Re: portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread RW via freebsd-ports 
On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 06:51:44 +1100 (EST)
Dave Horsfall wrote:

> Is there some reason why portsnap cannot clean
> up /var/db/portsnap/files? I've just had to remove a zillion of them,
> a bunch at a time because "rm" choked on the arg list.

If you mean files under /var/db/portsnap/files/ then these are not
temporary files, they are the compressed snapshot, and you should not
delete them without very good reason. They are supposed to persist and
may remain unmodified for many months. 


Zillion is a bit vague, there should be one file for each port plus one
for each file outside a port directory. I have ~27k files.


The temporary .gz files are stored in the directory above and may be
deleted. 


___
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"

Re: portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread Dave Horsfall 
On Fri, 6 Jan 2017, Xin LI wrote:

> Because the files are still being used?  What makes you believe they are 
> unused, by the way?

How would I tell?  Some were there since last October, surviving a few 
reboots...

What I do see is the INDEX file containing "...|$tmpfile"; could that be 
the problem?  That INDEX hadn't been cleaned out for some reason?

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."
___
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"

Re: portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread Michelle Sullivan 

Dave Horsfall wrote:

(Many responses)

I note that no-one has answered the question which caused me to post the
message in the first place viz: why weren't the files being removed
automatically?  Everyone appears to have missed this point...

I didn't and some of the answers are helpful even if not answering the 
original.


"portsnap fetch" - I wasn't aware it removed the old files at the 
beginning, but will take the other poster's word for that (especially 
after checking the remaining few remaining systems I have on FreeBSD 
would seem to indicate it as a fact)...  however "rm -r /var/db/portsnap 
&& portsnap fetch" is an easy way to clean everything up... if you think 
it's not working correctly.


The index file you will have is: /var/db/portsnap/INDEX

It is possible this was deleted/replaced at some time thereby losing the 
mapping of the files... perhaps a working directory failure (out of 
space etc).. but that should be fixed at every successful fetch as it 
finishes with the following lines of code:


# Move files into their proper locations
rm -f tag INDEX tINDEX
rm -rf files
mv tag.new tag
mv tINDEX.new tINDEX
mv INDEX.new INDEX
mv snap/ files/

('snap' being created new everytime)..

The other part you might not be considering is that the files have to be 
cleaned up on the portsnap server (snapshot builder) itself... but again 
looking at code it should 'just work' - unless someone has tampered with 
it since I downloaded it all and setup my own server...


Regards,

Michelle
___
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"

Re: portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread Xin LI 
Because the files are still being used?  What makes you believe they are
unused, by the way?

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Dave Horsfall  wrote:

> (Many responses)
>
> I note that no-one has answered the question which caused me to post the
> message in the first place viz: why weren't the files being removed
> automatically?  Everyone appears to have missed this point...
>
> --
> Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will
> suffer."
> ___
> 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"
>
___
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"

Re: portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread Bob Eager 
On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 10:34:39 +1100 (EST)
Dave Horsfall  wrote:

> (Many responses)
> 
> I note that no-one has answered the question which caused me to post
> the message in the first place viz: why weren't the files being
> removed automatically?  Everyone appears to have missed this point...
> 

Didn't miss the point, just didn't know the answer!

(and offered a [rather poor] workaround)!
___
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"

Re: portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread Dave Horsfall 
(Many responses)

I note that no-one has answered the question which caused me to post the 
message in the first place viz: why weren't the files being removed 
automatically?  Everyone appears to have missed this point...

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."
___
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"

Re: portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread Jonathan Chen 
On 7 January 2017 at 11:30, Bob Eager  wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 06:51:44 +1100 (EST)
> Dave Horsfall  wrote:
>
>> Is there some reason why portsnap cannot clean
>> up /var/db/portsnap/files? I've just had to remove a zillion of them,
>> a bunch at a time because "rm" choked on the arg list.
>>
>> Perhaps a "portsnap clean" command?  I'm surprised that there isn't
>> one.
>
> find and xargs will do it in one go.

find with -delete saves a few processes.
-- 
Jonathan Chen 
___
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"

Re: portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread Bob Eager 
On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 06:51:44 +1100 (EST)
Dave Horsfall  wrote:

> Is there some reason why portsnap cannot clean
> up /var/db/portsnap/files? I've just had to remove a zillion of them,
> a bunch at a time because "rm" choked on the arg list.
> 
> Perhaps a "portsnap clean" command?  I'm surprised that there isn't
> one.

find and xargs will do it in one go.
___
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"

Re: portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread Dave Horsfall 
On Fri, 6 Jan 2017, olli hauer wrote:

> Why?

For the reason I stated; I had to remove hundreds of them by hand.

> As soon you run "portsnap fetch" old files in this directory are purged!

Not here they weren't...

> If you look into /var/db/portsnap/INDEX you can see the mapping of the 
> files

I don't have that file.

> I'm running portsnap on one system since portsnap was introduced and 
> never had issues with cleanups.

Hmmm...

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."
___
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"

Re: portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread olli hauer 
On 2017-01-06 20:51, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> Is there some reason why portsnap cannot clean up /var/db/portsnap/files?  
> I've just had to remove a zillion of them, a bunch at a time because "rm" 
> choked on the arg list.
> 
> Perhaps a "portsnap clean" command?  I'm surprised that there isn't one.
> 

Why?

As soon you run "portsnap fetch" old files in this directory are purged!
If you look into /var/db/portsnap/INDEX you can see the mapping of the files

I'm running portsnap on one system since portsnap was introduced and never had 
issues with cleanups.

-- 
olli
___
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"

portsnap temporary files

2017-01-06 Thread Dave Horsfall 
Is there some reason why portsnap cannot clean up /var/db/portsnap/files?  
I've just had to remove a zillion of them, a bunch at a time because "rm" 
choked on the arg list.

Perhaps a "portsnap clean" command?  I'm surprised that there isn't one.

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."
___
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"

Re: using ports for things they were never meant to do

2017-01-06 Thread Lowell Gilbert 
Julian Elischer  writes:

> So this seems to be  a speciality of mine.
>
> I often find that I need a ports tree at rev X except for some port
> foo/bar that needs to be at some different rev (Y) to pick up  a
> fix/change needed by the application. Now there is no reason that I
> can't just edit the distinfo file and the Makefile and replace X with
> Y, and that nearly always works if X and Y are not too different. I'd
> prefer however to be able to upgrade the Makefile to the right level,
> but that then hits the problem that he Makefile is using an API with
> the rest of the ports system, that is rapidly changing. SO you have
> much more chance of your build failing because of Makefile changes
> than due to incompatibilities in the distfiles.
>
> My personal way of handing that would be to break the pkg rev out to a
> separate file with nothing but PORTVERSION and PORTREVISION in it so
> that the version of the distfile being fetched is divorced from the
> ports API.  Then in my tree I update distinfo and the new Portrev and
> leave the Makefile alone.
>
> Does anyone else have a better way to slide a particular port back or
> ahead compared to the rest of the tree?

I find it easier to use sticky dates in Subversion...
___
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"

Re: ports/devel/noweb/Makefile FETCH_* is wrong, comment out works.

2017-01-06 Thread Julian H. Stacey 
> > Do feel free to open a PR about the regression  :-)
> 
> Thanks, Will do, 

Done.  https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215830

Cheers,
Julian
-- 
Julian Stacey, BSD Linux Unix Sys Eng Consultant Munich
 Reply below, Prefix '> '. Plain text, No .doc, base64, HTML, quoted-printable.
 http://berklix.eu/brexit/#stolen_votes
___
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"

Re: using ports for things they were never meant to do

2017-01-06 Thread Michelle Sullivan 

Julian Elischer wrote:

So this seems to be  a speciality of mine.

I often find that I need a ports tree at rev X except for some port 
foo/bar that needs to be at some different rev (Y) to pick up  a 
fix/change needed by the application. Now there is no reason that I 
can't just edit the distinfo file and the Makefile and replace X with 
Y, and that nearly always works if X and Y are not too different. I'd 
prefer however to be able to upgrade the Makefile to the right level, 
but that then hits the problem that he Makefile is using an API with 
the rest of the ports system, that is rapidly changing. SO you have 
much more chance of your build failing because of Makefile changes 
than due to incompatibilities in the distfiles.


My personal way of handing that would be to break the pkg rev out to a 
separate file with nothing but PORTVERSION and PORTREVISION in it so 
that the version of the distfile being fetched is divorced from the 
ports API.  Then in my tree I update distinfo and the new Portrev and 
leave the Makefile alone.


Does anyone else have a better way to slide a particular port back or 
ahead compared to the rest of the tree?


I have  perl script that looks at the new tree and compares it to the 
old (my custom) tree and automatically updates all the ports using the 
old API, adding and removing patches/patchfiles as it goes...  Also have 
half a dozen fixes in my tree for stuff that is just wrong (may still 
be, may not matter with the even changing nature of the FreeBSD 
tree.)... The script can also point at individual ports and do just 
those as necessary, and if it detects that I have manually put in a 
newer version it just goes and ignores all changes until the FreeBSD 
tree for that port catches up...


My advice, write your own that fixes the API to how you want it until 
you're ready to update the API or every time the API changes take it up 
the erm, enough of that please! :P


Regards,

Michelle
___
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"

using ports for things they were never meant to do

2017-01-06 Thread Julian Elischer 

So this seems to be  a speciality of mine.

I often find that I need a ports tree at rev X except for some port 
foo/bar that needs to be at some different rev (Y) to pick up  a 
fix/change needed by the application. Now there is no reason that I 
can't just edit the distinfo file and the Makefile and replace X with 
Y, and that nearly always works if X and Y are not too different. I'd 
prefer however to be able to upgrade the Makefile to the right level, 
but that then hits the problem that he Makefile is using an API with 
the rest of the ports system, that is rapidly changing. SO you have 
much more chance of your build failing because of Makefile changes 
than due to incompatibilities in the distfiles.


My personal way of handing that would be to break the pkg rev out to a 
separate file with nothing but PORTVERSION and PORTREVISION in it so 
that the version of the distfile being fetched is divorced from the 
ports API.  Then in my tree I update distinfo and the new Portrev and 
leave the Makefile alone.


Does anyone else have a better way to slide a particular port back or 
ahead compared to the rest of the tree?





___
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"