this package on the server, it tells me : jail: ns3 15:03:57 /home/gregober # pkg add postfix-2.10.0,1.txz Installing postfix-2.10.0,1...missing dependency mysql-client-5.1.68 Failed to install the following 1 package(s): postfix-2.10.0,1.txz I have tried to set the dependency to an updated version of the port : jail: ns3 15:04:16 /home/gregober # pkg set -o databases/mysql51-client:databases/mysql56-client Change origin from databases/mysql51-client to databases/mysql56-client for all dependencies? [y/N]: y But no luck !! Any idea how to do that ? Well, the best way is generally to use a package compiled against the correct set of dependencies in the first place. postfix will be linking against the MySQL client shared libraries. Those have different ABI versions between mysql51 and mysql56. Meaning you can't simply swap one for the other and expect things to still work. 'pkg set -o' looks like it does what you want, but really, it doesn't. What it does is allow smoothly replacing one complete dependency tree with another. So, running: # pkg set -o databases/mysql51-client:databases/mysql56-client is fine and dandy, and a necessary prerequisite to then running an upgrade against a package repo where everything that links against mysql client has been linked against mysql56-client specifically. In fact, you're doing things the wrong way round. 'pkg set -o' works on what has already been installed. You could in principle use 'pkg set -o' to switch your mysql56-client machine to using mysql51-client -- which means running 'pkg set -o ...' and then *reinstalling all the packages that depend on mysql56-client with equivalent packages linked against mysql51-client*. After that, your postfix package should install OK. Ultimate plans are that the need to use 'pkg set -o' should disappear entirely, as the package dependency solver should be clever enough to work out all this stuff for itself. There's also ideas about making more finely grained binary packages -- several packages from one port essentially. So out of each mysqlXX-client port there'd be several packages created, one of which contains just the shared libraries. The good thing about that is it will be possible to install shared libraries for several different mysqlXX versions simultaneously, which would make your postfix problem fairly trivial to solve. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[PKGNG] i386-wine-1.5.30
Hi,
Pkgng packages are available for i386-wine-1.5.30 [1] at local-distfiles [2].
Currently packages are available for FreeBSD 8 and 9 [3][4]. For previous
version of i386-wine replace 'latest' with the version number.
To install the port try one of the following options:
- Method 1 (Quick and easy)
For FreeBSD 8 (as root)
# pkg add http://alturl.com/4smzi
For FreeBSD 9 (as root)
# pkg add http://alturl.com/tn8mv
- Method 2 (Repo)
This method will only be fully supported with pkgng v1.1.
1) Set `PKG_MULTIREPOS' to `YES' in ${LOCALBASE}/etc/pkg.conf
2) Add repo `wine-devel' with URL [2] to ${LOCALBASE}/etc/pkg.conf
3) Install (as root):
# pkg install -r wine-devel i386-wine
or upgrade (as root):
# pkg upgrade -r wine-devel
Regards
David
P.S. I'll be available on Saturday to address any issues / questions.
[1] See the wiki for more details: http://wiki.FreeBSD.org/i386-Wine (WIP)
[2] See your local FreeBSD mirror under ports/local-distfiles/dbn/i386-wine-
devel/${ABI}/latest where ABI=freebsd:X:x86:64 for X in {8, 9}.
[3] Packages are built from FreeBSD 8.3 and 9.1 respectively.
[4] Packaging for FreeBSD 10 will be resumed in due course.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Are the procedure with portmaster exactly the same when one is using pkgng
I'm specifically thinking of the directories that has to be emptied or deleted. Thanks /Leslie Using portmaster to do a complete reinstallation of all your ports: 1. portmaster --list-origins ~/installed-port-list 2. Update your ports tree 3. portmaster -ty --clean-distfiles 4. portmaster --check-port-dbdir 5. portmaster -Faf 6. pkg_delete -a 7. rm -rf /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg 8. Back up any files in /usr/local you wish to save, such as configuration files in /usr/local/etc 9. Manually check /usr/local and /var/db/pkg to make sure that they are really empty 10. Re-install portmaster 11. portmaster `cat ~/installed-port-list` - ___ 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
pkgng repositories
Hello List, FreeBSD home page say it is still fixing some security breach and ETA is unknown. Does some noble soul maintain any publically accessible pkgng repo? Security is not much of a concern, it is going to live in VM. Building from ports is cumbersome for likes KDE, Xorg et. al. thanks, Quark ___ 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: pkgng repositories
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 6:54 AM, Quark unixuser2000-f...@yahoo.com wrote: Hello List, FreeBSD home page say it is still fixing some security breach and ETA is unknown. Does some noble soul maintain any publically accessible pkgng repo? Security is not much of a concern, it is going to live in VM. Building from ports is cumbersome for likes KDE, Xorg et. al. thanks, Quark http://mirror.exonetric.net/pub/pkgng/ Thank you very much . Mehmet Erol Sanliturk ___ 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: pkgng repositories
On Wed, 01 May 2013 08:54:33 -0500, Quark unixuser2000-f...@yahoo.com wrote: Does some noble soul maintain any publically accessible pkgng repo? PCBSD has one! ftp://ftp.pcbsd.org/pub/mirror/packages/9.1-RELEASE/amd64/ (or i386) ___ 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: pkgng repositories
On Wed, 01 May 2013 08:54:33 -0500, Quark unixuser2000-f...@yahoo.com wrote: Does some noble soul maintain any publically accessible pkgng repo? PCBSD has one! ftp://ftp.pcbsd.org/pub/mirror/packages/9.1-RELEASE/amd64/ (or i386) ___ Also if I remember right Xorg and KDE4 are included on the release DVD image. -- | _ ASCII Ribbon Eric S Pulley | ( ) Campaign Against pul...@dabus.com | X HTML Mail | / \ www.asciiribbon.org ___ 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: pkgng repositories
yes, it does, bit dated though. - Original Message - From: Eric S Pulley pul...@dabus.com To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Sent: Wednesday, 1 May 2013 8:24 PM Subject: Re: pkgng repositories On Wed, 01 May 2013 08:54:33 -0500, Quark unixuser2000-f...@yahoo.com wrote: Does some noble soul maintain any publically accessible pkgng repo? PCBSD has one! ftp://ftp.pcbsd.org/pub/mirror/packages/9.1-RELEASE/amd64/ (or i386) ___ Also if I remember right Xorg and KDE4 are included on the release DVD image. -- | _ ASCII Ribbon Eric S Pulley | ( ) Campaign Against pul...@dabus.com | X HTML Mail | / \ www.asciiribbon.org ___ 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 ___ 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: pkgng repositories
thanks guys, Mark Mehmt - Original Message - From: Mark Felder f...@feld.me To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Sent: Wednesday, 1 May 2013 7:33 PM Subject: Re: pkgng repositories On Wed, 01 May 2013 08:54:33 -0500, Quark unixuser2000-f...@yahoo.com wrote: Does some noble soul maintain any publically accessible pkgng repo? PCBSD has one! ftp://ftp.pcbsd.org/pub/mirror/packages/9.1-RELEASE/amd64/ (or i386) ___ 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 ___ 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
pkgng: ignoring some papckaes in 'pkg upgrade'
Hello, is possible to ignore some packages with the 'pkg upgrade' command ? In particular I don't want the upgrade of the 'conky' package, because it is compiled with a non-standard options. Thanks Maurizio ___ 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
pkgng / poudriere oddity
Hello list, It seems I'm experiencing some issues while trying to install packages that have dependencies that have other dependencies as well, or at least that's how I understand it. # uname -a FreeBSD host.example.com 9.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: Tue Dec 4 09:23:10 UTC 2012 r...@farrell.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 # pkg install mtr-nox11 Updating repository catalogue Repository catalogue is up-to-date, no need to fetch fresh copy The following packages will be installed: Installing gettext: 0.18.1.1_1 Installing pcre: 8.32 Installing libiconv: 1.14_1 Installing glib: 2.34.3 Installing libffi: 3.0.13 Installing perl: 5.14.2_3 Installing python27: 2.7.3_6 Installing mtr-nox11: 0.84 The installation will require 149 MB more space 0 B to be downloaded Proceed with installing packages [y/N]: y Checking integrity... done Installing gettext-0.18.1.1_1...missing dependency libiconv-1.14_1 # pkg rquery %n-%v libiconv libiconv-1.14_1 Is there an obvious reason why gettext dependencies are not pulled in and installed? If I do pkg install gettext all goes well and libiconv in installed as dependency. I've already did a poudriere bulk -j jail_name -p ports_tree -c -f pkg_list.txt for the pkg repo to no avail. To mention that on the host using pkgng I did several pkg delete -f for all packages installed except pkg. Thank you, Andrei Brezan ___ 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: pkgng / poudriere oddity
On 03/31/13 16:07, CyberLeo Kitsana wrote: On 03/31/2013 08:58 AM, Andrei Brezan wrote: Hello list, It seems I'm experiencing some issues while trying to install packages that have dependencies that have other dependencies as well, or at least that's how I understand it. # uname -a FreeBSD host.example.com 9.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: Tue Dec 4 09:23:10 UTC 2012 r...@farrell.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 # pkg install mtr-nox11 Updating repository catalogue Repository catalogue is up-to-date, no need to fetch fresh copy The following packages will be installed: Installing gettext: 0.18.1.1_1 Installing pcre: 8.32 Installing libiconv: 1.14_1 Installing glib: 2.34.3 Installing libffi: 3.0.13 Installing perl: 5.14.2_3 Installing python27: 2.7.3_6 Installing mtr-nox11: 0.84 The installation will require 149 MB more space 0 B to be downloaded Proceed with installing packages [y/N]: y Checking integrity... done Installing gettext-0.18.1.1_1...missing dependency libiconv-1.14_1 # pkg rquery %n-%v libiconv libiconv-1.14_1 Is there an obvious reason why gettext dependencies are not pulled in and installed? If I do pkg install gettext all goes well and libiconv in installed as dependency. I've already did a poudriere bulk -j jail_name -p ports_tree -c -f pkg_list.txt for the pkg repo to no avail. To mention that on the host using pkgng I did several pkg delete -f for all packages installed except pkg. Try turning PARALLEL_JOBS to 1 in poudriere.conf and then rebuilding all the packages. This sounds very similar to a behaviour I was witnessing with non-pkgng repos constructed by Poudriere, whereby the INDEX was ending up incomplete, and so the dependencies were never installed by pkg_add -r. I would imagine a similar race condition could be affecting pkgng as well. I just haven't had time to troubleshoot it very far, and the above seemed to alleviate the issue. # By default MAKE_JOBS is disabled to allow only one process per cpu # Use the following to allow it anyway ALLOW_MAKE_JOBS=yes This one enabled was the reason behind it, disabling it and rebuilding the whole repo fixed it. I've left PARALLEL_JOBS to default, # of core's. Thanks for the pointer, Andrei ___ 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: pkgng / poudriere oddity
On 03/31/2013 08:58 AM, Andrei Brezan wrote: Hello list, It seems I'm experiencing some issues while trying to install packages that have dependencies that have other dependencies as well, or at least that's how I understand it. # uname -a FreeBSD host.example.com 9.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: Tue Dec 4 09:23:10 UTC 2012 r...@farrell.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 # pkg install mtr-nox11 Updating repository catalogue Repository catalogue is up-to-date, no need to fetch fresh copy The following packages will be installed: Installing gettext: 0.18.1.1_1 Installing pcre: 8.32 Installing libiconv: 1.14_1 Installing glib: 2.34.3 Installing libffi: 3.0.13 Installing perl: 5.14.2_3 Installing python27: 2.7.3_6 Installing mtr-nox11: 0.84 The installation will require 149 MB more space 0 B to be downloaded Proceed with installing packages [y/N]: y Checking integrity... done Installing gettext-0.18.1.1_1...missing dependency libiconv-1.14_1 # pkg rquery %n-%v libiconv libiconv-1.14_1 Is there an obvious reason why gettext dependencies are not pulled in and installed? If I do pkg install gettext all goes well and libiconv in installed as dependency. I've already did a poudriere bulk -j jail_name -p ports_tree -c -f pkg_list.txt for the pkg repo to no avail. To mention that on the host using pkgng I did several pkg delete -f for all packages installed except pkg. Try turning PARALLEL_JOBS to 1 in poudriere.conf and then rebuilding all the packages. This sounds very similar to a behaviour I was witnessing with non-pkgng repos constructed by Poudriere, whereby the INDEX was ending up incomplete, and so the dependencies were never installed by pkg_add -r. I would imagine a similar race condition could be affecting pkgng as well. I just haven't had time to troubleshoot it very far, and the above seemed to alleviate the issue. -- Fuzzy love, -CyberLeo Furry Peace! - http://www.fur.com/peace/ ___ 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: pkgng
On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 18:54:00 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 15/12/2012 18:23, Walter Hurry wrote: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 15:31:03 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: 'm slowly collecting examples of applications where the shlib analysis doesn't work properly In case you don't already have them in your list: opnjdk7 libreoffice Thanks. Added to the list. It always has to be the really big projects (and tedious to debug because of that) doesn't it. Matthew, pkg check -Ba is still showing a number of false alarms for virtualbox- ose-4.2.6. Walter ___ 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: pkgng
On 12/02/2013 17:43, Walter Hurry wrote: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 18:54:00 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 15/12/2012 18:23, Walter Hurry wrote: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 15:31:03 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: 'm slowly collecting examples of applications where the shlib analysis doesn't work properly In case you don't already have them in your list: opnjdk7 libreoffice Thanks. Added to the list. It always has to be the really big projects (and tedious to debug because of that) doesn't it. Matthew, pkg check -Ba is still showing a number of false alarms for virtualbox- ose-4.2.6. Ah. OK. I'll investigate, at the weekend probably. Just to be sure, you are running pkgng master from Github, and not the release from ports? Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: pkgng
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 17:57:57 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 12/02/2013 17:43, Walter Hurry wrote: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 18:54:00 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 15/12/2012 18:23, Walter Hurry wrote: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 15:31:03 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: 'm slowly collecting examples of applications where the shlib analysis doesn't work properly In case you don't already have them in your list: opnjdk7 libreoffice Thanks. Added to the list. It always has to be the really big projects (and tedious to debug because of that) doesn't it. Matthew, pkg check -Ba is still showing a number of false alarms for virtualbox- ose-4.2.6. Ah. OK. I'll investigate, at the weekend probably. Just to be sure, you are running pkgng master from Github, and not the release from ports? No, I'm running the (up to date) version from the ports: $ pkg -v 1.0.7 $ ___ 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: pkgng package repository tracking security updates
On 14/01/2013 22:44, n j wrote: One thing to think about would be the option of port maintainers uploading the pre-compiled package of the updated port (or if the size of the upload is an issue then just the hash signature of the valid package archive so other people with more bandwidth can upload it) to help the package building cluster (at least for mainstream architectures). The idea behind it being that the port maintainer has to compile the port anyway and pkg create is not a big overhead. The result would be a sort of distributed package building solution. Sorry. Distributed package building like this is never going to be acceptable. Too much scope for anyone to introduce trojans into packages. Building packages securely is a very big deal, and as recent events have shown, you can't take any chances. Cheers, Matthew ___ 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: pkgng package repository tracking security updates
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Matthew Seaman matt...@freebsd.orgwrote: On 14/01/2013 22:44, n j wrote: One thing to think about would be the option of port maintainers uploading the pre-compiled package of the updated port (or if the size of the upload is an issue then just the hash signature of the valid package archive so other people with more bandwidth can upload it) to help the package building cluster (at least for mainstream architectures). The idea behind it being that the port maintainer has to compile the port anyway and pkg create is not a big overhead. The result would be a sort of distributed package building solution. Sorry. Distributed package building like this is never going to be acceptable. Too much scope for anyone to introduce trojans into packages. Building packages securely is a very big deal, and as recent events have shown, you can't take any chances. Cheers, Matthew I'd trust this system as far as I trust port maintainers right now. I understand that a port maintainer can submit arbitrary MASTER_SITES in a port Makefile which allows the maintainer to inject malware as they wish. If I trust the port maintainer to make me download and build something coming from e.g. http://samm.kiev.ua or http://danger.rulez.sk (just random picks, no offense intended), then I'd trust that maintainer to upload the package for me or submit a SHA256 hash that the correct package must have. So if somebody else were to build the package, the server would accept the upload only if it matches the hash. Am I overlooking something? Is there some kind of port verification by someone from the team prior to accepting the port submission? -- Nino ___ 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: pkgng package repository tracking security updates
n j nin...@gmail.com writes: On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Matthew Seaman matt...@freebsd.orgwrote: On 14/01/2013 22:44, n j wrote: One thing to think about would be the option of port maintainers uploading the pre-compiled package of the updated port (or if the size of the upload is an issue then just the hash signature of the valid package archive so other people with more bandwidth can upload it) to help the package building cluster (at least for mainstream architectures). The idea behind it being that the port maintainer has to compile the port anyway and pkg create is not a big overhead. The result would be a sort of distributed package building solution. Sorry. Distributed package building like this is never going to be acceptable. Too much scope for anyone to introduce trojans into packages. Building packages securely is a very big deal, and as recent events have shown, you can't take any chances. Cheers, Matthew I'd trust this system as far as I trust port maintainers right now. Well, almost. It would have to be cryptographically validated, which would be a bit of work to get right. I understand that a port maintainer can submit arbitrary MASTER_SITES in a port Makefile which allows the maintainer to inject malware as they wish. If I trust the port maintainer to make me download and build something coming from e.g. http://samm.kiev.ua or http://danger.rulez.sk (just random picks, no offense intended), then I'd trust that maintainer to upload the package for me or submit a SHA256 hash that the correct package must have. So if somebody else were to build the package, the server would accept the upload only if it matches the hash. It's easier to sneak something into a binary than a source code package, although you can never be *completely* sure either way (c.f., Ken Thompson's classic speech Reflections on Trusting Trust). In practice, some amount of subterfuge would be required for the attacker to keep from being found out too soon to do much good; possibly quite a lot of subterfuge, if the port gets run on TrustedBSD systems or other forms of system auditing. Once anyone notices a problem, the port will be shut down quickly. Am I overlooking something? Is there some kind of port verification by someone from the team prior to accepting the port submission? Well, a committer has to check the port in personally, but deliberate sabotage could probably sneak by the committer most of the time. - Lowell ___ 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
pkgng package repository tracking security updates
Hi, One of my primary concerns when managing a system is its security. In the interest of security, I usually hold to that patch early, patch often. Ports are kept well up-to-date and with portmaster it is not a problem to keep updating the ports. However, as Ivan [1] pointed out on his blog on pkgng: Having source-based ports is all fine and well but all that time compiling ports is subtracted from the time the server(s) would perform some actually useful work. After all, servers exist to do some work, not to be waited on while compiling. The same goes for me: I don't want to wait for ports anymore. I don't want to wait for compilation too, especially on large ports and weak hardware, and do it often to stay on top of security vulnerabilities. For that reason I look forward to binary packages. So, my question regarding pkgng is not really about the tool itself, but rather what will be provided via official repositories. One of the problems with the old pkg_* tools was that packages for a lot of software didn't exist and for those that did exist they weren't updated when vulnerabilities were discovered and patched upstream (and in ports). Is this going to improve with pkgng repositories, will there be a, say, -SECURITY repository that will build the new version of packages at least as often as security vulnerabilities are fixed in ports? [1] http://ivoras.net/blog/tree/2012-08-31.using-pkgng-in-real-life.html Regards, -- Nino ___ 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: pkgng package repository tracking security updates
On 1/14/2013 1:07 PM, n j wrote: Hi, One of my primary concerns when managing a system is its security. In the interest of security, I usually hold to that patch early, patch often. Ports are kept well up-to-date and with portmaster it is not a problem to keep updating the ports. However, as Ivan [1] pointed out on his blog on pkgng: Having source-based ports is all fine and well but all that time compiling ports is subtracted from the time the server(s) would perform some actually useful work. After all, servers exist to do some work, not to be waited on while compiling. The same goes for me: I don't want to wait for ports anymore. I don't want to wait for compilation too, especially on large ports and weak hardware, and do it often to stay on top of security vulnerabilities. For that reason I look forward to binary packages. So, my question regarding pkgng is not really about the tool itself, but rather what will be provided via official repositories. One of the problems with the old pkg_* tools was that packages for a lot of software didn't exist and for those that did exist they weren't updated when vulnerabilities were discovered and patched upstream (and in ports). Is this going to improve with pkgng repositories, will there be a, say, -SECURITY repository that will build the new version of packages at least as often as security vulnerabilities are fixed in ports? [1] http://ivoras.net/blog/tree/2012-08-31.using-pkgng-in-real-life.html Regards, Hi Nino, I thing that it's good to wait for ports to compile and to be able to chose your configure options for the packages you install. It's good to know what options you need and what options you don't and why, that's one of the reasons why i'm using FreeBSD. I feel that the goal for pkgng is that you can install your locally built binary packages in a tinderbox on all your infrastructure so you don't have to compile every port on every server. IIRC it was considered too cumbersome to compile all the ports tree for all the architectures supported and provide the so called official binary repositories. Regards, Andrei ___ 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: pkgng package repository tracking security updates
On 14/01/2013 13:10, Andrei Brezan wrote: I thing that it's good to wait for ports to compile and to be able to chose your configure options for the packages you install. It's good to know what options you need and what options you don't and why, that's one of the reasons why i'm using FreeBSD. I feel that the goal for pkgng is that you can install your locally built binary packages in a tinderbox on all your infrastructure so you don't have to compile every port on every server. IIRC it was considered too cumbersome to compile all the ports tree for all the architectures supported and provide the so called official binary repositories. No, that's not *the* goal for pkgng. The goal is to provide a state-of-the-art binary package management system for FreeBSD (and anyone else who would like to use it). For many users this will entail downloading pre-compiled packages from FreeBSD official repositories. But it will be possible for third parties to set up their own repositories, in the same way that eg. the Postgresql project has their own Yum repositories for RH-alikes. It will also be possible for people to compile their own packages either for direct installation, or to create their own private repositories to serve their own networks with their custom configured packages. And, ideally, people will be able to use a *mix* of the above as best suits their needs. Cheers, Matthew ___ 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: pkgng package repository tracking security updates
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Andrei Brezan andrei...@gmail.com wrote: On 1/14/2013 1:07 PM, n j wrote: Hi, One of my primary concerns when managing a system is its security. In the interest of security, I usually hold to that patch early, patch often. Ports are kept well up-to-date and with portmaster it is not a problem to keep updating the ports. However, as Ivan [1] pointed out on his blog on pkgng: Having source-based ports is all fine and well but all that time compiling ports is subtracted from the time the server(s) would perform some actually useful work. After all, servers exist to do some work, not to be waited on while compiling. The same goes for me: I don't want to wait for ports anymore. I don't want to wait for compilation too, especially on large ports and weak hardware, and do it often to stay on top of security vulnerabilities. For that reason I look forward to binary packages. So, my question regarding pkgng is not really about the tool itself, but rather what will be provided via official repositories. One of the problems with the old pkg_* tools was that packages for a lot of software didn't exist and for those that did exist they weren't updated when vulnerabilities were discovered and patched upstream (and in ports). Is this going to improve with pkgng repositories, will there be a, say, -SECURITY repository that will build the new version of packages at least as often as security vulnerabilities are fixed in ports? [1] http://ivoras.net/blog/tree/**2012-08-31.using-pkgng-in-** real-life.htmlhttp://ivoras.net/blog/tree/2012-08-31.using-pkgng-in-real-life.html Regards, Hi Nino, I thing that it's good to wait for ports to compile and to be able to chose your configure options for the packages you install. It's good to know what options you need and what options you don't and why, that's one of the reasons why i'm using FreeBSD. I feel that the goal for pkgng is that you can install your locally built binary packages in a tinderbox on all your infrastructure so you don't have to compile every port on every server. IIRC it was considered too cumbersome to compile all the ports tree for all the architectures supported and provide the so called official binary repositories. Regards, Andrei Hi Andrei, ports system is not going away with pkgng and it is still there for everyone who, like yourself, appreciates choosing all configure options and compile it by hand. I know that I'm not the only one who appreciates the practicality of binary packages and that is why I'm wondering if there are any plans for supplying the packages on a more consistent basis. I do understand that the infrastructure is limited and this might be cumbersome, but Linux distributions are doing it and while the same model probably isn't applicable to the smaller FreeBSD community, there are ways around that - building new versions only when (major?) security issues are identified, doing it for a limited scope of (most commonly used?) packages, using some kind of distributed hosting (e.g. torrents with maintainer-uploaded digital signatures) and so on. Regards, -- Nino ___ 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: pkgng package repository tracking security updates
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Matthew Seaman matt...@freebsd.org wrote: On 14/01/2013 13:10, Andrei Brezan wrote: I thing that it's good to wait for ports to compile and to be able to chose your configure options for the packages you install. It's good to know what options you need and what options you don't and why, that's one of the reasons why i'm using FreeBSD. I feel that the goal for pkgng is that you can install your locally built binary packages in a tinderbox on all your infrastructure so you don't have to compile every port on every server. IIRC it was considered too cumbersome to compile all the ports tree for all the architectures supported and provide the so called official binary repositories. No, that's not *the* goal for pkgng. The goal is to provide a state-of-the-art binary package management system for FreeBSD (and anyone else who would like to use it). For many users this will entail downloading pre-compiled packages from FreeBSD official repositories. But it will be possible for third parties to set up their own repositories, in the same way that eg. the Postgresql project has their own Yum repositories for RH-alikes. It will also be possible for people to compile their own packages either for direct installation, or to create their own private repositories to serve their own networks with their custom configured packages. And, ideally, people will be able to use a *mix* of the above as best suits their needs. Cheers, Matthew Hi Matthew, The point of my question was exactly if it was possible to elaborate on the pre-compiled packages from FreeBSD official repositories part. Would it be possible to have a (security-wise) up-to-date pre-compiled packages in the official repositories? Note, I don't expect an unreasonable effort here - I understand there will always be delays between upstream fix -- ports fix -- up-to-date package and it is acceptable for the binary package to lag a few days behind the port (depending on the availability of package building cluster or maintainer upload). Regards, -- Nino ___ 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: pkgng package repository tracking security updates
On 14/01/2013 14:36, n j wrote: The point of my question was exactly if it was possible to elaborate on the pre-compiled packages from FreeBSD official repositories part. Would it be possible to have a (security-wise) up-to-date pre-compiled packages in the official repositories? Note, I don't expect an unreasonable effort here - I understand there will always be delays between upstream fix -- ports fix -- up-to-date package and it is acceptable for the binary package to lag a few days behind the port (depending on the availability of package building cluster or maintainer upload). Yes, there will be a pkgng package building cluster which will track updates to the ports and provide as up-to-date a collection of packages as possible for at least x86, amd64 on all supporter FreeBSD branches and head. Possibly other architectures as well. However, as all that is still under construction (and construction plans have been heavily revised in the light of the earlier security compromise) I have no good idea of what sort of turn-around will be possible. I expect at least as good as the old pkg build cluster managed and probably better. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk ___ 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: pkgng package repository tracking security updates
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote: On 14/01/2013 14:36, n j wrote: The point of my question was exactly if it was possible to elaborate on the pre-compiled packages from FreeBSD official repositories part. Would it be possible to have a (security-wise) up-to-date pre-compiled packages in the official repositories? Note, I don't expect an unreasonable effort here - I understand there will always be delays between upstream fix -- ports fix -- up-to-date package and it is acceptable for the binary package to lag a few days behind the port (depending on the availability of package building cluster or maintainer upload). Yes, there will be a pkgng package building cluster which will track updates to the ports and provide as up-to-date a collection of packages as possible for at least x86, amd64 on all supporter FreeBSD branches and head. Possibly other architectures as well. However, as all that is still under construction (and construction plans have been heavily revised in the light of the earlier security compromise) I have no good idea of what sort of turn-around will be possible. I expect at least as good as the old pkg build cluster managed and probably better. Cheers, Matthew Thanks, that's encouraging news. One thing to think about would be the option of port maintainers uploading the pre-compiled package of the updated port (or if the size of the upload is an issue then just the hash signature of the valid package archive so other people with more bandwidth can upload it) to help the package building cluster (at least for mainstream architectures). The idea behind it being that the port maintainer has to compile the port anyway and pkg create is not a big overhead. The result would be a sort of distributed package building solution. Regards, -- Nino ___ 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: pkgng - Symlinks created by portupgrade?
On 11/01/2013 15:18, Walter Hurry wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 01:50:34 +, Walter Hurry wrote:
Thank you yet again, Matthew. As always, you are a fount of knowledge.
The guidance on LATEST_LINK has helped a great deal. I still have a
further question or two though; I shall follow up within a day or two.
Just one further question: Is there a reason why 'pkg create' doesn't
generate synonyms this way, even when the output directory is set to /usr/
ports/packages/All?
Yes. 'pkg create' may be used to create arbitrary packages outside the
context of ports, so it doesn't want to assume the LATEST_LINK layout.
(All you need is an appropriate MANIFEST file... or a previously
installed package on your system.)
Like I said, for the purpose of generating a pkgng repo, this whole
question of directory structure is pretty much immaterial: pkgng doesn't
care. Any sort of directory structure containing .txz package tarballs
will do. (Usually putting all the pkgs together in one big directory is
what happens.)
The LATEST_LINK layout is aimed at people logging into a ftp server and
hunting through the directory tree for the packages they want. Most
pkgng repos won't let you login like that, nor will all of them
necessarily let you get a directory listing, other than the data you can
extract from repo.sqlite.
As for special casing things when writing to ${PORTSDIR}/packages/All --
no one has seen fit to write the code to do that. If you think this
sort of functionality would be useful, well, we always like to get pull
requests. I would point out though that there is already perfectly good
code in bsd.port.mk et al to do this sort of thing, which you can access
by 'make package'.
Cheers,
Matthew
___
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: pkgng - Symlinks created by portupgrade?
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:50:56 +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 11/01/2013 15:18, Walter Hurry wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 01:50:34 +, Walter Hurry wrote:
Thank you yet again, Matthew. As always, you are a fount of knowledge.
The guidance on LATEST_LINK has helped a great deal. I still have a
further question or two though; I shall follow up within a day or two.
Just one further question: Is there a reason why 'pkg create' doesn't
generate synonyms this way, even when the output directory is set to
/usr/
ports/packages/All?
Yes. 'pkg create' may be used to create arbitrary packages outside the
context of ports, so it doesn't want to assume the LATEST_LINK layout.
(All you need is an appropriate MANIFEST file... or a previously
installed package on your system.)
Like I said, for the purpose of generating a pkgng repo, this whole
question of directory structure is pretty much immaterial: pkgng doesn't
care. Any sort of directory structure containing .txz package tarballs
will do. (Usually putting all the pkgs together in one big directory is
what happens.)
The LATEST_LINK layout is aimed at people logging into a ftp server and
hunting through the directory tree for the packages they want. Most
pkgng repos won't let you login like that, nor will all of them
necessarily let you get a directory listing, other than the data you can
extract from repo.sqlite.
As for special casing things when writing to ${PORTSDIR}/packages/All --
no one has seen fit to write the code to do that. If you think this
sort of functionality would be useful, well, we always like to get pull
requests. I would point out though that there is already perfectly good
code in bsd.port.mk et al to do this sort of thing, which you can access
by 'make package'.
Thanks for the comprehensive explanation, Matthew. It's no big deal; I
was just curious. Yes, I was aware that pkg repo ignores symlinks - it
says so in 'man pkg-repo'.
___
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
pkgng - Symlinks created by portupgrade?
I am using pkgng. When I issue 'portupgrade package -p', after build and installation, it builds a new package, as advertised. This (by default) is put into /usr/ ports/packages/All. At the same time, it installs a set of symlinks; one for each relevant port category, plus one in /usr/ports/packages/Latest. It is the naming of this last in which I am interested. Sometimes the symlink seems to bear the name (absent the version) of the package, and sometimes the name of the port (plus '.txz', of course). Two questions: 1) Does anyone know the logic used to derive the name of the symlink? 2) Would it be considered a breach of etiquette to email the port maintainer (bdrewery) and ask, or is this regarded as acceptable? 'man portupgrade' doesn't seem to shed any light on this, and I am unaware of where to seek other documentation. ___ 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: pkgng - Symlinks created by portupgrade?
On 09/01/2013 18:31, Walter Hurry wrote: I am using pkgng. When I issue 'portupgrade package -p', after build and installation, it builds a new package, as advertised. This (by default) is put into /usr/ ports/packages/All. At the same time, it installs a set of symlinks; one for each relevant port category, plus one in /usr/ports/packages/Latest. It is the naming of this last in which I am interested. Sometimes the symlink seems to bear the name (absent the version) of the package, and sometimes the name of the port (plus '.txz', of course). Two questions: 1) Does anyone know the logic used to derive the name of the symlink? 2) Would it be considered a breach of etiquette to email the port maintainer (bdrewery) and ask, or is this regarded as acceptable? 'man portupgrade' doesn't seem to shed any light on this, and I am unaware of where to seek other documentation. The layout of /usr/ports/packages is actually down to the ports system directly and not in the control of any add on software like portupgrade, portmaster or pkgng. The files under /usr/ports/packages/Latest are named according to the LATEST_LINK variable in each port. It's meant to be unique per-port, but falls somewhat short. Various ports have NO_LATEST_LINK set which suppresses creating that link. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
pkgng - Obsolete Dependencies?
On several of my boxes (set up with pkgng), libcheck was recorded as a dependency of a number of (wxPython etc.) packages. However, I noticed that on a fresh install, libcheck did not get pulled in. So I returned to the older boxes and reinstalled the depending packages, using 'pkg install -f'. Lo and behold, the dependencies disappeared. Is this expected behaviour? ___ 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: pkgng - Obsolete Dependencies?
On 03/01/2013 20:59, Walter Hurry wrote: On several of my boxes (set up with pkgng), libcheck was recorded as a dependency of a number of (wxPython etc.) packages. However, I noticed that on a fresh install, libcheck did not get pulled in. So I returned to the older boxes and reinstalled the depending packages, using 'pkg install -f'. Lo and behold, the dependencies disappeared. Is this expected behaviour? As far as I can see, libcheck is not currently a dependency of any of the x11-toolkits/py-wx* ports. As libcheck is a unit test framework, it would be unlikely to be anything other than a BUILD_DEPENDS anyhow -- and if you use pkgng with a repo, the only packages you'ld install and the only dependencies pkgng would record are the RUN_DEPENDS and LIB_DEPENDS. So I don't know why it appeared on your older systems, but having it disappear on the updated ones would be correct and the expected outcome. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Another question about pkgng
On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 00:02:51 +, Walter Hurry wrote: On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 21:54:50 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 24/11/2012 20:28, Walter Hurry wrote: When I issue 'pkg version -R' it does not actually use the remote repository for comparison; instead it uses the local cache of the remote repository, i.e. it checks local.sqlite against repo.sqlite. That's fine, but should it not do a 'pkg update' first? That would be consistent with the way 'pkg upgrade' and 'pkg install' behave, so personally I think that would be a yes. Can you open an issue on Github so this point does not get forgotten please? https://github.com/pkgng/pkgng/issues Thanks, Matthew. Done - Issue #396 Sterling work, Matthew*; thanks for all your efforts. (* It's fixed in 1.1) ___ 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
pkgng
My system: FreeBSD 9.1-RC3 #0 r242324: Tue Oct 30 00:18:27 UTC 2012 r...@obrian.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 I installed new pkg, I have WITH_PKGNG=yes in /etc/make.conf, I ran pkg2ng and I use portmaster. I turned ON SHLIBS=YES in pkg.conf and pkg_check -Ba show: pkg check -Ba pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk_images.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk_forms.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (htmldoc-1.8.27_7) shared library libfltk_images.so.1.3 not found pkg: (htmldoc-1.8.27_7) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbasewx.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbasewx.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbasewx.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginlines.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libceleste.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library liblocalfeatures.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libceleste.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbasewx.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libceleste.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libicpfindlib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbasewx.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginbase.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libhuginvigraimpex.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libmakefilelib.so.0.0 not found pkg: (hugin-2011.4.0_3) shared library libicpfindlib.so.0.0 not
Re: pkgng
On 15/12/2012 14:16, ajtiM wrote: My system: FreeBSD 9.1-RC3 #0 r242324: Tue Oct 30 00:18:27 UTC 2012 r...@obrian.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 I installed new pkg, I have WITH_PKGNG=yes in /etc/make.conf, I ran pkg2ng and I use portmaster. I turned ON SHLIBS=YES in pkg.conf and pkg_check -Ba show: pkg check -Ba pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk_images.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk_forms.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found pkg: (fltk-1.3.2) shared library libfltk.so.1.3 not found [... repetetive stuff elided ...] allocate memory pkg: elf_begin() for /usr/local/man/man1/jackstart.1.gz failed: I/O error: Cannot allocate memory pkg: Cannot mmap /var/run/ld-elf.so.hints: Cannot allocate memory I rebuilt hugin, fltk and jack and ran again but I got the same. Thank you for the report. I'll add it to issue #403 at the pkgng github (https://github.com/pkgng/pkgng/issues/403) so it doesn't get forgotten. I'm slowly collecting examples of applications where the shlib analysis doesn't work properly so I can debug them. Sometimes it seems to be due to ports needing LD_LIBRARY_PATH set in the environment, which we can't do much about, but there are other cases which seemingly have a different etiology. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: pkgng
On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 15:31:03 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: 'm slowly collecting examples of applications where the shlib analysis doesn't work properly In case you don't already have them in your list: opnjdk7 libreoffice ___ 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: pkgng
On 15/12/2012 18:23, Walter Hurry wrote: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 15:31:03 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: 'm slowly collecting examples of applications where the shlib analysis doesn't work properly In case you don't already have them in your list: opnjdk7 libreoffice Thanks. Added to the list. It always has to be the really big projects (and tedious to debug because of that) doesn't it. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Issue with the pkgng repository
I have another minor issue with pkgng: Say package foo-1.0 depends on bar-1.0. Then bar-1.0 is upgraded to version 1.1. So a new package bar-1.1 is built (from the port), and replaces bar-1.0 in the repository. The repository database is then updated using 'pkg repo'. Now the repository database is out of whack: It still thinks foo-1.0 depends on bar-1.0 (the deps table in the compressed repo.sqlite database - i.e. repo.txz in the repository). Admittedly the packages will still install (from the repository in question) on another machine, but nevertheless it doesn't seem quite right. One workaround is to re-create the foo package (plus any others depending on bar) and refresh the repository, but is this an omission? ___ 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: Issue with the pkgng repository
On 04/12/2012 20:52, Walter Hurry wrote: I have another minor issue with pkgng: Say package foo-1.0 depends on bar-1.0. Then bar-1.0 is upgraded to version 1.1. So a new package bar-1.1 is built (from the port), and replaces bar-1.0 in the repository. The repository database is then updated using 'pkg repo'. Now the repository database is out of whack: It still thinks foo-1.0 depends on bar-1.0 (the deps table in the compressed repo.sqlite database - i.e. repo.txz in the repository). Admittedly the packages will still install (from the repository in question) on another machine, but nevertheless it doesn't seem quite right. One workaround is to re-create the foo package (plus any others depending on bar) and refresh the repository, but is this an omission? This is a flaw in your package repository maintenance process. If bar-1.0 is upgraded to bar-1.1 then you should rebuild all the packages that have a direct dependency on it, and possibly many of the packages that have an indirect dependency too. I say 'rebuild' because that is generally what happens in practice, even though in many cases you could probably get away with simply repackaging everything that requires bar-1.x. Not always though, and it's hard to tell the difference programatically in the general case. If, for example, bar-1.0 provides libbar.so.1 and bar-1.1 provides libbar.so.2 then full rebuilds are definitely required for anything that ultimately links against libbar.so. And to discover that 100% accurately, you have to examine the dynamic linkage characteristics of every ELF file in every package with bar-1.x somewhere in its dependency tree. (No, LIB_DEPENDS cannot be relied on for this) That's just once example reason why you might need a full rebuild. There are many more. Which is why it is standard to just punt and rebuild everything that requires bar-1.x. Tracking this sort of stuff manually is pretty tedious. Which is why things like poudriere and tinderbox exist; so you can automate. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Issue with the pkgng repository
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 21:32:19 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: This is a flaw in your package repository maintenance process. Helpful and detailed response snipped for brevity Thanks. Noted. I shall rethink the process accordingly. ___ 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: using new pkgng system on 9.0 system
Tomorrow I'm going to prepare a 9.1-RC3 with pkgng. Wish me luck :) Where is the pkgng repository for 9.1-RC3? -- Richard -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. ___ 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: using new pkgng system on 9.0 system
Matthew Seaman wrote: On 23/11/2012 19:19, Fbsd8 wrote: Where do I find the url for the beta-test server repositories? Can I use ftp or browser to see index content? pkg.conf as supplied in the port-mgmt/pkg port comes with the right URL for the FreeBSD pkg repo[*], which is currently pointing at the beta-test repo, but which will in the fullness of time be changed to point at the actual production repo. There is no pkg.conf supplied. It's named as pkg.conf.sample this fact is not mentioned anywhere. pkg should be released with a default pkg.conf not a pkg.conf.sample so pkg is ready to function right from the original install of pkg. No, in general you can't assume that you'll be able to browse the repo using a web browser or similar. Even if you could, all you'ld see is a lot of pkg tarballs which would tell you the package names and versions and how much data you'll need to download and not a lot else. Use the repo catalogue. It can tell you almost anything you might want to know about the available packages in the repo. Cheers, Matthew [*] Note: the default URL uses an SRV record in the DNS, which typical web browsers don't know how to handle. You'll just get NXDOMAIN if you try and point Firefox at it. For those who know how to handle SRV records, it looks like this: worm:~:% dig _http._tcp.pkg.freebsd.org IN SRV ; DiG 9.8.3-P4 _http._tcp.pkg.freebsd.org IN SRV ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 48300 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;_http._tcp.pkg.freebsd.org.IN SRV ;; ANSWER SECTION: _http._tcp.pkg.freebsd.org. 3600 IN SRV 10 10 80 pkgbeta.FreeBSD.org. ;; Query time: 44 msec ;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8) ;; WHEN: Fri Nov 23 21:13:50 2012 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 83 Yes the url pkgbeta.FreeBSD.org can be browsed using a browser. As of Nov 28 pkgbeta.FreeBSD.org only contains the pkg package. So in conclusion, pkg is not ready for testing. ___ 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
Another question about pkgng
When I issue 'pkg version -R' it does not actually use the remote repository for comparison; instead it uses the local cache of the remote repository, i.e. it checks local.sqlite against repo.sqlite. That's fine, but should it not do a 'pkg update' first? ___ 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: Another question about pkgng
On 24/11/2012 20:28, Walter Hurry wrote: When I issue 'pkg version -R' it does not actually use the remote repository for comparison; instead it uses the local cache of the remote repository, i.e. it checks local.sqlite against repo.sqlite. That's fine, but should it not do a 'pkg update' first? That would be consistent with the way 'pkg upgrade' and 'pkg install' behave, so personally I think that would be a yes. Can you open an issue on Github so this point does not get forgotten please? https://github.com/pkgng/pkgng/issues Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Another question about pkgng
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 21:54:50 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 24/11/2012 20:28, Walter Hurry wrote: When I issue 'pkg version -R' it does not actually use the remote repository for comparison; instead it uses the local cache of the remote repository, i.e. it checks local.sqlite against repo.sqlite. That's fine, but should it not do a 'pkg update' first? That would be consistent with the way 'pkg upgrade' and 'pkg install' behave, so personally I think that would be a yes. Can you open an issue on Github so this point does not get forgotten please? https://github.com/pkgng/pkgng/issues Thanks, Matthew. Done - Issue #396 ___ 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: Another question about pkgng
- Sent via BlackBerry from Thai Citrus -Original Message- From: Walter Hurry walterhu...@gmail.com Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.orgDate: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 00:02:51 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Another question about pkgng On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 21:54:50 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 24/11/2012 20:28, Walter Hurry wrote: When I issue 'pkg version -R' it does not actually use the remote repository for comparison; instead it uses the local cache of the remote repository, i.e. it checks local.sqlite against repo.sqlite. That's fine, but should it not do a 'pkg update' first? That would be consistent with the way 'pkg upgrade' and 'pkg install' behave, so personally I think that would be a yes. Can you open an issue on Github so this point does not get forgotten please? https://github.com/pkgng/pkgng/issues Thanks, Matthew. Done - Issue #396 ___ 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 ___ 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: using new pkgng system on 9.0 system
Matthew Seaman wrote: On 22/11/2012 14:51, Fbsd8 wrote: Since pkg is being replaced by pkgng in Release 10.0 I would like to get head start by playing with it on my 9.0 system. Cool. Where can I find a write up about installing and using pkgng? If you start from http://wiki.freebsd.org/pkgng (which has quite a bit of information in its own right) there are links to a number of articles where people describe their experiences with pkgng. Have all the pkg packages been converted to pkgng format and are they being kept up to date? Ah. Now, there you have zeroed in on the biggest stumbling point at the moment. There are binary packages available, but only from the beta-test server, and they aren't necessarily updated promptly, nor is there a guarantee that every package you want might will be available. Almost all ports will work just fine with pkgng -- the few exceptions really are in need of fixing in any case; it's just that pkg_tools lets you get away with things that pkgng doesn't. Most people testing pkgng at the moment are building their own package sets -- poudriere is a popular choice for doing that -- and setting up their own private repositories. There should have been official FreeBSD pkgng repos available 'Real Soon Now' -- recent events have put the schedule back significantly, and everyone is primarily concerned with doing it right rather than doing it quickly. So, please wait patiently for an announcement. It will happen, even if it does seem an interminable wait. Cheers, Matthew Can I browse the beta-test server repositories for the packages I want? ___ 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: using new pkgng system on 9.0 system
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote: Most people testing pkgng at the moment are building their own package sets -- poudriere is a popular choice for doing that -- and setting up their own private repositories. There should have been official FreeBSD pkgng repos available 'Real Soon Now' -- recent events have put the schedule back significantly, and everyone is primarily concerned with doing it right rather than doing it quickly. So, please wait patiently for an announcement. It will happen, even if it does seem an interminable wait. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk Mathew Can' we create a new format package using recent version of portmaster? Or am I reading everything incorrectly? Amitabh ___ 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
pkgng usage
Installed pkgng as port. Converted my old pkg database to new format. Ran pkg delete for virtualbox package using it's full name from pkg info. That worked fine. But it left behind all it's dependences. Command pkg autoremove says there is noting to do. How do I find and remove orphaned packages? The ___ 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: using new pkgng system on 9.0 system
On 23/11/2012 16:24, Amitabh Kant wrote: Can' we create a new format package using recent version of portmaster? Or am I reading everything incorrectly? Yes, you can certainly do that. portmaster works pretty well with pkgng although it is still missing a few features compared to using it with pkg_tools. Cheers, Matthew ___ 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: pkgng usage
On 23/11/2012 16:31, Fbsd8 wrote: Installed pkgng as port. Converted my old pkg database to new format. Ran pkg delete for virtualbox package using it's full name from pkg info. That worked fine. But it left behind all it's dependences. Command pkg autoremove says there is noting to do. How do I find and remove orphaned packages? You can use pkg_cutleaves with pkgng in this sort of situation. The autoremove flags don't get set by pkg2ng unfortunately, as it can't tell what you installed explicitly by name and what was pulled in as a dependency. As you keep using pkgng, the autoremove flags will get set to more sane values and that feature will become more useful. Cheers, Matthew ___ 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: using new pkgng system on 9.0 system
On 23/11/2012 15:38, Fbsd8 wrote: Can I browse the beta-test server repositories for the packages I want? Download the repo catalogue by setting up your pkg.conf appropriately then running: pkg update Then you can use tools like 'pkg search' or 'pkg rquery' to investigate the available packages. (The first of those commands is more aimed at human readable output, the second for scripting usage.) Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: using new pkgng system on 9.0 system
Matthew Seaman wrote: On 23/11/2012 15:38, Fbsd8 wrote: Can I browse the beta-test server repositories for the packages I want? Download the repo catalogue by setting up your pkg.conf appropriately then running: pkg update Then you can use tools like 'pkg search' or 'pkg rquery' to investigate the available packages. (The first of those commands is more aimed at human readable output, the second for scripting usage.) Where do I find the url for the beta-test server repositories? Can I use ftp or browser to see index content? ___ 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: using new pkgng system on 9.0 system
On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 19:03:50 +, Matthew Seaman wrote: Most people testing pkgng at the moment are building their own package sets -- poudriere is a popular choice for doing that -- and setting up their own private repositories. Yes, I too am building my own package set and creating a private repository for local distributon. It seems to be working very well indeed. Poudriere though: I read somewhere that ZFS is a prerequisite. Is that so? Second question: At the moment I'm using 'pkg create' to generate packages from conventionally built ports, 'pkg repo' to create/update the tarred repo file, and a tiny Python script for HTTP serving. Am I missing out on some functionality? ___ 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: using new pkgng system on 9.0 system
On 23/11/2012 19:19, Fbsd8 wrote: Where do I find the url for the beta-test server repositories? Can I use ftp or browser to see index content? pkg.conf as supplied in the port-mgmt/pkg port comes with the right URL for the FreeBSD pkg repo[*], which is currently pointing at the beta-test repo, but which will in the fullness of time be changed to point at the actual production repo. No, in general you can't assume that you'll be able to browse the repo using a web browser or similar. Even if you could, all you'ld see is a lot of pkg tarballs which would tell you the package names and versions and how much data you'll need to download and not a lot else. Use the repo catalogue. It can tell you almost anything you might want to know about the available packages in the repo. Cheers, Matthew [*] Note: the default URL uses an SRV record in the DNS, which typical web browsers don't know how to handle. You'll just get NXDOMAIN if you try and point Firefox at it. For those who know how to handle SRV records, it looks like this: worm:~:% dig _http._tcp.pkg.freebsd.org IN SRV ; DiG 9.8.3-P4 _http._tcp.pkg.freebsd.org IN SRV ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 48300 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;_http._tcp.pkg.freebsd.org.IN SRV ;; ANSWER SECTION: _http._tcp.pkg.freebsd.org. 3600 IN SRV 10 10 80 pkgbeta.FreeBSD.org. ;; Query time: 44 msec ;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8) ;; WHEN: Fri Nov 23 21:13:50 2012 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 83 -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: using new pkgng system on 9.0 system
On 23/11/2012 20:36, Walter Hurry wrote: Poudriere though: I read somewhere that ZFS is a prerequisite. Is that so? Yes. poudriere uses the cloning and snapshotting abilities of ZFS as a fundamental part of the way it works. You can use tinderbox instead if you only have conventional filesystems, but that isn't so easy to use as poudriere. Second question: At the moment I'm using 'pkg create' to generate packages from conventionally built ports, 'pkg repo' to create/update the tarred repo file, and a tiny Python script for HTTP serving. Am I missing out on some functionality? Convenience mostly. Basically what the package building software does is take the repetitive chore of typing 'make buildpackage' over and over again, and automates it. Pkg repos built 'by hand' have exactly the functionality as those built using poudriere. You only need a very basic webserver to publish the packages, or you can just use a file:// URL and no HTTP server at all if you're creating packages to be used on the same machine. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
problem with pkgng
I am attempting to migrate a test box to pkgng, and have run into difficulty: When I run the pkg2ng script, it fails to register postgreql-jdbc because one if its files, namely /usr/local/share/doc/postgresql/README-client, is also installed by postgresql-client-9.2.1. In this, pkgng is perfectly correct, but how do I work around the issue? My assumption is that I will need to use pkg register with a hacked plist file from which the offending entry has been removed. Can anyone shed light on how to achieve this? I'm afraid I'm rather a novice at present. ___ 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: Portupgrade now supports pkgng [/usr/ports/UPDATING]
On 10/28/2012 03:00 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: PKGNG is a replacement for the pkg_* tools that record package data in /var/db/pkg. It also allows for binary package upgrades. If you are wanting to use pkgng for binary packages, there's no need to use portupgrade anymore. Just 'pkg install name', 'pkg upgrade', etc. Understood. Thanks. For some reason I thought I could use the PKGNG tool set together with portupgrade the same way the pkg_* tools are used. Is there a straightforward way to go back to using the pkg_* tools in 9.1? Thanks. ___ 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: Portupgrade now supports pkgng [/usr/ports/UPDATING]
On 10/28/2012 2:16 AM, Alexander Kapshuk wrote: On 10/28/2012 03:00 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: PKGNG is a replacement for the pkg_* tools that record package data in /var/db/pkg. It also allows for binary package upgrades. If you are wanting to use pkgng for binary packages, there's no need to use portupgrade anymore. Just 'pkg install name', 'pkg upgrade', etc. Understood. Thanks. For some reason I thought I could use the PKGNG tool set together with portupgrade the same way the pkg_* tools are used. pkgng obsoletes portupgrade -P and pkg_add -r. Even if portupgrade -P did have pkg support, it would not work right because of different OPTIONS/dependencies, and the desync between your local ports tree and the remote package server's versions. You can use 'pkg install' to replace 'portupgrade -P' right now, and just not use -P if you want to use the port. But it will not go smoothly. Picking one of the other is best. (Ports or packages) If you're managing multiple servers with packages, I recommend checking out ports-mgmt/poudriere (http://fossil.etoilebsd.net/poudriere) as it will build the binary packages to create your own remote pkgng repository. poudriere+pkgng really do obsolete portupgrade all together. Is there a straightforward way to go back to using the pkg_* tools in 9.1? If you have not installed, upgraded, or deinstalled anything, yes. You can cp all of the package dirs from /var/db/pkg.bak into /var/db/pkg, and remove WITH_PKGNG from /etc/make.conf and then run pkgdb -fu again. Thanks. -- Regards, Bryan Drewery bdrewery@freenode/EFNet ___ 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: Portupgrade now supports pkgng [/usr/ports/UPDATING]
Le Sat, 27 Oct 2012 21:22:32 +0300, Alexander Kapshuk alexander.kaps...@gmail.com a écrit : Having done all of the above, I ran portupgrade to update all the pkgs that needed upgrading on my system, and got the message below: root@box0:/root/tmp # portupgrade -varRP --batch -L '%s_%s' USING PKGNG Packages are not yet suported. Use pkg(8) directly. That doesn't sound like portupgrade supports pkgng, or did I misread the message in the UPDATING file? pkg is able to make packages upgrade by itself. I think the good way to update with packages is pkg updgrade then portupgrade to build the ports without packages avalaible. Anyway I had many problems with portupgrade and pkg (basically It was not able to build its database because of inconsistency in ports dependencies), portmaster with pkgng patch looks better. Regards. ___ 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: Portupgrade now supports pkgng [/usr/ports/UPDATING]
Got it. Thanks. ___ 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: Portupgrade now supports pkgng [/usr/ports/UPDATING]
On 10/28/2012 04:27 PM, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote: pkg is able to make packages upgrade by itself. I think the good way to update with packages is pkg updgrade then portupgrade to build the ports without packages avalaible. Anyway I had many problems with portupgrade and pkg (basically It was not able to build its database because of inconsistency in ports dependencies), portmaster with pkgng patch looks better. Regards. Understood. Thanks. I'll look into that. ___ 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: Portupgrade now supports pkgng [/usr/ports/UPDATING]
Quick question about portupgrade's support for pkgng. The /usr/ports/UPDATING says: 20121015: AFFECTS: users of ports-mgmt/portupgrade AUTHOR: bdrew...@freebsd.org Portupgrade now supports pkgng. To use pkgng, enable it in your make.conf, and convert your databases. This is optional and not currently required. # make -C /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg install clean # echo 'WITH_PKGNG=yes' /etc/make.conf # pkg2ng # pkgdb -fu Having done all of the above, I ran portupgrade to update all the pkgs that needed upgrading on my system, and got the message below: root@box0:/root/tmp # portupgrade -varRP --batch -L '%s_%s' USING PKGNG Packages are not yet suported. Use pkg(8) directly. That doesn't sound like portupgrade supports pkgng, or did I misread the message in the UPDATING file? box0=; uname -a FreeBSD box0.my.domain 9.1-RC2 FreeBSD 9.1-RC2 #0 r241133: Tue Oct 2 17:11:45 UTC 2012 r...@obrian.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 Thanks. Alexander Kapshuk. ___ 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
Fwd: re: Portupgrade now supports pkgng [/usr/ports/UPDATING]
If my reading the code snippet below is right, portupgrade-2.4.10.2 does not support pkgng yet if pkgdb has been converted for use with pkgng using pkg2ng. /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/portupgrade/work/pkgtools-2.4.10.2/bin/portupgrade:561,565 # FIXME: pkgng if $use_packages $pkgdb.with_pkgng? STDERR.puts Packages are not yet suported. Use pkg(8) directly. return 0 end Original Message Subject:re: Portupgrade now supports pkgng [/usr/ports/UPDATING] Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 21:22:32 +0300 From: Alexander Kapshuk alexander.kaps...@gmail.com To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Quick question about portupgrade's support for pkgng. The /usr/ports/UPDATING says: 20121015: AFFECTS: users of ports-mgmt/portupgrade AUTHOR: bdrew...@freebsd.org Portupgrade now supports pkgng. To use pkgng, enable it in your make.conf, and convert your databases. This is optional and not currently required. # make -C /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg install clean # echo 'WITH_PKGNG=yes' /etc/make.conf # pkg2ng # pkgdb -fu Having done all of the above, I ran portupgrade to update all the pkgs that needed upgrading on my system, and got the message below: root@box0:/root/tmp # portupgrade -varRP --batch -L '%s_%s' USING PKGNG Packages are not yet suported. Use pkg(8) directly. That doesn't sound like portupgrade supports pkgng, or did I misread the message in the UPDATING file? box0=; uname -a FreeBSD box0.my.domain 9.1-RC2 FreeBSD 9.1-RC2 #0 r241133: Tue Oct 2 17:11:45 UTC 2012 r...@obrian.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 Thanks. Alexander Kapshuk. ___ 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: Portupgrade now supports pkgng [/usr/ports/UPDATING]
On 10/27/2012 1:22 PM, Alexander Kapshuk wrote: Quick question about portupgrade's support for pkgng. The /usr/ports/UPDATING says: 20121015: AFFECTS: users of ports-mgmt/portupgrade AUTHOR: bdrew...@freebsd.org Portupgrade now supports pkgng. To use pkgng, enable it in your make.conf, and convert your databases. This is optional and not currently required. # make -C /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg install clean # echo 'WITH_PKGNG=yes' /etc/make.conf # pkg2ng # pkgdb -fu Having done all of the above, I ran portupgrade to update all the pkgs that needed upgrading on my system, and got the message below: root@box0:/root/tmp # portupgrade -varRP --batch -L '%s_%s' USING PKGNG Packages are not yet suported. Use pkg(8) directly. That doesn't sound like portupgrade supports pkgng, or did I misread the message in the UPDATING file? PKGNG is a replacement for the pkg_* tools that record package data in /var/db/pkg. It also allows for binary package upgrades. If you are wanting to use pkgng for binary packages, there's no need to use portupgrade anymore. Just 'pkg install name', 'pkg upgrade', etc. box0=; uname -a FreeBSD box0.my.domain 9.1-RC2 FreeBSD 9.1-RC2 #0 r241133: Tue Oct 2 17:11:45 UTC 2012 r...@obrian.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 Thanks. Alexander Kapshuk. -- Regards, Bryan Drewery bdrewery@freenode/EFNet ___ 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: pkgng and the old pkg_* programs
On Sun 2012-10-21 18:10:06 UTC+0100, Arthur Chance (free...@qeng-ho.org) wrote: Now that portmaster officially supports pkgng I've converted to using it. Is there any reason to keep the old pkg_* programs around, or can I delete them and add WITHOUT_PKGTOOLS to my /etc/src.conf? I'm running RELEASE-9.0 on amd64 and will update to REL-9.1 as soon as it arrives if that matters. I don't think there's any harm in leaving the pkg_* programs there? Of course if you delete them, a binary upgrade with freebsd-update will most likely put them back. I've switched to pkgng on two machines here. Working well so far, although pkg2ng had some initial problems with the conversion due to some conflicting files that had been installed by different packages... ___ 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: pkgng and the old pkg_* programs
I have tried it. There's my report ;) Without pkg_*, pkg2ng doesn't work. pkg info shows only himself (pkg-1.0.1). And I have no idea how to register all this stuff which I have already into pkgng database. New [re]installations from ports and directly from pkg work fine. So for new installation it seems to be fine, for old you have to run pkg2ng before you will remove pkg_* binaries. On Sun, 2012-10-21 at 18:36 +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 21/10/2012 18:10, Arthur Chance wrote: Now that portmaster officially supports pkgng I've converted to using it. Is there any reason to keep the old pkg_* programs around, or can I delete them and add WITHOUT_PKGTOOLS to my /etc/src.conf? I'm running RELEASE-9.0 on amd64 and will update to REL-9.1 as soon as it arrives if that matters. There is no particularly good reason to keep pkg_tools around once you've made the switch to pkgng. pkgng should provide replacements for all the pkg_tool functionality and slot into its place quite smoothly. However, I'm not sure that there's been adequate testing on a pkg_tools-free setup, so it is not entirely outside the bounds of possibility that you might run into some odd problems. If you do, please report what happens, as that's definitely a bug that needs fixing. Cheers, Matthew ___ 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: pkgng and the old pkg_* programs
On 22/10/2012 11:57, mbsd wrote: I have tried it. There's my report ;) Without pkg_*, pkg2ng doesn't work. pkg info shows only himself (pkg-1.0.1). And I have no idea how to register all this stuff which I have already into pkgng database. Correct. You need pkg_tools to run pkg2ng. But that's the last thing you'll ever need pkg_tools for... Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: pkgng and the old pkg_* programs
On 10/22/12 11:17, andrew clarke wrote: On Sun 2012-10-21 18:10:06 UTC+0100, Arthur Chance (free...@qeng-ho.org) wrote: Now that portmaster officially supports pkgng I've converted to using it. Is there any reason to keep the old pkg_* programs around, or can I delete them and add WITHOUT_PKGTOOLS to my /etc/src.conf? I'm running RELEASE-9.0 on amd64 and will update to REL-9.1 as soon as it arrives if that matters. I don't think there's any harm in leaving the pkg_* programs there? I doubt whether there's any harm either, it's just the principle of not having useless binaries lying around. Partly it's an old (and obsolete) habit developed in the days when the largest disks were a handful of megabytes in size, but it's also good security practice not to install anything that's unnecessary. Of course if you delete them, a binary upgrade with freebsd-update will most likely put them back. I always upgrade from source, and cut out unused subsystems with the WITHOUT_* knobs in /etc/src.conf, so that's not going to be a problem. I've switched to pkgng on two machines here. Working well so far, although pkg2ng had some initial problems with the conversion due to some conflicting files that had been installed by different packages... Ditto. ___ 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: pkgng and the old pkg_* programs
On 10/21/12 18:36, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 21/10/2012 18:10, Arthur Chance wrote: Now that portmaster officially supports pkgng I've converted to using it. Is there any reason to keep the old pkg_* programs around, or can I delete them and add WITHOUT_PKGTOOLS to my /etc/src.conf? I'm running RELEASE-9.0 on amd64 and will update to REL-9.1 as soon as it arrives if that matters. There is no particularly good reason to keep pkg_tools around once you've made the switch to pkgng. pkgng should provide replacements for all the pkg_tool functionality and slot into its place quite smoothly. However, I'm not sure that there's been adequate testing on a pkg_tools-free setup, so it is not entirely outside the bounds of possibility that you might run into some odd problems. If you do, please report what happens, as that's definitely a bug that needs fixing. Will do. Thanks to all who worked on pkgng. ___ 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
pkgng and the old pkg_* programs
Now that portmaster officially supports pkgng I've converted to using it. Is there any reason to keep the old pkg_* programs around, or can I delete them and add WITHOUT_PKGTOOLS to my /etc/src.conf? I'm running RELEASE-9.0 on amd64 and will update to REL-9.1 as soon as it arrives if that matters. ___ 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: pkgng and the old pkg_* programs
On 21/10/2012 18:10, Arthur Chance wrote: Now that portmaster officially supports pkgng I've converted to using it. Is there any reason to keep the old pkg_* programs around, or can I delete them and add WITHOUT_PKGTOOLS to my /etc/src.conf? I'm running RELEASE-9.0 on amd64 and will update to REL-9.1 as soon as it arrives if that matters. There is no particularly good reason to keep pkg_tools around once you've made the switch to pkgng. pkgng should provide replacements for all the pkg_tool functionality and slot into its place quite smoothly. However, I'm not sure that there's been adequate testing on a pkg_tools-free setup, so it is not entirely outside the bounds of possibility that you might run into some odd problems. If you do, please report what happens, as that's definitely a bug that needs fixing. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
pkgng repository URL for minor version
What is the method in a repository of pkg there to split packages for
difference minor version? At present PACKAGESSITE set to
http://pkg.freebsd.org/${ABI}/latest, where $ABI forming URL on 9.0 or
9.1/amd64 into http://pkg.freebsd.org/freebsd:9:x86:64/latest/
How it is possible to specify necessary minor version or determine for which
version the package. For an example, some software builds on 9.1 isn't
compatible with 9.0 libraries (_ThreadRuneLocale Undefined symbol)
___
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: pkgng questions
--- On Thu, 8/30/12, Matt Burke mattbli...@icritical.com wrote: From: Matt Burke mattbli...@icritical.com Subject: Re: pkgng questions To: Mark Felder f...@feld.me Cc: po...@freebsd.org Date: Thursday, August 30, 2012, 7:44 AM On 08/30/12 13:01, Mark Felder wrote: I think you're very confused about what pkgng is for. At this time, ports are STILL the recommended way to install things and keep them up to date. Really? I think the last time I compiled X or a web browser (until using poudriere) was about 10 years ago. I mix packages and ports here, heavily using zsh;/var/db/pkg/;pipes;portmaster and a thumbdrive(ftp) to other machines Pkgng is the first step required for us to get a better package management system so we can shift the community towards primarily using packages. I like packages - they save me compiling massive things on my desktop and they let me keep my servers running exactly the same software built from our CI setup. 'make package' is so quick and easy, it'd be hard to beat. So I thought I'd get a grip on pkgng before pkg_* disappears from base. I had a couple of questions I wanted to answer - 1) How easy does it make keeping my desktop (currently releng/9.1 built with dtrace) up-to-date 2) How much easier will it be to maintain production and testing servers? The answer has made me start downloading an OpenIndiana iso. 2. Is there a list of ports like nvidia-driver, nspluginwrapper, linux-f10-flashplugin, sampleicc (dependency of libreoffice!) which aren't in pkgng? Everything can be built into the pkgng format except a few ports that need workarounds. There's a list on the wiki. http://wiki.freebsd.org/pkgng Go to the bottom Known Failures section. I don't see any of the examples I gave listed, apart from nvidia-driver 3. How do I force pkg to install/upgrade a single package, regardless of dependencies being out of date? You should never try to do this anyway; you'll end up with packages built against the wrong versions of libraries. You're suggesting that I should upgrade an entire machine which may have proven itself over a period of years to be perfectly stable, just because I need a small utility which really doesn't care about the man page typo which caused gettext-0.1.2_3 to change to gettext-0.1.2_4? Notable here, things which depend upon firefox; gcc46; ... 4. How do I get poudiere to build against a local src/obj tree, or a zfs snapshot of a pre-built jail, instead of 9.0-RELEASE? The poudriere man page has all the instructions needed to create jails of any release version to be used for building packages. No, the man page doesn't mention anything about specifying where to pull the distribution from, only what method of access to use. You don't do it this way. You build everything on your poudriere server and push all of your packages to the client. You do this every single time. If you decide you want a new package on your client, you build it on your poudriere server and have your client request it. If you're using poudriere/pkgng, your clients should NEVER be compiling ports or installing packages outside of what your poudriere server is providing. Poudriere is giving you a cleanroom environment where it can guarantee that all the packages and their required packages/libraries are sane. Pkgng doesn't require ZFS -- poudriere does. Your clients should never have poudriere. I am confused. If pkg_* are removed, how is a person with a single desktop machine (worst case, a netbook) expected to operate if they need a specific port build? Are they to spend a week compiling 1000+ ports themselves in a poudriere VM? Or is the flexibility of FreeBSD ports just not deemed to be useful to the end user (or person unable to provide a dedicated any more? I am also perplexed; (unconvinced; ignorant...).. Waiting for a more comprehensive comparison to what exists now. And I've read the documentation thoroughly, but not enough times to fully comprehend all the strata... 8. Is there a pkgng equivalent of 'ls -lt /var/db/pkg' without firing up sqlite? Are you looking for the date column (not sure why that's useful as it can change due to many things)? Doesn't pkg info -a suffice? 'ls -lt /var/db/pkg' will show me what packages were installed sorted by day. It is very useful on servers which aren't routinely upgraded to the latest and greatest untested versions /var/db/pkg/ here is also indispensable, ( which I detailed precisely why in a message to the freebsd-current list, this month... ) Until I'm forced to upgrade to /pkg/ instead (I've workarounds and maybe a PR or two (feature req.) thought out...), I see this as a fork of the package registration API to something less useful to some, more useful to others (those using less ports than the number I've
[Fwd: [HEADSUP][CFT] pkgng beta1 is out]
having a real sat solver for the dependency tree. Currently we have a really simple and minimalistic solver which works well but if we can to go to an even finer package management we would need a real solver. Please may you expand on what you really mean here? I was under the impression that the only problem was to provide a total order on ports compatible to the partial order fixed by dependency, and this is very easy. There is for example one routine to do that in portupgrade. Or do you have something more sophisticated in mind? -- Michel Talon ta...@lpthe.jussieu.fr ___ 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
