On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 08:58:04AM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
By my calculations there are 28 ports that set 'BROKEN' because of
architecture incompatibility on my amd64 system
IMHO these Makefiles are broken and should be fixed.
mcl
___
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:20:05AM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
Actually I take your point, that it should be possible to distinguish
between ports that permanently won't work on some architectures by
design, and ports that temporarily don't work because of mistakes or
broken dependencies or
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:53:23PM +, Chris Rees wrote:
Occasionally someone runs an exp- for sparc64 (lol) etc.
You're conflating two different ideas. The arch is orthogonal to
TRYBROKEN.
They use TRYBROKEN to test packages marked BROKEN, but ONLY_FOR_ARCHS
sets IGNORE.
This part is
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 05:16:08AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
On 01/20/2012 04:53, Chris Rees wrote:
Occasionally someone runs an exp- for sparc64 (lol) etc.
... which given the overwhelming lack of users for this platform is
almost certainly a waste of resources.
When we switch to
On 21 Jan 2012 19:51, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:53:23PM +, Chris Rees wrote:
Occasionally someone runs an exp- for sparc64 (lol) etc.
You're conflating two different ideas. The arch is orthogonal to
TRYBROKEN.
Perhaps I didn't phrase it
On 21/01/2012 19:33, Mark Linimon wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 08:58:04AM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
By my calculations there are 28 ports that set 'BROKEN' because of
architecture incompatibility on my amd64 system
IMHO these Makefiles are broken and should be fixed.
Actually,
On 19 Jan 2012 08:58, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 19/01/2012 01:31, Michael Scheidell wrote:
in manually trying to build an index for a tinderbox/binary/portmaster
distribution, I started to look at some of the things that slow these
down.
and, being a former
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 05:40:09PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
On 01/18/2012 17:31, Michael Scheidell wrote:
in manually trying to build an index for a tinderbox/binary/portmaster
distribution
I highly recommend looking at ports-mgmt/p5-FreeBSD-Portindex for this
purpose. After the initial
On 20/01/2012 09:18, Chris Rees wrote:
On 19 Jan 2012 08:58, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 19/01/2012 01:31, Michael Scheidell wrote:
anyway, worth the cycles?
take out -.include bsd.port.pre.mk; -.if ${ARCH} == sparc64
-BROKEN=Does not install on sparc64
On 20/01/2012 09:30, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
# /usr/bin/time -hl make index
Generating INDEX-10 - please wait..Makefile, line 41: warning:
/sbin/sysctl -n hw.instruction_sse 2 /dev/null returned non-zero status
Which Makefile does the warning refer to?
lucid-nonsense:/usr/ports:% grep -r
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Matthew Seaman
m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
That's a systematic problem: callying sysctl like that will return a
non-zero status if you ask it about a non-existent sysctl, but doing
that is basically the point of the test. One fix would be:
On 20 Jan 2012 10:20, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 20/01/2012 09:18, Chris Rees wrote:
On 19 Jan 2012 08:58, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 19/01/2012 01:31, Michael Scheidell wrote:
anyway, worth the cycles?
take out -.include
On 20/01/2012 12:53, Chris Rees wrote:
On 20 Jan 2012 10:20, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 20/01/2012 09:18, Chris Rees wrote:
On 19 Jan 2012 08:58, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 19/01/2012 01:31, Michael Scheidell wrote:
anyway,
On 20 Jan 2012 13:06, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 20/01/2012 12:53, Chris Rees wrote:
On 20 Jan 2012 10:20, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 20/01/2012 09:18, Chris Rees wrote:
On 19 Jan 2012 08:58, Matthew Seaman
On 01/20/2012 04:53, Chris Rees wrote:
Occasionally someone runs an exp- for sparc64 (lol) etc.
... which given the overwhelming lack of users for this platform is
almost certainly a waste of resources.
They use TRYBROKEN to test packages marked BROKEN, but ONLY_FOR_ARCHS sets
IGNORE.
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 05:16:08AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
On 01/20/2012 04:53, Chris Rees wrote:
Occasionally someone runs an exp- for sparc64 (lol) etc.
... which given the overwhelming lack of users for this platform is
almost certainly a waste of resources.
how about ia64?
They
On 20/01/2012 13:14, Chris Rees wrote:
On 20 Jan 2012 13:06, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 20/01/2012 12:53, Chris Rees wrote:
On 20 Jan 2012 10:20, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk
wrote:
On 20/01/2012 09:18, Chris Rees wrote:
On 19 Jan 2012
On 1/20/12 8:33 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
Actually, going back to the original question -- if this means not
having to .includebsd.port.pre.mk in a reasonable number of cases,
then it might even be a win overall when generating an index. (At a
guess. Have to do some experiments to confirm
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:44:23AM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
HAS_SSE!= ${SYSCTL} -i -n hw.instruction_sse 2/dev/null
It's only a warning though, so INDEX generation should still work.
Yes, but the warning makes portmgrs sad. It leaves 'junk' in the
output of the file that's used to
On 1/20/12 2:38 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:44:23AM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
HAS_SSE!= ${SYSCTL} -i -n hw.instruction_sse 2/dev/null
It's only a warning though, so INDEX generation should still work.
and, there are lots of these around also.
LIBNET_CONFIG?=
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:44:23AM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
HAS_SSE!= ${SYSCTL} -i -n hw.instruction_sse 2/dev/null
It's only a warning though, so INDEX generation should still work.
Yes, but the warning makes
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:44:23AM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
HAS_SSE!= ${SYSCTL} -i -n hw.instruction_sse 2/dev/null
It's only a warning though, so INDEX generation should still work.
Yes, but the warning makes
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 02:48:24PM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote:
You mean like this ?
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/dads-sysctl.html
Yeah, but that's missing the 2 /dev/null corollary.
mcl
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
On 20/01/2012 20:26, Mark Linimon wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 02:48:24PM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote:
You mean like this ?
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/dads-sysctl.html
Yeah, but that's missing the 2 /dev/null corollary.
Or the mustn't return non-zero exit code in
On 19/01/2012 01:31, Michael Scheidell wrote:
in manually trying to build an index for a tinderbox/binary/portmaster
distribution, I started to look at some of the things that slow these down.
and, being a former real-time, robotics guy... I figure, take ONE line
of code out, and you make
On 01/18/2012 17:31, Michael Scheidell wrote:
in manually trying to build an index for a tinderbox/binary/portmaster
distribution
I highly recommend looking at ports-mgmt/p5-FreeBSD-Portindex for this
purpose. After the initial set up incremental changes take seconds,
instead of 30+ minutes.
26 matches
Mail list logo
