On 08/03/2013 23:43, Glen Barber wrote:
BTW, you should upgrade devel/subversion anyway, since there are
security vulnerabilities.
BTW, you should remove GA, since it is a security vulnerability itself.
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
htt
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:14:05AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 06, 2013 2:30:54 pm Glen Barber wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 01:11:07PM -0500, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> > > On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 08:55:30PM -0400 I heard the voice of
> > > Glen Barber, and lo! it spake th
On Tuesday, August 06, 2013 2:30:54 pm Glen Barber wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 01:11:07PM -0500, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 08:55:30PM -0400 I heard the voice of
> > Glen Barber, and lo! it spake thus:
> > >
> > > The error generated is non-fatal, and once I receive
On 06.08.13 21:11, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
Sure, right _now_ devel/subversion and base svnlite get along, but
what happens when ports moves to 1.9 which changes the WT format?
This is just one of the quirks that subversion has, in that it's
database can't be easily parsed with other tools. Pe
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 01:11:07PM -0500, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 08:55:30PM -0400 I heard the voice of
> Glen Barber, and lo! it spake thus:
> >
> > The error generated is non-fatal, and once I receive response on a
> > proposed patch, will be suppressed if the svn vers
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 08:55:30PM -0400 I heard the voice of
Glen Barber, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> The error generated is non-fatal, and once I receive response on a
> proposed patch, will be suppressed if the svn version used to check
> out the tree is not compatible with that used to check th
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 13:36:29 +0300
Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Sergey V. Dyatko
> wrote:
> > On Sun, 4 Aug 2013 20:57:04 -0400
> > Glen Barber wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 05:50:28PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >> > If you are disinclined to fix your commi
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Sergey V. Dyatko
wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Aug 2013 20:57:04 -0400
> Glen Barber wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 05:50:28PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>> > If you are disinclined to fix your commit, then consider this
>> > an official request to back out revision 2525
On Sun, 4 Aug 2013 20:57:04 -0400
Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 05:50:28PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > If you are disinclined to fix your commit, then consider this
> > an official request to back out revision 252505.
> >
>
> You are the first and only one to complain after thi
On Sat, 3 Aug 2013 22:04:56 -0400
Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 08:10:09AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> > doesn't this show again that svn came a bit early?
>
> No, it shows that people do not keep their third-party software up to
> date.
>
> Glen
>
what about devel/subversi
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 09:23:45PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 06:18:58PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > You are the first and only one to complain after this change was in
> > > effect for 2 months.
> >
> > Perhaps, I'm "the first and only one to complain" because others
On Sun, 4 Aug 2013, Glen Barber wrote:
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 06:18:58PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
You are the first and only one to complain after this change was in
effect for 2 months.
Perhaps, I'm "the first and only one to complain" because others already
recognize that you will turn a
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 06:18:58PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > You are the first and only one to complain after this change was in
> > effect for 2 months.
>
> Perhaps, I'm "the first and only one to complain" because others already
> recognize that you will turn a deaf ear to their complaints.
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 08:57:04PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 05:50:28PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > If you are disinclined to fix your commit, then consider this
> > an official request to back out revision 252505.
> >
>
> You are the first and only one to complain aft
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 08:55:30PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 05:44:33PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > If you want to upgrade, and use http/https access to repositories,
> > > please check, that SERF option is enabled, as NEON support
> > > ^
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 05:50:28PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> If you are disinclined to fix your commit, then consider this
> an official request to back out revision 252505.
>
You are the first and only one to complain after this change was in
effect for 2 months.
I am sorry that you do not ke
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 05:44:33PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > If you want to upgrade, and use http/https access to repositories,
> > please check, that SERF option is enabled, as NEON support
> > ^
>
> I did not want to upgrade. It was suggested/fo
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 07:28:00PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 04:23:58PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > Here's a perfect example why chasing the bleeding edge ports
> > is a stupid idea. After upgrading devel/subversion as you
> > suggested, I see
> >
>
> They are not "bl
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 04:51:08PM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Steve Kargl
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:43:13PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> >> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:30:23PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Thanks.
> >> >
> >> > Looks like an en
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:43:13PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:30:23PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> > Looks like an entry in /usr/src/UPDATING is missing if
>> > /usr/bin/svn* is forcing an obso
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 04:23:58PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> Here's a perfect example why chasing the bleeding edge ports
> is a stupid idea. After upgrading devel/subversion as you
> suggested, I see
>
They are not "bleeding edge ports", they are updates to ported software.
> cd /usr/ports
>
Hi,
On 08/04/13 19:23, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:43:13PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:30:23PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
Thanks.
Looks like an entry in /usr/src/UPDATING is missing if
/usr/bin/svn* is forcing an obsolscence of a functioning
installe
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:43:13PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:30:23PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Looks like an entry in /usr/src/UPDATING is missing if
> > /usr/bin/svn* is forcing an obsolscence of a functioning
> > installed port.
> >
>
> The
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 08:53:35PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:10:45PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > If the script can't find svnversion or svnliteversion,
> > then it issues an error.
> >
>
> *sigh*
>
> No. It is *not* a fatal error.
>
I didn't say anything about a
Hi,
On Sat, 3 Aug 2013 22:04:56 -0400
Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 08:10:09AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> > doesn't this show again that svn came a bit early?
>
> No, it shows that people do not keep their third-party software up to
> date.
you want to say, that it is true
Hi,
On Sat, 3 Aug 2013 15:17:02 -0700
Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:43:13PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:30:23PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:08:58PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:03:49PM -
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 08:10:09AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> doesn't this show again that svn came a bit early?
No, it shows that people do not keep their third-party software up to
date.
Glen
pgpYOeX7Ozb_m.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:10:45PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> If the script can't find svnversion or svnliteversion,
> then it issues an error.
>
*sigh*
No. It is *not* a fatal error.
Glen
pgpfCeLOUvRrt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 06:47:19PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 03:46:08PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 06:20:47PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 03:17:02PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > >
> > > > > BTW, you should upgrade de
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 03:46:08PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 06:20:47PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 03:17:02PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> > > > BTW, you should upgrade devel/subversion anyway, since there are
> > > > security vulnerabilities
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 06:20:47PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 03:17:02PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> > > BTW, you should upgrade devel/subversion anyway, since there are
> > > security vulnerabilities.
> >
> > 1.7.9 works/worked fine for updating my /usr/src and my pers
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 11:21:52PM +0100, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> >svn repository. The change to use svnlite in newvers.sh should
> >have an entry in UPDATING to alert users that have a too old
> >svn port that they need to upgrade. I go as far to suggest that
>
> I agree.
> To me this is a
>Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
>Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 15:17:02 -0700
>From: Steve Kargl
>To: Glen Barber
>Subject: Re: svn error during 'make buildkernel'?
>svn repository. The change to use svnlite in newvers.sh should
>have an entry in UPDATING to
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 03:17:02PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > The port was at 1.8.x before I added the additional lookup of
> > svnlite to the script.
>
> My installed port was at 1.7.9. I can't find anywhere that
> states that one must immediately upgrade to a new version
> when a port's mai
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:43:13PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:30:23PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:08:58PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:03:49PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > > I updated my /usr/src with subversi
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:30:23PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:08:58PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:03:49PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > I updated my /usr/src with subversion from ports:
> > >
> > > % pkg info | grep subver
> > > subversion
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 05:08:58PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:03:49PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > I updated my /usr/src with subversion from ports:
> >
> > % pkg info | grep subver
> > subversion-1.7.9_1 Version control system
> >
> > 'make buildworld' co
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:03:49PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> I updated my /usr/src with subversion from ports:
>
> % pkg info | grep subver
> subversion-1.7.9_1 Version control system
>
> 'make buildworld' completed as expected. 'make buildkernel'
> seems to complete, but I'm seein
I updated my /usr/src with subversion from ports:
% pkg info | grep subver
subversion-1.7.9_1 Version control system
'make buildworld' completed as expected. 'make buildkernel'
seems to complete, but I'm seeing
:> hack.c
cc -shared -nostdlib hack.c -o hack.So
rm -f hack.c
MAKE=make
39 matches
Mail list logo
