I think it should be
LIB_DEPENDS+= netsnmp:${PORTSDIR}/net-mgmt/net-snmp
Like this
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159253
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/php52-snmp-tp4656720p4657818.html
Sent from the freebsd-ports mailing list archive at
Hello,
I'm not sure that gtk-3.0 appears in 1997 ;-).
# New ports collection makefile for: gtk13
^
# Date Created: 28 Sep 1997
^^^
# Whom: Vanilla I. Shu
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 10:26 +0200, David Demelier wrote:
Hello,
I'm not sure that gtk-3.0 appears in 1997 ;-).
It isn't a typo. This port was repo-copied from gtk20 which was in a
previous life gtk13 :). It all history.
-Koop
# New ports collection makefile for: gtk13
olli hauer wrote:
On 2011-08-01 23:31, Olli Hauer wrote:
On 2011-08-01 22:54, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
Olli Hauer wrote:
On 2011-08-01 12:55, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
[...]
Today (after Postfix upgrade) I have this in daily report:
Backup passwd and group files:
elsa.codelab.cz group
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 10:42:13AM -0400, b. f. wrote:
In sec 5.4.2 MASTER_SITES in the porter handbook:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/makefile-distfiles.html#AEN1512
the example given is:
MASTER_SITES= ${MASTER_SITE_GNU}
However,
Am 30.07.2011 15:44, schrieb Pawel Pekala:
Dnia 2011-07-30, o godz. 09:08:20
Carmel carmel...@hotmail.com napisał(a):
I am in the process of setting up a new PC and wanted to install
claws-mail as my MUA. I have it all ready installed on another
machine I use. This port, unfortunately, is
Am 30.07.2011 19:44, schrieb Lev Serebryakov:
Hello, Freebsd-ports.
How could I run `portmaster' without ANY questions and
confirmations?
Simple and obvious `portmaster --no-confirm -y list of ports'
doesn't work. It asks:
(1) About interactive ports.
(2) About removing old
since we have net-snmp 5.7 in ports it would be right to correct some ports
from netsnmp.20 to netsnmp.30
[root@monitor /usr/ports]# grep -R netsnmp.20 *
french/plgrenouille/Makefile:LIB_DEPENDS=
netsnmp.20:${PORTSDIR}/net-mgmt/net-snmp
security/libfwbuilder/Makefile:
On Aug 1, 2011, at 9:01 PM, Sahil Tandon sa...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 00:04:14 +0200, olli hauer wrote:
No, you don't hit the limitation. It seems you really found a bug in
the Framework!
From the Framework code in bsd.port.mk existing groups should honored.
Along
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 00:04:14 +0200, olli hauer wrote:
No, you don't hit the limitation. It seems you really found a bug in
the Framework!
From the Framework code in bsd.port.mk existing groups should honored.
Along those lines, what about using groupmod instead of
on 31/07/2011 22:14 Doug Barton said the following:
Understood, but I'm not sure what I can do about it unless I can
reproduce it.
I reproduced the problem by doing a similar kind of upgrade:
$ pkg_delete -f gtk-2.\*
$ portmaster -v atk-2.0.1 gio-fam-backend-2.28.8 glib-2.28.8
(Note: I am totally new to FreeBSD ports and have no idea if I am sending this
to the right place.)
At least for FreeBSD 8.2-stable, the most recent PackageKit port requires that
the lzma port be installed -- it fails to link if you have not
installed the lzma port
(which itself requires a little
on 02/08/2011 16:14 Andriy Gapon said the following:
And now to my side of the problem.
While profiling pkg_info with ktrace I see getdirentries(2) calls sometimes
take quite a while. And since I have 1000 ports all those calls do add up.
DTrace shows that the calls are quite fast (~0.3 ms)
2011/7/30 Lev Serebryakov l...@freebsd.org:
Hello, Freebsd-ports.
How could I run `portmaster' without ANY questions and
confirmations?
Simple and obvious `portmaster --no-confirm -y list of ports'
doesn't work. It asks:
(1) About interactive ports.
(2) About removing old distfiles
on 02/08/2011 21:26 Doug Barton said the following:
On 08/02/2011 06:14, Andriy Gapon wrote:
Second, I think that portmaster could cache the origin = pkg mapping that it
builds while working on port A, so that it can be readily re-used for port B.
That could also include negative mapping where
On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 03:39:57PM +0400, Pavel Timofeev thus spake:
since we have net-snmp 5.7 in ports it would be right to correct some ports
from netsnmp.20 to netsnmp.30
[root@monitor /usr/ports]# grep -R netsnmp.20 *
french/plgrenouille/Makefile:LIB_DEPENDS=
On 08/02/2011 12:12, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 02/08/2011 21:26 Doug Barton said the following:
On 08/02/2011 06:14, Andriy Gapon wrote:
Second, I think that portmaster could cache the origin = pkg mapping that
it
builds while working on port A, so that it can be readily re-used for port
B.
I notice that http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/156253
exists for the 1.46.1 update, however 1.47 is out since July 11. I'm
curious about whatever plans may exist to do the update ...
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
on 02/08/2011 23:08 Doug Barton said the following:
On 08/02/2011 12:12, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 02/08/2011 21:26 Doug Barton said the following:
On 08/02/2011 06:14, Andriy Gapon wrote:
Second, I think that portmaster could cache the origin = pkg mapping that
it
builds while working on port
On 08/02/2011 13:39, Andriy Gapon wrote:
Just a few small corrections:
I was using your description of the situation. Sorry if I misunderstood.
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of
On 2011-Aug-01 19:21:21 +0200, Michel Talon ta...@lpthe.jussieu.fr wrote:
This is unfortunately impossible because the ports system is organized
around a make logic and the relevant dependency variables are only
obtained through running make on each ports Makefile *in the context* of
the gigantic
On 02/08/2011 10:45, Koop Mast wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 10:26 +0200, David Demelier wrote:
Hello,
I'm not sure that gtk-3.0 appears in 1997 ;-).
It isn't a typo. This port was repo-copied from gtk20 which was in a
previous life gtk13 :). It all history.
Yes but this does not make
On 8/2/11 5:37 PM, David Demelier wrote:
On 02/08/2011 10:45, Koop Mast wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 10:26 +0200, David Demelier wrote:
Hello,
I'm not sure that gtk-3.0 appears in 1997 ;-).
It isn't a typo. This port was repo-copied from gtk20 which was in a
previous life gtk13 :). It all
Are you serious? Upgrading the OS on a production machine is a really steep
price to pay. I've over a thousand working ports and numerous customers that
I would have to port afterwards.
You really can't fix what appears to be a reasonable request?
--
View this message in context:
On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:34:00 -0700 (PDT), JoelFRodriguez wrote:
Are you serious? Upgrading the OS on a production machine is a really
steep
price to pay. I've over a thousand working ports and numerous
customers that
I would have to port afterwards.
You really can't fix what appears to be a
On 08/02/2011 15:34, JoelFRodriguez wrote:
Are you serious? Upgrading the OS on a production machine is a really steep
price to pay. I've over a thousand working ports and numerous customers that
I would have to port afterwards.
FreeBSD 6 has been EOL since November 30, 2010. We have been
Thanks for the quick reply and I certainly appreciate your viewpoint.
Are these undefined references defined by FREEBSD? If so, why would you
introduce an OS dependency in a library intended to provide unicode support?
c++ -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -W -Wall -ansi -pedantic -Wpointer-arith
On 08/02/2011 17:59, JoelFRodriguez wrote:
This stuff has worked fine on my FREEBSD6.2 system until this week. And if I
read these msgs correctly, this problem also occurs on FREEBSD8.
The current icu and glib20 ports work fine on all supported versions of
FreeBSD.
I think bapt's response was
Baptiste Daroussin b...@freebsd.org wrote:
For the third time, I'm running a deprecation campaign to
remove old, unmaintain and/or problematic stuff from the
ports tree (ports@)
As usual I may be wrong there maybe some false positive,
I sharpened a bit my analysis scripts so there should be
[ adding portmgr@ to the chain since we're in bpmk territory]
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 15:09:49 +0200, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 00:04:14 +0200, olli hauer wrote:
No, you don't hit the limitation. It seems you really found a bug in
the Framework!
make fetch succeeded for every one of the ~150 ports that
I tried from that list, using the first site it attempted in
the considerable majority of cases.
Did it fetch from a FreeBSD distfile mirror? We don't count that as
functioning correctly.
--
Eitan Adler
31 matches
Mail list logo
