Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
2010/5/19, Max Herrgård herrg...@gmail.com: Hm that's weird, I have that old mercurial too. Rest of the repo seems to be -current on a quick compare to with a few packages to pkgsrc.se though. Could be a problem with the CVS-git conversion. Can anyone with access please check that? More than mercurial could be lagging behind and causing build errors because of out of sync pkgs etc. devel/atk is out-of-date too 1.30 — http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/pkgsrc/devel/atk/Makefile?only_with_tag=MAIN 1.28 — http://gitweb.dragonflybsd.org/pkgsrc.git/blob/HEAD:/devel/atk/Makefile So x11/gtk2 fails to build. -- Alexander Polakov | plhk.ru
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 02:20:48AM +0400, Alexander Polakov wrote: 2010/5/19, Max Herrg??rd herrg...@gmail.com: Hm that's weird, I have that old mercurial too. Rest of the repo seems to be -current on a quick compare to with a few packages to pkgsrc.se though. Could be a problem with the CVS-git conversion. Can anyone with access please check that? More than mercurial could be lagging behind and causing build errors because of out of sync pkgs etc. devel/atk is out-of-date too 1.30 ??? http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/pkgsrc/devel/atk/Makefile?only_with_tag=MAIN 1.28 ??? http://gitweb.dragonflybsd.org/pkgsrc.git/blob/HEAD:/devel/atk/Makefile So x11/gtk2 fails to build. -- Where is gitweb.dragonflybsd.org getting that git repo? I am mirroring NetBSD's pkgsrc.git on theshell.com, and I have CVS version 1.70 of that file, but the distname is 1.30, not 1.28. http://www.theshell.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=pkgsrc.git;a=blob;f=devel/atk/Makefile;h=ac8cdb6199ef34499d38e5aadf61d5115d659e3c;hb=HEAD --Peter pgpWbeoriqmY8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
Justin C. Sherrill wrote: On Thu, May 27, 2010 3:48 pm, Chris Turner wrote: will submit PR eventually.. Please do it - having a bunch of patches for the pkgsrc people won't take long, and that's 90 packages that would now build for 2.6, 2.7, i386, and x86_64, so it's useful 360 times over. I'll make it a project to get my pkgsrc fixlets in this weekend - fwiw I don't think the error is the same on gstreamer 64bits - will verify (that the bug was different on i386 - don't have a 64 bit station and probably wont for some time)
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
On Fri, May 28, 2010 3:03 am, Chris Turner wrote: Justin C. Sherrill wrote: On Thu, May 27, 2010 3:48 pm, Chris Turner wrote: will submit PR eventually.. Please do it - having a bunch of patches for the pkgsrc people won't take long, and that's 90 packages that would now build for 2.6, 2.7, i386, and x86_64, so it's useful 360 times over. I'll make it a project to get my pkgsrc fixlets in this weekend - fwiw I don't think the error is the same on gstreamer 64bits - will verify (that the bug was different on i386 - don't have a 64 bit station and probably wont for some time) The build reports on avalon will get you to the error messages - for example: http://avalon.dragonflybsd.org/reports/x86_64/2.7/20100526.1040/gstreamer0.10-0.10.28/build.log http://avalon.dragonflybsd.org/reports/i386/2.7/20100527.0630/py26-gstreamer0.10-0.10.18/configure.log Go to http://avalon.dragonflybsd.org/reports/ and work down from there.
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
2010/5/18 Max Herrgård herrg...@gmail.com:
To get 2010Q1 you can use git://git.theshell.com/pkgsrc.git and the
pkgsrc-2010Q1 branch.
Is this source reliable? because on my 2.7/amd64 I was building
gstreamer and I got this error :-(
(the pkgsrc mailinglist does not respond to this )
the pkgsrc repository was made using the make file options
pkgsrc-create:
@echo If problems occur you may have to rm -rf pkgsrc and try again.
@echo
mkdir -p ${.CURDIR}/pkgsrc
cd ${.CURDIR}/pkgsrc git init
cd ${.CURDIR}/pkgsrc \
git remote add origin git://git.theshell.com/pkgsrc.git
cd ${.CURDIR}/pkgsrc git fetch origin
cd ${.CURDIR}/pkgsrc git branch pkgsrc-2010Q1 origin/pkgsrc-2010Q1
cd ${.CURDIR}/pkgsrc git checkout pkgsrc-2010Q1
cd ${.CURDIR}/pkgsrc git pull
The error is
=== Resuming update for gstreamer0.10-0.10.28
= Bootstrap dependency digest=20010302: found digest-20080510
=== Building for gstreamer0.10-0.10.28
Making all in pkgconfig
Making all in gst
Making all in parse
Making all in libs
Making all in gst
Making all in base
Making all in controller
Making all in dataprotocol
Making all in net
Making all in helpers
LINK gst-plugin-scanner
../../../gst/.libs/libgstreamer-0.10.so: undefined reference to `__udivti3'
gmake[4]: *** [gst-plugin-scanner] Error 1
gmake[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
gmake[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
gmake[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
gmake: *** [all] Error 2
*** Error code 2
Stop.
bmake: stopped in /usr/pkgsrc/multimedia/gstreamer0.10
*** Error code 1
Stop.
bmake: stopped in /usr/pkgsrc/multimedia/gstreamer0.10
*** Error code 1
Stop.
bmake: stopped in /usr/pkgsrc/multimedia/gstreamer0.10
*** Error code 1
Stop.
bmake: stopped in /usr/pkgsrc/multimedia/gst-plugins0.10-bad
*** Error code 1
Stop.
bmake: stopped in /usr/pkgsrc/multimedia/gst-plugins0.10-bad
*** Error code 1
Stop.
bmake: stopped in /usr/pkgsrc/multimedia/farsight2
*** Error code 1
Stop.
bmake: stopped in /usr/pkgsrc/multimedia/farsight2
*** Error code 1
Stop.
bmake: stopped in /usr/pkgsrc/chat/pidgin
*** Error code 1
Stop.
bmake: stopped in /usr/pkgsrc/chat/pidgin
Thanks
--Siju
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
27 maj 2010 kl. 11.19 skrev Siju George: 2010/5/18 Max Herrgård herrg...@gmail.com: To get 2010Q1 you can use git://git.theshell.com/pkgsrc.git and the pkgsrc-2010Q1 branch. Is this source reliable? because on my 2.7/amd64 I was building gstreamer and I got this error :-( Yes, I'm pretty sure it is. Making all in helpers LINK gst-plugin-scanner ../../../gst/.libs/libgstreamer-0.10.so: undefined reference to `__udivti3' gmake[4]: *** [gst-plugin-scanner] Error 1 gmake[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 gmake[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 gmake[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 gmake: *** [all] Error 2 *** Error code 2 The bulk build fails with same error: http://avalon.dragonflybsd.org/reports/x86_64/2.7/20100526.1040/gstreamer0.10-0.10.28/build.log Thanks --Siju I don't know how to fix it though, but it would be good to have it fixed. This gstreamer breaks lots of packages in the bulk build. http://avalon.dragonflybsd.org/reports/x86_64/2.7/20100526.1040/meta/report.html Max
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
On Thu, May 27, 2010 7:14 am, Max Herrgård wrote: I don't know how to fix it though, but it would be good to have it fixed. This gstreamer breaks lots of packages in the bulk build. http://avalon.dragonflybsd.org/reports/x86_64/2.7/20100526.1040/meta/report.html Seconded; gstreamer is one of the worst offenders right now in terms of dependent package breakage. It's the same on 2.6,2.7, i386, and x86_64. Dave Shao has identified the problem: http://www.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-single.pl?number=43082 It's fixed by using a newer gcc. I assume we're going to want to upgrade gcc, though that may cause issues in other places.
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
On Thu, 27 May 2010 09:09:24 -0400 Justin C. Sherrill jus...@shiningsilence.com wrote: It's fixed by using a newer gcc. I assume we're going to want to upgrade gcc, though that may cause issues in other places. I did my last package build with CCVER=gcc44, I had to add CFLAGS+= -march=i686 to prevent an error involving gcc inserting references to 64 bit atomic builtins in 32 bit compiles. The symptom is: undefined reference to `__sync_fetch_and_add_4 and similar. Other than that everything I have seems to be fine (and I can use threads in libavcodec). -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins.|licences available see You lose and Bill collects. |http://www.sohara.org/
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 02:49:19PM +0530, Siju George wrote: 2010/5/18 Max Herrg?rd herrg...@gmail.com: To get 2010Q1 you can use git://git.theshell.com/pkgsrc.git and the pkgsrc-2010Q1 branch. Is this source reliable? because on my 2.7/amd64 I was building gstreamer and I got this error :-( (the pkgsrc mailinglist does not respond to this ) It syncs directly from NetBSD every hour. --Peter pgprTCi0rO4xB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
On Thu, May 27, 2010 3:48 pm, Chris Turner wrote: will submit PR eventually.. Please do it - having a bunch of patches for the pkgsrc people won't take long, and that's 90 packages that would now build for 2.6, 2.7, i386, and x86_64, so it's useful 360 times over. If those patches go in and SJG's patch for kde4-libs works out, we'd have no packages left that caused significant dependency breakage - they'd all be in the single digits. That would be wonderful! And possibly unprecedented, at least recently.
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
18 maj 2010 kl. 21.59 skrev Goetz Isenmann: On Mon, 17 May 2010 20:53:42 +0200 Max Herrgård herrg...@gmail.com wrote: If you do 'make pkgsrc-create' you get git://git.dragonflybsd.org/ pkgsrc.git (see /usr/src/Makefile). It's pkgsrc-current . But when I compare it with cvs checkout -rpkgsrc-2010Q1 and cvs checkout pkgsrc, it doesn't look very current, e.g: == /usr/pkgsrc/devel/mercurial/Makefile == # $NetBSD: Makefile,v 1.38 2010/02/10 19:17:36 joerg Exp $ # DISTNAME= mercurial-1.4.3 PKGREVISION=1 CATEGORIES= devel scm MASTER_SITES= http://mercurial.selenic.com/release/ MAINTAINER= w...@netbsd.org HOMEPAGE= http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ Hm that's weird, I have that old mercurial too. Rest of the repo seems to be -current on a quick compare to with a few packages to pkgsrc.se though. Could be a problem with the CVS-git conversion. Can anyone with access please check that? More than mercurial could be lagging behind and causing build errors because of out of sync pkgs etc. Max
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
2010/5/17 Max Herrgård herrg...@gmail.com: 17 maj 2010 kl. 20.05 skrev Goetz Isenmann: Hi! What flavor of pkgsrc do I get, when I use cd /usr make pkgsrc-create/update? There are regular updates, but there seem to be a lot of differences compared to 2010Q1 and cvs/pkgsrc-changes. -- Goetz If you do 'make pkgsrc-create' you get git://git.dragonflybsd.org/pkgsrc.git (see /usr/src/Makefile). It's pkgsrc-current I guess the packages that get installed using pkg_radd are built from pkgsrc-stable? Thanks --Siju
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
On Tue, May 18, 2010 10:59 am, Siju George wrote: I guess the packages that get installed using pkg_radd are built from pkgsrc-stable? Yes - pkgsrc-2010Q1 is the current build.
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
On Tue, May 18, 2010 10:59 am, Siju George wrote: I guess the packages that get installed using pkg_radd are built from pkgsrc-stable? Yes - pkgsrc-2010Q1 is the current build.
Re: which pkgsrc version do I get via git?
On Mon, 17 May 2010 20:53:42 +0200 Max Herrgård herrg...@gmail.com wrote: If you do 'make pkgsrc-create' you get git://git.dragonflybsd.org/ pkgsrc.git (see /usr/src/Makefile). It's pkgsrc-current . But when I compare it with cvs checkout -rpkgsrc-2010Q1 and cvs checkout pkgsrc, it doesn't look very current, e.g: == /usr/pkgsrc/devel/mercurial/Makefile == # $NetBSD: Makefile,v 1.38 2010/02/10 19:17:36 joerg Exp $ # DISTNAME= mercurial-1.4.3 PKGREVISION=1 CATEGORIES= devel scm MASTER_SITES= http://mercurial.selenic.com/release/ MAINTAINER= w...@netbsd.org HOMEPAGE= http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ == pkgsrc-2010Q1/devel/mercurial/Makefile == # $NetBSD: Makefile,v 1.40 2010/04/02 22:28:43 wiz Exp $ # DISTNAME= mercurial-1.5.1 CATEGORIES= devel scm MASTER_SITES= http://mercurial.selenic.com/release/ MAINTAINER= w...@netbsd.org HOMEPAGE= http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ COMMENT=Fast, lightweight source control management system == pkgsrc/devel/mercurial/Makefile == # $NetBSD: Makefile,v 1.42 2010/05/13 19:39:13 wiz Exp $ # DISTNAME= mercurial-1.5.3 CATEGORIES= devel scm MASTER_SITES= http://mercurial.selenic.com/release/ MAINTAINER= w...@netbsd.org HOMEPAGE= http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ COMMENT=Fast, lightweight source control management system
