Re: xorg-server 1.18.4 segfaults

[Emanuel Haupt]

Koichiro IWAO  wrote:
> Konstantin,
> 
> Deinstalling llvm37 helped, thanks!

This should probably be mentioned in in ports/UPDATING.

Emanuel
___
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: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[Jonathan Chen]

On 16 February 2017 at 16:50, Thomas Mueller  wrote:
>
>> For every build -
>> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/make.conf
>
>> OPTIONS_SET= OPTIMIZED_CFLAGS SIMD PGSQL IPV6
>> editors_vim_SET= CSCOPE X11 GTK3 PYTHON
>
>> You can also get more specific by using -
>
>> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/-make.conf
>> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/-make.conf
>> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/-make.conf
>> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/--make.conf
>> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/--make.conf
>> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/---make.conf
>
>
>> Shane Ambler
>
> Is there any way to do this options preconfiguring not using poudriere?
>
> One good thing about NetBSD pkgsrc, also Gentoo portage, is being able to set 
> options by package or for all packages in /etc/make.conf or mk.conf .
>
> Is there a good way to do this in FreeBSD prior to running synth?

You can set up all the port options to use with synth in
/usr/local/etc/synth/LiveSystem-make.conf,
eg:

devel_git_UNSET= CONTRIB CVS GITWEB P4 PERL SEND_EMAIL
print_gutenprint_SET=CUPS


Cheers.
-- 
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: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[Thomas Mueller]

> For every build -
> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/make.conf

> OPTIONS_SET= OPTIMIZED_CFLAGS SIMD PGSQL IPV6
> editors_vim_SET= CSCOPE X11 GTK3 PYTHON

> You can also get more specific by using -

> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/-make.conf
> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/-make.conf
> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/-make.conf
> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/--make.conf
> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/--make.conf
> /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/---make.conf


> Shane Ambler

Is there any way to do this options preconfiguring not using poudriere?

One good thing about NetBSD pkgsrc, also Gentoo portage, is being able to set 
options by package or for all packages in /etc/make.conf or mk.conf .

Is there a good way to do this in FreeBSD prior to running synth?

I found it very disconcerting to do a massive portupgrade (using portupgrade), 
going to bed or otherwise away from the computer, and then finding it stopped 
at a dialog screen.

I ran make config-recursive many times, several times on the same port to get 
what was missed on the first or previous make config-recursive.

I am not familiar with the details on planned upgrades to the ports framework 
and how they will affect usability of portmaster, but remember some users swore 
by portmanager during the pkg_* days, prior to pkgng.

Portmanager could not be made compatible with pkgng and was subsequently 
dropped from ports/ports-mgmt.

Tom

___
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: xorg-server 1.18.4 segfaults

[Warren Block]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017, Kevin Oberman wrote:


On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Warren Block  wrote:

  The ports tree still thinks llvm37 is really needed by some of these, and 
trying to pkg delete llvm37 wants to also delete many installed applications.  
This seems wrong, but I have seen zero information about this before, so maybe 
it is
  not just my system.  I'd be willing to update docs about this, provided 
someone can clarify just what information needs to be there.  `pkg delete -f 
llvm37' to just delete that, then an entry in make.conf to force llvm39?

This is odd. I had llvm34 through llvm39. I only found one dependency when I 
deleted them, an old version of clang. (Deleted it, too.) this is on a system 
with full MATE desktop and almost 1500 ports. I'm really curious what might 
have been showing
a run dependency on 37. Did you try re-building them so that they would depend 
on llvm39? Note: I did not have to do this on my 11-STABLE system which has by 
far the most ports installed.)


My system was in an interesting state due to testing the experimental 
xorg from https://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/newxorg.diff


I have updated the ports tree and am rebuilding now.  I don't know if 
that diff has been updated to apply to the present ports tree yet.

___
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: xorg-server 1.18.4 segfaults

[Kevin Oberman]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Warren Block  wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Feb 2017, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Koichiro IWAO 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Konstantin,
>>>

 Deinstalling llvm37 helped, thanks!


>>> P.S.
>>>
>>> I actually deinstalled all older versions of llvm, llvm36, llvm37.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> `whois vmeta.jp | nkf -w`
>>> meta 
>>>
>>>
>> Isn't it about time to put a note into UPDATING that ALL versions of LLVM
>> older than 3.9 (LLVM39) should be deleted "pkg delete LLVM??" before
>> attempting to build the new Xorg software. I guess that includes libGL,
>> libGLU, libdrm, dri and libglapi. Maybe xorg-server and xorg-drivers, too.
>> Otherwise these reports are just going  to keep rolling in. (Well, that
>> won't stop them, but might slow them down and make it easy to tell people
>> where to find the fix.)
>>
>> I'm still nervous about re-starting X because I may have missed something.
>>
>
> The ports tree still thinks llvm37 is really needed by some of these, and
> trying to pkg delete llvm37 wants to also delete many installed
> applications.  This seems wrong, but I have seen zero information about
> this before, so maybe it is not just my system.  I'd be willing to update
> docs about this, provided someone can clarify just what information needs
> to be there.  `pkg delete -f llvm37' to just delete that, then an entry in
> make.conf to force llvm39?
>

This is odd. I had llvm34 through llvm39. I only found one dependency when
I deleted them, an old version of clang. (Deleted it, too.) this is on a
system with full MATE desktop and almost 1500 ports. I'm really curious
what might have been showing a run dependency on 37. Did you try
re-building them so that they would depend on llvm39? Note: I did not have
to do this on my 11-STABLE system which has by far the most ports
installed.)
--
Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer
E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com
PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683
___
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: Expulsion of John Marino - reasons and impact?

[Chris H]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 16:42:33 -0800 Dave Hayes  wrote

> On 02/14/2017 15:15, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> > On 2/14/2017 2:58 PM, Michael Gmelin wrote:
> >>> On 14 Feb 2017, at 22:16, Bryan Drewery  wrote:
>  On 2/14/2017 12:50 PM, Dewayne Geraghty wrote:
>  https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision=433827
> >>> I think that commit message combined with
> >>> https://www.freebsd.org/internal/code-of-conduct.html is enough.
> >> The commit message basically says that he misbehaved once too often and
> >> the CoC defines what "misbehave" might mean. Not over the top
> >> transparent/detailed to be honest. > Right, would you want an organization
> >> you volunteered for to drag your > name through the mud for some reason?
> 
> For reference, the commit message has this text:
> 
> > Their behaviour towards their fellow contributors has repeatedly fallen
> > short of what the Project expects of its members. They were given multiple
> > warnings that their interactions with other contributors needed to improve
> > and unfortunately they did not.
> 
> Don't you think his name is -already- dragged through the mud by having 
> one's commit bit removed with reasons as stated above?
> 
> Just curious. :)

Hello. Is there an *adult* in the room?
c'mon. Am I the only one here that see's this as childish behavior?
I feel like I'm in a classroom in elementary school, and the teacher
just punished one of the students for misbehavior. Or maybe Parents
scolding their bickering kids.
Aghhh!
Don't any of you get it?! You're plowing through thousands of lines
of code. You're anxious, you've got a few hundred pr(1)'s to get
through. The last thing you are right now is "feely". You intend
to get these PR's out, so things can move forward with the ports
tree. Which will really help *everyone*. I've been in this sort
of situation *thousands* of times, myself. The pressure gets to
you. *John* is not the only one here that gets, or ever feels
this way, and any of you who have made *any* real commitments
to the FreeBSD source/ports/$WORK know damn good and well what
I mean here.

Summary;
This action is a childish outburst by someone, or someone(s)
with the power to pull, or the influence to pull commit bits.
Pure, and simple.
This is NOT how a PROFESSIONAL organization reacts to situations
where quality personnel are involved.
This sort of thing looks REALLY bad in the press!

Say what you want about me. But I know well, and good that
many, if not most of you reading along, know what I am saying
is at *least* not far off.

Thank you for your indulgence, and apologies if any of my
language should seem offensive.
After some 30 years on BSD, I feel strongly about it, and this
sort of thing *really* disappoints me.

--Chris


___
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: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[Shane Ambler]

On 16/02/2017 05:28, Adam Weinberger wrote:

On 15 Feb, 2017, at 11:47, abi  wrote:






On 15.02.2017 18:00, Adam Weinberger wrote:

On 15 Feb, 2017, at 2:26, Thomas Mueller 
wrote:

Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by
surprise.

Now my question is what is the status of synth?

Should I switch from portmaster to synth?

If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from
portmaster to synth, then I have to switch back, and this would
be a monster mess of extra work.

Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand
and don't want to go too far off course updating my ports.


I don't recommend portmaster for anybody. It's unmaintained, it
already causes headaches on upgrades, and even though it works
now, it is unlikely to keep working as the ports tree evolves.


This is FUD. Yes, portmaster can be less maintained, but it works
without observable issues, at least I don't see any problems with
it on my systems. synth and poudriere lacks the ability to set and
maintain port options recursively, eliminating any practical (from
user perspective, not developer) use of such software stand alone.


Sure it does.

poudriere options -j jailname editors/vim

Sets options recursively.

Not seeing any problems with it right now isn't the point of my
message. The point is that portmaster WILL break when new features
(currently in progress) are added to the ports build system, and
being unmaintained, there's no guarantees that it will ever unbreak.


I used to do that sort thing in tinderbox, with poudriere and the new
options framework I prefer to set my options in make.conf.

For every build -
/usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/make.conf

OPTIONS_SET= OPTIMIZED_CFLAGS SIMD PGSQL IPV6
editors_vim_SET= CSCOPE X11 GTK3 PYTHON

You can also get more specific by using -

/usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/-make.conf
/usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/-make.conf
/usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/-make.conf
/usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/--make.conf
/usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/--make.conf
/usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/---make.conf


--
FreeBSD - the place to B...Software Developing

Shane Ambler

___
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: Expulsion of John Marino - reasons and impact?

[Dave Hayes]

On 02/14/2017 15:15, Bryan Drewery wrote:

On 2/14/2017 2:58 PM, Michael Gmelin wrote:

On 14 Feb 2017, at 22:16, Bryan Drewery  wrote:

On 2/14/2017 12:50 PM, Dewayne Geraghty wrote:
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision=433827

I think that commit message combined with
https://www.freebsd.org/internal/code-of-conduct.html is enough.

The commit message basically says that he misbehaved once too often and the CoC defines 
what "misbehave" might mean. Not over the top transparent/detailed to be honest.

Right, would you want an organization you volunteered for to drag your
name through the mud for some reason?


For reference, the commit message has this text:


Their behaviour towards their fellow contributors has repeatedly fallen short
of what the Project expects of its members. They were given multiple warnings
that their interactions with other contributors needed to improve and
unfortunately they did not.


Don't you think his name is -already- dragged through the mud by having 
one's commit bit removed with reasons as stated above?


Just curious. :)
--
Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - d...@jetcafe.org
 *The opinions expressed above are entirely my own* 

Why is the third hand on the watch called the second hand?
___
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: xorg-server 1.18.4 segfaults

[Warren Block]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017, Kevin Oberman wrote:


On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Koichiro IWAO  wrote:


Konstantin,


Deinstalling llvm37 helped, thanks!



P.S.

I actually deinstalled all older versions of llvm, llvm36, llvm37.


--
`whois vmeta.jp | nkf -w`
meta 



Isn't it about time to put a note into UPDATING that ALL versions of LLVM
older than 3.9 (LLVM39) should be deleted "pkg delete LLVM??" before
attempting to build the new Xorg software. I guess that includes libGL,
libGLU, libdrm, dri and libglapi. Maybe xorg-server and xorg-drivers, too.
Otherwise these reports are just going  to keep rolling in. (Well, that
won't stop them, but might slow them down and make it easy to tell people
where to find the fix.)

I'm still nervous about re-starting X because I may have missed something.


The ports tree still thinks llvm37 is really needed by some of these, 
and trying to pkg delete llvm37 wants to also delete many installed 
applications.  This seems wrong, but I have seen zero information about 
this before, so maybe it is not just my system.  I'd be willing to 
update docs about this, provided someone can clarify just what 
information needs to be there.  `pkg delete -f llvm37' to just delete 
that, then an entry in make.conf to force llvm39?

___
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: HEADSUP: FLAVORS (initial version) and subpackages proposals

[Bryan Drewery]

On 12/18/2016 4:31 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I have been working for a while on 2 long standing feature request for the 
> ports
> tree: flavors and subpackages.
> 
> For flavors I would like to propose a simple approach first which is more 
> like a
> rework of the slave ports for now:
> 
> Examples available here:
> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D8840 (with the implementation)
> and
> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D8843
> 
> Design: introduce a 3rd level in the hierarchy and make it work a bit like 
> slave
> ports
> 
> pros:
> - all slave ports are self hosted under the same directory: easier for
>   maintenance
> - should work with all existing tools
> 
> cons:
> - hackish: it is not really much more than a slave port
> - it adds plenty of new Makefiles :(
> 
> I think anyway this is an improvement
> 
> Next step after that is in would be to extend it to allow some dependency on 
> "I
> depend on whatever flavor if port X"
> 
> Subpackages:
> Design:
> Add a new macro MULTI_PACKAGES
> flag plist with an @pkg{suffixofthesubpackage} file
> the framework will split the plist into small plist and create all the 
> packages
> All variables like COMMENT can be overridden with a 
> COMMENT_${suffixofthesubpackage}
> 
> pros:
> - simple and working almost now
> - allow to simplify lots of ports
> - options friendly (_PACKAGE automatically appends a new entry to
>   MULTI_PACKAGES)
> 
> cons:
> - will break the paradigm that certain tools depend on (portmaster/portupgrade
>   in particular are a huge problem since they are not actively maintained)
> 
> Example of the usage:
> https://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/multipackage.diff
> 
> Note that I took the mpg123 as an example because it was a simple one to test
> not because it may need subpackages
> 
> As a result you build 3 packages:
> mpg123 (the runtime tools)
> mpg123-lib: the runtime libraries
> mpg123-sndio: the sndio plugin
> 
> LIB_DEPENDS on ports depending on libmpg123.so does not have to be changed, 
> the
> framework already automatically register only the mpg123-lib as a dependency 
> and
> not others.
> 
> Not the example is missing one thing: a dependency between mpeg123-lib and
> mpg123
> 
> The second is not ready yet and would take time to land
> 
> Any comment?
> 
> Best regards,
> Bapt
> 

By the way, support for Poudriere on this is progressing.  A Pull
request was submitted with support for another FLAVORS-type
implementation, that pretty much works with your patches as well. I am
working to resolve the DEPENDS_ARGS bug first, which also fixes allowing
the same ORIGIN into the queue multiple times.  Once that is done, then
FLAVORS can be supported in Poudriere.

-- 
Regards,
Bryan Drewery



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: xorg-server 1.18.4 segfaults

[Kevin Oberman]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Koichiro IWAO  wrote:

> Konstantin,
>>
>> Deinstalling llvm37 helped, thanks!
>>
>
> P.S.
>
> I actually deinstalled all older versions of llvm, llvm36, llvm37.
>
>
> --
> `whois vmeta.jp | nkf -w`
> meta 
>

Isn't it about time to put a note into UPDATING that ALL versions of LLVM
older than 3.9 (LLVM39) should be deleted "pkg delete LLVM??" before
attempting to build the new Xorg software. I guess that includes libGL,
libGLU, libdrm, dri and libglapi. Maybe xorg-server and xorg-drivers, too.
Otherwise these reports are just going  to keep rolling in. (Well, that
won't stop them, but might slow them down and make it easy to tell people
where to find the fix.)

I'm still nervous about re-starting X because I may have missed something.
--
Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer
E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com
PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683
___
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: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[Adam Weinberger]

> On 15 Feb, 2017, at 12:17, abi  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 15.02.2017 21:58, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>>> On 15 Feb, 2017, at 11:47, abi  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 15.02.2017 18:00, Adam Weinberger wrote:
> On 15 Feb, 2017, at 2:26, Thomas Mueller  wrote:
> 
> Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by surprise.
> 
> Now my question is what is the status of synth?
> 
> Should I switch from portmaster to synth?
> 
> If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from portmaster to 
> synth, then I have to switch back, and this would be a monster mess of 
> extra work.
> 
> Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand and don't 
> want to go too far off course updating my ports.
 
 I don't recommend portmaster for anybody. It's unmaintained, it already 
 causes headaches on upgrades, and even though it works now, it is unlikely 
 to keep working as the ports tree evolves.
>>> 
>>> This is FUD. Yes, portmaster can be less maintained, but it works without 
>>> observable issues, at least I don't see any problems with it on my systems. 
>>> synth and poudriere lacks the ability to set and maintain port options 
>>> recursively, eliminating any practical (from user perspective, not 
>>> developer) use of such software stand alone.
>> 
>> Sure it does.
>> 
>> poudriere options -j jailname editors/vim
>> 
>> Sets options recursively.
>> 
>> Not seeing any problems with it right now isn't the point of my message. The 
>> point is that portmaster WILL break when new features (currently in 
>> progress) are added to the ports build system, and being unmaintained, 
>> there's no guarantees that it will ever unbreak.
>> 
> 
> Poudriere can't be considered as an option for everyone due to it's 
> connection to jails, synth can't set options recursively, however it's 
> extremely simple to use.
> 
> According to current port tree, portmaster has maintainer and it's simple 
> enough to be fixed by virtually everyone.
> 
> Can you provide link to new features? Never saw that port tree has some 
> drastically changes.

You're right, jails do require more setup, drive space, and complexity (not to 
mention being quite slow on UFS). But at the end of the day, jails are a better 
paradigm for building ports. Most failures these days come from the environment 
influencing the build, or upgrade problems rebuilding ports when old ports stop 
working haphazardly. Best effort is taken to fix these problems, but 
maintainers and committers can't predict every setup possibility; the general 
target is making sure that they build in a pristine environment, meaning 
poudriere.

https://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=134825+0+archive/2016/freebsd-ports/20161225.freebsd-ports
 for the new features I was referring to.

# Adam


-- 
Adam Weinberger
ad...@adamw.org
https://www.adamw.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: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[abi]

On 15.02.2017 21:58, Adam Weinberger wrote:

On 15 Feb, 2017, at 11:47, abi  wrote:



On 15.02.2017 18:00, Adam Weinberger wrote:

On 15 Feb, 2017, at 2:26, Thomas Mueller  wrote:

Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by surprise.

Now my question is what is the status of synth?

Should I switch from portmaster to synth?

If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from portmaster to synth, 
then I have to switch back, and this would be a monster mess of extra work.

Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand and don't want 
to go too far off course updating my ports.


I don't recommend portmaster for anybody. It's unmaintained, it already causes 
headaches on upgrades, and even though it works now, it is unlikely to keep 
working as the ports tree evolves.


This is FUD. Yes, portmaster can be less maintained, but it works without 
observable issues, at least I don't see any problems with it on my systems. 
synth and poudriere lacks the ability to set and maintain port options 
recursively, eliminating any practical (from user perspective, not developer) 
use of such software stand alone.


Sure it does.

poudriere options -j jailname editors/vim

Sets options recursively.

Not seeing any problems with it right now isn't the point of my message. The 
point is that portmaster WILL break when new features (currently in progress) 
are added to the ports build system, and being unmaintained, there's no 
guarantees that it will ever unbreak.



Poudriere can't be considered as an option for everyone due to it's 
connection to jails, synth can't set options recursively, however it's 
extremely simple to use.


According to current port tree, portmaster has maintainer and it's 
simple enough to be fixed by virtually everyone.


Can you provide link to new features? Never saw that port tree has some 
drastically changes.

___
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: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[Adam Weinberger]

> On 15 Feb, 2017, at 11:47, abi  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 15.02.2017 18:00, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>>> On 15 Feb, 2017, at 2:26, Thomas Mueller  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by surprise.
>>> 
>>> Now my question is what is the status of synth?
>>> 
>>> Should I switch from portmaster to synth?
>>> 
>>> If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from portmaster to synth, 
>>> then I have to switch back, and this would be a monster mess of extra work.
>>> 
>>> Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand and don't 
>>> want to go too far off course updating my ports.
>> 
>> I don't recommend portmaster for anybody. It's unmaintained, it already 
>> causes headaches on upgrades, and even though it works now, it is unlikely 
>> to keep working as the ports tree evolves.
> 
> This is FUD. Yes, portmaster can be less maintained, but it works without 
> observable issues, at least I don't see any problems with it on my systems. 
> synth and poudriere lacks the ability to set and maintain port options 
> recursively, eliminating any practical (from user perspective, not developer) 
> use of such software stand alone.

Sure it does.

poudriere options -j jailname editors/vim

Sets options recursively.

Not seeing any problems with it right now isn't the point of my message. The 
point is that portmaster WILL break when new features (currently in progress) 
are added to the ports build system, and being unmaintained, there's no 
guarantees that it will ever unbreak.

# Adam


-- 
Adam Weinberger
ad...@adamw.org
https://www.adamw.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: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[abi]

On 15.02.2017 18:00, Adam Weinberger wrote:

On 15 Feb, 2017, at 2:26, Thomas Mueller  wrote:

Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by surprise.

Now my question is what is the status of synth?

Should I switch from portmaster to synth?

If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from portmaster to synth, 
then I have to switch back, and this would be a monster mess of extra work.

Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand and don't want 
to go too far off course updating my ports.


I don't recommend portmaster for anybody. It's unmaintained, it already causes 
headaches on upgrades, and even though it works now, it is unlikely to keep 
working as the ports tree evolves.


This is FUD. Yes, portmaster can be less maintained, but it works 
without observable issues, at least I don't see any problems with it on 
my systems. synth and poudriere lacks the ability to set and maintain 
port options recursively, eliminating any practical (from user 
perspective, not developer) use of such software stand alone.


___
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: Lynis and lsof

[Kevin Oberman]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 4:52 AM, Lars Engels  wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:33:09AM +0100, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > security/lynis seems to like having lsof available.
> > However sysutils/lsof isn't listed as a dependency (whether optional or
> > not).
> >
> > Would it be possible to add it, as a convenience?
> >
> > I can provide the patch and/or file a bug report if you'll agree.
> >
> >   bye & Thanks
> >   av.
>
> Andrea,
>
> thanks for making me aware of this!
> I just updated the port to 2.4.1 and added a runtime dependency on lsof.
>

In that case, a note that lsof should be added to PORTS_MODULES on
/etc/src.conf. lsof uses several undocumented kernel interfaces that are
not stable (as they are not intended for external use). As a result, things
can break if the kernel is updated without lsof also being updated.

PORTS_MODULES will take case of this for those who build the kernel from
source. Things get rather messy if you use freebsd-update or packages
though, as the packaging system sees no reason to make a new lsof package.
I have no idea how to properly handle this. I simply always build lsof from
source and lock it so 'pkg upgrade' won't touch it.
--
Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer
E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com
PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683
___
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: please fix the pkg downloads system

[Bryan Drewery]

On 2/8/2017 8:06 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
> please work on having the "Latest" image in a directory that has the cvs
> revision number in its name
> 
> and make the current names just be links to there.
> 
> I ONCE AGAIN (for the third time) got half of one release (432891) and
> half of another (433120) because the newest snapshot of the pkgs was
> replaced half way through my process of downloading a large set of packages.

Yup it is an annoying issue. https://github.com/freebsd/pkg/issues/988
is the tracking bug for it. Ideas and patches welcome.

-- 
Regards,
Bryan Drewery



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[Adam Weinberger]

> On 15 Feb, 2017, at 2:26, Thomas Mueller  wrote:
> 
> Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by surprise.
> 
> Now my question is what is the status of synth?
> 
> Should I switch from portmaster to synth?
> 
> If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from portmaster to synth, 
> then I have to switch back, and this would be a monster mess of extra work.
> 
> Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand and don't 
> want to go too far off course updating my ports.

I don't recommend portmaster for anybody. It's unmaintained, it already causes 
headaches on upgrades, and even though it works now, it is unlikely to keep 
working as the ports tree evolves.

You should switch to poudriere or Synth. Poudriere is what most of the 
committers use, and it's what all the builder machines use. It's simple to set 
up, and is the reference ports tool. Synth is a great builder too, and AFAIK 
John is still very actively developing it.

# Adam


-- 
Adam Weinberger
ad...@adamw.org
https://www.adamw.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: Expulsion of John Marino - reasons and impact?

[Jim Ohlstein]

Hello,

On 02/14/2017 06:15 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote:

On 2/14/2017 2:58 PM, Michael Gmelin wrote:

On 14 Feb 2017, at 22:16, Bryan Drewery  wrote:

On 2/14/2017 12:50 PM, Dewayne Geraghty wrote:
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision=433827

I think that commit message combined with
https://www.freebsd.org/internal/code-of-conduct.html is enough.

The commit message basically says that he misbehaved once too often and the CoC defines 
what "misbehave" might mean. Not over the top transparent/detailed to be honest.


Right, would you want an organization you volunteered for to drag your
name through the mud for some reason?  I don't think it's our place (the
project) to say more than we already have publicly.  Please drop this
before it gets out of hand.  Discussing people personally/negatively in
a public forum is not appropriate.



John has posted on the FreeBSD forums[1] that he did nothing and that 
there is "[no] evidence of continued bad behavior", so this argument 
holds no water any longer.


Don't get me wrong, I am not defending him. I have witnessed his nature 
publicly, and I have been on the receiving end here on the list and 
privately. However, he was an extremely active committer and at a time 
when PR's wait for committers, people complain that there aren't enough 
volunteers, and mentors are maxed out, perhaps a simple "trust us" (to 
use John's words) does not suffice. JMMHO of course.



[1] https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/59705/#post-342589
--
Jim Ohlstein
___
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: Lynis and lsof

[Lars Engels]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:33:09AM +0100, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> security/lynis seems to like having lsof available.
> However sysutils/lsof isn't listed as a dependency (whether optional or 
> not).
> 
> Would it be possible to add it, as a convenience?
> 
> I can provide the patch and/or file a bug report if you'll agree.
> 
>   bye & Thanks
>   av.

Andrea,

thanks for making me aware of this!
I just updated the port to 2.4.1 and added a runtime dependency on lsof.


Lars


pgpmtwBDdt_4a.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[Matthieu Volat]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 09:26:18 +
"Thomas Mueller"  wrote:

> Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by surprise.
> 
> Now my question is what is the status of synth?
> 
> Should I switch from portmaster to synth?
> 
> If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from portmaster to synth, 
> then I have to switch back, and this would be a monster mess of extra work.
> 
> Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand and don't 
> want to go too far off course updating my ports.
> 
> 
> Tom
> 


To my knowledge (ie reading freebsd-ports@), portmaster is not deprecated and 
you are not forced to switch unless you want to use different functionnality 
only provided by other tools...


-- Matthieu Volat 


pgp9qSjbW6Zig.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[abi]

15.02.2017 12:26, Thomas Mueller пишет:

Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by surprise.

Now my question is what is the status of synth?

Should I switch from portmaster to synth?

If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from portmaster to synth, 
then I have to switch back, and this would be a monster mess of extra work.

Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand and don't want 
to go too far off course updating my ports.


Tom


John said that he will continue to develop synth and new maintainer has 
assigned already.



___
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"

Lynis and lsof

[Andrea Venturoli]

Hello.

security/lynis seems to like having lsof available.
However sysutils/lsof isn't listed as a dependency (whether optional or 
not).


Would it be possible to add it, as a convenience?

I can provide the patch and/or file a bug report if you'll agree.

 bye & Thanks
av.
___
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: Expulsion of John Marino - reasons and impact?

[thierry]

Selon Michael Gmelin  le mer. 15 févr. 00:32:36 2017 :

Well, if it was something he said in public, pointing to it might be  
enlightening. On the other hand, I assume he could always do that  
himself if he feels like it.


John's point of view is readable here:
http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/users/2017-February/313221.html

--
Th. Thomas.
___
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: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[Lars Engels]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 09:26:18AM +, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by surprise.
> 
> Now my question is what is the status of synth?
> 
> Should I switch from portmaster to synth?
> 
> If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from portmaster to
> synth, then I have to switch back, and this would be a monster mess of
> extra work.
> 
> Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand and
> don't want to go too far off course updating my ports.
> 

Hi Tom,

John wants to keep on working on synth:

https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/59705/


pgprtJvQh3ySm.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino?

[Thomas Mueller]

Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by surprise.

Now my question is what is the status of synth?

Should I switch from portmaster to synth?

If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from portmaster to synth, 
then I have to switch back, and this would be a monster mess of extra work.

Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand and don't want 
to go too far off course updating my ports.


Tom

___
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"