OSS Audio

[blubee blubeeme]

I'm looking at the information for audio/oss and it seems that the source
used is different than the 4frontversion.

-

This port uses installation procedure that is very different from
the one used by 4Front and is not supported by them.

-

The port also seems to lack a maintainer but a lot of work is being
committed by  jbe...@freebsd.org, m...@freebsd.org and a few others.

Why is this version of oss different than the 4front version?

I know in the past 4front went closed source but version 4.xx has been open
sourced again along with many improvements.

Is there any reason why this port can't or shouldn't move to the one
supported by 4front?
___
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"

poudriere jail -c -j JNAME -m null -M PREBUILT-WORLD-PATH -S /usr/src -v 12.0-CURRENT complains about "DIrectory not empty" for PREBUILT-WORLD-PATH

[Mark Millard]

Note: /usr/ports/ (and so poudriere-devel) as of -r425204 
(poudriere-devel-3.2.99.20171129).

I expect that the below is from ports-mgmt/poudriere-=devel
-r454996 and its:

  - ports/jail -c NOZFS: Consider non-empty-already-existing-directory a failure

where the change did not cover an explicit use of -m null also
being involved to deliberately being using a pre-built
world that is located via use of -M PATH .

[There is one other side note about a potential
issue later below.]

# poudriere jail -c -j FBSDjailRPI2 -m null -M 
/usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud -S /usr/src -v 12.0-CURRENT
[00:00:00] Creating FBSDjailRPI2 fs at 
/usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud... fail
[00:00:00] Error: Directory not empty at 
/usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud

# ls -lTdt /usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud/*
drwxr-xr-x  26 root  wheel  2048 Nov 27 00:33:01 2017 
/usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud/etc
drwxr-xr-x   2 root  wheel  2560 Nov 27 00:29:51 2017 
/usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud/rescue
. . .

(So: a pre-built world, created via a cross build and
copied over beforehand.)

# poudriere jail -c -j FBSDjailRPI2 -m null -M 
/usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud -S /usr/src -v 12.0-CURRENT
[00:00:00] Creating FBSDjailRPI2 fs at 
/usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud... fail
[00:00:00] Error: Directory not empty at 
/usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud


/usr/local/etc/poudriere.conf has:

NO_ZFS=yes


/usr/local/share/poudriere/include/fs.sh has:

createfs() {
[ $# -ne 3 ] && eargs createfs name mnt fs
local name mnt fs
name=$1
mnt=$(echo $2 | sed -e "s,//,/,g")
fs=$3

[ -z "${NO_ZFS}" ] || fs=none

if [ -n "${fs}" -a "${fs}" != "none" ]; then
. . .
else
msg_n "Creating ${name} fs at ${mnt}..."
if ! mkdir -p "${mnt}"; then
echo " fail"
err 1 "Failed to create directory ${mnt}"
fi
# If the directory is non-empty then we didn't create it.
if ! dirempty "${mnt}"; then
echo " fail"
err 1 "Directory not empty at ${mnt}"
fi
echo " done"
fi
}

For -m null here -M /usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud
should point to a non-empty directory as far as I can tell. And
it does. But that leads to the above code rejecting the -M
path.



[Note: I also question, if, with -S /usr/src
in use, the SRC_BASE assignment below is
correct.]

/usr/local/share/poudriere/jail.sh has:

create_jail() {
[ "${JAILNAME#*.*}" = "${JAILNAME}" ] ||
err 1 "The jailname cannot contain a period (.). See jail(8)"

if [ "${METHOD}" = "null" ]; then
[ -z "${JAILMNT}" ] && \
err 1 "Must set -M to path of jail to use"
[ "${JAILMNT}" = "/" ] && \
err 1 "Cannot use / for -M"
fi
. . .
SRC_BASE="${JAILMNT}/usr/src"

case ${METHOD} in
. . .
null)
JAILFS=none
FCT=
;;
esac

if [ "${JAILFS}" != "none" ]; then
[ -d "${JAILMNT}" ] && \
err 1 "Directory ${JAILMNT} already exists"
fi

createfs ${JAILNAME} ${JAILMNT} ${JAILFS:-none}
. . .



===
Mark Millard
markmi at dsl-only.net

___
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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Michelle Sullivan]

Baho Utot wrote:



On 12/3/2017 5:04 PM, Carmel NY wrote:
I just checked out < 
https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports/wiki/quickstart-freebsd>
and < http://ravenports.ironwolf.systems/> and I have to admit that I 
am interested.

I am wondering if it will ever get accepted into the ports system.



No wayThey hate John around here.


Incorrect.  John won't get the commit-bit back and is unlikely to do 
anything himself.  However I'm betting if someone stepped up to the 
plate to submit it into the ports tree it would be accepted providing 
they also volunteer to be the maintainer.


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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Michelle Sullivan]

Adam Weinberger wrote:

On 3 Dec, 2017, at 14:31, Michelle Sullivan  wrote:

Adam Weinberger wrote:

You seem very angry about things breaking in HEAD, Baho. Things break in HEAD 
sometimes. This is why we recommend that end-users who can't have breakages, or 
users who depend on undeveloped tools, stay on the quarterly branch. Portmaster 
works perfectly on quarterly. Always has.


Quarterly is just a frozen HEAD with no/minute chances of security patches or 
other changes... why would you want to be there?  I couldn't even get someone to 
patch a security issue before the pkg_*->pkgng change..  was patched 4 days 
later despite having the patch in the bug before... and despite asking for the 
patch to be put in the quarterly they didn't either.  One continues to watch the 
exodus.

The MFH process was very complicated at first, and many committers didn't 
participate in it. Now it's largely automated and expected of all ports 
committers. The quarterly branches these days receive essentially all security 
fixes and most build fixes. As with all things FreeBSD, it's a best-effort 
process.

Quarterly is mostly static, and receives no unnecessary updates. It also 
receives no known breakages. That's the tradeoff between it and head.

We do the best we can, and if things get missed it's because we need more 
community involvement.


I got involved, I got shutdown by people who are determined to move 
FreeBSD in their direction, I am no longer involved.




If you can't handle the flux of HEAD, stay on quarterly. If you need the 
cutting-edge, use HEAD. As you noted, we are strained for resources to keep 
quarterly going; we simply don't have the ability to provide another in-between 
level.



You mean if you're not into security or part of a security company stay 
on quarterly, but if you need to keep patched up because you are in the 
top 100 of most attacked sites/companies in the world, deploy a team of 
people to patch security issues and run your own ports tree because 
breakage on HEAD is often and when you need it the least and quarterly 
doesn't guarantee it'll even work/compile and nearly never gets security 
patches.



Sorry, but that's the truth of it and the reason I no longer use FreeBSD 
or the Ports tree, instead using a derivative of each which is a lot 
more stable and patched against security issues within hours of them 
being identified.


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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Mark Linimon]

Let me see if I can clear up some common misconceptions ...

On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 12:56:45AM +, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> I believe portmaster and portupgrade work or worked on all supported
> versions and architectures of FreeBSD

In my experience I can only speak for amd64/i386, but AFAIK yes.

> but synth is limited.

Synth is written in Ada which IIUC limits it to amd64/i386.  I think
there was work to get Ada going under some arm variant but AFAIK it
was never completed.

Synth was never an option for mips/mips64/powerpc/powerpc64/sparc64.
 
> Does poudriere work on all supported versions and architectures of
> FreeBSD?

I personally run it native on amd64/powerpc64/sparc64 and cross on
aarch64/armv6/armv7, on various combinations of 10, 11, and -CURRENT.
I've had it running, under load, on these buildenvs for several years,
both with and without ZFS.  It is my go-to system.

It is also used to build packages on the freebsd.org cluster, including
mips/mips64.

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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Dennis Glatting]

On Sun, 2017-12-03 at 20:07 +, Steven Hartland wrote:
> People really seem to miss the point that there are only finite
> resources
> and as an open source project that depends on people volunteering
> their
> time to add new features and maintain tools.

Missing the point cuts both ways. 

If you have a a couple swaths of servers managed to certain tool chains
then the conversion process is an unnecessary and non-trivial resource
consumption. I have moved servers to Ubuntu and (groan) other Linux
flavors and customized the processes because:

 1) I am tired of port breakage. I am past tired of being told to read
UPDATEs when UPDATEs often has limited information, including install
conflicts. 

 2) "Error 70" on installs with no indication of where the error was
incurred and thus requiring me to make with debug flags and then dig
deep is past annoying. 

 3) Nvidia does not support CUDA under FreeBSD and this is a problem
for TensorFlow and other applications. If I went the OpenCL route
(e.g., AMD GPUs) then my application base would be significantly
limited. I don't consider Intel a serious solution.

Further:

1) Under FreeBSD I do not do binaries, rather I do source and I do
source for reasons. Under Linux, source is troublesome.

2) I had no hope of getting Intel Phi processors working under FreeBSD
but I do have them working under Linux, including the older Phis under
CentOS. I recognize this is an Intel problem which is one of the
reasons I do not consider Intel a serious solution, not to mention the
requirements and cost of an Intel compiler and Intel libraries.

3) FreeBSD offers me ZFS and FreeNAS as an alternative, particularly
for HyperV/VMware SANS. Under Linux, ZFS has historically been
troublesome.


These are nothing more than a few data points. Please do not bother
with the "then become a maintainer" response. It is not that I do not
appreciate the efforts of others but that statement is a BS response,
you know it, and I'll simply delete your message.



___
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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Jonathan Chen]

On 4 December 2017 at 13:56, Thomas Mueller  wrote:

> I can still see possible use for portmaster in that something has to be used 
> to build synth or poudriere from source.

You don't need portmaster for that. You just need make(1).
-- 
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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Thomas Mueller]

from Chris H:

> port-mgmt/poudriere gets the attention, and maintenance that it does, because
> it was created, and is maintained by someone with a commit bit (bdrewery).
> port-mgmt/synth was also created, and maintained by someone with a commit bit
> (jmarino).
> However, John's commit bit was taken away. While I'll not comment as to why,
> nor elaborate on my personal stand/feelings regarding that action. I can say
> that he has superseded synth with an application called Ravenports[1].
> I also attempted to take on ports-mgmt/portmaster early on in my endeavors
> as a ports maintainer. However, that experience also didn't go well, and I'll
> not bog this thread down with the details. My main intent for my reply, is
> simply to indicate as to why history has been the way it has regarding the
> other ports management utilities, and to indicate there is another possible
> solution, that was not previously mentioned. That I thought you (and others?)
> might be interested in. :)
 
> [1]
> https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports
> https://github.com/jrmarino/ravenadm
> https://github.com/jrmarino/ravensource

I was curious enough to take a look at those Github pages.

Still too early for me to judge.

I see the supported target systems are very limited, but there is a limit to 
what one person alone can do.

I believe portmaster and portupgrade work or worked on all supported versions 
and architectures of FreeBSD, but synth is limited.

Does poudriere work on all supported versions and architectures of FreeBSD?  I 
looked in the Makefile and found no such limitation.

I can still see possible use for portmaster in that something has to be used to 
build synth or poudriere from source.


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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Thomas Mueller]

Sorry to be sending this again, but I forgot to update the subject line the 
first time.

from Baho Utot:

> I don't use HEAD.  I use Quartlery with synth.  It is just I expect a little
> more than amature hour.  I was on Archlinux for 10 years and they are very
> bleeding edge.  Almost No breakage in ten years. The only reason I left Linux
> was systemd.  After landing in FreeBSD the experence has been terrible at
> best, I have been a user for more than 5 years hoping that things would get
> better after seeing all the work promised not getting done.  I am done with
> FreeBSD and I am going to my own scratch built Linux.  I already have all my
> raspberry pi on my own linux version and now I am working on moving my
> desktops.  Should be complete by the end of the year.

I never got started with Archlinux because of their mailing lists' severe 
moderation policy.  I became an infant mortality.

I asked how and if it was possible to rebuild the Archlinux system from source 
as is done with FreeBSD and NetBSD, but that message was rejected by moderator, 
explanation being that I could find the answer in one minute, or was it ten 
minutes, from the wiki.  I still haven't found it.  I unsubscribed about two 
days later.

I suppose you're aware of Linux From Scratch and Cross Linux From Scratch 
(trac.clfs.org)?

Two distros you could try are Voidlinux (voidlinux.eu) and Gentoo 
(www.gentoo.org).

I have git-cloned their source/package trees.

I would like to get back to Linux but am not ready to give up on FreeBSD.

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: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

[Thomas Mueller]

from Baho Utot:

> I don't use HEAD.  I use Quartlery with synth.  It is just I expect a little
> more than amature hour.  I was on Archlinux for 10 years and they are very
> bleeding edge.  Almost No breakage in ten years. The only reason I left Linux
> was systemd.  After landing in FreeBSD the experence has been terrible at
> best, I have been a user for more than 5 years hoping that things would get
> better after seeing all the work promised not getting done.  I am done with
> FreeBSD and I am going to my own scratch built Linux.  I already have all my
> raspberry pi on my own linux version and now I am working on moving my
> desktops.  Should be complete by the end of the year.

I never got started with Archlinux because of their mailing lists' severe 
moderation policy.  I became an infant mortality.

I asked how and if it was possible to rebuild the Archlinux system from source 
as is done with FreeBSD and NetBSD, but that message was rejected by moderator, 
explanation being that I could find the answer in one minute, or was it ten 
minutes, from the wiki.  I still haven't found it.  I unsubscribed about two 
days later.

I suppose you're aware of Linux From Scratch and Cross Linux From Scratch 
(trac.clfs.org)?

Two distros you could try are Voidlinux (voidlinux.eu) and Gentoo 
(www.gentoo.org).

I have git-cloned their source/package trees.

I would like to get back to Linux but am not ready to give up on FreeBSD.

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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Baho Utot]

On 12/3/2017 5:04 PM, Carmel NY wrote:

On Sunday, December 3, 2017 3:46 PM, Chris H stated:

On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 11:53:58 + "FreeBSD Ports ML"  
po...@freebsd.org> said

On Saturday, December 2, 2017 5:40 AM, Stari Karp stated:

On Sat, 2017-12-02 at 01:12 +, Ben Woods wrote:

Hi Carmel,

My understanding is that poudriere is the only package building
system that is officially supported by the portmgr, apart from raw

make.

There are many other nice ports building tools contributed by the
community, which each have their niche market, but the maintenance
of those tools is a community responsibility also.

The announcement of impending flavors and breakage of package
building infrastructure that doesn’t support it was some time ago
(I believe at least 6 months), with a number of reminders since
then. If a community


Yes, 6 months but IMO ports maintainers have still 2 or three months.
They "pushed" flavors out to early. I do not why.

Well, I certainly have no intention of installing and then learning
how to use an industrial sized solution line poudriere for a
relatively small home network.

I am hoping that  someone can get "synth" back up and working
correctly. If not it might be time for me to look at another OS for my
network.

Looking back at other port management utilities like "portmanager",
"portmaster", "portupgrade" and now "synth", The FreeBSD team has

done

a pretty good job of obfuscating and rendering them impotent. Which
brings me to what happens if I do embrace "poudriere". How long before
that becomes history also?

port-mgmt/poudriere gets the attention, and maintenance that it does,
because it was created, and is maintained by someone with a commit bit
(bdrewery).
port-mgmt/synth was also created, and maintained by someone with a
commit bit (jmarino).
However, John's commit bit was taken away. While I'll not comment as to
why, nor elaborate on my personal stand/feelings regarding that action. I can
say that he has superseded synth with an application called Ravenports[1].
I also attempted to take on ports-mgmt/portmaster early on in my
endeavors as a ports maintainer. However, that experience also didn't go
well, and I'll not bog this thread down with the details. My main intent for my
reply, is simply to indicate as to why history has been the way it has regarding
the other ports management utilities, and to indicate there is another
possible solution, that was not previously mentioned. That I thought you
(and others?) might be interested in. :)

I just checked out < 
https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports/wiki/quickstart-freebsd>
and < http://ravenports.ironwolf.systems/> and I have to admit that I am 
interested.
I am wondering if it will ever get accepted into the ports system.



No wayThey hate John around here.
___
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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Baho Utot]

On 12/3/2017 3:46 PM, Chris H wrote:
On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 11:53:58 + "FreeBSD Ports ML" 
 said



On Saturday, December 2, 2017 5:40 AM, Stari Karp stated:
> On Sat, 2017-12-02 at 01:12 +, Ben Woods wrote:
> > Hi Carmel,
> >
> > My understanding is that poudriere is the only package building 
system

> > that is officially supported by the portmgr, apart from raw make.
> >
> > There are many other nice ports building tools contributed by the
> > community, which each have their niche market, but the 
maintenance of

> > those tools is a community responsibility also.
> >
> > The announcement of impending flavors and breakage of package 
building
> > infrastructure that doesn’t support it was some time ago (I 
believe at
> > least 6 months), with a number of reminders since then. If a 
community

> >
> Yes, 6 months but IMO ports maintainers have still 2 or three months.
> They "pushed" flavors out to early. I do not why.

Well, I certainly have no intention of installing and then learning 
how to

use
an industrial sized solution line poudriere for a relatively small home
network.

I am hoping that  someone can get "synth" back up and working 
correctly. If

not
it might be time for me to look at another OS for my network.

Looking back at other port management utilities like "portmanager",
"portmaster", "portupgrade" and now "synth", The FreeBSD team has done a
pretty good job of obfuscating and rendering them impotent. Which 
brings me
to what happens if I do embrace "poudriere". How long before that 
becomes

history also?
port-mgmt/poudriere gets the attention, and maintenance that it does, 
because
it was created, and is maintained by someone with a commit bit 
(bdrewery).
port-mgmt/synth was also created, and maintained by someone with a 
commit bit

(jmarino).
However, John's commit bit was taken away. While I'll not comment as 
to why,
nor elaborate on my personal stand/feelings regarding that action. I 
can say

that he has superseded synth with an application called Ravenports[1].
I also attempted to take on ports-mgmt/portmaster early on in my 
endeavors
as a ports maintainer. However, that experience also didn't go well, 
and I'll
not bog this thread down with the details. My main intent for my 
reply, is
simply to indicate as to why history has been the way it has regarding 
the
other ports management utilities, and to indicate there is another 
possible
solution, that was not previously mentioned. That I thought you (and 
others?)

might be interested in. :)

[1]
https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports
https://github.com/jrmarino/ravenadm
https://github.com/jrmarino/ravensource


--
Carmel


--Chris



Had a look at Ravenports.  Thanks for the info.  It looks a lot like and 
rpm spec file.
If that thing really works, I can get behind it.  It look like  what the 
ports system should have been.


___
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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Baho Utot]

On 12/3/2017 3:07 PM, Steven Hartland wrote:

Come on guys you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.

Yes I got caught out by flavours too, but it was quickly fixed and it 
adds a much needed feature which will make ports and associated tools 
better at the end of the day.


People really seem to miss the point that there are only finite 
resources and as an open source project that depends on people 
volunteering their time to add new features and maintain tools.


A number of the messages to this thread really don’t seem to 
appreciate that and they come across very poorly.


Sure it would it be nice if everyone’s favourite tool was always 
maintained in good time but that can’t always be the case, however if 
anyone really wants something, they can chip in and make it happen, 
thats the beauty of open source projects.


For those who are considering migrating to something else, would your 
time not be better spent chipping in to help?




Not really, you are still left with current hardware not being supported.

When we adopted poudriere at work, it really enabled us to make much 
quicker progress than we had been able to do with portmaster, so for 
those that havent tried it its well worth a shot if your previous 
favourite tool hasn’t been updated yet.




Also if I was to update the "other tools" would it be incorperated into 
the ports or would all the work be for nothing?


___
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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Baho Utot]

On 12/3/2017 11:56 AM, Adam Weinberger wrote:

On 3 Dec, 2017, at 7:55, Baho Utot  wrote:



On 12/02/17 18:31, Adam Weinberger wrote:

On 2 Dec, 2017, at 13:41, Baho Utot  wrote:


On 12/2/2017 1:43 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:

On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 11:53:58AM +, Carmel NY wrote:

Looking back at other port management utilities like "portmanager",
"portmaster", "portupgrade" and now "synth", The FreeBSD team has
done a pretty good job of obfuscating and rendering them impotent.

That's one possible explanation.  Or, as Occam's Razor suggests, they
continue to try to modernize the Ports Collection, despite obstacles
(including stale codebases and stubborn maintainers).

I'll admit some of the transitions have been pretty rough.  But when
you go back and look at Ports as of e.g. FreeBSD 4, there have been a
lot of good changes -- including some which were necessary due to sheer
scale.

If we had stayed with what we had then, the whole thing would have
collapsed by now.

mcl
___


What you have noe is not that great either.  When is base going to be 
packed.ie something that makes sense and works?

You seem very angry about things breaking in HEAD, Baho. Things break in HEAD 
sometimes. This is why we recommend that end-users who can't have breakages, or 
users who depend on undeveloped tools, stay on the quarterly branch. Portmaster 
works perfectly on quarterly. Always has.
Everyone understands that poudriere isn't for everybody---Steve Kargl outlined 
a pretty classic example of a workflow and system that aren't amenable to 
poudriere. We've asked repeatedly for people to work on portmaster. Far more 
people complain about it breaking than put in ANY effort to fix it.
HEAD is for development. You have to tolerate breakage on HEAD, and participate 
in fixing things, otherwise you need to switch to the quarterly branches.
# Adam

I don't use HEAD.  I use Quartlery with synth.  It is just I expect a little 
more than amature hour.  I was on Archlinux for 10 years and they are very 
bleeding edge.  Almost No breakage in ten years. The only reason I left Linux 
was systemd.  After landing in FreeBSD the experence has been terrible at best, 
I have been a user for more than 5 years hoping that things would get better 
after seeing all the work promised not getting done. I am done with FreeBSD and 
I am going to my own scratch built Linux.  I already have all my raspberry pi 
on my own linux version and now I am working on moving my desktops. Should be 
complete by the end of the year.

If you don't use HEAD, then I fail to see how flavours have wronged you. Synth 
now supports flavours, and quarterly works exactly as it did a week ago.

Either way, a scratch built Linux sounds like a great alternative to FreeBSD, 
which is terrible at best.

# Adam




well I can at least count on it to work and with current hardware to boot.

___
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 : Re: Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin 'devel/py-setuptools@py27'

[Bastien OGIER via freebsd-ports]

Updating poudriere to 3.2.2 did the trick.
[00:04:36] [07] [00:00:00] Building devel/scons@py27 | scons-2.5.1_1
[00:04:50] [07] [00:00:14] Finished devel/scons@py27 | scons-2.5.1_1: Success

Sorry to bother with such an "easy" problem, kind of new to freebsd and 
poudriere, the error message made me guess I couldn't do anything on my side.

Thank you very much guys !

Bastien

>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin 
> 'devel/py-setuptools@py27'
> Local Time: 3 décembre 2017 11:57 PM
> UTC Time: 3 décembre 2017 22:57
> From: kors...@free.fr
> To: Kevin Oberman 
> po...@freebsd.org , Bastien OGIER 
>
> Hi,
>
> I have to error from today !
>
> My poudriere was 3.1. I upgaded to 3.2 and everything SEEMS to work fine. At 
> least it compiles without this error :) I wait the end of the process to be 
> sure of it.
>
> I advise you to upgrade poudriere to at least 3.2, either by building it in 
> poudriere (poudriere bulk -j  ports-mgmt/poudriere ), or by the ports 
> tree.
>
> Gabriel
>
> - Mail original -
> De: "Kevin Oberman" rkober...@gmail.com
> À: "Bastien OGIER" b.og...@protonmail.com
> Cc: ["po...@freebsd.org](mailto:%22po...@freebsd.org)" po...@freebsd.org
> Envoyé: Dimanche 3 Décembre 2017 23:53:09
> Objet: Re: Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin 
> 'devel/py-setuptools@py27'
>
> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Bastien OGIER via freebsd-ports <
> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>> Had some troubles trying to update my poudriere pkgs today, bulk is
>> throwing the following error :
>> [00:00:02] >> Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin
>> 'devel/py-setuptools@py27'; Please contact maintainer of the port to fix
>> this.
>> Didn't see anything related on the recent mailinglist so I hope I did the
>> right thing mailing it there.
>> Bastien
>
> You seem to have been bitten by FLAVORS. Is pkg(8) up-to-date? I got this
> type of error as I managed to update PORTDIR after the FLAVORS commit, but
> before pkg was updated properly to deal with it.
>
> After updating /usr/portds/ports-mgmt/pkg and re-building it, those errors
> vanished and things started working fairly well again.
>
> NOTE: There is at least one bug that has not bitten me but has gotten a
> couple of people that has a proposed patch under review at this time. I
> don't think this is what caused your error, but I'm mot at all sure.
>
> 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](mailto:%22freebsd-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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Adam Weinberger]

> On 3 Dec, 2017, at 14:31, Michelle Sullivan  wrote:
> 
> Adam Weinberger wrote:
>> 
>> You seem very angry about things breaking in HEAD, Baho. Things break in 
>> HEAD sometimes. This is why we recommend that end-users who can't have 
>> breakages, or users who depend on undeveloped tools, stay on the quarterly 
>> branch. Portmaster works perfectly on quarterly. Always has.
>> 
> 
> Quarterly is just a frozen HEAD with no/minute chances of security patches or 
> other changes... why would you want to be there?  I couldn't even get someone 
> to patch a security issue before the pkg_*->pkgng change..  was patched 4 
> days later despite having the patch in the bug before... and despite asking 
> for the patch to be put in the quarterly they didn't either.  One continues 
> to watch the exodus.

The MFH process was very complicated at first, and many committers didn't 
participate in it. Now it's largely automated and expected of all ports 
committers. The quarterly branches these days receive essentially all security 
fixes and most build fixes. As with all things FreeBSD, it's a best-effort 
process.

Quarterly is mostly static, and receives no unnecessary updates. It also 
receives no known breakages. That's the tradeoff between it and head.

We do the best we can, and if things get missed it's because we need more 
community involvement. If you can't handle the flux of HEAD, stay on quarterly. 
If you need the cutting-edge, use HEAD. As you noted, we are strained for 
resources to keep quarterly going; we simply don't have the ability to provide 
another in-between level.

# 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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Mark Millard]

Carmel NY carmel_ny at outlook.com wrote on
Sun Dec 3 22:04:34 UTC 2017 :

> I just checked out < 
> https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports/wiki/quickstart-freebsd > 
> and < http://ravenports.ironwolf.systems/ > and I have to admit that I am 
> interested. 
> I am wondering if it will ever get accepted into the ports system.

I'll note that https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports says:

Official Website
Please visit http://ravenports.ironwolf.systems for additional and current 
information.


Ravenports has its own repository: Unlike ports-mgmt/synth,
Ravenports is not based on the FreeBSD ports tree in FreeBSD.
So switching is more than a tool change. The list of available
ports is visible at:

http://ravenports.ironwolf.systems/catalog/

It said "2,356 entries" at the time I looked. They are
just getting started.


It looks like for those not on x86-64/amd64 and aarch64
will possibly be out of range for Ravenports. Also some
*BSD's may be as well.

Details:
Extracting some text from the Supported Platforms area
of the http://ravenports.ironwolf.systems/ page. . .
(Track by looking at the original page.)

. . .
For the core developers, the main architectures targeted are the x86_64 and ARM 
Aarch64.
New architecture support from serious contributors capable of performing the 
initial
bootstrap and periodic quality-assurance builds of the entire Ravenports tree 
will be
accepted into the project.

Long Term
Support increasingly unlikely
• Darwin/Mac OSX/x86_64
• OpenBSD/amd64
• NetBSD/amd64
• i386 (Linux and *BSD)

Short Term
Platform support planned
• Solaris 10+ / Illumos
• FreeBSD/ARM64
• Linux/AArch64

Current
Currently supported platforms
• DragonFly 4.9 and later
• FreeBSD/amd64 Release 11 and later
• Linux/x86-64 (glib 2.6.32-based)



(I listed the contents of the 3 boxes
in right-box to left-box order.)

===
Mark Millard
markmi at dsl-only.net

___
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: Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin 'devel/py-setuptools@py27'

[Gabriel Guillon]

Hi,

I have to error from today !

My poudriere was 3.1. I upgaded to 3.2 and everything SEEMS to work fine. At 
least it compiles without this error :) I wait the end of the process to be 
sure of it.

I advise you to upgrade poudriere to at least 3.2, either by building it in 
poudriere (poudriere bulk -j  ports-mgmt/poudriere ), or by the ports 
tree.

-- 
Gabriel

- Mail original -
De: "Kevin Oberman" 
À: "Bastien OGIER" 
Cc: "po...@freebsd.org" 
Envoyé: Dimanche 3 Décembre 2017 23:53:09
Objet: Re: Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin 
'devel/py-setuptools@py27'

On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Bastien OGIER via freebsd-ports <
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Had some troubles trying to update my poudriere pkgs today, bulk is
> throwing the following error :
>
> [00:00:02] >> Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin
> 'devel/py-setuptools@py27'; Please contact maintainer of the port to fix
> this.
>
> Didn't see anything related on the recent mailinglist so I hope I did the
> right thing mailing it there.
>
> Bastien
>

You seem to have been bitten by FLAVORS. Is pkg(8) up-to-date? I got this
type of error as I managed  to update PORTDIR after the FLAVORS commit, but
before pkg was updated properly to deal with it.

After updating /usr/portds/ports-mgmt/pkg and re-building it, those errors
vanished and things started working fairly well again.

NOTE: There is at least one bug that has not bitten me but has gotten a
couple of people that has a proposed patch under review at this time. I
don't think this is what caused your error, but I'm mot at all sure.
--
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"
___
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: Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin 'devel/py-setuptools@py27'

[Kevin Oberman]

On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Bastien OGIER via freebsd-ports <
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Had some troubles trying to update my poudriere pkgs today, bulk is
> throwing the following error :
>
> [00:00:02] >> Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin
> 'devel/py-setuptools@py27'; Please contact maintainer of the port to fix
> this.
>
> Didn't see anything related on the recent mailinglist so I hope I did the
> right thing mailing it there.
>
> Bastien
>

You seem to have been bitten by FLAVORS. Is pkg(8) up-to-date? I got this
type of error as I managed  to update PORTDIR after the FLAVORS commit, but
before pkg was updated properly to deal with it.

After updating /usr/portds/ports-mgmt/pkg and re-building it, those errors
vanished and things started working fairly well again.

NOTE: There is at least one bug that has not bitten me but has gotten a
couple of people that has a proposed patch under review at this time. I
don't think this is what caused your error, but I'm mot at all sure.
--
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"

Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin 'devel/py-setuptools@py27'

[Bastien OGIER via freebsd-ports]

Hello,

Had some troubles trying to update my poudriere pkgs today, bulk is throwing 
the following error :

[00:00:02] >> Error: devel/scons depends on nonexistent origin 
'devel/py-setuptools@py27'; Please contact maintainer of the port to fix this.

Didn't see anything related on the recent mailinglist so I hope I did the right 
thing mailing it there.

Bastien
___
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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Chris H]

On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 22:04:15 + "freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>" 
 said


On Sunday, December 3, 2017 3:46 PM, Chris H stated:
> On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 11:53:58 + "FreeBSD Ports ML" 
> po...@freebsd.org> said
> > On Saturday, December 2, 2017 5:40 AM, Stari Karp stated:
> > > On Sat, 2017-12-02 at 01:12 +, Ben Woods wrote:
> > > > Hi Carmel,
> > > >
> > > > My understanding is that poudriere is the only package building
> > > > system that is officially supported by the portmgr, apart from raw
> make.
> > > >
> > > > There are many other nice ports building tools contributed by the
> > > > community, which each have their niche market, but the maintenance
> > > > of those tools is a community responsibility also.
> > > >
> > > > The announcement of impending flavors and breakage of package
> > > > building infrastructure that doesn’t support it was some time ago
> > > > (I believe at least 6 months), with a number of reminders since
> > > > then. If a community
> > > >
> > > Yes, 6 months but IMO ports maintainers have still 2 or three months.
> > > They "pushed" flavors out to early. I do not why.
> >
> > Well, I certainly have no intention of installing and then learning
> > how to use an industrial sized solution line poudriere for a
> > relatively small home network.
> >
> > I am hoping that  someone can get "synth" back up and working
> > correctly. If not it might be time for me to look at another OS for my
> > network.
> >
> > Looking back at other port management utilities like "portmanager",
> > "portmaster", "portupgrade" and now "synth", The FreeBSD team has
> done
> > a pretty good job of obfuscating and rendering them impotent. Which
> > brings me to what happens if I do embrace "poudriere". How long before
> > that becomes history also?
> port-mgmt/poudriere gets the attention, and maintenance that it does,
> because it was created, and is maintained by someone with a commit bit
> (bdrewery).
> port-mgmt/synth was also created, and maintained by someone with a
> commit bit (jmarino).
> However, John's commit bit was taken away. While I'll not comment as to
> why, nor elaborate on my personal stand/feelings regarding that action. I
> can
> say that he has superseded synth with an application called Ravenports[1].
> I also attempted to take on ports-mgmt/portmaster early on in my
> endeavors as a ports maintainer. However, that experience also didn't go
> well, and I'll not bog this thread down with the details. My main intent for
> my
> reply, is simply to indicate as to why history has been the way it has
> regarding
> the other ports management utilities, and to indicate there is another
> possible solution, that was not previously mentioned. That I thought you
> (and others?) might be interested in. :)

I just checked out <
https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports/wiki/quickstart-freebsd> 
and < http://ravenports.ironwolf.systems/> and I have to admit that I am
interested. 
I am wondering if it will ever get accepted into the ports system.

Are you looking to become Maintainer for it? :)

Honestly, I'd have already volunteered. But I'm between hardware right
now. My dev box died, and I haven't yet decided on the hardware I want to
get to replace it. So unless someone else decides to take it on before I
do. I'll push it into the ports system.

tl,dr;
Yes. As soon as I, or someone else volunteers to do so. Maybe you? :)


--
Carmel


--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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Michelle Sullivan]

Adam Weinberger wrote:


You seem very angry about things breaking in HEAD, Baho. Things break in HEAD 
sometimes. This is why we recommend that end-users who can't have breakages, or 
users who depend on undeveloped tools, stay on the quarterly branch. Portmaster 
works perfectly on quarterly. Always has.



Quarterly is just a frozen HEAD with no/minute chances of security 
patches or other changes... why would you want to be there?  I couldn't 
even get someone to patch a security issue before the pkg_*->pkgng 
change..  was patched 4 days later despite having the patch in the bug 
before... and despite asking for the patch to be put in the quarterly 
they didn't either.  One continues to watch the exodus.


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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Carmel NY]

On Sunday, December 3, 2017 3:46 PM, Chris H stated:
> On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 11:53:58 + "FreeBSD Ports ML"  
> po...@freebsd.org> said
> > On Saturday, December 2, 2017 5:40 AM, Stari Karp stated:
> > > On Sat, 2017-12-02 at 01:12 +, Ben Woods wrote:
> > > > Hi Carmel,
> > > >
> > > > My understanding is that poudriere is the only package building
> > > > system that is officially supported by the portmgr, apart from raw
> make.
> > > >
> > > > There are many other nice ports building tools contributed by the
> > > > community, which each have their niche market, but the maintenance
> > > > of those tools is a community responsibility also.
> > > >
> > > > The announcement of impending flavors and breakage of package
> > > > building infrastructure that doesn’t support it was some time ago
> > > > (I believe at least 6 months), with a number of reminders since
> > > > then. If a community
> > > >
> > > Yes, 6 months but IMO ports maintainers have still 2 or three months.
> > > They "pushed" flavors out to early. I do not why.
> >
> > Well, I certainly have no intention of installing and then learning
> > how to use an industrial sized solution line poudriere for a
> > relatively small home network.
> >
> > I am hoping that  someone can get "synth" back up and working
> > correctly. If not it might be time for me to look at another OS for my
> > network.
> >
> > Looking back at other port management utilities like "portmanager",
> > "portmaster", "portupgrade" and now "synth", The FreeBSD team has
> done
> > a pretty good job of obfuscating and rendering them impotent. Which
> > brings me to what happens if I do embrace "poudriere". How long before
> > that becomes history also?
> port-mgmt/poudriere gets the attention, and maintenance that it does,
> because it was created, and is maintained by someone with a commit bit
> (bdrewery).
> port-mgmt/synth was also created, and maintained by someone with a
> commit bit (jmarino).
> However, John's commit bit was taken away. While I'll not comment as to
> why, nor elaborate on my personal stand/feelings regarding that action. I can
> say that he has superseded synth with an application called Ravenports[1].
> I also attempted to take on ports-mgmt/portmaster early on in my
> endeavors as a ports maintainer. However, that experience also didn't go
> well, and I'll not bog this thread down with the details. My main intent for 
> my
> reply, is simply to indicate as to why history has been the way it has 
> regarding
> the other ports management utilities, and to indicate there is another
> possible solution, that was not previously mentioned. That I thought you
> (and others?) might be interested in. :)

I just checked out < 
https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports/wiki/quickstart-freebsd> 
and < http://ravenports.ironwolf.systems/> and I have to admit that I am 
interested. 
I am wondering if it will ever get accepted into the ports system.

-- 
Carmel


pgpseQLhdz4N4.pgp
Description: PGP signature

RE: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Chris H]

On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 11:53:58 + "FreeBSD Ports ML" 
 said


On Saturday, December 2, 2017 5:40 AM, Stari Karp stated:
> On Sat, 2017-12-02 at 01:12 +, Ben Woods wrote:
> > Hi Carmel,
> >
> > My understanding is that poudriere is the only package building system
> > that is officially supported by the portmgr, apart from raw make.
> >
> > There are many other nice ports building tools contributed by the
> > community, which each have their niche market, but the maintenance of
> > those tools is a community responsibility also.
> >
> > The announcement of impending flavors and breakage of package building
> > infrastructure that doesn’t support it was some time ago (I believe at
> > least 6 months), with a number of reminders since then. If a community
> >
> Yes, 6 months but IMO ports maintainers have still 2 or three months.
> They "pushed" flavors out to early. I do not why.

Well, I certainly have no intention of installing and then learning how to
use
an industrial sized solution line poudriere for a relatively small home
network.

I am hoping that  someone can get "synth" back up and working correctly. If
not
it might be time for me to look at another OS for my network.

Looking back at other port management utilities like "portmanager",
"portmaster", "portupgrade" and now "synth", The FreeBSD team has done a
pretty good job of obfuscating and rendering them impotent. Which brings me
to what happens if I do embrace "poudriere". How long before that becomes
history also?

port-mgmt/poudriere gets the attention, and maintenance that it does, because
it was created, and is maintained by someone with a commit bit (bdrewery).
port-mgmt/synth was also created, and maintained by someone with a commit bit
(jmarino).
However, John's commit bit was taken away. While I'll not comment as to why,
nor elaborate on my personal stand/feelings regarding that action. I can say
that he has superseded synth with an application called Ravenports[1].
I also attempted to take on ports-mgmt/portmaster early on in my endeavors
as a ports maintainer. However, that experience also didn't go well, and I'll
not bog this thread down with the details. My main intent for my reply, is
simply to indicate as to why history has been the way it has regarding the
other ports management utilities, and to indicate there is another possible
solution, that was not previously mentioned. That I thought you (and others?)
might be interested in. :)

[1]
https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports
https://github.com/jrmarino/ravenadm
https://github.com/jrmarino/ravensource


--
Carmel


--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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Steven Hartland]

Come on guys you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.

Yes I got caught out by flavours too, but it was quickly fixed and it adds
a much needed feature which will make ports and associated tools better at
the end of the day.

People really seem to miss the point that there are only finite resources
and as an open source project that depends on people volunteering their
time to add new features and maintain tools.

A number of the messages to this thread really don’t seem to appreciate
that and they come across very poorly.

Sure it would it be nice if everyone’s favourite tool was always maintained
in good time but that can’t always be the case, however if anyone really
wants something, they can chip in and make it happen, thats the beauty of
open source projects.

For those who are considering migrating to something else, would your time
not be better spent chipping in to help?

When we adopted poudriere at work, it really enabled us to make much
quicker progress than we had been able to do with portmaster, so for those
that havent tried it its well worth a shot if your previous favourite tool
hasn’t been updated yet.

  Regards
  Steve
___
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: What is the solution when the port has __pycache__ fs violation: lib/python3.6/site-packages/PyQt5/__pycache__/pyrcc_main.cpython-36.pyc

[Antoine Brodin]

On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 8:37 PM, Yuri  wrote:
> I am not getting the error when I build in podriere, but for some reason the
> central builds fail.
>
>> =>> Error: Filesystem touched during build:
>> extra:
>> usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/PyQt5/__pycache__/pyrcc_main.cpython-36.pyc
>
>
> The port: audio/carla

Hi,

This seems to be a bug in textproc/py-qt5-xml,  it doesn't package
byte-compiled versions of some modules.

Cheers,

Antoine
___
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"

What is the solution when the port has __pycache__ fs violation: lib/python3.6/site-packages/PyQt5/__pycache__/pyrcc_main.cpython-36.pyc

[Yuri]

I am not getting the error when I build in podriere, but for some reason the 
central builds fail.


=>> Error: Filesystem touched during build:
extra: 
usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/PyQt5/__pycache__/pyrcc_main.cpython-36.pyc


The port: audio/carla

Yuri

___
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: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

[emilia]

> I had no idea that the handbook was still directing people straight to HEAD. 
> You're absolutely
> right, that should be changed. Unfortunately, directing people to an SVN path 
> is difficult, because
> the SVN URL changes every 3 months, and switching an SVN branch from one path 
> to another isn't
> completely trivial.
> 
> For binary package users, new installs always default to installing packages 
> from quarterly, but we
> could do more to urge port builders toward quarterly branches too.

Hey, I have been using portsnap to update my ports tree and had no idea that 
quarterly releases of
the ports tree exist.

Maybe portsnap could be adapted to use the quarterly release and have that 
enabled per default on
the -RELEASE branch?
(I do not see any mention of branches in the portsnap manpage, on 11.1-RELEASE)
___
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: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

[Christoph Brinkhaus]

On Sun, Dec 03, 2017 at 09:47:20AM -0700, Adam Weinberger wrote:

Dear Adam,

first of all I thank you and all contributers. In my optinion things
are running as smooth as possible. One must be extreme optimistic to 
expect such a change to happen without any issues.

> > On 3 Dec, 2017, at 6:31, Eric Masson  wrote:
> > 
> > Is ports/head becoming the alter ego of src/head (possible breakages or
> > disruptive new features from time to time) ?
> 
> Categorically, yes, though major breakages are rare. Situations like this, 
> where a major new feature gets introduced and the FreeBSD developers and 
> community hunt down problems and solve them, is strictly the role of HEAD. 
> While of course we can make no *guarantees* in either branch, ports-secteam 
> works very hard to inspect everything that gets merged to quarterly.
> 
As far as I know it takes a little amount of time to have changes
merged to quarterly. This might be of interest in case of securtity
issues only.

> > If yes, this should be written down in the handbook (chapter on ports
> > still states ports/head for svn retrieval) and quarterly ports branches
> > should be publicized.
> 
> I had no idea that the handbook was still directing people straight to HEAD. 
> You're absolutely right, that should be changed. Unfortunately, directing 
> people to an SVN path is difficult, because the SVN URL changes every 3 
> months, 
> and switching an SVN branch from one path to another isn't completely trivial.
> 
> For binary package users, new installs always default to installing packages 
> from quarterly, but we could do more to urge port builders toward quarterly 
> branches too.
> 
I think the situation is good as it is now. Newcommers are and have
been encouraged to use packages first. With the introduction of falvors 
more users might be happy with packages.
Everything is well documented. With poudriere or synth there is no
effect on the host if the build fails just because some unlucky
situation. I think for most useres there is no need to rebuild the
ports day by day.

Thank you and all the others for all your effort! 
And whatever you will do, someone will volunteer to complain;-).

Kind regards,
Christoph
___
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: firefox-esr on armv6/7

[bob prohaska]

On Sun, Dec 03, 2017 at 10:34:43AM +0100, Mika??l Urankar wrote:
> 2017-12-03 6:45 GMT+01:00 bob prohaska :
> 
> >
> > Is there a writeup somewhere on how to restart a make? The Handbook
> > does not reflect the recent changes. /usr/src and /usr/ports are
> > current as of Dec. 2, if that matters. I didn't recognize anything
> > in /usr/ports/UPDATING.
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Are you building with poudriere? if so, you probably need to do poudriere
> jail -j jailname -k
> If you are buiding with "make", a make clean should be enough.

Plain vanilla make. Don't think I tried make clean, since I wanted 
make to pick up where it left off. If that can't be done it's a big
setback on long builds.

I've seen much discussion of poudriere, if that's the new way to do
things I'll try it, but it seems like a big hammer for a small nail.

Many thanks!

bob prohaska



___
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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Adam Weinberger]

> On 3 Dec, 2017, at 7:55, Baho Utot  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 12/02/17 18:31, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>>> On 2 Dec, 2017, at 13:41, Baho Utot  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 12/2/2017 1:43 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
 On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 11:53:58AM +, Carmel NY wrote:
> Looking back at other port management utilities like "portmanager",
> "portmaster", "portupgrade" and now "synth", The FreeBSD team has
> done a pretty good job of obfuscating and rendering them impotent.
 That's one possible explanation.  Or, as Occam's Razor suggests, they
 continue to try to modernize the Ports Collection, despite obstacles
 (including stale codebases and stubborn maintainers).
 
 I'll admit some of the transitions have been pretty rough.  But when
 you go back and look at Ports as of e.g. FreeBSD 4, there have been a
 lot of good changes -- including some which were necessary due to sheer
 scale.
 
 If we had stayed with what we had then, the whole thing would have
 collapsed by now.
 
 mcl
 ___
 
>>> 
>>> What you have noe is not that great either.  When is base going to be 
>>> packed.ie something that makes sense and works?
>> You seem very angry about things breaking in HEAD, Baho. Things break in 
>> HEAD sometimes. This is why we recommend that end-users who can't have 
>> breakages, or users who depend on undeveloped tools, stay on the quarterly 
>> branch. Portmaster works perfectly on quarterly. Always has.
>> Everyone understands that poudriere isn't for everybody---Steve Kargl 
>> outlined a pretty classic example of a workflow and system that aren't 
>> amenable to poudriere. We've asked repeatedly for people to work on 
>> portmaster. Far more people complain about it breaking than put in ANY 
>> effort to fix it.
>> HEAD is for development. You have to tolerate breakage on HEAD, and 
>> participate in fixing things, otherwise you need to switch to the quarterly 
>> branches.
>> # Adam
> 
> I don't use HEAD.  I use Quartlery with synth.  It is just I expect a little 
> more than amature hour.  I was on Archlinux for 10 years and they are very 
> bleeding edge.  Almost No breakage in ten years. The only reason I left Linux 
> was systemd.  After landing in FreeBSD the experence has been terrible at 
> best, I have been a user for more than 5 years hoping that things would get 
> better after seeing all the work promised not getting done. I am done with 
> FreeBSD and I am going to my own scratch built Linux.  I already have all my 
> raspberry pi on my own linux version and now I am working on moving my 
> desktops. Should be complete by the end of the year.

If you don't use HEAD, then I fail to see how flavours have wronged you. Synth 
now supports flavours, and quarterly works exactly as it did a week ago.

Either way, a scratch built Linux sounds like a great alternative to FreeBSD, 
which is terrible at best.

# 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: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

[Adam Weinberger]

> On 3 Dec, 2017, at 6:31, Eric Masson  wrote:
> 
> Is ports/head becoming the alter ego of src/head (possible breakages or
> disruptive new features from time to time) ?

Categorically, yes, though major breakages are rare. Situations like this, 
where a major new feature gets introduced and the FreeBSD developers and 
community hunt down problems and solve them, is strictly the role of HEAD. 
While of course we can make no *guarantees* in either branch, ports-secteam 
works very hard to inspect everything that gets merged to quarterly.

> If yes, this should be written down in the handbook (chapter on ports
> still states ports/head for svn retrieval) and quarterly ports branches
> should be publicized.

I had no idea that the handbook was still directing people straight to HEAD. 
You're absolutely right, that should be changed. Unfortunately, directing 
people to an SVN path is difficult, because the SVN URL changes every 3 months, 
and switching an SVN branch from one path to another isn't completely trivial.

For binary package users, new installs always default to installing packages 
from quarterly, but we could do more to urge port builders toward quarterly 
branches too.

# 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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Baho Utot]

On 12/02/17 18:31, Adam Weinberger wrote:

On 2 Dec, 2017, at 13:41, Baho Utot  wrote:


On 12/2/2017 1:43 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:

On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 11:53:58AM +, Carmel NY wrote:

Looking back at other port management utilities like "portmanager",
"portmaster", "portupgrade" and now "synth", The FreeBSD team has
done a pretty good job of obfuscating and rendering them impotent.

That's one possible explanation.  Or, as Occam's Razor suggests, they
continue to try to modernize the Ports Collection, despite obstacles
(including stale codebases and stubborn maintainers).

I'll admit some of the transitions have been pretty rough.  But when
you go back and look at Ports as of e.g. FreeBSD 4, there have been a
lot of good changes -- including some which were necessary due to sheer
scale.

If we had stayed with what we had then, the whole thing would have
collapsed by now.

mcl
___



What you have noe is not that great either.  When is base going to be 
packed.ie something that makes sense and works?


You seem very angry about things breaking in HEAD, Baho. Things break in HEAD 
sometimes. This is why we recommend that end-users who can't have breakages, or 
users who depend on undeveloped tools, stay on the quarterly branch. Portmaster 
works perfectly on quarterly. Always has.

Everyone understands that poudriere isn't for everybody---Steve Kargl outlined 
a pretty classic example of a workflow and system that aren't amenable to 
poudriere. We've asked repeatedly for people to work on portmaster. Far more 
people complain about it breaking than put in ANY effort to fix it.

HEAD is for development. You have to tolerate breakage on HEAD, and participate 
in fixing things, otherwise you need to switch to the quarterly branches.

# Adam




I don't use HEAD.  I use Quartlery with synth.  It is just I expect a 
little more than amature hour.  I was on Archlinux for 10 years and they 
are very bleeding edge.  Almost No breakage in ten years. The only 
reason I left Linux was systemd.  After landing in FreeBSD the experence 
has been terrible at best, I have been a user for more than 5 years 
hoping that things would get better after seeing all the work promised 
not getting done.  I am done with FreeBSD and I am going to my own 
scratch built Linux.  I already have all my raspberry pi on my own linux 
version and now I am working on moving my desktops.  Should be complete 
by the end of the year.


___
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: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

[Kurt Jaeger]

Hi!

> Give jrmarino some time, he is obviously working on it:
> https://github.com/jrmarino/synth/commit/35a664ac24b5cf6aedb2d0ae30594e5dc95c93d5

synth 2.00 which supports FLAVORS, hit the ports tree a short time ago.

-- 
p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 3 years to 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: Please upgrade ports-mgmt/synth to 2.00

[Kurt Jaeger]

Hi!

> > Please update ports-mgmt/synth to 2.00, which was just recently
> > tagged. This will bring in Flavors support.
> 
> The PR has a patch and was test-build on cur, 10.3i.
> 
> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=224049

It hit the tree, thanks to all!

-- 
p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 3 years to 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: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

[Eric Masson]

Adam Weinberger  writes:

Hi Adam,

> Given that most people don't participate and test patches while they're
> in review, you have to expect that some bugs will only surface when it
> lands in HEAD. This is precisely why we have quarterly branches, and why
> we recommend that most people stay on quarterly.

For starters, the following is not intended to troll anyone.

FLAVORS mechanism seems to be a quite nice tool to improve ports, but
the landing in ports/head raises few questions.

Is ports/head becoming the alter ego of src/head (possible breakages or
disruptive new features from time to time) ?

If yes, this should be written down in the handbook (chapter on ports
still states ports/head for svn retrieval) and quarterly ports branches
should be publicized.

I've just switched to 2017Q4 on my main 11-STABLE box by digging in
various ports docs after I've read this very post I'm answering to.

I thus got rid of ports/head FLAVORS related issues (portmaster is my
tool of choice as poudriere seems a bit overkill for my needs).

Thanks to all involved.

Éric Masson

-- 
 Cela m'a même déjà valu quelques discussions animés avec mes paires
 -+- FC in  : Tête à tête ou tête à queue ? -+-
___
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: Linux KMS/DRM and Google DRM

[Ivan Klymenko]

В Sun, 3 Dec 2017 19:43:41 +0800
blubee blubeeme  пишет:

> Google is trying to get HDMI drm upstream into the linux kernel:
> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item=2017-Google-Intel-HDCP-DRM
> 
> As we see this coming, how would the guys on FreeBSD working on that
> Linux kmod stuff deal when this stuff starts to creep into the linux
> kernel?

Why do not they arrange DRM directly into the eyes or brain?
___
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 Port: php-xapian-1.4.5 - install fails under DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= php=7.1

[Oliver Schonrock]

I think it's just a path issue:

[root@epsilon php-xapian]# cat /etc/make.conf
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= php=7.1

[root@epsilon php-xapian]# make reinstall
===>  Installing for php-xapian-1.4.5
===>   php-xapian-1.4.5 depends on file:
/usr/local/include/php/main/php.h - found
===>   php-xapian-1.4.5 depends on shared library: libxapian.so - found
(/usr/local/lib/libxapian.so)
===>   Registering installation for php-xapian-1.4.5
pkg-static: Unable to access file
/usr/ports/databases/php-xapian/work/stage/usr/local/share/xapian/php7/xapian.php:No
such file or directory
*** Error code 74

This makes it work (but I am not convinced it's quite right?)

[root@epsilon php-xapian]# mkdir -p
/usr/ports/databases/php-xapian/work/stage/usr/local/share/xapian/php7
[root@epsilon php-xapian]# ln -s ../php/xapian.php
/usr/ports/databases/php-xapian/work/stage/usr/local/share/xapian/php7/xapian.php
[root@epsilon php-xapian]# make install
===>  Installing for php-xapian-1.4.5
===>   php-xapian-1.4.5 depends on file:
/usr/local/include/php/main/php.h - found
===>   php-xapian-1.4.5 depends on shared library: libxapian.so - found
(/usr/local/lib/libxapian.so)
===>  Checking if php-xapian already installed
===>   Registering installation for php-xapian-1.4.5
Installing php-xapian-1.4.5...


Also make install doesn't do the usual:

echo "extension=xapian.so" >> /usr/local/etc/php/ext-20-xapian.ini

should it?


-- 
Oliver Schönrock
email: oli...@schonrocks.com



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Linux KMS/DRM and Google DRM

[blubee blubeeme]

Google is trying to get HDMI drm upstream into the linux kernel:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item=2017-Google-Intel-HDCP-DRM

As we see this coming, how would the guys on FreeBSD working on that Linux
kmod stuff deal when this stuff starts to creep into the linux kernel?
___
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
+-+
emulators/fs-uae-launcher   | 2.4.1   | 2.8.4
+-+


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: Please upgrade ports-mgmt/synth to 2.00

[Kurt Jaeger]

Hi!

> Please update ports-mgmt/synth to 2.00, which was just recently
> tagged. This will bring in Flavors support.

The PR has a patch and was test-build on cur, 10.3i.

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=224049

-- 
p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 3 years to 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"