Re: INDEX build failed for 11.x

From: Ports Index build Subject: INDEX build failed for 11.x Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 00:05:39 GMT > INDEX build failed with errors: > Generating INDEX-11 - please wait..--- describe.accessibility --- > --- describe.arabic --- > --- describe.archivers --- > --- describe.astro --- > ---

INDEX build failed for 11.x

INDEX build failed with errors: Generating INDEX-11 - please wait..--- describe.accessibility --- --- describe.arabic --- --- describe.archivers --- --- describe.astro --- --- describe.audio --- --- describe.benchmarks --- --- describe.biology --- --- describe.cad --- --- describe.chinese --- ---

Re: Begone, accursed poudriere partitions!

On 4/7/21 2:26 PM, driesm.michi...@gmail.com wrote: [...] The easiest fix is to delete the zfs datasets that poudriere created. You can find the correct dataset with # zfs list And then most probably # zfs destroy -r zroot/poudriere [...] Thank you for your assistance!

RE: Begone, accursed poudriere partitions!

> -Original Message- > From: owner-freebsd-po...@freebsd.org > On Behalf Of George Mitchell > Sent: Wednesday, 7 April 2021 20:18 > To: freebsd ports > Subject: Begone, accursed poudriere partitions! > > On one occasion, probably a couple of years ago, I tried poudriere out. > I

Begone, accursed poudriere partitions!

On one occasion, probably a couple of years ago, I tried poudriere out. I decided it was too heavy for my use case and uninstalled it. Ever since, though, every time my build machine reboots, *something* recreates a whole poudriere tree on my ZFS file system, with a total of ten mountpoints

Help with changing gitlab based download urls in ports

Dear all, gitlab seems to have deactivated a path FreeBSD is currently using to download packages hosted on gitlab.com. This also causes gitlab-ce to be not fetchable anymore. I already created a review to fix this here (sry, it also includes an upgrade of gitlab-ce, but without the upgrade,

New 2021Q2 branch

Hi, The 2021Q2 branch has been created. It means that the next update on the quarterly packages will be on the 2021Q2 branch. A lot of things happened in the last three months: - pkg 1.16.3 - New USES: kodi mpi - New keywords: exec postexec postunexec preexec preunexec touch unexec - New default

Re: Updating poudriere to use gitup

* Carmel [20210407 06:03]: > Is there a 'How-to" posted on how to convert poudriere to use 'gitup' or > even "git" if necessary? Poudriere doesn't support gitup (so far?) Your options are to use methods git or null, see poudriere-ports(8). To use gitup with poudriere, configure your ports with

Re: Updating poudriere to use gitup

Hi! > With the change in the FreeBSD ports system, I have started to use > "gitup". I have this working fine. Unfortunately, I cannot figure out > how to get poudriere, version 3.3.99.20210303_1 to use 'gitup' too. It > insists on using 'portsnap'. This is on a FreeBSD 11.4-p9 system. > > Is

Updating poudriere to use gitup

With the change in the FreeBSD ports system, I have started to use "gitup". I have this working fine. Unfortunately, I cannot figure out how to get poudriere, version 3.3.99.20210303_1 to use 'gitup' too. It insists on using 'portsnap'. This is on a FreeBSD 11.4-p9 system. Is there a 'How-to"

FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date

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,

Re: Any plan to fix ports git main history compatibility with old GitHub master?

Thanks! I was able to fix that this morning and I just merged back from main and everything is working fine. *Eric Turgeon* On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 2:08 PM Ulrich Spörlein wrote: > On Mon, 2021-04-05 at 21:45:57 +, Brooks Davis wrote: > >On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 05:33:08PM -0300, Eric

Re: FreeCAD

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 22:14:21 +0200 Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote: > ## LuMiWa via freebsd-ports (freebsd-ports@freebsd.org): > > > I try to install cad/freecad and it pulls lang/Python 27. > > FreeCAD itself depends on Python "3.6 or higher". What exactly did > you do? > > > I didn't

Re: FreeCAD

## LuMiWa via freebsd-ports (freebsd-ports@freebsd.org): > I try to install cad/freecad and it pulls lang/Python 27. FreeCAD itself depends on Python "3.6 or higher". What exactly did you do? > I didn't install. So you're sying it's not relevant anymore anyway? Regards, Christoph -- Spare

The whole git migration of ports

Hey there, I wanted to reach out to the people both doing the massive migration, as well as the people covering answers to frequent questions here on the lists, and I’m sure on the forums and elsewhere. There’s something important to know: Thank you. Seriously. Open source is often

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On 4/6/21 10:25 AM, Michael Gmelin wrote: > Hi Jose, > > On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 08:33:27 -0700 > Jose Quinteiro wrote: > > ... > This information is not correct. > You are absolutely right. Sorry for the bad information! Thanks, Jose ___

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

Hi Jose, On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 08:33:27 -0700 Jose Quinteiro wrote: > On 4/6/21 6:28 AM, Michael Gmelin wrote: > > Example: > > > > git config core.excludesFile=$HOME/.gitexcludes > > echo .sujournal >>$HOME/.gitexcludes > > > > In case you don't want to override the excludesFile setting,

Re: Any plan to fix ports git main history compatibility with old GitHub master?

On Mon, 2021-04-05 at 21:45:57 +, Brooks Davis wrote: On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 05:33:08PM -0300, Eric Turgeon wrote: Today when trying to sync the GhostBSD ports tree with the FreeBSD ports tree, I found out the main branch history is not compatible with the old GitHub master. Any plan to

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 18:40:44 +0200 (CEST) Marco Beishuizen wrote: > On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Helge Oldach wrote: > > > Marco Beishuizen wrote on Tue, 06 Apr 2021 15:59:48 +0200 (CEST): > >> To avoid possible future problems I placed .sujournal into > >> $HOME/.gitexcludes as you

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Helge Oldach wrote: Marco Beishuizen wrote on Tue, 06 Apr 2021 15:59:48 +0200 (CEST): To avoid possible future problems I placed .sujournal into $HOME/.gitexcludes as you suggested. That would work as there is no good reason a .sujournal file would be tracked by

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On 4/6/21 6:28 AM, Michael Gmelin wrote: > Example: > > git config core.excludesFile=$HOME/.gitexcludes > echo .sujournal >>$HOME/.gitexcludes > > In case you don't want to override the excludesFile setting, alter one > of the config files in the default global location >

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Michael Gmelin wrote: Sorry, I forgot: git checkout main Once done, just regularly: git pull --ff-only Explanation: "clone" is roughly equivalent to "init + remote add + checkout". Separating the three steps will allow for the -f (--force) option on "remote add"

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Helge Oldach wrote: Sorry, I forgot: git checkout main Once done, just regularly: git pull --ff-only Explanation: "clone" is roughly equivalent to "init + remote add + checkout". Separating the three steps will allow for the -f (--force) option on "remote add"

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 15:12:42 +0200 (CEST) free...@oldach.net (Helge Oldach) wrote: > Marco Beishuizen wrote on Tue, 06 Apr 2021 14:25:51 +0200 (CEST): > > On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Helge Oldach wrote: > > > cd /usr/ports > > > git init . > > > git remote add -t main -f freebsd > > >

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

* Marco Beishuizen [20210406 14:35]: > Pulling isn't possible either: > > ... > There is no tracking information for the current branch. > Please specify which branch you want to rebase against. > See git-pull(1) for details. > > git pull > > If you wish to set tracking information for

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Felix Palmen wrote: This is meant to avoid cloning, you can just `pull` after adding a remote to an empty repository. Pulling isn't possible either: ... There is no tracking information for the current branch. Please specify which branch you want to rebase

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

* Marco Beishuizen [20210406 14:25]: > On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Helge Oldach wrote: > > > cd /usr/ports > > git init . > > git remote add -t main -f freebsd https://git.freebsd.org/ports.git > > This created new .git subdirectories but still cannot clone into /usr/ports. This is meant to

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Helge Oldach wrote: cd /usr/ports git init . git remote add -t main -f freebsd https://git.freebsd.org/ports.git Kind regards Helge This created new .git subdirectories but still cannot clone into /usr/ports. -- The minute a man is convinced that he is

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

* Marco Beishuizen [20210406 14:01]: > From https://git.freebsd.org/ports.git. > It's up since yesterday. Cloning after totally emptying /usr/ports worked > fine, but today git complained about corrupt files in the .git subdirectory > so I decided to start over again. This was the first commit:

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

> On 6. Apr 2021, at 13:10, Marco Beishuizen > wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm trying to git clone the portstree into /usr/ports. /usr/ports is > a separate filesystem so it contains a .sujournal file. But now git > complains "fatal: destination path 'ports' already exists and is not > an empty

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Felix Palmen wrote: Where did you clone from? The official repo is only available for a few hours now. So, if you cloned from a mirror (Github, Gitlab, …?), some breakage with the transition seems plausible. Ah, please no CC, thanks. From

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

* Marco Beishuizen [20210406 13:47]: > I did clone it yesterday but today a git pull resulted in a corrupt file for > some reason, so I decided to start over. Where did you clone from? The official repo is only available for a few hours now. So, if you cloned from a mirror (Github, Gitlab, …?),

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Hans Petter Selasky wrote: Not sure if it helps, but did you try to add a "/", like: git clone /usr/ports/ This doesn't make a difference. Isn't there a way to force git to clone it into /usr/ports? Regards, Marco -- When the usher noticed a man stretched

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021, the wise Felix Palmen wrote: Normally, you should clone only once and use `git pull` afterwards, so no problem here. Furthermore, if you don't really need git but just want to keep your ports tree up to date, you might want to have a look at net/gitup instead. It's

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

* Marco Beishuizen [20210406 13:09]: > So my question is what to do next? Recreating a new .sujournal every time a > ports tree needs to be cloned is quite annoying. Normally, you should clone only once and use `git pull` afterwards, so no problem here. Furthermore, if you don't really need git

Re: cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

On 4/6/21 1:09 PM, Marco Beishuizen wrote: Hi, I'm trying to git clone the portstree into /usr/ports. /usr/ports is a separate filesystem so it contains a .sujournal file. But now git complains "fatal: destination path 'ports' already exists and is not an empty directory." So my question

cannot git clone into /usr/ports when separate filesystem

Hi, I'm trying to git clone the portstree into /usr/ports. /usr/ports is a separate filesystem so it contains a .sujournal file. But now git complains "fatal: destination path 'ports' already exists and is not an empty directory." So my question is what to do next? Recreating a new

FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date

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,

Re: poudriere and gitup

Tatsuki Makino wrote: > -U default value can be changed in ${LOCALBASE}/etc/poudriere.conf, cannot it? > The default value is defined in common.sh. > > GIT_PORTSURL="git.FreeBSD.org/ports.git" > And > poudriere ports -c -m git+https -B main > Yes, you can put GIT_PORTSURL into poudriere.conf and

Re: Any plan to fix ports git main history compatibility with old GitHub master?

[The original send attempt for this failed somehow.] Eric Turgeon ericbsd at freebsd.org wrote on Mon Apr 5 20:33:22 UTC 2021 : > Today when trying to sync the GhostBSD ports tree with the FreeBSD ports > tree, I found out the main branch history is not compatible with the old > GitHub master. >

Re: Any plan to fix ports git main history compatibility with old GitHub master?

___ 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 and gitup

Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports wrote on 2021/04/06 06:37: > poudriere ports -c -B main -m git -U 'https://git.FreeBSD.org/ports.git' -p > freebsd > -U default value can be changed in ${LOCALBASE}/etc/poudriere.conf, cannot it? The default value is defined in common.sh.

Re: Any plan to fix ports git main history compatibility with old GitHub master?

On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 05:33:08PM -0300, Eric Turgeon wrote: > Today when trying to sync the GhostBSD ports tree with the FreeBSD ports > tree, I found out the main branch history is not compatible with the old > GitHub master. > > Any plan to migrate to main with hold git history as we had with

Re: poudriere and gitup

On 05/04/21 23:26, Jose Quinteiro wrote: On 4/4/21 7:35 AM, Carmel wrote: On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 12:18:27 +, Rene Ladan stated: ... Is or will poudriere default to using net/gitup in FreeBSD 13? Is there a way to configure it in the "poudriere.conf" file? There's a "git" option for the "-m

Re: poudriere and gitup

On 4/4/21 7:35 AM, Carmel wrote: > On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 12:18:27 +, Rene Ladan stated: > ... > Is or will poudriere default to using net/gitup in FreeBSD 13? Is there > a way to configure it in the "poudriere.conf" file? > There's a "git" option for the "-m method" command-line switch of

Any plan to fix ports git main history compatibility with old GitHub master?

Today when trying to sync the GhostBSD ports tree with the FreeBSD ports tree, I found out the main branch history is not compatible with the old GitHub master. Any plan to migrate to main with hold git history as we had with freebsd-src? *Eric TurgeonFreeBSD ports committer* www.freebsd.org

Re: Building www/chromium [fake-pkg] Error code 1

On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 05:15:32AM +0900, Tatsuki Makino wrote: > bob prohaska wrote on 2021/04/06 03:03: > > When trying to compile www/chromium on an 8GB Pi4 using > > make -j4 -DBATCH MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES=yes > > > make.log & > > The ports go wrong if you use -j 4 for

Re: Building www/chromium [fake-pkg] Error code 1

bob prohaska wrote on 2021/04/06 03:03: > When trying to compile www/chromium on an 8GB Pi4 using > make -j4 -DBATCH MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES=yes > make.log & The ports go wrong if you use -j 4 for make. The value can be adjusted with MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER=4 , etc.

Building www/chromium [fake-pkg] Error code 1

When trying to compile www/chromium on an 8GB Pi4 using make -j4 -DBATCH MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES=yes > make.log & the process stopped with ===> Registering installation for bash-5.1.4_1 as automatic pkg-static: open(/home/bob/freebsd-ports/shells/bash/work/.metadir): No

Re: gitup on two machines

Maybe the second machine is up to date. Or do you mean that gitup does not exit but keeps waiting forever? Regards, Ronald Van: "@lbutlr" Datum: 5 april 2021 18:49 Aan: FreeBSD Onderwerp: gitup on two machines I have tow machines, both on 12.2-RELEASE Running `gitup ports` on one

gitup on two machines

I have tow machines, both on 12.2-RELEASE Running `gitup ports` on one server updates the ports tree. Running the the same command with the same configuration (pointing at the GitHub mirror in both cases) just sits there with no feedback and does nothing, even if I run it with a -v 2 flag.

Re: gitip usage.

On 04 Apr 2021, at 10:46, Jeffrey Bouquet via freebsd-ports wrote: > running 12.2 STABLE, Curious, why are you not running the RELEASE version of 12.2? -- "Are you pondering what I'm pondering?" "I think so, Brain. But Trojans won’t arrive on the scene for another 300 years."

FreeBSD Port: lang/cmucl

Hello, I am trying to port cmucl to RPI4-B RELEASE-13.0-RC3 (arm64-aarch64), but of course I can't as port's and host's architectures are different. Any method for cross-building/compiling this port? or any other port? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org

Read-only https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/ accessible now; push access not reported as available yet

https://cgit.freebsd.org/ shows: QUOTE NameDescription IdleLinks development doc FreeBSD documentation tree 16 hourssummarylogtree ports FreeBSD ports tree 57 min. summarylogtree src FreeBSD source tree 3 days summarylogtree END QUOTE

Re: poudriere and gitup

On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 10:35:25AM -0400, Carmel wrote: > On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 12:18:27 +, Rene Ladan stated: > >On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Carmel wrote: > >> I am using "poudriere-devel", version 3.3.99.20210303_1 on a FreeBSD > >> 11.4-RELEASE-p8 amd64 machine. I was told that

Re: FreeBSD Manual Pages site: missing manuals

Thanks Makino! It makes sense and my investigation is over :) Thanks, Nuno Teixeira Tatsuki Makino escreveu no dia segunda, 5/04/2021 à(s) 05:25: > probably > > "releng/12.2" branch: Thu Sep 10 23:56:59 2020 UTC > Add gitup 0.87: Tue Dec 29 12:53:20 2020 UTC > >

Re: FreeBSD Manual Pages site: missing manuals

probably "releng/12.2" branch: Thu Sep 10 23:56:59 2020 UTC Add gitup 0.87: Tue Dec 29 12:53:20 2020 UTC ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to

FreeBSD Manual Pages site: missing manuals

Hello, I have an interesting PR saying that FreeBSD Manual Pages site can't find gitup (ports) manpage. It also couldn't find gopass (ports). Any hints why

FreeCAD

Hi! I try to install cad/freecad and it pulls lang/Python 27. I thought that we are done with version 27. I didn't install. Thank you. -- “We live in a world where there is more and more information, and less and less meaning.” Jean Baudrillard ___

Re: gitip usage.

Carmel carmel_ny at outlook.com wrote on Sun Apr 4 18:05:17 UTC 2021 : > On Sun, 4 Apr 2021 19:49:04 +0200 (CEST), Helge Oldach stated: > >Jeffrey Bouquet via freebsd-ports wrote on Sun, 04 Apr 2021 18:46:15 > >+0200 (CEST): > >> running 12.2 STABLE, I would like a complete DEFAULTS and PORTS >

Re: gitip usage.

On Sun, 4 Apr 2021 19:49:04 +0200 (CEST), Helge Oldach stated: >Jeffrey Bouquet via freebsd-ports wrote on Sun, 04 Apr 2021 18:46:15 >+0200 (CEST): >> running 12.2 STABLE, I would like a complete DEFAULTS and PORTS >> example for gitup.conf. > > "defaults" : { > "host"

Re: gitip usage.

* Jeffrey Bouquet via freebsd-ports [20210404 16:46]: > [...] which invocation would work that I've been able to make > update the ports past april 1 No matter what you're trying to use, there are no updates *yet*, transition to GIT is still in progress. See also:

gitip usage.

running 12.2 STABLE, I would like a complete DEFAULTS and PORTS example for gitup.conf. forums and this list provide changes [ tersely or sed templating tersely, ] , but no latest indication in its entirety of which invocation would work that I've been able to make update the ports past

Re: poudriere and gitup

On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 12:18:27 +, Rene Ladan stated: >On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Carmel wrote: >> I am using "poudriere-devel", version 3.3.99.20210303_1 on a FreeBSD >> 11.4-RELEASE-p8 amd64 machine. I was told that poudriere uses >> 'portsnap' by default. What, do I have to do if

Specific svn/git package update use case

Hi all, I've been following the discussion about the git upgrade to the ports repro but am not clear about how it impacts my use case. At the moment I track ports on the revision that the Freebsd build cluster uses to build the "latest" package set. I take the currently reported latest build

Re: No update for a day on ports?

Felix Palmen felix at palmen-it.de wrote on Sat Apr 3 20:35:46 UTC 2021 : > * Mark Millard via freebsd-ports [20210403 > 10:02]: > > Felix Palmen felix at palmen-it.de wrote on > > > There was an announcement to deprecate it, but it's still built with > > > releng/13 so far, and I'd be

Re: No update for a day on ports?

* Mark Millard via freebsd-ports [20210403 10:02]: > Felix Palmen felix at palmen-it.de wrote on > > There was an announcement to deprecate it, but it's still built with > > releng/13 so far, and I'd be surprised if the snapshots for it wouldn't > > be available any more. Deprecation of portsnap

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 03/04/21 18:10, LuMiWa via freebsd-ports wrote: It is not good. The last was I did red was "portsnap" stay still for awhile. I am portsnap and portmaster user for years. Where should I find information what will happened with /usr/ports. Will gitup just replace, update? I am using FreeBSD

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:10:33PM -0400, LuMiWa wrote: > On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 05:51:29 -0600 > The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:00:29PM +0200, Guido Falsi via > > freebsd-ports wrote: > > > On 03/04/21 11:28, Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports wrote: > > > > On

Re: No update for a day on ports?

Felix Palmen felix at palmen-it.de wrote on Fri Apr 2 22:49:58 UTC 2021 : > * Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports [20210403 > 00:35]: > > On 02/04/21 23:16, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: > > > but I use pkg/portsnap . > > > > > > How does that affect us? > > > > AFAIK you can't use it

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 05:51:29 -0600 The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: > On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:00:29PM +0200, Guido Falsi via > freebsd-ports wrote: > > On 03/04/21 11:28, Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports wrote: > > > On 03/04/21 02:24, The Doctor wrote: > > >> On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 03/04/21 13:50, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 11:28:23AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: On 03/04/21 02:24, The Doctor wrote: On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 02:05:45AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: On 03/04/21 01:35, The Doctor wrote: On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:35:57AM +0200,

Re: poudriere and gitup

On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Carmel wrote: > I am using "poudriere-devel", version 3.3.99.20210303_1 on a FreeBSD > 11.4-RELEASE-p8 amd64 machine. I was told that poudriere uses > 'portsnap' by default. What, do I have to do if I want it to defer to > "gitup" {devel/py-git-up}

Re: poudriere and gitup

gitup is not yet an option for creating the ports tree in poudriere: $ zfs snapshot zroot/poudriere/ports/default@svn $ zfs send zroot/poudriere/ports/default@svn | zfs recv zroot/poudriere/ports/svn $ poudriere ports -d $ poudriere ports -c -U https://git.freebsd.org/ports.git -m git -B main

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:00:29PM +0200, Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports wrote: > On 03/04/21 11:28, Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports wrote: > > On 03/04/21 02:24, The Doctor wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 02:05:45AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: > >>> On 03/04/21 01:35, The Doctor wrote: > >>> > >>>

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 11:28:23AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: > On 03/04/21 02:24, The Doctor wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 02:05:45AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: > >> On 03/04/21 01:35, The Doctor wrote: > >>> On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:35:57AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: > On 02/04/21

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 06:23:00AM +0200, Helge Oldach wrote: > The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote on Fri, 02 Apr 2021 23:16:53 +0200 (CEST): > > Git is ready, > > Is it? > > # git clone -o freebsd https://git.freebsd.org/ports.git > Cloning into 'ports'... > fatal: repository

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 11:01:18PM -0700, Mark Millard via freebsd-ports wrote: > > > On 2021-Apr-2, at 20:24, The Doctor wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 07:45:56AM +0600, Muhammad Moinur Rahman wrote: > >> Once it is publicly mentioned that the conversion is completed run the > >>

poudriere and gitup

I am using "poudriere-devel", version 3.3.99.20210303_1 on a FreeBSD 11.4-RELEASE-p8 amd64 machine. I was told that poudriere uses 'portsnap' by default. What, do I have to do if I want it to defer to "gitup" {devel/py-git-up} instead? -- Carmel pgpagGmZ3Dx1s.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 03/04/21 11:28, Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports wrote: On 03/04/21 02:24, The Doctor wrote: On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 02:05:45AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: On 03/04/21 01:35, The Doctor wrote: Please install gitup and read it's man page, it's straight forward. -- Guido Falsi Results:

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 03/04/21 06:23, Helge Oldach wrote: The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote on Fri, 02 Apr 2021 23:16:53 +0200 (CEST): Git is ready, Is it? # git clone -o freebsd https://git.freebsd.org/ports.git Cloning into 'ports'... fatal: repository 'https://git.freebsd.org/ports.git/' not found # Check

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 03/04/21 02:24, The Doctor wrote: On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 02:05:45AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: On 03/04/21 01:35, The Doctor wrote: On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:35:57AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: On 02/04/21 23:16, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 04:45:00PM +0200,

FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date

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,

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 2021-Apr-2, at 20:24, The Doctor wrote: > On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 07:45:56AM +0600, Muhammad Moinur Rahman wrote: >> Once it is publicly mentioned that the conversion is completed run the >> following command: >> >> sed -e '/github.com/d' -e 's/freebsd\/freebsd-//g'

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 07:45:56AM +0600, Muhammad Moinur Rahman wrote: > Once it is publicly mentioned that the conversion is completed run the > following command: > > sed -e '/github.com/d' -e 's/freebsd\/freebsd-//g' /usr/local/etc/gitup.conf > > then do `gitup ports` > > Kind Regards, >

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 2021-Apr-2, at 18:20, The Doctor wrote: > On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 05:54:48PM -0700, Mark Millard via freebsd-ports > wrote: >> >> >> On 2021-Apr-2, at 17:41, Mark Millard wrote: >> >>> The Doctor doctor at doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote on >>> Sat Apr 3 00:27:42 UTC 2021 : >>> >>> Results:

Re: No update for a day on ports?

Once it is publicly mentioned that the conversion is completed run the following command: sed -e '/github.com/d' -e 's/freebsd\/freebsd-//g' /usr/local/etc/gitup.conf then do `gitup ports` Kind Regards, Moin > On 3 Apr, 2021, at 07:20, The Doctor via freebsd-ports > wrote: > > On Fri, Apr

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 05:54:48PM -0700, Mark Millard via freebsd-ports wrote: > > > On 2021-Apr-2, at 17:41, Mark Millard wrote: > > > The Doctor doctor at doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote on > > Sat Apr 3 00:27:42 UTC 2021 : > > > > Results: > > > >> gitup -v 1 ports > >> # Host: github.com > >> #

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 2021-Apr-2, at 17:41, Mark Millard wrote: > The Doctor doctor at doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote on > Sat Apr 3 00:27:42 UTC 2021 : > > Results: > >> gitup -v 1 ports >> # Host: github.com >> # Port: 443 >> # Repository: /freebsd/freebsd-ports.git >> # Target: /usr/ports >> gitup:

Re: No update for a day on ports?

The Doctor doctor at doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote on Sat Apr 3 00:27:42 UTC 2021 : Results: > gitup -v 1 ports > # Host: github.com > # Port: 443 > # Repository: /freebsd/freebsd-ports.git > # Target: /usr/ports > gitup: get_commit_details: refs/heads/master doesn't exist in >

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 02:05:45AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: > On 03/04/21 01:35, The Doctor wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:35:57AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: > >> On 02/04/21 23:16, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: > >>> On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 04:45:00PM +0200, Guido Falsi via

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 03/04/21 01:35, The Doctor wrote: On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:35:57AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: On 02/04/21 23:16, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 04:45:00PM +0200, Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports wrote: On 02/04/21 15:44, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: On

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:35:57AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: > On 02/04/21 23:16, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 04:45:00PM +0200, Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports > > wrote: > >> On 02/04/21 15:44, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: > >>> On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at

Re: No update for a day on ports?

* Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports [20210403 00:35]: > On 02/04/21 23:16, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: > > but I use pkg/portsnap . > > > > How does that affect us? > > AFAIK you can't use it anymore. Use gitup. It's almost a drop-in > replacement. There was an announcement to deprecate

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 02/04/21 23:16, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 04:45:00PM +0200, Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports wrote: On 02/04/21 15:44, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 08:55:00AM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote: Hi! As a minor aside, has anyone stated

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 04:45:00PM +0200, Guido Falsi via freebsd-ports wrote: > On 02/04/21 15:44, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 08:55:00AM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >>> As a minor aside, has anyone stated the reason why the user-base of base >

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 7:36 AM Michael Gmelin wrote: > > > On 2. Apr 2021, at 16:27, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 4:53 AM Robert Huff wrote: > > >The transition has happened. > >Where do I find the authoritative guide for non-committers? > > > >

Re: No update for a day on ports?

Hi, On 4/2/21 9:44 AM, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: Then the question is : Moving forward, how do we update the ports? There are a number of ways. You can use the prebuilt git package or one of it's variants or substitutes. If you prefer to build git yourself, you can use the

Re: No update for a day on ports?

On 02/04/21 15:44, The Doctor via freebsd-ports wrote: On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 08:55:00AM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote: Hi! As a minor aside, has anyone stated the reason why the user-base of base or ports are moving to git? Yes: https://github.com/bsdimp/freebsd-git-docs/blob/main/git-why.md

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

> On 2. Apr 2021, at 16:27, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 4:53 AM Robert Huff wrote: > >> >>The transition has happened. >>Where do I find the authoritative guide for non-committers? >> >> >>Respectfully, >> >> >>

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >