06.01.2012 06:20, Doug Barton wrote:
I do package build systems that support a variety of types of end
systems. (Nearly) all of them use php in some form or another, but a
substantial portion of them don't have web servers, and therefore don't
need the cgi, apache module, or the apache
On 01/08/2012 04:59, Martin Kropfinger wrote:
Hi there!
The porters handbook describes a way to handle config files:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/plist-config.html
It is recommended to do it this way for keeping changed files after
deinstallation on the system.
On 9 Jan 2012 06:01, Da Rock freebsd-po...@herveybayaustralia.com.au
wrote:
All arguments aside, I've finally made headway - I think... its really
frustrating for me because to me it seems a bit of a blackbox atm. I'm
still trying to untangle the threads.
I fiddled and tweaked and finally got
(Note: an HTML version of this report is available at
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr-summary.cgi?category=ports .)
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users.
These represent problem reports covering all versions including
experimental development code and
Doug Barton ha scritto:
What would make my life a whole lot simpler is if lang/php5 were the
command line version, and the cgi and apache modules were separate
ports. Is this feasible?
Short answer: no. Long answer: nothing is impossible ;-)
Extensions are compiled based on settings of the
Il giorno 08/gen/2012, alle ore 21:43, Maxim Khitrov ha scritto:
Hi all,
I'm not sure whether this is a FreeBSD or uwsgi problem, but the
current port (uwsgi 1.0) isn't compiling on FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE amd64
for the following reasons:
1. In uwsgiconfig.py:534 uwsgi checks for the
Hi,
Just in case this isn't a known issue..
cheers
Paul.
--- Upgrading 'opendkim-2.4.1' to 'opendkim-2.4.2' (mail/opendkim)
--- Building '/usr/ports/mail/opendkim'
=== Cleaning for opendkim-2.4.2
=== License BSD SENDMAIL accepted by the user
=== Found saved configuration for
I'm trying to fix a port which absolutely will not build with clang,
since clang does not support the gcc extension used by this port. I set
USE_GCC=4.2+, which is the lowest version of GCC which will work, but it
doesn't properly override CC=clang.
wxs at ack spamdyke % env CC=clang make
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Roberto De Ioris robe...@unbit.it wrote:
Il giorno 08/gen/2012, alle ore 21:43, Maxim Khitrov ha scritto:
Hi all,
I'm not sure whether this is a FreeBSD or uwsgi problem, but the
current port (uwsgi 1.0) isn't compiling on FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE amd64
for the
Hi.
There is PR: http://bugs.freebsd.org/163687
It tries to fix port building when user built it's perl installation
with USE_PERL option (creating symlinks in /usr/bin) set to off (not the
default). Patch in PR just replaces static shebang with ${PERL} variable
from Mk/bsd.perl.mk. But it
Adding perl and skv@
On 9 January 2012 18:49, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov cvs-...@yandex.ru wrote:
Hi.
There is PR: http://bugs.freebsd.org/163687
It tries to fix port building when user built it's perl installation with
USE_PERL option (creating symlinks in /usr/bin) set to off (not the
default).
On 9.1.2012 19:35, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
FreeBSD9 capabilities are completely different from linux one.
I will try to make a port, otherwise i will enable to check only for linux.
Yea, I spent a bit more time looking at it and the FreeBSD version of
sys/capability.h seems to be related to
2012/1/9 Chris Rees cr...@freebsd.org:
1. Fix devel/automake too (by replacing /usr/bin/perl with ${PERL})
2. Create symlinks unconditionally in perl port and drop USE_PERL option
/usr/bin is in LOCALBASE which may be read only.
--
Eitan Adler
___
Eitan Adler wrote on 09.01.2012 23:32:
2012/1/9 Chris Reescr...@freebsd.org:
1. Fix devel/automake too (by replacing /usr/bin/perl with ${PERL})
2. Create symlinks unconditionally in perl port and drop USE_PERL option
/usr/bin is in LOCALBASE which may be read only.
Ok, but if so most part
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov cvs-...@yandex.ru wrote:
Eitan Adler wrote on 09.01.2012 23:32:
2012/1/9 Chris Reescr...@freebsd.org:
1. Fix devel/automake too (by replacing /usr/bin/perl with ${PERL})
2. Create symlinks unconditionally in perl port and drop USE_PERL
On 1/9/2012 8:42 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanovcvs-...@yandex.ru wrote:
Eitan Adler wrote on 09.01.2012 23:32:
2012/1/9 Chris Reescr...@freebsd.org:
1. Fix devel/automake too (by replacing /usr/bin/perl with ${PERL})
2. Create symlinks
On 2012-01-09 18:23, Paul Macdonald wrote:
Hi,
Just in case this isn't a known issue..
cheers
Paul.
--- Upgrading 'opendkim-2.4.1' to 'opendkim-2.4.2' (mail/opendkim)
--- Building '/usr/ports/mail/opendkim'
[...]
= Couldn't fetch it - please try to retrieve this
= port manually
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 09:04:25PM +0100, Olli Hauer wrote:
On 2012-01-09 18:23, Paul Macdonald wrote:
Hi,
Just in case this isn't a known issue..
cheers
Paul.
--- Upgrading 'opendkim-2.4.1' to 'opendkim-2.4.2' (mail/opendkim)
--- Building '/usr/ports/mail/opendkim'
so maybe there is package to make existing php5 package that would
work w/ apache and not just fastcgi
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Chuck Swiger cswi...@mac.com wrote:
On Jan 9, 2012, at 12:02 PM, alexus wrote:
there is no way to make it like that? so it has to be build via ports?
The PHP
On 1/9/12 3:17 PM, Andrey Chernov wrote:
Is it hard to just update this port to the latest version instead?
(CC'ed to the maintainer)
I have seen several of these before.
problem is, tuesday, you update the port. works wednesday, thursday and
friday.
by monday, they moved it.
so, you
I think I saw something in the list that FreeBSD 9.x has zip already
built in? so, ports that need 'zip' won't need zip?
for maintainers, they should use something like:
USE_ZIP=yes
to:
if ${OSVERSION} = 90
USE_ZIP=yes
.endif
and/or BUILD_DEPENDS+=
I think I saw something in the list that FreeBSD 9.x has zip already
built in? so, ports that need 'zip' won't need zip?
for maintainers, they should use something like:
USE_ZIP=yes
to:
if ${OSVERSION} = 90
USE_ZIP=yes
.endif
and/or BUILD_DEPENDS+=
Michael Scheidell wrote on 10.01.2012 00:30:
I think I saw something in the list that FreeBSD 9.x has zip already
built in? so, ports that need 'zip' won't need zip?
for maintainers, they should use something like:
USE_ZIP= yes
to:
if ${OSVERSION} = 90
USE_ZIP= yes
.endif
and/or
On 2012-01-09 21:17, Andrey Chernov wrote:
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 09:04:25PM +0100, Olli Hauer wrote:
On 2012-01-09 18:23, Paul Macdonald wrote:
Hi,
Just in case this isn't a known issue..
cheers
Paul.
--- Upgrading 'opendkim-2.4.1' to 'opendkim-2.4.2' (mail/opendkim)
--- Building
Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote on 10.01.2012 01:06:
Michael Scheidell wrote on 10.01.2012 00:30:
I think I saw something in the list that FreeBSD 9.x has zip already
built in? so, ports that need 'zip' won't need zip?
for maintainers, they should use something like:
USE_ZIP= yes
to:
if
On 1/9/12 4:06 PM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
(at what OSVERSION was zip included in the base?)
unzip, not zip. I believe it should be handled in bsd.port.mk like it
done for USE_XZ. Something like:
.if defined(USE_ZIP) ${OSVERSION} 90
EXTRACT_DEPENDS+=
On 1/9/12 4:10 PM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
.if exists(/usr/bin/unzip)
UNZIP_CMD?=/usr/bin/unzip
.else
UNZIP_CMD?=${LOCALBASE}/bin/unzip
.endif
in bsd.commands.mk
not in 900044
grep /usr/bin/zip /usr/ports/Mk/*
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
o: 561-999-5000
d: 561-948-2259
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 1/9/12 4:14 PM, Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 1/9/12 4:10 PM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
.if exists(/usr/bin/unzip)
UNZIP_CMD?=/usr/bin/unzip
.else
UNZIP_CMD?=${LOCALBASE}/bin/unzip
.endif
in bsd.commands.mk
not in
On 1/9/12 4:23 PM, Greg Larkin wrote:
This list of version values is very helpful in these cases:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/freebsd-versions.html
Unfortunately, the version was not bumped when unzip was added to base,
but you'll probably be able to narrow down where
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 01:06:04AM +0400, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
Michael Scheidell wrote on 10.01.2012 00:30:
I think I saw something in the list that FreeBSD 9.x has zip already
built in? so, ports that need 'zip' won't need zip?
for maintainers, they should use something like:
On 2012-01-09 22:23, Greg Larkin wrote:
On 1/9/12 4:14 PM, Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 1/9/12 4:10 PM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
.if exists(/usr/bin/unzip)
UNZIP_CMD?=/usr/bin/unzip
.else
UNZIP_CMD?=${LOCALBASE}/bin/unzip
.endif
in bsd.commands.mk
not in 900044
On 1/9/12 4:46 PM, olli hauer wrote:
Have at the moment no 7.x machine handy but zip files can be handled by tar, at
last here on a 8.2 machine and I have no unzip installed.
hey, don't confuse me.
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
o: 561-999-5000
d: 561-948-2259
*| *SECNAP Network Security
Hello
I'm trying to migrate from REDHAT EL world to FREEBSD. We have a policy of
installing binary packages and stay away from compiling source code.
I have FreeBSD-9.0RC3 and I did pkg_add -r apache22 pkg_add -r php5, so now I
have both packages installed but I can't get them to work
On 9 Jan 2012 21:16, Michael Scheidell scheid...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 1/9/12 4:10 PM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
.if exists(/usr/bin/unzip)
UNZIP_CMD?=/usr/bin/unzip
.else
UNZIP_CMD?=${LOCALBASE}/bin/unzip
.endif
in bsd.commands.mk
not in 900044
grep /usr/bin/zip
On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 15:52:19 -0600, ale...@alexus.org wrote:
Hello
I'm trying to migrate from REDHAT EL world to FREEBSD. We have a policy
of installing binary packages and stay away from compiling source code.
I have FreeBSD-9.0RC3 and I did pkg_add -r apache22 pkg_add -r php5, so
now I
On 2012-01-09 23:18, Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 1/9/12 4:46 PM, olli hauer wrote:
Have at the moment no 7.x machine handy but zip files can be handled by tar,
at last here on a 8.2 machine and I have no unzip installed.
hey, don't confuse me.
Don't worry, I believe you will do the
On 1/9/12 5:36 PM, Olli Hauer wrote:
Don't worry, I believe you will do the right thing ;)
( Chris just confirmed that tar can extract zip files also on 7.4 and he use
this in games/ioquake3)
so, that means we can use tar in 8.x and 9.x. we didn't need unzip... :0-)
so, I am a ports
--On January 9, 2012 3:55:48 PM +1000 Da Rock
freebsd-po...@herveybayaustralia.com.au wrote:
I just need to work out how to check the checksum against a linux source.
I haven't found that yet.
My brief search was unsuccessful as well. Is it really possible that the
LInux community has
On 1/9/12 4:52 PM, alexus wrote:
Hello
I'm trying to migrate from REDHAT EL world to FREEBSD. We have a policy of
installing binary packages and stay away from compiling source code.
I have FreeBSD-9.0RC3 and I did pkg_add -r apache22 pkg_add -r php5, so now I
have both packages installed
On 2012-01-09 23:31, Mark Felder wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 15:52:19 -0600, ale...@alexus.org wrote:
Hello
I'm trying to migrate from REDHAT EL world to FREEBSD. We have a policy of
installing binary packages and stay away from compiling source code.
I have FreeBSD-9.0RC3 and I did
On 09/01/2012 22:28, Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On January 9, 2012 3:55:48 PM +1000 Da Rock
freebsd-po...@herveybayaustralia.com.au wrote:
I just need to work out how to check the checksum against a linux source.
I haven't found that yet.
My brief search was unsuccessful as well. Is it really
On Jan 9, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
My brief search was unsuccessful as well. Is it really possible that the
LInux community has abandoned providing checksums for RPM packages? If so,
that boggles the mind. Surely they don't believe their repositories are
unassailable?
rpm
On 2012-01-09 23:39, Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 1/9/12 5:36 PM, Olli Hauer wrote:
Don't worry, I believe you will do the right thing ;)
( Chris just confirmed that tar can extract zip files also on 7.4 and he use
this in games/ioquake3)
so, that means we can use tar in 8.x and 9.x. we
Ruslan Mahmatkhanov cvs-...@yandex.ru writes:
There is PR: http://bugs.freebsd.org/163687
It tries to fix port building when user built it's perl installation
with USE_PERL option (creating symlinks in /usr/bin) set to off (not
the default). Patch in PR just replaces static shebang with
On 09/01/2012 21:52, alexus wrote:
I'm trying to migrate from REDHAT EL world to FREEBSD. We have a
policy of installing binary packages and stay away from compiling
source code. I have FreeBSD-9.0RC3 and I did pkg_add -r apache22
pkg_add -r php5, so now I have both packages installed but I
On Jan 9, 2012, at 2:00 PM, alexus wrote:
One of the things I'm seeing is that unfortunately packages are
somewhat limited vs ports...
Packages come precompiled with default options. For people who want
non-default options, you would need to build your own package from ports rather
than
On 01/10/12 08:28, Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On January 9, 2012 3:55:48 PM +1000 Da Rock
freebsd-po...@herveybayaustralia.com.au wrote:
I just need to work out how to check the checksum against a linux
source.
I haven't found that yet.
My brief search was unsuccessful as well. Is it really
Op ma 09 jan 2012 22:49:33 schreef Ruslan Mahmatkhanov:
Hi.
There is PR: http://bugs.freebsd.org/163687
It tries to fix port building when user built it's perl installation
with USE_PERL option (creating symlinks in /usr/bin) set to off (not the
default). Patch in PR just replaces static
On 01/09/2012 12:08, alexus wrote:
so maybe there is package to make existing php5 package that would
work w/ apache and not just fastcgi
There is not a package with that option enabled. You will need to build
/usr/ports/lang/php5 and run 'make config' to enable it.
Hope this helps,
Doug
--
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 05:39:03PM -0500, Michael Scheidell wrote:
so, I am a ports committer, how about I hack bsd.port.*.mk files :-)
Commits to bsd.port.mk need to be approved by portmgr, preferably after
regression-testing on the cluster.
mcl
___
ok, thanks
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 01/09/2012 12:08, alexus wrote:
so maybe there is package to make existing php5 package that would
work w/ apache and not just fastcgi
There is not a package with that option enabled. You will need to build
I'm having some trouble using knobs and defined in the Makefile. It
keeps complaining about the unexpected.
I've tried .if defined(WITH_PAM) and .ifdefined(WITH_PAM) and it
complains about an unexpected ( in the first, and an unexpected word
in the second.
How do I conditionally handle the
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 06:22:58PM +, b. f. wrote:
I'm trying to fix a port which absolutely will not build with clang,
since clang does not support the gcc extension used by this port. I set
USE_GCC=4.2+, which is the lowest version of GCC which will work, but it
doesn't properly
Jan Beich wrote on 10.01.2012 03:06:
Ruslan Mahmatkhanovcvs-...@yandex.ru writes:
There is PR: http://bugs.freebsd.org/163687
It tries to fix port building when user built it's perl installation
with USE_PERL option (creating symlinks in /usr/bin) set to off (not
the default). Patch in PR
The updated PREFIX and DESTDIR section has been committed. Thanks for
the feedback and suggestions!
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
I'd like to install a couple of the python module ports as part of my python32
install (also from ports). Is there an incantation I can use with portinstall
or the ports Makefile that will allow me to tell typical py-* modules in my
python 3.2 libraries instead of with python 2.7, or should I
Try add this line in /etc/make.conf
PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=python3.2
wen
2012/1/10 Matthew Pounsett m...@conundrum.com
I'd like to install a couple of the python module ports as part of my
python32 install (also from ports). Is there an incantation I can use with
portinstall or the ports
On 2012/01/10, at 01:16, wen heping wrote:
Try add this line in /etc/make.conf
PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=python3.2
Perfect! Thanks very much!
One of the dependencies turns out to have a syntax dependency on python2.x, but
I can work with that.
58 matches
Mail list logo
