As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
Thank you for your troll.
For your convenience, we will do our best not to reply to you any
further, to waste either your time, or valuable electrons.
mcl
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. One common problem is
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
Thanks to the various folks in this thread for reminding me why I
stepped down from portmgr.
I really don't have the heart these days to argue with people.
Y'all have fun. I won't be contributing any more to this thread.
mcl
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 01:29:32PM +0100, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> Just a thought: "FreeNAS"
FreeNAS uses ports ... in their own way. Yes, they do contribute back
changes as well.
The point that I was trying to make, even though I used bad data, was
that Ports aren't being driven by external i
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 10:38:50PM -0800, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> Wrong. I've worked at 3 companies over the years that make direct use of
> the ports tree when creating an embedded product based on FreeBSD.
OK, then this is the first I've heard of it. My mistake.
mcl
_
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 03:54:39PM -0800, Roger Marquis wrote:
> "time for it to go", by whose definition? Good code doesn't have a
> fixed lifespan and the claimed rationale doesn't constitute a good
> business case.
It was believed to be a bad design pattern to let ports modify anything
in base
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
On Thu, Jan 01, 2015 at 06:05:38PM -0800, Chris H wrote:
> Would anyone be willing to clarify? Or am I simply "blacklisted"? ;)
The list is not complete. No doubt you've merely been overlooked, sorry.
mcl
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 08:20:45AM -0700, Warren Block wrote:
> I think I could make a good case for moving that ports FAQ into the
> Porter's Handbook, even if it is for committers.
Sounds good.
mcl
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lis
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 08:09:48AM -0600, Rusty Nejdl wrote:
> Sorry guys, but I will have to give up maintainership on my 10 ports as
> I have completely run out of time and am not keeping up with my ports
> and keeping them to standards. I'll jump back in when I can and thank
> you all in advance
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 05:30:22PM -0500, Lawrence K. Chen, P.Eng. wrote:
> Wonder if there's still time to now see what ports I have installed that
> haven't been staged yet?
This doesn't quite answer your question, but there's a portsmon page
listing all nonstaged ports:
http://portsmon.freebsd
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 04:34:01PM -0700, Don Lewis wrote:
> What's going on with portsmon.freebsd.org these days? A number of my
> ports have been updated quite a while ago, but there isn't any updated
> build status on portsmon.
portsmon suffered some bitrot when a vuxml URL grew a "|" in it.
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 07:00:00PM -0600, Mike Brown wrote:
> After starting down this road, you may decide it's less of an ordeal just to
> write something yourself and put it up on your own blog. :/
There are those of us who will do our best to pick up changes and run with
them.
mcl
__
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 07:43:17PM +0200, Daniel Ryslink wrote:
> I was quite seriously ill for some time, and I have only now noticed
> these messages. I am the maintainer of the games/gnarr port.
Please take care of yourself. Fixing ports should be secondary.
mcl
__
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 12:02:32PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> This is a problem with the Apache POI port but it is also an issue
> with a potential Apache hadoop update: apparently our cluster
> doesn't like ports that download stuff as part of their build
s/doesn't like/doesn't allow/
This is
101 - 200 of 1353 matches
Mail list logo
