Re: file not recognizing MP3 files?
On Feb 28, 2011, at 18:22, Andrew Watts wrote: It appears that version 5.05 of file is not recognizing MP3 files. On my mac, running 10.5.8, I get this: andrew@drbernice ~ $ file nanana.mp3 nanana.mp3: data Looks like this: http://bugs.gw.com/view.php?id=114 Are you on PowerPC or Intel? Could be an endian issue. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: file not recognizing MP3 files?
On 2011-03-01 03:47 , Arno Hautala wrote: and annoyingly: $ /opt/local/bin/file /usr/bin/file /opt/local/bin/file /usr/bin/file: Mach-O fat file with 2 architectures /opt/local/bin/file: Mach-O fat file with 2 architectures Interesting, I get different results: $ port -q installed file file @5.05_0 (active) $ /opt/local/bin/file --version file-5.05 magic file from /opt/local/share/misc/magic $ /usr/bin/file /usr/bin/file /opt/local/bin/file /usr/bin/file: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures /usr/bin/file (for architecture x86_64):Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64 /usr/bin/file (for architecture i386): Mach-O executable i386 /opt/local/bin/file: Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64 $ /opt/local/bin/file /usr/bin/file /opt/local/bin/file /usr/bin/file: Mach-O fat file with 2 architectures /opt/local/bin/file: data The sources for the Apple provided file command is here: http://opensource.apple.com/source/file/file-39/ Would someone care to compare the sources and magic file? Rainer ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
Am 01.03.11 03:33, schrieb Arno Hautala: I say drop the version options, make perl5 install 5.12, and any newer version in the future, and then revbump all the p5- modules. +1 Martin -- Martin Krischik mailto://krisc...@users.sourceforge.net https://sourceforge.net/users/krischik ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: file not recognizing MP3 files?
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 4:51 AM, Ryan Schmidt ryandes...@macports.org wrote: On Feb 28, 2011, at 18:22, Andrew Watts wrote: It appears that version 5.05 of file is not recognizing MP3 files. On my mac, running 10.5.8, I get this: andrew@drbernice ~ $ file nanana.mp3 nanana.mp3: data Looks like this: http://bugs.gw.com/view.php?id=114 Are you on PowerPC or Intel? Could be an endian issue. I'm on Intel. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: file not recognizing MP3 files?
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Rainer Müller rai...@macports.org wrote: On 2011-03-01 03:47 , Arno Hautala wrote: and annoyingly: $ /opt/local/bin/file /usr/bin/file /opt/local/bin/file /usr/bin/file: Mach-O fat file with 2 architectures /opt/local/bin/file: Mach-O fat file with 2 architectures Interesting, I get different results: $ port -q installed file file @5.05_0 (active) $ /opt/local/bin/file --version file-5.05 magic file from /opt/local/share/misc/magic $ /usr/bin/file /usr/bin/file /opt/local/bin/file /usr/bin/file: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures /usr/bin/file (for architecture x86_64): Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64 /usr/bin/file (for architecture i386): Mach-O executable i386 /opt/local/bin/file: Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64 $ /opt/local/bin/file /usr/bin/file /opt/local/bin/file /usr/bin/file: Mach-O fat file with 2 architectures /opt/local/bin/file: data I'm seeing exactly the same output. If I drop back to 5.04, it works again; I suspect that the bug report that Ryan linked to is probably the same issue, although they don't mention the additional inability to recognize skinny Mach-O files. The sources for the Apple provided file command is here: http://opensource.apple.com/source/file/file-39/ Would someone care to compare the sources and magic file? Rainer ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 04:34:22PM -0800, Dan Ports wrote: I see this as a high-priority issue that affects many people. So if we can get things closer to working by revbumping a bunch of ports, we should do that ASAP. Is there any reason *not* to revbump p5-* (or more precisely anything using PortGroup perl5?) If no one objects, I'll do exactly this today. Dan -- Dan R. K. Ports MIT CSAILhttp://drkp.net/ ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 10:45, Dan Ports dpo...@macports.org wrote: If no one objects, I'll do exactly this today. One, slight, objection. In the interest of not having to revbump twice, are we ready to fully migrate to 5.12? I've seen several votes for dropping the multiple perl versions and just following the latest stable release. I haven't seen any requests to stick with the existing multiple version support. If there's a consensus to just move to 5.21, I say do both today. If the consensus isn't there yet, revbump first. -- arno s hautala /-| a...@alum.wpi.edu pgp b2c9d448 ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
On 2011-03-01 16:45 , Dan Ports wrote: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 04:34:22PM -0800, Dan Ports wrote: I see this as a high-priority issue that affects many people. So if we can get things closer to working by revbumping a bunch of ports, we should do that ASAP. Is there any reason *not* to revbump p5-* (or more precisely anything using PortGroup perl5?) If no one objects, I'll do exactly this today. Not an objection per se, but as this has been discussed on macports-users only, I am explicitly adding Eric and Marcus as current maintainers of perl5 to CC to this post. Rainer ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 11:09:19AM -0500, Arno Hautala wrote: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 10:45, Dan Ports dpo...@macports.org wrote: If no one objects, I'll do exactly this today. One, slight, objection. In the interest of not having to revbump twice, are we ready to fully migrate to 5.12? I've seen several votes for dropping the multiple perl versions and just following the latest stable release. I haven't seen any requests to stick with the existing multiple version support. If there's a consensus to just move to 5.21, I say do both today. If the consensus isn't there yet, revbump first. I'm quite clear on the need for multiple versions of perl. For one, I use several perl versions for what I do. IIRC the ghc port requires perl5.8 for its configuration, newer versions of perl don't work (this may have changed, though I see ghc still depends on perl5.8). There may be additional reasons to maintain several perl versions. Revbumping all the p5-* ports is certainly an easy solution to the problem, and perhaps should have been done at the same time the perl5* changes went in. -eric ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: port upgrade outdated woes continued ... now help2man wont upgrade
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 2:02 AM, Andrea D'Amore and.dam...@macports.orgwrote:
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Gregory Dodwell gregree...@gmail.com
wrote:
port contents p5-locale-gettext
Port p5-locale-gettext contains:
/opt/local/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.9/darwin-2level/Locale/gettext.pm
/opt/local/bin/perl 'foreach $prefix (@INC) {print $prefix\n;}'
/opt/local/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.9/darwin-2level
That looks fine.
Just to reproduce the bug can you run:
port clean --all help2man
port selfupdate
port -d configure help2man
and paste the part after --- Configuring help2man line?
I'm looking for solutions for the same problem, and it appears that this is
as far as this thread went. Maybe you continued off list...
Here's what I get:
--- Configuring help2man
DEBUG: Using compiler 'Mac OS X gcc 4.2'
DEBUG: configure phase started at Tue Mar 1 12:23:53 CST 2011
DEBUG: Executing org.macports.configure (help2man)
DEBUG: Environment: CPATH='/opt/local/include' CFLAGS='-pipe -O2 -arch
x86_64' CPPFLAGS='-I/opt/local/include' CXXFLAGS='-pipe -O2 -arch x86_64'
LIBRARY_PATH='/opt/local/lib' MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET='10.6'
PERL='/opt/local/bin/perl' CXX='/usr/bin/g++-4.2'
CC_PRINT_OPTIONS_FILE='/opt/local/var/macports/build/_opt_local_var_macports_sources_rsync.macports.org_release_ports_textproc_help2man/work/.CC_PRINT_OPTIONS'
F90FLAGS='-pipe -O2 -m64' LDFLAGS='-L/opt/local/lib -arch x86_64'
OBJC='/usr/bin/gcc-4.2' FCFLAGS='-pipe -O2 -m64' INSTALL='/usr/bin/install
-c' OBJCFLAGS='-pipe -O2 -arch x86_64' FFLAGS='-pipe -O2 -m64'
CC_PRINT_OPTIONS='YES' CC='/usr/bin/gcc-4.2'
DEBUG: Assembled command: 'cd
/opt/local/var/macports/build/_opt_local_var_macports_sources_rsync.macports.org_release_ports_textproc_help2man/work/help2man-1.38.4
./configure --prefix=/opt/local --enable-nls'
checking for perl... /opt/local/bin/perl
checking for module Locale::gettext... no
checking for msgfmt... /opt/local/bin/msgfmt
checking for gcc... /usr/bin/gcc-4.2
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
checking for suffix of executables...
checking whether we are cross compiling... no
checking for suffix of object files... o
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
checking whether /usr/bin/gcc-4.2 accepts -g... yes
checking for /usr/bin/gcc-4.2 option to accept ISO C89... none needed
checking for library containing dlsym... none required
checking for library containing bindtextdomain... -lintl
configure: error: perl module Locale::gettext required
shell command cd
/opt/local/var/macports/build/_opt_local_var_macports_sources_rsync.macports.org_release_ports_textproc_help2man/work/help2man-1.38.4
./configure --prefix=/opt/local --enable-nls returned error 1
Error: Target org.macports.configure returned: configure failure: shell
command failed (see log for details)
DEBUG: Backtrace: configure failure: shell command failed (see log for
details)
while executing
$procedure $targetname
Warning: the following items did not execute (for help2man):
org.macports.configure
Log for help2man is at:
/opt/local/var/macports/logs/_opt_local_var_macports_sources_rsync.macports.org_release_ports_textproc_help2man/main.log
Error: Status 1 encountered during processing.
Considering the error: perl module Locale::gettext required, is this
essentially fallout of the perl5 discussion currently going on?
Thanks for any insights.
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
On Feb 28, 2011, at 20:33, Arno Hautala wrote: This would also be a good candidate for enhancing the perl5 PortGroup. Automatically revbump when the perl5 port is updated. Though this could probably be rolled into the version dependency work. The portgroup isn't the appropriate place to do that. I'm not even sure code to do what you're suggesting is possible in a portgroup. I think revbumps will have to continue to happen individually in each affected port. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
perl5 AND perl5.8 ?
I never explicitely installed perl, it came from dependencies. Today port outdated says: perl5 5.8.9_0 5.12.3_0 perl5.85.8.9_3 5.8.9_4 What should I do ? I doubt having perl 5.8 and perl 5.12 will be okay... -- Erwan ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5 AND perl5.8 ?
2011/3/1 Erwan David er...@rail.eu.org: I never explicitely installed perl, it came from dependencies. Today port outdated says: perl5 5.8.9_0 5.12.3_0 perl5.8 5.8.9_3 5.8.9_4 What should I do ? I doubt having perl 5.8 and perl 5.12 will be okay... I would probably wait and not upgrade those packages until after the whole perl thing is sorted out. If you upgrade now there is a good chance that some of your software will stop working. Alternatively you could switch perl5 to use the perl5_8 variant; or upgrade it as is (which will switch to perl5.12) and then recompile all of your p5-* ports. Scott ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5 AND perl5.8 ?
On 01/03/11 21:02, Scott Webster wrote: 2011/3/1 Erwan David er...@rail.eu.org: I never explicitely installed perl, it came from dependencies. Today port outdated says: perl5 5.8.9_0 5.12.3_0 perl5.85.8.9_3 5.8.9_4 What should I do ? I doubt having perl 5.8 and perl 5.12 will be okay... I would probably wait and not upgrade those packages until after the whole perl thing is sorted out. If you upgrade now there is a good chance that some of your software will stop working. Alternatively you could switch perl5 to use the perl5_8 variant; or upgrade it as is (which will switch to perl5.12) and then recompile all of your p5-* ports. Scott Easier : With several port uninstall, I arrived to the conclusion that only autoconf and automake needed it, (with help2man and p5-locale-gettext) : I removed everything, since they are only build dependencies. A way to remove the build dependencies would be interesting ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5 AND perl5.8 ?
On Mar 1, 2011, at 3:05 PM, Erwan David wrote: A way to remove the build dependencies would be interesting port echo leaves could probably get you close to that... -- Daniel J. Luke ++ | * dl...@geeklair.net * | | *-- http://www.geeklair.net -* | ++ | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | | reflect the opinions of my employer. | ++ ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
On Mar 1, 2011, at 2:28 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: On Feb 28, 2011, at 20:33, Arno Hautala wrote: This would also be a good candidate for enhancing the perl5 PortGroup. Automatically revbump when the perl5 port is updated. Though this could probably be rolled into the version dependency work. The portgroup isn't the appropriate place to do that. Why not? I'm not even sure code to do what you're suggesting is possible in a portgroup. Why not? Looks like portindex uses mportopen. I haven't tested it (yet), but a cursory look at the source seems to indicate that it should work. The group file is basically just included into the portfile anyway. I think revbumps will have to continue to happen individually in each affected port. I think it would actually make sense to just set the epoch in the p5 portgroup (say to something like MMDDxx). Then only ports that install perl modules that don't use the portgroup would need to be individually touched. -- Daniel J. Luke ++ | * dl...@geeklair.net * | | *-- http://www.geeklair.net -* | ++ | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | | reflect the opinions of my employer. | ++ ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5 AND perl5.8 ?
Le Tue 1/03/2011, Daniel J. Luke disait On Mar 1, 2011, at 3:05 PM, Erwan David wrote: A way to remove the build dependencies would be interesting port echo leaves could probably get you close to that... thanks, it works -- Erwan ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: port upgrade outdated woes continued ... now help2man wont upgrade
On Mar 1, 2011, at 12:38, Bill Christensen wrote: Considering the error: perl module Locale::gettext required, is this essentially fallout of the perl5 discussion currently going on? Presumably yes. Did you rebuild all your perl modules after upgrading perl? If not, that's the suggested resolution for now. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
On Mar 1, 2011, at 14:13, Daniel J. Luke wrote: On Mar 1, 2011, at 2:28 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: On Feb 28, 2011, at 20:33, Arno Hautala wrote: This would also be a good candidate for enhancing the perl5 PortGroup. Automatically revbump when the perl5 port is updated. Though this could probably be rolled into the version dependency work. The portgroup isn't the appropriate place to do that. Why not? I'm not even sure code to do what you're suggesting is possible in a portgroup. Why not? Looks like portindex uses mportopen. I haven't tested it (yet), but a cursory look at the source seems to indicate that it should work. The group file is basically just included into the portfile anyway. The suggestion was: when the version of perl is updated, all ports using the perl5 portgroup should automatically have their revisions increased. I don't know how to accomplish that using a portgroup. Yes, the portgroup is included into the portfile, but at the very top, before anything else in the port has been executed. Then a few lines further down, the port calls the perl5.setup procedure, passing it the name and version of the perl module. Then the port might define a revision, if there is one. By the time the port defines a revision, if any, there are no more calls to the portgroup, thus no chance for it to modify the revision. And even if there would be a way for it to, say, increment the revision that's already in the portfile, that would be pretty confusing, wouldn't it? The portfile says version 1.0 revision 1 but in fact version 1.0 revision 2 gets installed. If the maintainer increases the revision in the portfile to 3, revision 4 actually gets installed. Nobody would expect that. And would such code just stay in the portgroup stay there forever? I don't see how it could ever be removed. But I can stop thinking about that idea because you proposed a different one: I think revbumps will have to continue to happen individually in each affected port. I think it would actually make sense to just set the epoch in the p5 portgroup (say to something like MMDDxx). Then only ports that install perl modules that don't use the portgroup would need to be individually touched. I had not considered using the epoch, and that might work. It presupposes that no existing port using this portgroup already has an epoch set higher than this proposed value, but that's not an unreasonable supposition. It also requires that if a port sets the epoch, it do so before the portgroup, so that the portgroup can override it. Logically, the epoch has higher precedence than the version, and so should appear in the portfile on a line above the version, but many existing ports have their epochs on the line below the version. So we would have to mass-update epochs to ensure they're before versions, and clearly document this requirement, and also the requirement that p5 ports would need to use an epoch of the same format that the portgroup uses. (I never really liked seeing the epoch as a date/timestamp because I didn't see any purpose to it, and was going to change the Guide to recommend simple incrementing integers, like we use for the revision and like many ports use f or the epoch, but this suggestion for the perl ports does look like a good use of that.) ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
On Mar 1, 2011, at 4:16 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: The suggestion was: when the version of perl is updated, all ports using the perl5 portgroup should automatically have their revisions increased. I don't know how to accomplish that using a portgroup. Well, you could do it the same way as you would with the epoch (I just think it makes more sense to use epoch). It would still probably require looking at any port that had a revision set already. I think revbumps will have to continue to happen individually in each affected port. I think it would actually make sense to just set the epoch in the p5 portgroup (say to something like MMDDxx). Then only ports that install perl modules that don't use the portgroup would need to be individually touched. I had not considered using the epoch, and that might work. It presupposes that no existing port using this portgroup already has an epoch set higher than this proposed value, but that's not an unreasonable supposition. It also requires that if a port sets the epoch, it do so before the portgroup, so that the portgroup can override it. unless you want the portgroup to be able to override the individual ports as well (special magic to set it only if it's greater than the one in the portfile maybe?) Logically, the epoch has higher precedence than the version, and so should appear in the portfile on a line above the version, but many existing ports have their epochs on the line below the version. So we would have to mass-update epochs to ensure they're before versions, and clearly document this requirement, and also the requirement that p5 ports would need to use an epoch of the same format that the portgroup uses. ... but unless we put some code in the portgroup to do special magic, there's still a problem if you ever want to set epoch in the port Without any magic, it only requires looking at any ports that do set epoch on their own (as opposed to rev-bumping or setting epoch on every single port). -- Daniel J. Luke ++ | * dl...@geeklair.net * | | *-- http://www.geeklair.net -* | ++ | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | | reflect the opinions of my employer. | ++ ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
I just revbumped all of the ports that build perl5 modules in r76604. So if you have been having problems, the next `port selfupdate port upgrade outdated` should rebuild quite a few ports with perl 5.12 and get things working again. Dan -- Dan R. K. Ports MIT CSAILhttp://drkp.net/ ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Re: perl5, perl5.* changes
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 03:01:18AM CET, Dan Ports dpo...@macports.org said: I just revbumped all of the ports that build perl5 modules in r76604. So if you have been having problems, the next `port selfupdate port upgrade outdated` should rebuild quite a few ports with perl 5.12 and get things working again. Dan ANd what abbout ports like ghostscript which depends on perl, but are not in p5-* ? ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
