when are the ports being unfrozen ?

2007-05-16 Thread Craig Butler
Hi All Any news when the ports are being unfrozen ? Portaudit is now detecting a few problems Surly it is beneficial to keep the ports current with security updates during a freeze ? Cheers Craig B This email has been handled

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Alexander Leidinger
Quoting Stephen Montgomery-Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Tue, 15 May 2007 16:53:35 -0500): Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: 2. Sorting the dependencies in pkg_create. My fix now cuts this out completely. Thus there is no need to change the structure of

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Matthew D. Fuller
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 10:13:41AM +0200 I heard the voice of Ulrich Spoerlein, and lo! it spake thus: True, true. And as pointed out above, if you don't build the INDEX with your current pkg options, it is useless anyway. Oh, worse. If you don't build INDEX with your current _installed

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Ulrich Spoerlein
On 5/16/07, Matthew D. Fuller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 10:13:41AM +0200 I heard the voice of Ulrich Spoerlein, and lo! it spake thus: True, true. And as pointed out above, if you don't build the INDEX with your current pkg options, it is useless anyway. Oh, worse. If

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread J. Porter Clark
What I don't like about the flattening of the dependencies is that there seems to be information loss; that is, I can't figure out why one port (e.g., gweled) requires another port (e.g., cdrtools). Is there any tool to unflatten the dependencies? -- J. Porter Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Alexander Leidinger
Quoting J. Porter Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Wed, 16 May 2007 06:25:32 -0500): What I don't like about the flattening of the dependencies is that there seems to be information loss; that is, I can't figure out why one port (e.g., gweled) requires another port (e.g., cdrtools). Is there

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Stephen Montgomery-Smith
Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: On 5/15/07, Stephen Montgomery-Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: I also need to quickly look up origin - pkgname and would suggest placing this in the INDEX file. Then you have the foundation in place to be able to run 'make vim-7.1.2.tbz' in,

Re: Honor $PREFIX or use output from pkg-config(1)

2007-05-16 Thread Pav Lucistnik
Tijl Coosemans píše v st 16. 05. 2007 v 15:44 +0200: On Tuesday 15 May 2007 23:59:23 Pav Lucistnik wrote: You expect dependencies in LOCALBASE and install into PREFIX. Shouldn't you install into ${DESTDIR}${PREFIX} or ${TARGETDIR} ? Hell no :) That plan got scraped. -- Pav Lucistnik

Re: Honor $PREFIX or use output from pkg-config(1)

2007-05-16 Thread Tijl Coosemans
On Tuesday 15 May 2007 23:59:23 Pav Lucistnik wrote: You expect dependencies in LOCALBASE and install into PREFIX. Shouldn't you install into ${DESTDIR}${PREFIX} or ${TARGETDIR} ? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Stephen Montgomery-Smith
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: [LoN]Kamikaze wrote: Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: Basically I think we are stuck on making make package-depends go any faster. However I do think that the modifications I made to pkg_create go a very significant way to

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Ulrich Spoerlein
On 5/16/07, Alexander Leidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting J. Porter Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Wed, 16 May 2007 06:25:32 -0500): What I don't like about the flattening of the dependencies is that there seems to be information loss; that is, I can't figure out why one port (e.g.,

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Alexander Leidinger
Quoting Ulrich Spoerlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wed, 16 May 2007 18:28:55 +0200): The problem not discussed so far is: some ports may not have all first order dependencies. So anyone wanting to change this should install a tinderbox and start testing fixing those ports. Hmmm, this is a red

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Ulrich Spoerlein
Alexander Leidinger wrote: Quoting Ulrich Spoerlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wed, 16 May 2007 18:28:55 +0200): The problem not discussed so far is: some ports may not have all first order dependencies. So anyone wanting to change this should install a tinderbox and start testing fixing those

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Stephen Montgomery-Smith
Alexander Leidinger wrote: Quoting Stephen Montgomery-Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wed, 16 May 2007 07:59:11 -0500): Alexander Leidinger wrote: Quoting Stephen Montgomery-Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Tue, 15 May 2007 16:53:35 -0500): Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Stephen Montgomery-Smith
Ok chaps, I think I have it. This involves no recursive calls of make. Furthermore the dependencies it creates are the real dependencies on your system, not what ports thinks it should be, because it gets all the information from /var/db/pkg. On my system it takes a second or two to

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Robert Noland
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 16:01 -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: Ok chaps, I think I have it. This involves no recursive calls of make. Furthermore the dependencies it creates are the real dependencies on your system, not what ports thinks it should be, because it gets all the

Re: Time to abandon recursive pulling of dependencies?

2007-05-16 Thread Stephen Montgomery-Smith
Robert Noland wrote: On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 16:01 -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: Ok chaps, I think I have it. This involves no recursive calls of make. Furthermore the dependencies it creates are the real dependencies on your system, not what ports thinks it should be, because it