t; > https://ftp.fau.de/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/packages/amd64/
> >
> > BR/Rob
> >
> >
> >
>
> There was an issue on ftp.eu syncing snapshot packages, it's likely to
> be fixed but will take a little while for the current set of syncs to
> finish before the updated files appear.
>
OK, I'll check now and then :)
> Synced April 02 at time of writing
> https://ftp.eu.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/packages/amd64/
> https://ftp.lysator.liu.se/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/packages/amd64/
> https://ftp.fau.de/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/packages/amd64/
>
> BR/Rob
>
>
>
There was an is
Hi,
Is there an issue with syncing of mirror sites? Of the 4 mirror sites
in Europe I checked 3 are out of sync with packages:
Synced May 05 at time of writing
https://ftp.hostserver.de/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/packages/amd64/
Synced April 02 at time of writing
https://ftp.eu.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBS
hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 07:18:40PM +0200, Jan Stary said that
> (sorry, wrong list before)
>
> On Oct 14 15:40:21, frantisek holop wrote:
> > hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 08:26:58AM -0500, Marco Peereboom said that
> > > so you got lucky for 10 years, now what?
> > >
> > > port snaps always
On Oct 14 19:49:58, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Jan Stary [2010-10-14 19:21]:
> > > but i guess this is possible if the port snaps building machine's
> > > system was built from newer sources, and wasn't an "official"
> > > snapshot.
> > What "official snapshot"?
>
> the ones theo does. or more pre
* Jan Stary [2010-10-14 19:21]:
> > but i guess this is possible if the port snaps building machine's
> > system was built from newer sources, and wasn't an "official"
> > snapshot.
> What "official snapshot"?
the ones theo does. or more precise, the ones that end up on
ftp.openbsd.org and it mir
(sorry, wrong list before)
On Oct 14 15:40:21, frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 08:26:58AM -0500, Marco Peereboom said that
> > so you got lucky for 10 years, now what?
> >
> > port snaps always lag a bit, you know, the laws of physics.
>
> yes, sometimes more, sometimes les
On Oct 14 15:18:49, frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 03:02:42PM +0200, Jan Stary said that
> > > > Snapshots and snapshot packages move forward all the time, unlike
> > > > your installed system. If you have a system that provides
> > > >
> From: Henning Brauer
> Date: 2010-10-14 13:42:50
>
> * Ahlsen-Girard, Edward F CTR USAF AFSOC AFSOC/A6OK
[2010-10-14 15:38]:
> > I thought that the party line was that most people should not run
> > -current
>
> FUD
>
> --
> Henning Brauer, h...@bsws.de, henn...@openbsd.org
>
h
On 2010/10/14 15:40, frantisek holop wrote:
> i got the bad majors because the packages wanted _newer_ libraries
> than the latest snapshot had. that is exactly the opposite of lagging.
>
> but i guess this is possible if the port snaps building machine's
> system was built from newer sources
ja
On 2010/10/14 15:57, frantisek holop wrote:
> i havent seen time/date differences in package snaps measured
> in days before,
this varies from arch to arch, it has been like this for a long time
with some arch (e.g. sparc64).
for the fastest arch, amd64/i386, you should usually see dates
within 1
hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 03:45:55PM +0200, Henning Brauer said that
> * frantisek holop [2010-10-14 15:43]:
> > hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 08:26:58AM -0500, Marco Peereboom said that
> > > so you got lucky for 10 years, now what?
> > >
> > > port snaps always lag a bit, you know, the laws o
10 years. 1. install snaphost, 2. install snapshot
> packages.
> > 99% of the time this worked great.
> > and as far as i know, this is the "party line".
> ^^ ^^^ ^^ ^
>
> > please point me to the documentation that says o
* frantisek holop [2010-10-14 15:43]:
> hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 08:26:58AM -0500, Marco Peereboom said that
> > so you got lucky for 10 years, now what?
> >
> > port snaps always lag a bit, you know, the laws of physics.
>
> yes, sometimes more, sometimes less.
> but if they do, you dont ge
and wasn't an "official"
snapshot.
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 03:18:49PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote:
> > hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 03:02:42PM +0200, Jan Stary said that
> > > > > Snapshots and snapshot packages move forward all the time, unlike
> &
* Ahlsen-Girard, Edward F CTR USAF AFSOC AFSOC/A6OK
[2010-10-14 15:38]:
> I thought that the party line was that most people should not run
> -current
FUD
--
Henning Brauer, h...@bsws.de, henn...@openbsd.org
BS Web Services, http://bsws.de
Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Servic
From: frantisek holop
Date: 2010-10-14 13:18:49
>
(snip)
> i have been using -current exactly like this for
> more than 10 years. 1. install snaphost, 2. install snapshot
packages.
> 99% of the time this worked great.
> and as far as i know, this is
so you got lucky for 10 years, now what?
port snaps always lag a bit, you know, the laws of physics.
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 03:18:49PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 03:02:42PM +0200, Jan Stary said that
> > > > Snapshots and snapshot packages move
hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 03:02:42PM +0200, Jan Stary said that
> > > Snapshots and snapshot packages move forward all the time, unlike
> > > your installed system. If you have a system that provides
> > > libcurses.so.10.0, and (a new version of) a package co
> > Snapshots and snapshot packages move forward all the time, unlike
> > your installed system. If you have a system that provides
> > libcurses.so.10.0, and (a new version of) a package comes out that
> > requires libcurses.so.11.0, there is simply no way to upgrade
hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:53:27PM +0200, Jan Stary said that
> On Oct 14 10:10:22, frantisek holop wrote:
> > hmm, on Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 04:40:23PM +, Christian Weisgerber said
> > that
> > > frantisek holop wrote:
> > >
> > > &g
On Oct 14 10:10:22, frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 04:40:23PM +, Christian Weisgerber said that
> > frantisek holop wrote:
> >
> > > for the last week or so, snapshot packages
> > > have "strange" dates alternatin
hmm, on Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 04:40:23PM +, Christian Weisgerber said that
> frantisek holop wrote:
>
> > for the last week or so, snapshot packages
> > have "strange" dates alternating with a one day difference:
>
> > ftp://ftp.fr.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBS
frantisek holop wrote:
> for the last week or so, snapshot packages
> have "strange" dates alternating with a one day difference:
> ftp://ftp.fr.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/packages/i386/
I now use "scp -p" instead of plain "scp" to upload the pa
On Oct 13 15:07:26, frantisek holop wrote:
> hi there,
>
> for the last week or so, snapshot packages
> have "strange" dates alternating with a one day difference:
>
> -rw-r--r-- 1 1001 0 134946 Oct 10 02:02 aalib-1.4p2-no_x11.tgz
> -rw-r--r-- 1 1001 0 1498
hi there,
for the last week or so, snapshot packages
have "strange" dates alternating with a one day difference:
-rw-r--r-- 1 1001 0 134946 Oct 10 02:02 aalib-1.4p2-no_x11.tgz
-rw-r--r-- 1 1001 0 149811 Oct 9 02:58 aalib-1.4p2.tgz
-rw-r--r-- 1 1001 0 30896 Oct 10 03:23 aa
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2010/06/02 16:23, Antti Harri wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
Apply or update, then rebuild libc (cd /usr/src/lib/libc && make obj &&
make && sudo make install). No need to rebuild mysql.
Because the fault was in libc I would
On 2010/06/02 16:23, Antti Harri wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> >Apply or update, then rebuild libc (cd /usr/src/lib/libc && make obj &&
> >make && sudo make install). No need to rebuild mysql.
>
> Because the fault was in libc I would assume that reboot is required too?
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
Apply or update, then rebuild libc (cd /usr/src/lib/libc && make obj &&
make && sudo make install). No need to rebuild mysql.
Because the fault was in libc I would assume that reboot is required too?
--
Antti Harri
On 2010-06-01, Antti Harri wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Antti Harri wrote:
>
>> I just updated to 5.1.47 from .45 and now mysqldump is segfaulting,
>> mysql_upgrade ran fine but it didn't help:
>
> I would like to warn other users, that update totally broke mysql
> here, I'm getting this also:
>
>
Hi,
the sparc64 package fuckup is being fixed as I write this mail, expect
mirrors to carry real sparc64 packages soon. Thanks for the report!
Nikolay
--
"It's all part of my Can't-Do approach to life." Wally
31 matches
Mail list logo
