Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[Thomas Mueller]

from Stari Karp:

> On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:24 -0400, Jim Ohlstein wrote:
> > On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:10 -0400, Stari Karp wrote:
> > > Looks like the new portmaster is coming but what is about Synth? I am
> > > the user of Synth and I like to know what the FreeBSD leaders decided, 
> > > please.

> > The "FreeBSD leaders," in their infinite wisdom, decided to can John
> > Marino. Synth development will likely go on, geared towards Dragonfly.
> > Whether it will support future FreeBSD ports enhancements is anyone's
> > guess. Whether gcc6-aux will ever be fixed for 12-CURRENT and 64 bit
> > inodes is also anyone's guess.

> > Sadly, it is/
> > was the best option for users looking to migrate to a "modern" tool for
> > whom poudriere was too much.

> I did install Dragonfly too and for my needs is very good. I am buying
> a new ssd drive and I will installed os from scratch. And I knew what
> happened with John Marino.

One problem I had with DragonFlyBSD was that I couldn't mount/read a NetBSD or 
FreeBSD partition, and FreeBSD and NetBSD couldn't mount/read a DragonFly 
partition.

That was on the DragonFly boot image written to USB stick, last version was 
somewhere before 4.4.

Latest experience (4.4.x) was that DragonFly installation boot image, written 
to USB stick, hung on boot.

I checked ports-mgmt/synth/Makefile for DPorts on github.com and see 

MAINTAINER= ericturgeon@gmail.com

but for pkgsrc-synth/pkgtools/synth in (NetBSD) pkgsrc,

MAINTAINER= dr...@marino.st
HOMEPAGE=   https://github.com/jrmarino/synth

I was not behind the scenes to judge who was right and who was wrong in the 
John Marino debacle.

It seems nobody in NetBSD, except John Marino, uses pkg or synth with pkgsrc, 
so if I try and need help, there would be no community to help.

64-bit inodes are not the only snag in 12-CURRENT.  Remember pkgbase, 
originally planned for 11.0-RELEASE?

I'll have to see what I can do with 11-STABLE and let 12-CURRENT wait on hold.

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: Finding depends-on ports

[Matthew Seaman]

On 02/06/2017 20:18, Beeblebrox via freebsd-ports wrote:
> I'm running a default-settings ports build from a ports-list file in
> poudriere (-f /path/file), which means no options have been defined by
> "# make config" or by make.conf (empty /var/db/ports, so can't look
> there).
> 
> Is there an easy way to find or back-trace which forward ports depend on
> a certain port without running configure for the whole list? The only
> thing I could think of is to write a shell script like: 
> cat file-name | while read line
> make -C $line all-depends-list | grep 
> printf $stuff > outfile

If you pull down the ports INDEX by 'make fetchindex' it's a simple
matter of cut(1) and grep(1)  to find all the ports that depend on some
other port.  Matching that up to the list of ports you have in your
build list is a job for comm(1).

Cheers,

Matthew





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Finding depends-on ports

[Beeblebrox via freebsd-ports]

I'm running a default-settings ports build from a ports-list file in
poudriere (-f /path/file), which means no options have been defined by
"# make config" or by make.conf (empty /var/db/ports, so can't look
there).

Is there an easy way to find or back-trace which forward ports depend on
a certain port without running configure for the whole list? The only
thing I could think of is to write a shell script like: 
cat file-name | while read line
make -C $line all-depends-list | grep 
printf $stuff > outfile

Regards
-- 
FreeBSD_amd64_12-Current_RadeonKMS
Please CC my email when responding, mail from list is not delivered.
___
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: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[Dewayne Geraghty]

Your use case is very similar to others that manage servers, particularly
on behalf of others.  We also rebuilt nightly , if any vulnerabilities were
discovered we'd test and push to clients' servers.
 :)
Cheers.
-- 
*Disclaimer:* *As implied by email protocols, the information in this
message is not confidential. Any intermediary or recipient may inspect,
modify (add), copy, forward, reply to, delete, or filter email for any
purpose unless said parties are otherwise obligated.  Nothing in this
message may be legally binding without cryptographic evidence of its
integrity and/or confidentiality.*
___
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: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[Stari Karp]

On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:24 -0400, Jim Ohlstein wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:10 -0400, Stari Karp wrote:
> > Looks like the new portmaster is coming but what is about Synth? I
> > am
> > the user of Synth and I like to know what the FreeBSD leaders
> > decided,
> > please.
> > 
> 
> The "FreeBSD leaders," in their infinite wisdom, decided to can John
> Marino. Synth development will likely go on, geared towards
> Dragonfly.
> Whether it will support future FreeBSD ports enhancements is anyone's
> guess. Whether gcc6-aux will ever be fixed for 12-CURRENT and 64 bit
> inodes is also anyone's guess.
> 
> Sadly, it is/
> was the best option for users looking to migrate to a "modern" tool
> for
> whom poudriere was too much.
> 

I did install Dragonfly too and for my needs is very good. I am buying
a new ssd drive and I will installed os from scratch. And I knew what
happened with John Marino. 

___
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: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[David Wolfskill]

On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 04:29:40PM +0200, Thierry Thomas wrote:
> ...
> But I have a naive question: if pkg supports flavours, and binary
> packages are built for your sets of options, is portmaster still
> relevant?
> 

Well, that depends... e.g., on one's set of requirements (and how they
are weighted).

In my own case, I believe portmaster is still relevant.  That said, I
doubt that many would have my particular set of requirements -- and that
of the few who might, very few would weight them at all similarly.

To provide a bit of context: On the systems where I use portmaster, I
also maintain private mirrors of the FreeBSD SVN repositories, which are
updated (only) overnight.  On a daily basis (on these machines -- one of
which is a designated "build machine"; the other is my laptop) I:
* Update the /usr/ports working copy.
* Update the stable/11 /usr/src working copy.
* Perform a src-based update to stable/11 (& reboot).
* While that is running, fetch the distfiles I'll be needing later
  (e.g. "portmaster -aF").
* Update all installed ports (e.g., "portmaster -ad").
* Update the "head" slice's /usr/src working copy.
* Reboot to the "head" slice.
* Perform a src-based update to head (& reboot).
* For the build machine, set the default boot slice to stable/11 & poweroff;
  for the laptop, reboot to stable/11, then use it for the rest of the day.

Please note that I am NOT recommending any of this to anyone else.

Peace,
david
-- 
David H. Wolfskill  da...@catwhisker.org
Looking forward to telling Mr. Trump: "You're fired!"

See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[Torsten Zuehlsdorff]

On 02.06.2017 16:29, Thierry Thomas wrote:

Le jeu.  1 juin 17 à 15:45:43 +0200, Torsten Zuehlsdorff 

  écrivait :


Just as a short note: there is a complete rewrite of portmaster ongoing.
Since its a beast and everything else is very hard there is no public
evidence in case of failure. ;) Until now.


I've been using portupgrade and then portmaster for a long time. I can
understand the need for such tools when you have to build ports with
non-default options.

But I have a naive question: if pkg supports flavours, and binary
packages are built for your sets of options, is portmaster still
relevant?


No, but most portmaster user do not have the default set of options. And 
flavours do not change the options of binary packages - as far as i 
understand. The should solve problems like having multiple ports of the 
same programm but for php 5.6, 7.0 and 7.1 at the same time. Or for 
different python or ruby versions.


Greetings,
Torsten
___
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: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[Thierry Thomas]

Le jeu.  1 juin 17 à 15:45:43 +0200, Torsten Zuehlsdorff 

 écrivait :

> Just as a short note: there is a complete rewrite of portmaster ongoing. 
> Since its a beast and everything else is very hard there is no public 
> evidence in case of failure. ;) Until now.

I've been using portupgrade and then portmaster for a long time. I can
understand the need for such tools when you have to build ports with
non-default options.

But I have a naive question: if pkg supports flavours, and binary
packages are built for your sets of options, is portmaster still
relevant?
-- 
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: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[George Mitchell]

On 06/02/17 06:24, Jim Ohlstein wrote:
> [...]
> Sadly, it is/
> was the best option for users looking to migrate to a "modern" tool for
> whom poudriere was too much.
> 

Meaning no disrespect to anyone who makes positive contributions to
the FreeBSD project, let's not forget that synth's dependence on Ada
is not to be taken lightly either.-- George



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[Mark Linimon]

On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 01:31:19PM +0200, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote:
> If someone likes synth please support it.

This.  Very much this.

mcl
___
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: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[Stari Karp]

Looks like the new portmaster is coming but what is about Synth? I am
the user of Synth and I like to know what the FreeBSD leaders decided,
please.

Thank you.

SK

___
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: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[Torsten Zuehlsdorff]

On 02.06.2017 12:24, Jim Ohlstein wrote:

On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:10 -0400, Stari Karp wrote:

Looks like the new portmaster is coming but what is about Synth? I am
the user of Synth and I like to know what the FreeBSD leaders
decided,
please.



The "FreeBSD leaders," in their infinite wisdom, decided to can John
Marino. Synth development will likely go on, geared towards Dragonfly.
Whether it will support future FreeBSD ports enhancements is anyone's
guess. 


While i can follow the critique i want to say: out of experience in 
various communities - online and offline: if one project is centered 
around one single person it will fail. Its just a matter of time and 
exceptions are rarely.


If someone likes synth please support it. Programming is just one single 
part needed to keep a project alive, even a programming-project. If you 
feel you are not a programmer, but for example a manager, manage to ask 
people for support, for feedback, for programming, etc.


Greetings,
Torsten
___
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: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[Jim Ohlstein]

On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:10 -0400, Stari Karp wrote:
> Looks like the new portmaster is coming but what is about Synth? I am
> the user of Synth and I like to know what the FreeBSD leaders
> decided,
> please.
> 

The "FreeBSD leaders," in their infinite wisdom, decided to can John
Marino. Synth development will likely go on, geared towards Dragonfly.
Whether it will support future FreeBSD ports enhancements is anyone's
guess. Whether gcc6-aux will ever be fixed for 12-CURRENT and 64 bit
inodes is also anyone's guess.

Sadly, it is/
was the best option for users looking to migrate to a "modern" tool for
whom poudriere was too much.

-- 
Jim Ohlstein
Professional Mailman Hosting
https://mailman-hosting.com/

___
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 you maintain which are out of date

[portscout]

Dear port maintainer,

The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more of your
ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity to check
each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate,
submit/commit an update. If any ports have already been updated, you can
safely ignore the entry.

You will not be e-mailed again for any of the port/version combinations
below.

Full details can be found at the following URL:
http://portscout.freebsd.org/po...@freebsd.org.html


Port| Current version | New version
+-+
devel/ocaml-ipaddr  | 2.6.1   | 2.8.0
+-+
devel/py-isort  | 4.2.5   | 4.2.9
+-+


If any of the above results are invalid, please check the following page
for details on how to improve portscout's detection and selection of
distfiles on a per-port basis:

http://portscout.freebsd.org/info/portscout-portconfig.txt

Thanks.
___
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: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[Torsten Zuehlsdorff]

On 01.06.2017 18:20, Matthieu Volat wrote:

On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 15:45:43 +0200
Torsten Zuehlsdorff  wrote:


[...]
Just as a short note: there is a complete rewrite of portmaster ongoing.
Since its a beast and everything else is very hard there is no public
evidence in case of failure. ;) Until now.

I'm currently try to convince all persons already got frustrated by
portmaster-programming to come together and work on it. I'm also working
at an decent automatic QA for it (and PHP and GitLab).



Hi and thanks, is there a name and a public repository for this initiative?


Currently not, but i would just name it simple like "portmaster 2". :D

The initiative is at the moment offline, besides various emails. I will 
meet with another person interested in rewrite and discuss it much more 
within the next weeks. Also there is a lot of paper with architectural 
notices, QA-requirements and ideas about what should be done and what not.


I will do a public announcement, when we start transferring it into the 
"wild". My current thought is creating a public repo on my private 
GitLab. I will use a special CI setup, but since it will need high 
permissions i need some control about what code went it.


I welcome of course every help. Beside the programming we need of course 
extensive testing and i want to improve the documentation on so many level.


Greetings,
Torsten
___
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: Hosting distfiles on HTTPS w/Let's Encrypt - how?

[Marcin Cieslak]

On Thu, 1 Jun 2017, Adam Weinberger wrote:

> I've tried fetching a distfile from my own server (which uses a Let's Encrypt 
> cert) and it fetches fine in a poudriere jail. I'm suspecting that there's 
> something unusual in your web server's SSL configuration, or in how you're 
> generating your LE cert. Do you have any interesting arguments that you're 
> giving dehydrated or your web server?

The only unusual thing in my certificate is that CN belongs to another domain 
and the domain in question
is listed in the subjectAltName along with a primary.

On a system with certificate bundle installed the following works fine:

fetch https://distfile.net/local-ports-distfiles/INIT.2014-12-24.tgz

My port (https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211164) has barely 
any dependencies, and there is
no certificate bundle in the jail. Adam - can you check if something installs 
NSS CA roots as a dependency in your jail?

I think I understand what happens - bare FreeBSD installation has no CA 
bundles, therefore fetch cannot really
do https. Most ports work either because one of the dependencies installs ca 
root nss or they have a plain HTTP
fallback (from distcache if need be). My distfiles are brand new and the 
distcache does not know them, not there is
any HTTP fallback.

The question is: do we silently require at least one unencrypted HTTP or FTP 
distfile source?
If not, what should be done to bootstrap certificates for fetch - include somme 
roots in base,
turn off certificate validation, other options?

Marcin

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature