Re: qt5-qmake failed update

Could be solved with set GSTREAMER=on or remove files/extrapatch-no-gstreamer and this line in the Makefile: GSTREAMER_EXTRA_PATCHES_OFF= ${FILESDIR}/extrapatch-no-gstreamer seems is forgotten to remove. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list

RE: py27 ports always show "new version available"

Hello. Are your portmaster outputting the following message? make: "/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk" line 1067: FLAVOR may not be passed empty as a make argument. When I tried portmaster -i cmake, portmaster always tries to update textproc/py-sphinx. It seems that it occurred because function

Re: qt5-qmake failed update

On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 12:28 AM, Walter Schwarzenfeld < w.schwarzenf...@utanet.at> wrote: > Another different error: > > ===> Patching for qt5-multimedia-5.9.3 > ===> Applying extra patch /usr/ports/multimedia/qt5-mult > imedia/files/extrapatch-no-gstreamer > No such line 17 in input file,

Re: qt5-qmake failed update

I solved it for the moment with /etc/make.conf and put in: CC=clang40 CXX=clang++40 CPP=clang-cpp40 (means clang40 for all, you can comment out it after update - if you want). ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: qt5-qmake failed update

Another different error: ===>  Patching for qt5-multimedia-5.9.3 ===>  Applying extra patch /usr/ports/multimedia/qt5-multimedia/files/extrapatch-no-gstreamer No such line 17 in input file, ignoring 1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to qtmultimedia.pro.rej *** Error code 1 Stop.

Re: qt5-qmake failed update

Same here for a lot of qt5-* On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 7:22 PM, Walter Schwarzenfeld < w.schwarzenf...@utanet.at> wrote: > same qt5-network. > > ___ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To

Re: qt5-qmake failed update

same qt5-network. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

qt5-qmake failed update

with ===>  Applying FreeBSD patches for qt5-qmake-5.9.3 /usr/bin/sed -i "" -e "/DEFAULT_LIBDIRS=/ s,\"n,n/usr/local/lib&," /ram/usr/ports/devel/qt5-qmake/work/qtbase-opensource-src-5.9.3/configure ===>   qt5-qmake-5.9.3 depends on package: pkgconf>=1.3.0_1 - found ===> 

Re: portmaster version "mismatch"

Stefan Esser is very quick => https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision=458299 ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to

If the port is designed to have a Motif version, a GTK version, and a NOGUI version, can these be made into flavors, instead of options?

The port can be built to have the exact same UI but alternatively based on Motif, GTK, or no GUI at all. In each case, the plist is exactly the same. Can these be made into flavors: FLAVORS=nogui motif gtk ? My opinion: this is a good idea. The package is originally designed to have 2 UI

portmaster version "mismatch"

Only info, I have already mailed the maintainer: Portmaster should have 3.18_8. Makefile shows 3.18_7. portmaster --version 3.18_6. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe,

Re: Ruby version question

On 01/06/18 14:17, Kevin Oberman wrote: You seem to assume that Ubuntu and FreeBSD both have the same version of Ruby installed. The current version in FreeBSD is  2.4.3.  2.3 is still available as lang/ruby23, but should only be used when some code won't work with 2.4. The Ubuntu system is

Re: Ruby version question

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 1:41 PM, Yuri wrote: > In order to get a Ruby version, I run this command: > > > $ ruby -r rbconfig -e 'C = RbConfig::CONFIG' -e 'puts C["ruby_version"]' > > > 2.4 > > > However, on Ubuntu 17.10 the same command returns 2.3.0 (with the minor > version of

Ruby version question

In order to get a Ruby version, I run this command: > $ ruby -r rbconfig -e 'C = RbConfig::CONFIG' -e 'puts C["ruby_version"]' > 2.4 However, on Ubuntu 17.10 the same command returns 2.3.0 (with the minor version of zero). My question is which one is correct, or "more correct"? Should it

Re: gnucash port won't install: ".../xml-generator.go:No such file or directory" [solved]

On 29/12/2017 07:51, Graham Menhennitt wrote: Hello all, I'm attempting to upgrade the finance/gnucash port from 2.6.18 to 2.6.19 and I'm getting errors on the installation stage. I've read the entry in UPDATING which says that I'm building the guile2 flavour by default. I could try

Re: Puppet SSL-related problems after updating Ruby

Hello On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 07:01:39PM -0500, Josh Endries wrote: > I recently updated packages on a 11.0 machine, which upgraded Ruby from > 2.3.5 to 2.3.6 (I think), and my Puppet install broke. It is logging > SSL-related issues with this message: > > SSL_read: decryption failed or bad