Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-29 Thread Jean-Sébastien Pédron
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 28.09.2011 21:32, Hartmann, O. wrote: floating like a dead man in the water. I suspect the conversters/libiconv broke something, since it claims it has installed libiconv.so.3, but there is never such a shared object installed! Here's what I

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Hartmann, O.
On 09/28/11 15:47, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote: 2011/9/27 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de: Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... FreeBSD XP anyone? Are you sure

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread perryh
Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote: 2011/9/27 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de: Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... FreeBSD XP anyone? Are you sure there's a sufficient window of opportunity?

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Hartmann, O.
On 09/28/11 09:26, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 15:47, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote: 2011/9/27 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de: Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Sep 28, 2011, at 10:29 AM, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 09:26, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 15:47, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote: 2011/9/27 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de: Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread h h
Hartmann, O. ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: On 09/28/11 09:26, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 15:47, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote: 2011/9/27 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de: Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Hartmann, O.
On 09/28/11 20:20, h h wrote: Hartmann, O. ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: On 09/28/11 09:26, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 15:47, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote: 2011/9/27 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de: Now I understand why some OS

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:20, h h wrote: Hartmann, O. ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: On 09/28/11 09:26, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 15:47, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote: 2011/9/27 O. Hartmann

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Hartmann, O.
On 09/28/11 20:41, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:20, h h wrote: Hartmann, O. ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: On 09/28/11 09:26, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 15:47, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Hartmann, O.
On 09/28/11 20:56, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:41, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:20, h h wrote: Hartmann, O. ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: On 09/28/11 09:26, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 15:47, per...@pluto.rain.com

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Matt
On 09/28/11 12:16, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:56, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:41, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:20, h h wrote: Hartmann, O.ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: On 09/28/11 09:26, Hartmann, O. wrote:

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Hartmann, O.
On 09/28/11 21:16, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:56, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:41, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:20, h h wrote: Hartmann, O. ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: On 09/28/11 09:26, Hartmann, O. wrote:

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Hartmann, O.
On 09/28/11 21:30, Matt wrote: On 09/28/11 12:16, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:56, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:41, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 20:20, h h wrote: Hartmann, O.ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de writes: On

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Doug Barton
On 09/28/2011 12:39, Hartmann, O. wrote: The mess started to happen when I tried to repair a non CLANG compiling port math/gotoblas with portmaster -vf amth/gotoblas. Since this build binutils and even gettext and libiconv, I guess they got broken. Last I saw was a successful installation

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Beech Rintoul
On Wednesday 28 September 2011 12:18:47 Doug Barton wrote: On 09/28/2011 12:39, Hartmann, O. wrote: The mess started to happen when I tried to repair a non CLANG compiling port math/gotoblas with portmaster -vf amth/gotoblas. Since this build binutils and even gettext and libiconv, I guess

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Doug Barton
On 09/28/2011 13:45, Beech Rintoul wrote: On Wednesday 28 September 2011 12:18:47 Doug Barton wrote: On 09/28/2011 12:39, Hartmann, O. wrote: The mess started to happen when I tried to repair a non CLANG compiling port math/gotoblas with portmaster -vf amth/gotoblas. Since this build binutils

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Beech Rintoul
On Wednesday 28 September 2011 12:47:50 Doug Barton wrote: On 09/28/2011 13:45, Beech Rintoul wrote: On Wednesday 28 September 2011 12:18:47 Doug Barton wrote: On 09/28/2011 12:39, Hartmann, O. wrote: The mess started to happen when I tried to repair a non CLANG compiling port

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Beech Rintoul be...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wednesday 28 September 2011 12:18:47 Doug Barton wrote: On 09/28/2011 12:39, Hartmann, O. wrote: The mess started to happen when I tried to repair a non CLANG compiling port math/gotoblas with portmaster -vf

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Beech Rintoul
On Wednesday 28 September 2011 12:53:23 Beech Rintoul wrote: On Wednesday 28 September 2011 12:47:50 Doug Barton wrote: On 09/28/2011 13:45, Beech Rintoul wrote: On Wednesday 28 September 2011 12:18:47 Doug Barton wrote: On 09/28/2011 12:39, Hartmann, O. wrote: The mess started to

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread h h
Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com writes: So if I change /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh to something like vers 9.9 I'm not going to shoot myself in the foot if I try and update? I would really like to avoid downgrading this box.I've altready been bitten once today and had to build packages

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Hartmann, O.
On 09/28/11 22:18, Doug Barton wrote: On 09/28/2011 12:39, Hartmann, O. wrote: The mess started to happen when I tried to repair a non CLANG compiling port math/gotoblas with portmaster -vf amth/gotoblas. Since this build binutils and even gettext and libiconv, I guess they got broken. Last I

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Matt
On 09/28/11 15:41, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 22:18, Doug Barton wrote: On 09/28/2011 12:39, Hartmann, O. wrote: The mess started to happen when I tried to repair a non CLANG compiling port math/gotoblas with portmaster -vf amth/gotoblas. Since this build binutils and even gettext and

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-28 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Sep 28, 2011, at 4:36 PM, Matt wrote: On 09/28/11 15:41, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 09/28/11 22:18, Doug Barton wrote: On 09/28/2011 12:39, Hartmann, O. wrote: The mess started to happen when I tried to repair a non CLANG compiling port math/gotoblas with portmaster -vf amth/gotoblas. Since

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Ade Lovett
It just means that folks didn't plan ahead and didn't think up proper contingency plans. First off, apologies to Garrett, I'm not picking on you directly, but I kinda knew this would come up. The undeniable fact is that configure scripts in general have chosen to do things a certain way.

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Daniel O'Connor
On 27/09/2011, at 13:33, Ade Lovett wrote: That is to say, until 9.0-R happens, and for some considerable period afterwards, ya'll can pretty much expect ports/ to be non-functional on HEAD. PRs mentioning this will be gleefully closed referencing this message. I imagine you can work around

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread h h
Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovett a...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011, h h wrote: Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovett a...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread O. Hartmann
On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote: Kevin Obermankob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Anton Shterenlikht
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:28:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote: Kevin Obermankob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Eduardo Morras
At 11:18 27/09/2011, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... At least there will be a long rest after the move to 10 is complete.. until FreeBSD 100. Or move to hexadecimal $ export

outside the box (Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT)

2011-09-27 Thread perryh
Ade Lovett a...@freebsd.org wrote: The undeniable fact is that configure scripts in general have chosen to do things a certain way. Unfortunately for us (us being FreeBSD), we have now broken these conceptions by moving to a dual-digit major release. I don't suppose REVISION=A.1 i.e.

Re: outside the box (Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT)

2011-09-27 Thread O. Hartmann
On 09/27/11 16:46, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org wrote: The undeniable fact is that configure scripts in general have chosen to do things a certain way. Unfortunately for us (us being FreeBSD), we have now broken these conceptions by moving to a dual-digit major

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread krad
On 27 September 2011 10:18, Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:28:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote: Kevin Obermankob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org wrote: With the

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread h h
Eduardo Morras nec...@retena.com writes: At 11:18 27/09/2011, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... At least there will be a long rest after the move to 10 is complete.. until

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Robert Huff
krad writes: we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8) Wasn't that what people said about two-digit years? Robert Huff ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Adrian Chadd
On 27 September 2011 20:22, Robert Huff roberth...@rcn.com wrote: krad writes:  we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8)        Wasn't that what people said about two-digit years? Our children will be dealing with Y2038. :-) Adrian

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Eitan Adler
2011/9/27 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de: Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating system ... FreeBSD XP anyone? ___ freebsd-po...@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Erik Trulsson
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 08:22:54AM -0400, Robert Huff wrote: krad writes: we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8) Wasn't that what people said about two-digit years? Not quite. There they mostly said No way that this program will still be in use when

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Doug Rabson
On 27 September 2011 13:57, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote: On 27 September 2011 20:22, Robert Huff roberth...@rcn.com wrote: krad writes: we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8) Wasn't that what people said about two-digit years? Our children

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Robert Huff
Adrian Chadd writes:  we can leave that to our grand children to figure out though 8)        Wasn't that what people said about two-digit years? Our children will be dealing with Y2038. :-) Statistically, some of us will. Robert

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Matthew D. Fuller
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 09:36:17AM -0400 I heard the voice of Robert Huff, and lo! it spake thus: Adrian Chadd writes: Our children will be dealing with Y2038. :-) Statistically, some of us will. Actually, I had to deal with it just last week... -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) |

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Hartmann, O.
On 09/27/11 16:27, Matthew D. Fuller wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 09:36:17AM -0400 I heard the voice of Robert Huff, and lo! it spake thus: Adrian Chadd writes: Our children will be dealing with Y2038. :-) Statistically, some of us will. Actually, I had to deal with it just last week...

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Chris Rees
On 27 September 2011 10:18, Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:28:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote: Kevin Obermankob6...@gmail.com  writes: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovetta...@freebsd.org  wrote: With the advent

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Brandon Gooch
On Sep 27, 2011 10:04 AM, Chris Rees cr...@freebsd.org wrote: On 27 September 2011 10:18, Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:28:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote: Kevin Obermankob6...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Sep 26,

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Gleb Kurtsou
On (26/09/2011 23:03), Ade Lovett wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random) assuming that FreeBSD would

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Vlad Galu
On Sep 27, 2011, at 8:50 PM, Gleb Kurtsou wrote: On (26/09/2011 23:03), Ade Lovett wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Chuck Swiger
Hi-- On Sep 27, 2011, at 11:50 AM, Gleb Kurtsou wrote: It's more exciting than that. FreeBSD = 10 is already seized by Apple :) http://www.google.com/codesearch#search/q=__FreeBSD__%5CW%2B10type=cs MacOS X doesn't define __FreeBSD__ either in CPP macros or the system headers: % touch foo.h;

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread Michael Butler
On 09/27/11 02:37, Daniel O'Connor wrote: On 27/09/2011, at 13:33, Ade Lovett wrote: That is to say, until 9.0-R happens, and for some considerable period afterwards, ya'll can pretty much expect ports/ to be non-functional on HEAD. PRs mentioning this will be gleefully closed referencing

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-27 Thread h h
Michael Butler i...@protected-networks.net writes: On 09/27/11 02:37, Daniel O'Connor wrote: On 27/09/2011, at 13:33, Ade Lovett wrote: That is to say, until 9.0-R happens, and for some considerable period afterwards, ya'll can pretty much expect ports/ to be non-functional on HEAD. PRs

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-26 Thread Kevin Oberman
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovett a...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completely at random)

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-26 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:56 PM, Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovett a...@freebsd.org wrote: With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while. The issue stems

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-26 Thread Kevin Oberman
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:01 PM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: It's not the FreeBSD dev's fault. Unfortunately the autotools folks were microoptimizing and didn't consider that the future would come sooner than it actually did. Garrett, First, I'm not complaining or criticizing

Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

2011-09-26 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:01 PM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: It's not the FreeBSD dev's fault. Unfortunately the autotools folks were microoptimizing and didn't consider that the future would come sooner