Re: Boost versions
Call for testing for Boost-1.76.0! WIP overlay for boost: https://github.com/fluffykhv/freebsd-ports-boost Pkg repository for boost: https://build.dimapanov.com/packages/130amd64-default/ Pkgs have some languages defaults set: DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=java=11 DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=lua=5.3 DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=php=7.4 DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=python=3.8 DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=python3=3.8 DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=ruby=2.7 All OPTIONS by default -- Dima. (desktop, kde, x11, office, ports-secteam)@FreeBSD team (flu...@freebsd.org, https://t.me/dima_panov) > On Wednesday, Apr 21, 2021 at 12:25 AM, Li-Wen Hsu (mailto:lw...@freebsd.org)> wrote: > Good news, I was talking with fluffy about the office@'s > maintainership of boost ports and realized that he has been working on > it for a while and now we have a public repository for calling for > tests: > > https://github.com/fluffykhv/freebsd-ports-boost > > Please help test and we might need to form another group to maintain > boost and its compatibility with other ports, please let us know if > you're interested. > > Nest, > Li-Wen signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Boost versions
Call for testing for Boost-1.76.0! WIP overlay for boost: https://github.com/fluffykhv/freebsd-ports-boost Pkg repository for boost: https://build.dimapanov.com/packages/130amd64-default/ Pkgs have some languages defaults set: DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=java=11 DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=lua=5.3 DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=php=7.4 DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=python=3.8 DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=python3=3.8 DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=ruby=2.7 All OPTIONS by default -- Dima. (desktop, kde, x11, office, ports-secteam)@FreeBSD team (flu...@freebsd.org, https://t.me/dima_panov) > On Wednesday, Apr 21, 2021 at 12:25 AM, Li-Wen Hsu (mailto:lw...@freebsd.org)> wrote: > Good news, I was talking with fluffy about the office@'s > maintainership of boost ports and realized that he has been working on > it for a while and now we have a public repository for calling for > tests: > > https://github.com/fluffykhv/freebsd-ports-boost > > Please help test and we might need to form another group to maintain > boost and its compatibility with other ports, please let us know if > you're interested. > > Nest, > Li-Wen signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Boost versions
Good news, I was talking with fluffy about the office@'s maintainership of boost ports and realized that he has been working on it for a while and now we have a public repository for calling for tests: https://github.com/fluffykhv/freebsd-ports-boost Please help test and we might need to form another group to maintain boost and its compatibility with other ports, please let us know if you're interested. Nest, Li-Wen ___ 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: Boost versions
On 17-4-2021 13:09, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 6:58 PM Kurt Jaeger wrote: Hi! Ceph has moved to Boost 1.75, so now it is build with the project. Which is of course a pity. Are there any plans to also get Boost 1.75 in ports? There is this one PR which touches the topic: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246106 It looks like a major undertaking! Why is that? If I look at what is in phabricator, the largest part is diffs on the plist? I don't think office@ currently has enough manpower to maintain boost ports. I suggest we need to seek a new maintainer or form a group to maintain it. I am also interested in updating boost, but I don't think I can maintain it solely. I can help on porting, allocating resource to test, but I don't think I can fix all the issues during upgrading and exp-run myself alone. I hope the maintenance of the complex ports like this can be a team work. Is anyone interested in joining the effort? I am importing boost 1.75 raw into Ceph, and build it there. That seems to work for what ceph needs. There used to be several versions of Boost in parallel. So perhaps that is the best way to avoid having to deal with ABI/API breakage... After that it is up to the maintainers of the dependant packages to update their package and start using boost-1.75. The report in bugzilla suggests that that is all what other maintainers ask. Or am I too simple in thinking this? --WjW ___ 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: Boost versions
On 17-4-2021 14:16, Kurt Jaeger wrote: Getting the port to build is one thing. Right that is probably not very complicated. But the API/ABI changes are indeed a pain. Reason for all kinds of trouble with Ceph as well. There used to be several versions of Boost in parallel. Yes. I have no idea how easy that would be. Neither do I, it is just a vague recollection. But there must be more libraries with that same challenge? The bigger part is, as you described: So perhaps that is the best way to avoid having to deal with ABI/API breakage... After that it is up to the maintainers of the dependant packages to update their package and start using boost-1.75. There is the implicit assumption that a patch that updates boost for all the dependent ports should also provide fixes if those ports fail to build after the update. That is the major task. There are "only" 490 ports that have boost in their Makefile. Or am I too simple in thinking this? No. The normal way would be to provide the patch, testbuild all the depends, list the broken ports in the PR and then a small group of folks can try to fix them one by one. I have no experience in that. Keeping up with Ceph is already quite a task, since that is a very fast moving task. --WjW ___ 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: Boost versions
Hi! > > > > Ceph has moved to Boost 1.75, so now it is build with the project. > > > > Which is of course a pity. [...] > > > It looks like a major undertaking! > Why is that? > If I look at what is in phabricator, the largest part is diffs on the > plist? Getting the port to build is one thing. > There used to be several versions of Boost in parallel. Yes. I have no idea how easy that would be. The bigger part is, as you described: > So perhaps that is the best way to avoid having to deal with ABI/API > breakage... > After that it is up to the maintainers of the dependant packages to > update their package and start using boost-1.75. There is the implicit assumption that a patch that updates boost for all the dependent ports should also provide fixes if those ports fail to build after the update. That is the major task. > Or am I too simple in thinking this? No. The normal way would be to provide the patch, testbuild all the depends, list the broken ports in the PR and then a small group of folks can try to fix them one by one. -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372Now what ? ___ 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: Boost versions
On 17-4-2021 13:09, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 6:58 PM Kurt Jaeger wrote: Hi! Ceph has moved to Boost 1.75, so now it is build with the project. Which is of course a pity. Are there any plans to also get Boost 1.75 in ports? There is this one PR which touches the topic: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246106 It looks like a major undertaking! Why is that? If I look at what is in phabricator, the largest part is diffs on the plist? I don't think office@ currently has enough manpower to maintain boost ports. I suggest we need to seek a new maintainer or form a group to maintain it. I am also interested in updating boost, but I don't think I can maintain it solely. I can help on porting, allocating resource to test, but I don't think I can fix all the issues during upgrading and exp-run myself alone. I hope the maintenance of the complex ports like this can be a team work. Is anyone interested in joining the effort? I am importing boost 1.75 raw into Ceph, and build it there. That seems to work for what ceph needs. There used to be several versions of Boost in parallel. So perhaps that is the best way to avoid having to deal with ABI/API breakage... After that it is up to the maintainers of the dependant packages to update their package and start using boost-1.75. The report in bugzilla suggests that that is all what other maintainers ask. Or am I too simple in thinking this? --WjW ___ 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: Boost versions
On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 6:58 PM Kurt Jaeger wrote: > > Hi! > > > Ceph has moved to Boost 1.75, so now it is build with the project. > > Which is of course a pity. > > > > Are there any plans to also get Boost 1.75 in ports? > > There is this one PR which touches the topic: > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246106 > > It looks like a major undertaking! I don't think office@ currently has enough manpower to maintain boost ports. I suggest we need to seek a new maintainer or form a group to maintain it. I am also interested in updating boost, but I don't think I can maintain it solely. I can help on porting, allocating resource to test, but I don't think I can fix all the issues during upgrading and exp-run myself alone. I hope the maintenance of the complex ports like this can be a team work. Is anyone interested in joining the effort? Best, Li-Wen ___ 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: Boost versions
Hi! > Ceph has moved to Boost 1.75, so now it is build with the project. > Which is of course a pity. > > Are there any plans to also get Boost 1.75 in ports? There is this one PR which touches the topic: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246106 It looks like a major undertaking! -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372Now what ? ___ 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"
