Re: Building interactive ports with poudriere

2018-01-30 Thread Yasuhiro KIMURA
From: Don Lewis Subject: Re: Building interactive ports with poudriere Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 16:31:26 -0800 (PST) >> have you tried: DISABLE_LICENSES=yes > > Or LICENSES_ACCEPTED=NONE in the poudriere.d/make.conf. I've got > LICENSES_ACCEPTED=jgraph in mine. It may be

Re: Building interactive ports with poudriere

2018-01-30 Thread Don Lewis
On 30 Jan, Matthias Fechner wrote: > Am 30.01.2018 um 19:32 schrieb Yasuhiro KIMURA: >> I would like to build security/bruteforceblocker with poudriere. This >> port have one options. But it has nothing to do with my question. The >> source of problem is license information. There is no license >>

Re: Use of undeclared identifier 'fpgetmask'

2018-01-30 Thread bob prohaska
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 11:15:24PM +0100, Jan Beich wrote: > > CHECK_FUNCTION_EXISTS(fpsetmask HAVE_FPSETMASK) > > which is under the following caveat > > * ``check_function_exists()`` only verifies linking, it does not verify > that the function is declared in system headers. > >

Re: Use of undeclared identifier 'fpgetmask'

2018-01-30 Thread Jan Beich
bob prohaska writes: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:14:26AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:48:48AM -0800, bob prohaska wrote: >> > > What happens if you force inclusion by deleting #ifdef HAVE_IEEEFP_H? >> > > >> > After commenting out the test,

Re: Building interactive ports with poudriere

2018-01-30 Thread Yasuhiro KIMURA
From: Matthias Fechner Subject: Re: Building interactive ports with poudriere Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:38:08 +0100 > have you tried: DISABLE_LICENSES=yes Oh, It's just what I would like to know. I fully understood explaining in detail helps me to get right answer. Anyway

Re: Building interactive ports with poudriere

2018-01-30 Thread Matthias Fechner
Am 30.01.2018 um 19:32 schrieb Yasuhiro KIMURA: > I would like to build security/bruteforceblocker with poudriere. This > port have one options. But it has nothing to do with my question. The > source of problem is license information. There is no license > information about this software either

Re: Building interactive ports with poudriere

2018-01-30 Thread Yasuhiro KIMURA
From: blubee blubeeme Subject: Re: Building interactive ports with poudriere Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 12:57:06 +0800 > I don't think that you can do what you are asking but with the bulk build > options, > you can use poudriere options [poudriere options] for a list From:

Re: Use of undeclared identifier 'fpgetmask'

2018-01-30 Thread bob prohaska
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:14:26AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:48:48AM -0800, bob prohaska wrote: > > > What happens if you force inclusion by deleting #ifdef HAVE_IEEEFP_H? > > > > > After commenting out the test, running make clean and restarting a single- > >

Re: Building interactive ports with poudriere

2018-01-30 Thread Mathieu Arnold
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 04:04:56AM +0900, Yasuhiro KIMURA wrote: > Hello. > > Poudriere sets 'BATCH=yes' when it builds ports. But there are some > ports that can't be built with batch mode. Then are there any way to > build such interactive ports with poudriere or do I have to build > other

Re: Building interactive ports with poudriere

2018-01-30 Thread mokhi
Hi :) Not sure if I got your question well. (I assume you want to choose options interactively while using poudriere for testing ports). AFAIK, There's an option -c for that that runs `make config` before building the port (you can then select options interactively). Best regards.

FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date

2018-01-30 Thread 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,