Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters

2012-07-18 Thread Chris Rees
On 17 Jul 2012 23:17, John Marino freebs...@marino.st wrote:

 On 7/17/2012 23:39, Mark Linimon wrote:

 On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:54:59AM -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote:

 We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though.

 ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port
 commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person?

 The answer to that is very complex.
 And, for each PR, maybe a different answer.


 This is true, but to address the previous question ...

 It is somewhat difficult to recruit new people who are willing to work
 within guidelines (both technical and social) and who seem to want to
 stay for the long-term.  portmgr does screen candidates to try to make
 sure that the quality of the Ports Collection doesn't decline.  Each
 vote is a judgement call.

 Having said that, we add new committers all the time.  OTOH we add new
 ports all the time, and due to this the backlog seems to remain constant.

 And again, as scheidell notes, some PRs are more equal than others.

 mcl


 Hi Mark,
 I think that's a reasonable assessment about how the backlog seems about
the same and how processes just naturally work.  But I think it could work
better.

 Let's take my case.
 I'm a maintainer of several Ada ports and compilers.  I'm also a pkgsrc
committer, but not a FreeBSD ports committer.  I have the same packages in
both trees, but the pkgsrc packages (ports) are more current.  That's
obviously because I can commit to one tree at will but I have to submit PR
and get in line for each update at FreeBSD (A quick shout out of
appreciation to Frederic who has been tremendously gracious to me over
these months).

 I was thinking about this - I really like how FreeBSD ports enforces to
the best of its ability that every port have a maintainer.  My name is on
several ports and I have pride in my work.  Would it be so bad if all my
submitted patches (as a recognized quality contributor with history) just
got committed as a passthrough?  Obviously you might be reluctant to do
this on ports that 200 packages depend on, but if you created a tier of
contributors below committer but above PR submitter, I think a lot of ports
would be maintained more often and there wouldn't be so much of a backlog.

 The worst case scenario is a contributor turns out to be a little sloppy,
doesn't bother to use Tinderbox, etc, and after a couple of incidents you
pull his privileges.  The benefit you gain from the others would outweigh
the incidents.

 I've seen the response that the committer is responsible for everything
he or she commits, but if the community gave them immunity from
consequences of maintainer patches, it shouldn't be a problem.

 I don't expect anything to come of this suggestion, but I've always
wondered why more responsibility wasn't given to port maintainers who don't
have commit privileges.

I got around this by linking in my PRs a Tinderbox log showing a successful
build.  For some developers, this was enough to just commit.  Not sure if I
would feel the same way nowadays though ;)

Of course there are names we recognise, and these people usually end up
with a commit bit eventually anyway.

Chris
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters

2012-07-18 Thread Lars Engels
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:43:02PM -0500, Mark Linimon wrote:
 On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09:50AM +0200, John Marino wrote:
  Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized
  quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough?
 
 This has been explored on the mailing lists before, however, we don't
 technically have a way to do either of the following:
 
  - let people commit to just some ports

Shouldn't this work with subversion?


pgpstPXYxNAYD.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters

2012-07-18 Thread John Marino

On 7/18/2012 00:43, Mark Linimon wrote:

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09:50AM +0200, John Marino wrote:

Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized
quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough?


This has been explored on the mailing lists before, however, we don't
technically have a way to do either of the following:

  - let people commit to just some ports
  - have any patches be autocommitted

No one has ever tackled the former problem.  The latter problem just
seems to me to open up ways for people to abuse the system.  It makes
me nervous.


Well, between the two I would suggest a combination of let people 
autocommit patches to just some ports.


Reasons - Don't have to hassle with the logistics of giving a limited 
commit bit, risk getting the permissions wrong, and removing it after 
the maintainer retires.


You'd have to create an automatic system that could verify the patches 
apply cleanly (or maybe just accept file replacements), and that the 
files came from maintainer.  A public/private key system should do that. 
 All you'd need to do is is map keys to ports and not accept any files 
outside of the allowed area.  Removing that mapping is a lot easier than 
tweaking commit privileges.


Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I 
think.


John
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: [HEADS-UP] CVS commit mails from ports

2012-07-18 Thread Beat Gaetzi
Hi Peter,

2012/7/18 Peter Jeremy pe...@rulingia.com:
 Thank you for your efforts in migrating the ports repository.

 On 2012-Jul-16 15:22:13 +0200, Beat Gaetzi b...@freebsd.org wrote:
The ports tree switched to Subversion this weekend. CVS commit mails
will be turned off soon. If you like to receive the ports commit mails
from Subversion please subscribe to svn-ports-all@ or svn-ports-head@.

 I think this could have been handled a bit better.  By turned off
 soon, I would have expected a couple of days to allow people to read
 this mail and take some action.  Instead, the mails were disabled by
 simon@ 7 hours after this mail.

 IMHO, the src list migration was handled more cleanly - peter@ just
 copied the cvs-all and cvs-src list members over to svn-src-all and
 shortly after, created a cvs-src-old to allow people time to convert
 any scripts that processed CVS commits.  See
 http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all/2008-October/273101.html
 http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all/2008-October/273112.html

I'm sorry for the trouble. The cvs-all list is marked as obsolete and
has the corresponding header:
**OBSOLETE** subscribe to svn-src-all and the individual cvs-ports/etc
lists instead! This list will go away in on or after 14th october, 2008.

As several people reported that they get the commit mails twice (from
cvs-all@ and one of the svn lists) and the list was marked as obsolete
I decided to stop the mailer from CVS.

Beat
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters

2012-07-18 Thread Chris Rees
On 18 Jul 2012 07:44, John Marino freebs...@marino.st wrote:

 On 7/18/2012 00:43, Mark Linimon wrote:

 On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09:50AM +0200, John Marino wrote:

 Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized
 quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough?


 This has been explored on the mailing lists before, however, we don't
 technically have a way to do either of the following:

   - let people commit to just some ports
   - have any patches be autocommitted

 No one has ever tackled the former problem.  The latter problem just
 seems to me to open up ways for people to abuse the system.  It makes
 me nervous.


 Well, between the two I would suggest a combination of let people
autocommit patches to just some ports.

 Reasons - Don't have to hassle with the logistics of giving a limited
commit bit, risk getting the permissions wrong, and removing it after the
maintainer retires.

 You'd have to create an automatic system that could verify the patches
apply cleanly (or maybe just accept file replacements), and that the files
came from maintainer.  A public/private key system should do that.  All
you'd need to do is is map keys to ports and not accept any files outside
of the allowed area.  Removing that mapping is a lot easier than tweaking
commit privileges.

 Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I
think.

It also does away with the QA aspect that committers currently provide.
I'd like to repeat that people sufficiently familiar with the ports system
to QA patches generally ends up with a commit bit fairly quickly.

Chris
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters

2012-07-18 Thread John Marino

On 7/18/2012 12:19, Chris Rees wrote:

On 18 Jul 2012 07:44, John Marinofreebs...@marino.st  wrote:

Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I

think.

It also does away with the QA aspect that committers currently provide.
I'd like to repeat that people sufficiently familiar with the ports system
to QA patches generally ends up with a commit bit fairly quickly.

Chris



I wouldn't assume people that become this proficient necessarily want a 
commit bit.


The whole point of my proposal is give and take.
Yes, you take away QA responsibility from an entire pool of committers 
and make it the primary responsibility of this new class of maintainer 
on a per port basis (and not nearly all ports either).  I was proposing 
that your gains (much less PRs, more often maintained ports) far 
outweigh the liabilities.  I would be selective who gets assigned to 
this new class.  They should have a body of work that instills 
confidence that they can handle QA.


You don't get something for nothing and it's not hard to revoke the 
privilege if a person can't handle it.

John

___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters

2012-07-18 Thread Chris Rees
On 18 Jul 2012 11:33, John Marino freebs...@marino.st wrote:

 On 7/18/2012 12:19, Chris Rees wrote:

 On 18 Jul 2012 07:44, John Marinofreebs...@marino.st  wrote:

 Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I

 think.

 It also does away with the QA aspect that committers currently provide.
 I'd like to repeat that people sufficiently familiar with the ports
system
 to QA patches generally ends up with a commit bit fairly quickly.

 Chris



 I wouldn't assume people that become this proficient necessarily want a
commit bit.

 The whole point of my proposal is give and take.
 Yes, you take away QA responsibility from an entire pool of committers
and make it the primary responsibility of this new class of maintainer on a
per port basis (and not nearly all ports either).  I was proposing that
your gains (much less PRs, more often maintained ports) far outweigh the
liabilities.  I would be selective who gets assigned to this new class.
 They should have a body of work that instills confidence that they can
handle QA.

 You don't get something for nothing and it's not hard to revoke the
privilege if a person can't handle it.

You are making a good point, but I'm trying to explain that the 'body of
work' for proposing a new developer is no greater than the standard you
suggest.

We do have developers who only commit to their own ports; while it's
generally hoped that they work on PRs too, it's not a requirement.  These
would fall under the category of 'super maintainers' if you like.

For further reading, Google 'Solutions for the PR load problem'.

Chris
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Weird problem with bsdadminscrips

2012-07-18 Thread Ruslan Mahmatkhanov


I got this on one of my machines (9.0-RELEASE):

= bsdadminscripts-6.1.1.tar.gz doesn't seem to exist in 
/usr/ports/distfiles/.
= Attempting to fetch 
http://heanet.dl.sourceforge.net/project/bsdadminscripts/bsdadminscripts/bsdadminscripts-6.1.1.tar.gz

bsdadminscripts-6.1.1.tar.gz  100% of   72 kB  150 kBps
===  Extracting for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1
= SHA256 Checksum OK for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1.tar.gz.
===  Patching for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1
===  Applying FreeBSD patches for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1
===  Configuring for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1
===  Installing for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1
===   Generating temporary packing list
===  Checking if sysutils/bsdadminscripts already installed
Unknown parameter 'yes'.
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/bsdadminscripts.1.gz
eval: bsdadminscripts.1: not found
installing: %%DATADIR%%/buildflags.awk
eval: buildflags.awk: not found
installing: %%PREFIX%%/etc/buildflags.conf.sample
eval: buildflags.conf.sample: not found
installing: %%DATADIR%%/buildflags.mk
eval: buildflags.mk: not found
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/buildflags.awk.1.gz
eval: buildflags.awk.1: not found
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/buildflags.conf.1.gz
eval: buildflags.conf.1: not found
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/buildflags.mk.1.gz
eval: buildflags.mk.1: not found
installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/distviper
eval: distviper: not found
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/distviper.1.gz
eval: distviper.1: not found
installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/pkg_libchk
eval: pkg_libchk: not found
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/pkg_libchk.1.gz
eval: pkg_libchk.1: not found
installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/pkg_upgrade
eval: pkg_upgrade: not found
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/pkg_upgrade.1.gz
eval: pkg_upgrade.1: not found
installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/pkg_validate
eval: pkg_validate: not found
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/pkg_validate.1.gz
eval: pkg_validate.1: not found
installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig
eval: portconfig: not found
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/portconfig.1.gz
eval: portconfig.1: not found
installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart
eval: rcstart: not found
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/rcstart.1.gz
eval: rcstart.1: not found
installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/uma
eval: uma: not found
installing: %%MAN%%/man1/uma.1.gz
eval: uma.1: not found
installing: %%PREFIX%%/etc/uma.conf.sample
eval: uma.conf.sample: not found
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstatus
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstop
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcrestart
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rconestart
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rconestatus
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rconestop
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rconerestart
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portbuild
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portclean
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portfetch
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig - %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portpackage
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig - 
%%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig-recursive
hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig - 
%%PREFIX%%/sbin/portfetch-recursive

===   Registering installation for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1
===  Cleaning for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1

As you see variables are not expanded. Have no problems with other ports 
on the same system. Have no problem with this port on other machines. 
What to look for? Thanks.


--
Regards,
Ruslan

Tinderboxing kills... the drives.

___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Weird problem with bsdadminscrips

2012-07-18 Thread Ruslan Mahmatkhanov

Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote on 18.07.2012 14:48:


As you see variables are not expanded. Have no problems with other ports
on the same system. Have no problem with this port on other machines.
What to look for? Thanks.



Ok, answering to myself. It was because of

NOPORTDOCS=yes
NOPORTEXAMPLES=yes

in /etc/make.conf (left from old times). Commenting them off solves the 
problem.


--
Regards,
Ruslan

Tinderboxing kills... the drives.


___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters

2012-07-18 Thread John Marino

On 7/18/2012 12:40, Chris Rees wrote:


You are making a good point, but I'm trying to explain that the 'body of
work' for proposing a new developer is no greater than the standard you
suggest.

We do have developers who only commit to their own ports; while it's
generally hoped that they work on PRs too, it's not a requirement.  These
would fall under the category of 'super maintainers' if you like.

For further reading, Google 'Solutions for the PR load problem'.



A very interesting read and essentially addresses the topic I started, 
with a different implementation.


You've been consistent in your concern, but maybe what I'm getting at is 
that these super maintainers don't need to be held to the same 
standard as someone with a commit bit.  Hopefully they are every bit as 
capable as a committer, but if they are only interested in maintaining 
say  10 ports and those ports aren't in the critical path of more 
important ports, what's the harm in handing the reins to a slightly less 
experienced person that wants to do it esp. with a large PR backlog?


If it passes lint and tinderbox checks, it's got to have some 
(acceptable) quality level.  Over time and with experience the 
maintainer will improve anyway, especially if he/she is also directly 
any PRs against the port.


That's another topic -- these super maintainers should be able to close 
PRs as well on their ports.


Speaking for myself, I think I'd make a good super-maintainer and I 
think the quality would be very high on my ports.  I know I'm not alone.


John
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice

2012-07-18 Thread Leslie Jensen


Hello.

I've tried to update but it will not build and the suggested procedure 
to fix the problem does not work for me.


Please see below.

Thanks







tail_build deliver
Module 'tail_build' delivered successfully. 0 files copied, 0 files 
unchanged


---
Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry !
  For more help with debugging build errors, please see the section in:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development

  internal build errors:

ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making 
/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/testtools/source/bridgetest


 it seems that the error is inside 'testtools', please re-run build
 inside this module to isolate the error and/or test your fix:
---

/usr/local/bin/bash
cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3
source ./Env.Host.sh
cd testtools
rm -Rf 
/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/testtools/unxfbsd.pro 
# optional module 'clean'

build

when the problem is isolated and fixed exit and re-run 'make' from the 
top-level

gmake[1]: *** [build] Fel 1
gmake[1]: Lämnar katalogen 
/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3

gmake: *** [source-env-and-recurse] Fel 2
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice.

=== make failed for editors/libreoffice
=== Aborting update

=== Update for editors/libreoffice failed
=== Aborting update

__


cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3
/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3:source 
./Env.Host.sh
SRC_ROOT=/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3: 
Command not found.

OOO_SHELL=/usr/local/bin/bash: Command not found.
JAVA_HOME=NO_JAVA_HOME: Command not found.
L10N_MODULE=/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/translations: 
Command not found.

WITH_LANG_LIST=en-US: Command not found.
PROGRESSBARCOLOR=126,170,23: Command not found.
PROGRESSSIZE=319,10: Command not found.
PROGRESSPOSITION=164,225: Command not found.
PROGRESSFRAMECOLOR=207,208,211: Command not found.
OOO_VENDOR=FreeBSD ports 3.5.5: Command not found.
OOODMAKEMODE=YES: Command not found.
PRODUCTVERSION=3.5: Command not found.
CALL_CDECL=TRUE: Command not found.
NO_REC_RES=TRUE: Command not found.
SO3=TRUE: Command not found.
SOLAR_PLUGIN=TRUE: Command not found.
UPDATER=YES: Command not found.
VCL=TRUE: Command not found.
ENABLEUNICODE=TRUE: Command not found.
NO_BSYMBOLIC=TRUE: Command not found.
EXTERNAL_WARNINGS_NOT_ERRORS=TRUE: Command not found.
PRODUCT=full: Command not found.
PROEXT=.pro: Command not found.
UNIXWRAPPERNAME=libreoffice: Command not found.
PRODUCTNAME=LibreOffice: Command not found.
INSTALLDIRNAME=libreoffice: Command not found.
PREFIXDIR=/usr/local: Command not found.
INSTALLDIR=/usr/local/lib/libreoffice: Command not found.
LIBDIR=/usr/local/lib: Command not found.
DATADIR=/usr/local/share: Command not found.
MANDIR=/usr/local/man: Command not found.
DOCDIR=/usr/local/share/doc/libreoffice: Command not found.
DO_FETCH_TARBALLS=NO: Command not found.
SYSTEM_MOZILLA_HEADERS=NO: Command not found.
BUILD_VER_STRING=FreeBSD ports 3.5.5: Command not found.
DEFAULT_TO_ENGLISH_FOR_PACKING=yes: Command not found.
ENABLE_GTK=TRUE: Command not found.
GTK_CFLAGS=-D_THREAD_SAFE -D_REENTRANT -I/usr/local/include/gtk-2.0 
-I/usr/local/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/local/include/cairo 
-I/usr/local/include/gdk-pixbuf-2.0 -I/usr/local/include/pango-1.0 
-I/usr/local/include/gio-unix-2.0/ -I/usr/local/include 
-I/usr/local/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/local/include/pixman-1 
-I/usr/local/include/freetype2 -I/usr/local/include/libpng15  : Command 
not found.
GTK_LIBS=-pthread -L/usr/local/lib -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -latk-1.0 
-lpangocairo-1.0 -lXext -lXrender -lXinerama -lXi -lXrandr -lXcursor 
-lXcomposite -lXdamage -lpangoft2-1.0 -lgio-2.0 -lXfixes -lcairo -lX11 
-lpango-1.0 -lfreetype -lfontconfig -lgdk_pixbuf_xlib-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 
-lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lm -lgobject-2.0 -lgthread-2.0 -lglib-2.0  : Command 
not found.
GTHREAD_CFLAGS=-D_REENTRANT -I/usr/local/include/glib-2.0  : Command not 
found.
GTHREAD_LIBS=-pthread -L/usr/local/lib -lgthread-2.0 -lglib-2.0  : 
Command not found.

ENABLE_STATIC_GTK=FALSE: Command not found.
ENABLE_CAIRO_CANVAS=TRUE: Command not found.
ENABLE_OPENGL=TRUE: Command not found.
ENABLE_NSPLUGIN=NO: Command not found.
ENABLE_PDFIMPORT=YES: Command not found.
ENABLE_MINIMIZER=YES: Command not found.
ENABLE_PRESENTER_SCREEN=YES: Command not found.
ENABLE_REPORTBUILDER=NO: Command not found.
ENABLE_SCRIPTING_BEANSHELL=NO: Command not found.
ENABLE_SCRIPTING_JAVASCRIPT=NO: Command not found.
ENABLE_SCRIPTING_PYTHON=YES: Command not found.
ENABLE_QUICKSTART_LIBPNG=TRUE: 

Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice

2012-07-18 Thread Lowell Gilbert
Leslie Jensen les...@eskk.nu writes:

 I've tried to update but it will not build and the suggested procedure
 to fix the problem does not work for me.

What version of clang do you have installed?
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice

2012-07-18 Thread Leslie Jensen
I was forced to deinstall clang 3.1 because Libre office wanted to install 
devel-clang 3.2 



Lowell Gilbert freebsd-ports-lo...@be-well.ilk.org skrev:Leslie Jensen 
les...@eskk.nu writes:

 I've tried to update but it will not build and the suggested procedure
 to fix the problem does not work for me.

What version of clang do you have installed?
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

libreoffice fails to build

2012-07-18 Thread Robert Huff

On a system running:

FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0: Wed Jul 18 08:15:22 EDT 2012  amd64 

and system clang (3.1), libreoffice 3.5.5 gets stuck at:

=
(1/1) Building module sal
=
Entering 
/data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/inc

Entering 
/data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/typesconfig

Entering 
/data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/rtl/source

Entering 
/data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/textenc

Entering 
/data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/osl/all

Entering 
/data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/android

Entering 
/data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/osl/unx

Entering 
/data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/util

Making:libuno_sal.so.3
: ERROR: /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version GLIBCXX_3.4.15 required by 
../unxfbsd.pro/lib/check_libuno_sal.so.3 not found
dmake:  Error code 1, while making  '../unxfbsd.pro/lib/libuno_sal.so.3'

This error persists after doing:

/usr/local/bin/bash
cd /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3
source ./Env.Host.sh
cd sal
rm -Rf 
/data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/unxfbsd.pro
 # optional module 'clean'
build


I though this had been fixed?


Robert Huff

___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice

2012-07-18 Thread Jung-uk Kim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 2012-07-18 10:57:58 -0400, Leslie Jensen wrote:
 I was forced to deinstall clang 3.1 because Libre office wanted to
 install devel-clang 3.2

I found that it does not build with clang-devel, yet. :-(

It is not clang's fault actually and I am working on a fix.  Please
stay tuned.

Jung-uk Kim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlAG94AACgkQmlay1b9qnVP3eACfQQ0pIcZhKobMdQH5G1dPa8Qn
NAwAoIpg+paSaqK8oAtUzxSn6MgrgNv2
=96xO
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice

2012-07-18 Thread Lowell Gilbert
Jung-uk Kim j...@freebsd.org writes:

 It is not clang's fault actually and I am working on a fix.  Please
 stay tuned.

One issue is that different problems have been presenting with very
similar symptoms, so that it's hard to help people who need technical
assistance. I don't see anything we can do about that, unfortunately.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice

2012-07-18 Thread Chris Rees
On 18 Jul 2012 12:55, Leslie Jensen les...@eskk.nu wrote:


 Hello.

 I've tried to update but it will not build and the suggested procedure to
fix the problem does not work for me.

 Please see below.

 Thanks







 tail_build deliver
 Module 'tail_build' delivered successfully. 0 files copied, 0 files
unchanged


 ---
 Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry !
   For more help with debugging build errors, please see the section in:
 http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development

   internal build errors:

 ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making
/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/testtools/source/bridgetest

  it seems that the error is inside 'testtools', please re-run build

  inside this module to isolate the error and/or test your fix:
 ---

 /usr/local/bin/bash
 cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3
 source ./Env.Host.sh
 cd testtools
 rm -Rf
/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/testtools/
unxfbsd.pro # optional module 'clean'
 build

 when the problem is isolated and fixed exit and re-run 'make' from the
top-level
 gmake[1]: *** [build] Fel 1
 gmake[1]: Lämnar katalogen
/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3

 gmake: *** [source-env-and-recurse] Fel 2
 *** Error code 1

 Stop in /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice.
 *** Error code 1

 Stop in /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice.

 === make failed for editors/libreoffice
 === Aborting update

 === Update for editors/libreoffice failed
 === Aborting update

 __


 cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3
 /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3:source ./
Env.Host.sh
 SRC_ROOT=/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3:
Command not found.


Two problems; you forgot to run bash first, so csh is choking on the syntax
in the file, and you aren't root.

Hopefully these pointers might help fix build; I'll try to get you a
package too.

Chris
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Bug in dns/fpdns

2012-07-18 Thread Greg Rivers

The ports version of dns/fpdns seems to have this[1] bug:

$ fpdns ns1.isc-sns.net.
Net::DNS::Header::data: no such method at 
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.16.0/Net/DNS/Fingerprint.pm line 668.


[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830449

--
Greg Rivers
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: libreoffice fails to build

2012-07-18 Thread Doug Barton
On 07/18/2012 08:46, Robert Huff wrote:
 
   On a system running:
 
 FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0: Wed Jul 18 08:15:22 EDT 2012  amd64 
 
   and system clang (3.1), libreoffice 3.5.5 

Built cleanly for me last night on r238444. Are you sure your world is
current enough to get the latest clang fixes?

Doug

-- 

Change is hard.



___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice

2012-07-18 Thread Jung-uk Kim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 2012-07-18 14:11:46 -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
 Jung-uk Kim j...@freebsd.org writes:
 
 It is not clang's fault actually and I am working on a fix.
 Please stay tuned.
 
 One issue is that different problems have been presenting with
 very similar symptoms, so that it's hard to help people who need
 technical assistance. I don't see anything we can do about that,
 unfortunately.

Yes, it is really hard for me to fix all supported releases. :-(

Anyway, here is the patch for testing:

http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/libreoffice-clang3.2.diff

cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/files
fetch http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/libreoffice-clang3.2.diff
patch -p0  libreoffice-clang3.2.diff
rm *.diff *.orig
cd ..
make clean
make

Let me know if it does not work.

Jung-uk Kim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlAHNwEACgkQmlay1b9qnVNHGACgjqHgF8WeX0s42f7+Qn6KYPAt
9jUAn1cegWFt7XTiOQSVvY/mJFd0MXFJ
=eE4j
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


[FYI] C++ compilers vs. __cplusplus (was Re: SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice)

2012-07-18 Thread Jung-uk Kim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

While I was tackling LibreOffice build issues, I found something
interesting about __cplusplus.  Basically, different C++ compilers may
have different __cplusplus definitions and it may cause some
strangeness.  Clang, for example, used to set it to 1 but now it is
set to C++ standard value since this commit:

http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=revrevision=156113

This is what I got from head:

GCC:
% cpp --version
cpp (GCC) 4.2.1 20070831 patched [FreeBSD]
Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE.

% cpp -x c++ -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus
#define __cplusplus 1
% cpp -x c++ -std=gnu++98 -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus
#define __cplusplus 1

Clang 3.1:
% clang-cpp --version
FreeBSD clang version 3.1 (branches/release_31 156863) 20120523
Target: x86_64-unknown-freebsd10.0
Thread model: posix
% clang-cpp -x c++ -std=c++98 -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus
#define __cplusplus 199711L
% clang-cpp -x c++ -std=c++0x -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus
#define __cplusplus 201103L
% clang-cpp -x c++ -std=gnu++98 -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus
#define __cplusplus 1
% clang-cpp -x c++ -std=gnu++0x -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus
#define __cplusplus 1

Clang 3.2 snapshot (ports/lang/clang-devel):
% /usr/local/bin/clang++ --version
clang version 3.2 (trunk)
Target: amd64-portbld-freebsd10.0
Thread model: posix
% /usr/local/bin/clang++ -E -x c++ -std=c++98 -dM /dev/null | grep
__cplusplus
#define __cplusplus 199711L
% /usr/local/bin/clang++ -E -x c++ -std=c++0x -dM /dev/null | grep
__cplusplus
#define __cplusplus 201103L
% /usr/local/bin/clang++ -E -x c++ -std=gnu++98 -dM /dev/null | grep
__cplusplus
#define __cplusplus 199711L
% /usr/local/bin/clang++ -E -x c++ -std=gnu++0x -dM /dev/null | grep
__cplusplus
#define __cplusplus 201103L

and so on and so forth...

This causes very subtle issues depending on compiler versions and
FreeBSD versions.  For example, NULL may be defined differently
because stable/9 and head have this:

#if __cplusplus = 201103L
#define NULLnullptr
#elif defined(__GNUG__)  defined(__GNUC__)  __GNUC__ = 4
#define NULL__null
#else
#if defined(__LP64__)
#define NULL(0L)
#else
#define NULL0
#endif  /* __LP64__ */
#endif  /* __GNUG__ */

Before that, we had this:

#if defined(__GNUG__)  defined(__GNUC__)  __GNUC__ = 4
#define NULL__null
#else
#if defined(__LP64__)
#define NULL(0L)
#else
#define NULL0
#endif  /* __LP64__ */
#endif  /* __GNUG__ */

What a mess...

Jung-uk Kim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlAHR/IACgkQmlay1b9qnVNd0QCfX1NPpOfc+haRebvmBb1+nMSY
KAUAn3A6vKEaV0FQy82gysnV79UdejMf
=7G3Z
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice

2012-07-18 Thread Jung-uk Kim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 2012-07-18 18:21:53 -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
 On 2012-07-18 14:11:46 -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
 Jung-uk Kim j...@freebsd.org writes:
 
 It is not clang's fault actually and I am working on a fix. 
 Please stay tuned.
 
 One issue is that different problems have been presenting with 
 very similar symptoms, so that it's hard to help people who need 
 technical assistance. I don't see anything we can do about that, 
 unfortunately.
 
 Yes, it is really hard for me to fix all supported releases. :-(
 
 Anyway, here is the patch for testing:
 
 http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/libreoffice-clang3.2.diff

The patch updated:

http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/libreoffice-clang3.2_2.diff

Basically, you need to revert two patches, i.e.,
patch-solenv__gbuild__platform__unxgcc.mk and
patch-solenv__inc__unxgcc.mk.

It didn't work for old releases. :-(

Jung-uk Kim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlAHS5UACgkQmlay1b9qnVM+5gCdGGuh3dp+tuH5miuQoY+gTey5
nQsAn3754EnZYX86X+IrFpYdlIy5LOMW
=qc1O
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: libreoffice fails to build

2012-07-18 Thread Robert Huff

Doug Barton writes:

  On a system running:
   
   FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0: Wed Jul 18 08:15:22 EDT 2012  amd64 
   
  and system clang (3.1), libreoffice 3.5.5 
  
  Built cleanly for me last night on r238444. Are you sure your
  world is current enough to get the latest clang fixes?

System and ports were updated (by csup) at 00:01 US Eastern
time today.
Recent enough?


Robert Huff

___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org