Re: Are there any maintainer for mplayer?
On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 04:26:45AM +0100, Andreas Davour wrote: On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, Mark Linimon wrote: On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 03:54:28AM +0100, Andreas Davour wrote: I looked in the Makefile for mplayer but couldn't find any MAINTAINER. $ cd multimedia/mplayer $ make maintainer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Looks like it's maintained to me ... The make target maintainer was news to me. I've always grep'ed for Maintainer in the makefile. This time I did like this: cat Makefile* | grep aintainer and thought I should have found it. Thanks for setting me straight. Try doing a cat Makefile* | grep -i aintainer instead. Then you will also find MAINTAINER, which I believe is how it is normally spelled. -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 As has been hashed out in -ports@ over the last few days there is at least a need to examine weither or not the current ports system should remain as is or potentially be re-engineered in the future (estimates if and when needed vary from ASAP to 10-15 years). I have volunteered to undertake a feasibility/pilot project to examine what changes (if any) are needed in the system (for the purposes of this thread I will not venture any of my own suggestions). I have the following broad questions for people: 1. What is more important to your personal use of FreeBSD (the ports system, the underlaying OS, some other aspect)? 2. How frequently do you interact with the ports systems and what is the most common interaction you have with it? 3. What is the single best aspect of the current system? 4. What is the single worst aspect of the current system? 5. If you where a new FreeBSD user how would your answers above change? If you where brand new to UNIX how whould they change? 6. Assuming that there was no additional work on your behalf would you use a new system if it corrected your answer to number 4? 7. Same as question 6 but for your answer on question 3? 8. How long have you used FreeBSD and/or UNIX in general? 9. That is your primary use(s) for your FreeBSD machine(s) (name upto 3)? 10. Assuming there is no functional difference what is your preferred installation method for 3rd party software? 11. On a scale from 1 to 10 (10 being the best) please rate the importance of the following aspects of the ports system? a. User Interface b. Consistency of behaviors and interactions c. Accuracy in dependant port installations d. Internal record keeping e. Granularity's of the port management system 12. Please rate your personal technical skill level? - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHUoJ/358R5LPuPvsRAsXMAJ9w4tU/uFbm30lAmVI2foESX4wRwQCg7SPD j3s4YmZv+qHIt2iQjN1NPxg= =0ScV -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I promised not to venture my opinion on things but this one needs it Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting. There have been a number of serious attempts and in depth research into various ports system issues (I still need to wade through a rather long one sent to me privately)... an other question did you read the preamble to this thread at all? (where it says I have volunteered to do the heavy lifting for anything that comes out this discussion [two others privately asked to also be involved]) - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHUsW9358R5LPuPvsRAmAHAJ9rjRvYBVFObiJ3ln3l1Rt4rjJQgwCgtvp8 YkY7kik0AqbLlvmfz5mHNXc= =7LUk -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: duration of the ports freeze
On Saturday 01 December 2007 15:05:39 Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: It's nothing like global warming. Global warming is an ill understood problem, with various estimates ranging from basically not existing to it's too late and we are all doomed anyway, and the potential consequences of not fixing it if it is a problem are widespread and catastrophic. Issues with the ports freeze are very well understood, with consequences of getting it wrong either way being fairly inconsequential, and always something that can be revisited without the whole world going down the tubes. The very worst that can happen is that a marginally used operating system will go down the tubes, and someone will fork the code long before that happens. To compare ports freeze to global warming is hyperbole in the extreme. I am not comparing a ports freeze to Global warming -- just likening the responses to a problem. Just like there were people in governemnt who tried to deny the need to tackle global warming so there are those, in the freebsd community, who wish to bury their head in the sand to the apparen need to re-engineer the ports system so that ports freezes are unnecessary. There is also the need to deal with other historical deficiencies in the ports sytem (especially dependency system) that are causing increasing problems. I have been using freebsd for over 14 years and am very aware the the engineering processes of the 70's and 80's upon which it was based are now creaking at the seams. We need to engineer in a more scaleable fashion and do it before exponential growth in the ports system overwhelms else. Like dealing with global warming it is better to act early than too late. david ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: 3. What is the single best aspect of the current system? Good people doing the heavy lifting 4. What is the single worst aspect of the current system? Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting. 8. How long have you used FreeBSD and/or UNIX in general? Since 1998. -- Dan Langille - http://www.langille.org/ BSDCan - The Technical BSD Conference: http://www.bsdcan.org/ ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: duration of the ports freeze
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I am not comparing a ports freeze to Global warming -- just likening the responses to a problem. And like global warming it is something everyone thinks they know something about but at the end of day it turns out that as far I can tell no one really understands the entire problem. Michael Crichton did a really good job looking at this in State of Fear (2003) where he basically showed in a fictionalized manner (but as shown in the appendix's fact based) that anyone who claimed to understand global warming (or lack thereof) was being at best egotistical.Basically his thesis is we do not know enough (with hard science) about the problem (or lack thereof) base any short of policy on. In short everyone is equally wrong. The ports system I think is currently in the same state you have one group who thinks nothing is wrong but doesn't have any historical evidence to support such a claim. On the other side you have people (like me) who know there is a problem but lack any kind of hard data to clearly state what it is (or that there even is one). Thats the reason for the survey I posted (an objective first look at peoples empirical perceptions of the system as a way of framing what questions need to be answered to know if there really is a long term problem). Only then can we quantize the problem and establish a set of tests to objectivally see the current longterm health of the system. Assuming a change is needed then we will need to start to look at solutions. I suspect the first 2 phases will not be done to mid Jan and a reasonable first cut as to solutions will not be done to the end of Feb. - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHUtzw358R5LPuPvsRAvbZAJ9uD8qfaiDVSFuNT1JG4+/PxjGivwCgjTi7 V7SShNXh55nTWrwOQXRLSzk= =6jfX -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: duration of the ports freeze
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I am not comparing a ports freeze to Global warming -- just likening the responses to a problem. And like global warming it is something everyone thinks they know something about but at the end of day it turns out that as far I can tell no one really understands the entire problem. Michael Crichton did a really good job looking at this in State of Fear (2003) where he basically showed in a fictionalized manner (but as shown in the appendix's fact based) that anyone who claimed to understand global warming (or lack thereof) was being at best egotistical.Basically his thesis is we do not know enough (with hard science) about the problem (or lack thereof) base any short of policy on. In short everyone is equally wrong. Well I've said my piece on the ports freeze, so no need for me to repeat myself. But thanks for the interesting reference to the book by Michael Crichton. If the book is as you say it is, then it happens to agree with my perceptions on the subject as well. Stephen ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
On Sunday 02 December 2007 06:41:12 Dan Langille wrote: On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: 3. What is the single best aspect of the current system? Good people doing the heavy lifting 4. What is the single worst aspect of the current system? Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting. 8. How long have you used FreeBSD and/or UNIX in general? Since 1998. Well in this case the people doing the talking are also committing themselves to the lifting so I guess you would say here that the advocates of change are on the side of the angels. I trust you are not dedicated to becoming a permanent member of the opposition!! If so I might be tempted to say the worst aspect of the current system is that there are too many people determined to deny the need for change irrespective of merit. David ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: duration of the ports freeze
On Sunday 02 December 2007 08:27:28 Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: I am not comparing a ports freeze to Global warming -- just likening the responses to a problem. And like global warming it is something everyone thinks they know something about but at the end of day it turns out that as far I can tell no one really understands the entire problem. Michael Crichton did a really good job looking at this in State of Fear (2003) where he basically showed in a fictionalized manner (but as shown in the appendix's fact based) that anyone who claimed to understand global warming (or lack thereof) was being at best egotistical.Basically his thesis is we do not know enough (with hard science) about the problem (or lack thereof) base any short of policy on. In short everyone is equally wrong. Nicely put -- the only thing I would disagree with in that argument is that clearly the present system is becoming more intolderable so in that sense those of us who argue for change are responding to what they see as a genuine problem whereas those who argue to do nothing tend to deny there is a problem. Those of us that are seripously inconvenienced as a result of the freeze tend to see such responses as inimicable. That aside I agree with you that we need to take an analytical approach rather than a didactic one. The ports system I think is currently in the same state you have one group who thinks nothing is wrong but doesn't have any historical evidence to support such a claim. On the other side you have people (like me) who know there is a problem but lack any kind of hard data to clearly state what it is (or that there even is one). So I think you are ploughing a straight furrow here. Thats the reason for the survey I posted (an objective first look at peoples empirical perceptions of the system as a way of framing what questions need to be answered to know if there really is a long term problem). Only then can we quantize the problem and establish a set of tests to objectivally see the current longterm health of the system. Assuming a change is needed then we will need to start to look at solutions. I suspect the first 2 phases will not be done to mid Jan and a reasonable first cut as to solutions will not be done to the end of Feb. That sounds like fast progress. One of the difficulties I have found when studying existing systems is that the most valuable insights frequently come from evidence initially gathered through dialogues that cumulatively create a body of anecdotal evidence which, by its nature, is not externally validated neither is the level of general applicability known . However once a body of anecdotal evidence has been obtained it can then be used as a resource to help frame the questions required to obtain empirical evidence. I therefore wonder if we could ask people (maybe through open invitations via a selcted number of freebsd maillists) to submit brief stories that concisely describe individual circumstances and experiences where the existing system has not worked well for them. If we are going to find out what is not working then we need responses to open questions that help not just identify weak spots but also why they are perceived to be weak!. Such an ivitation would need to be very carefully worded. This procedure will pose the challenge -- how can we empirically test both the validity and the generality the perceptions and experiences described to us? David ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: Hi, As has been hashed out in -ports@ over the last few days there is at least a need to examine weither or not the current ports system should remain as is or potentially be re-engineered in the future (estimates if and when needed vary from ASAP to 10-15 years). I have volunteered to undertake a feasibility/pilot project to examine what changes (if any) are needed in the system (for the purposes of this thread I will not venture any of my own suggestions). I have the following broad questions for people: I already replied to your questions in private but I wonder if you took a look at pkgsrc and the enhancements the OpenBSD people have done the pkg* commands and whether you think borrowing from them would be useful. Cheers, Miguel Mendez [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.energyhq.be PGP Key: 0xDC8514F1 ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:37:22 -0600, David Southwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 02 December 2007 06:41:12 Dan Langille wrote: On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: 3. What is the single best aspect of the current system? Good people doing the heavy lifting 4. What is the single worst aspect of the current system? Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting. 8. How long have you used FreeBSD and/or UNIX in general? Since 1998. Well in this case the people doing the talking are also committing themselves to the lifting so I guess you would say here that the advocates of change are on the side of the angels. I trust you are not dedicated to becoming a permanent member of the opposition!! If so I might be tempted to say the worst aspect of the current system is that there are too many people determined to deny the need for change irrespective of merit. Sad, I second on Dan's answer for #4 question. It's not that we opposite it. It's faith that we don't have. It's not first time for people to keep talk with no action. It's called bikeshed. The share/gnome/ - share/ project was very successful, because I have pushed it hard. I did 90 committed in MC CVS per day about two or three times and did a lot of work on hundreds of port. Whomever start to talk will have to be expect to do a lot of works to get success. I suggest you to get start to setup a team, setup ports development somewhere, and make sure you have changes available. Then we will starting to have a faith on this project. Cheers, Mezz David -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD GNOME Team - FreeBSD Multimedia Hat (ports, not src) http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wiki.freebsd.org/multimedia - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting. There have been a number of serious attempts and in depth research into various ports system issues (I still need to wade through a rather long one sent to me privately)... an other question did you read the preamble to this thread at all? (where it says I have volunteered to do the heavy lifting for anything that comes out this discussion [two others privately asked to also be involved]) What he's saying is that there have been many before you who have said and promised the same. Ideas get hashed out and we build amazing bike-sheds, but there has seldom been real product. What you have yet to do is distinguish yourself from history. In short, patches please. Until then, don't expect enthusiastic encouragement. -- Darren Pilgrim ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HELP needed by experienced porter for simple review
Any body?
I'm new to porting for FreeBSD and make files aren't my strongest suit.
So
I would be greatful if I could get an experienced porter to review my
make
files, for at very simple deamon.
I've read the porter handbook and the port seems to be working fine.
But
I'm uncertain as to what is best practise and since this will hopefully
be
the first of many ports, I would like to get i right.
If you want to help, please drop me a note and I will send you the two
small makefiles to review.
Hi and welcome!
First of all you should install ports-mgmt/portlint and run it against
your port (if you haven't done it already). Be sure to use the switch to
enable additional checks (I got bitten once because I forgot it).
Then you could perhaps put your work online somewhere and provide a link,
so everybody can take a look at it and test.
Best regards,
Jona
Ok. thanks.
Its simple so I will just put in in this mail.
I hope to have the ability to make changes in the source, so I've included
the proposed application
Makefile as well.
Its all working, but I would like to know if the concepts are sound?
Portlint throws a warning, but I don't se any reasonable way arrount that:
/usr/ports/distfilesportlint
WARN: Makefile: possible use of absolute pathname /etc/rc.conf.bak.
0 fatal errors and 1 warning found.
Root
Makefile:
--
# New ports collection makefile for: kissdx
# Date created:20. November 2007
# Whom:Simon I. Rigét
#
# $FreeBSD$
PORTNAME= kissdx
PORTVERSION= 0.13.10a
CATEGORIES= multimedia net
MASTER_SITES= http://freebsd.paragi.dk/kissdx/ \
http://kissdx.vidartysse.net/
DISTNAME= ${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}
MAINTAINER= [EMAIL PROTECTED]
COMMENT= A multimedia streaming server for KiSS/Linksys player
USE_ICONV= yes
# Dependencies of other packeges
LIB_DEPENDS= libdvdread:${PORTSDIR}/multimedia/libdvdread \
libiconv:${PORTSDIR}/converters/libiconv \
gd-2:${PORTSDIR}/graphics/gd
jpeg-6b_4:${PORTSDIR}/graphics/jpeg
# Man pages
MAN1= kissdx.1
MANCOMPRESSED= yes
# RC start and stop service
USE_RC_SUBR= kissdx
# set enviroment variables for port makefile
MAKE_ENV= FreeBSD=defined
# Convert CR/LF to LF in source files
USE_DOS2UNIX= yes
post-patch:
${REINPLACE_CMD} -e 's|Linux|Unix|g' ${WRKSRC}/kissdx.1
${REINPLACE_CMD} -e 's|/etc/|/usr/local/etc/|' ${WRKSRC}/kissdx.1
$(GZIP_CMD) -c ${INSTALL_WRKSRC}/kissdx.1 ${INSTALL_WRKSRC}/kissdx.1.gz
$(MKDIR) $(FILESDIR)
$(CP) ${WRKSRC}/kissdx.in ${FILESDIR}
do-install: all
$(INSTALL_PROGRAM) ${INSTALL_WRKSRC}/kissdx ${TARGETDIR}/sbin/kissdx
$(INSTALL_DATA) ${INSTALL_WRKSRC}/kissdx.conf ${TARGETDIR}/etc/kissdx.conf
$(INSTALL_MAN) ${INSTALL_WRKSRC}/kissdx.1.gz
${TARGETDIR}/man/man1/kissdx.1.gz
echo kissdx_enabled=\YES\ /etc/rc.conf
do-deinstall:
$(RM) ${TARGETDIR}/sbin/kissdx
$(RM) ${TARGETDIR}/etc/kissdx.conf
$(RM) ${TARGETDIR}/man/man1/kissdx.*
$(RM) ${TARGETDIR}/etc/rc.d/kissdx
$(CP) ${/etc/rc.conf} ${/etc/rc.conf}.bak
${GREP} -v kissdx_ /etc/rc.conf.bak /etc/rc.conf
.include bsd.port.mk
pkg-plist:
sbin/kissdx
etc/kissdx.conf
etc/rc.d/kissdx
Application
Makefile:
#
KiSS DX multi OS Makefile# By SR.
2007-11-30
#
Operating system# Uncomment for onr of the desired OS (Execpt FreeBSD which
will be definedby# the master
makefile)
#env= Environment(**ARGUMENTS)#NSLU2= defined#CYGWIN= definedLinux= defined
#
Generic settings## In some UNIX systems build options that affect all ports
can be setglobally.# this makefile should not override the existing
value.CC?=
gcc# compiler directives (defines)# Sendfile# -DUSE_INTERNAL_SENDFILE (less
performance) if you cannot use the
sendfilesyscall on your# target platform with 64-bit file access. Needed for
Unslung 5.5 on NSLU2.# -DUSE_INTERNAL_SENDFILE_MMAP (better performance)# with
-DUSE_INTERNAL_SENDFILE if your target platform supports memorymapped# files with
64-bit file access and you want to use it. Not possible with# 2GB files on
Unslung 5.5 on NSLU2.CFLAGS+= -DUSE_INTERNAL_SENDFILE # Support for lage file sizes
2GbCFLAGS+= -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64CFLAGS+= -D_GNU_SOURCE# Compile optionsCFLAGS+= -Wall
-Wstrict-prototypes# LiberariesLIBS+= -ldvdread# remove -liconv below if your
Re: HELP needed by experienced porter for simple review
GP wrote: Hi and welcome! First of all you should install ports-mgmt/portlint and run it against your port (if you haven't done it already). Be sure to use the switch to enable additional checks (I got bitten once because I forgot it). Then you could perhaps put your work online somewhere and provide a link, so everybody can take a look at it and test. You should not make changes to /etc/rc.conf at all from a port. Please remove that before submitting. Thanks, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HELP needed by experienced porter for simple review
You should not make changes to /etc/rc.conf at all from a port. Please remove that before submitting. Thanks, Doug Thanks I will, but how should it be done? I must be there for it to work? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: duration of the ports freeze
David Southwell wrote: Before I do so let me step outsiide the freebsd environment and ask what our comments would be if MS$ were to announce that they were about to release an upgrade to their operating system and until the new upgrade had been released upgrades to existing applications would be barred. I am sure we would all agree that that was ridiculous. But that is the result of our current practice. If they did I wonder if it might make the resulting os + set of applications more stable... folks running Vista might wish they did do this in fact. Cheers Mark ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HELP needed by experienced porter for simple review
GP wrote: You should not make changes to /etc/rc.conf at all from a port. Please remove that before submitting. Thanks, Doug Thanks I will, but how should it be done? I must be there for it to work? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Many ports need this to work, sadly it is often not mentioned at the end of make install or the pkg_add. I would love for it to say something like this. We need to make this easier to use when possible. In order for the install of port name to work, it should be activated via /etc.rc.conf, would you like for this modification to be made for you? If you type y, /etc/rconf will have the following line added. portname_enable=YES [y n] ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HELP needed by experienced porter for simple review
Many ports need this to work, sadly it is often not mentioned at the end of make install or the pkg_add. I would love for it to say something like this. We need to make this easier to use when possible. In order for the install of port name to work, it should be activated via /etc.rc.conf, would you like for this modification to be made for you? If you type y, /etc/rconf will have the following line added. portname_enable=YES [y n] Good ideer! I will work that in. Thanks ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HELP needed by experienced porter for simple review
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:37:57 -0600, GP [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Ok. thanks.
Its simple so I will just put in in this mail.
I hope to have the ability to make changes in the source, so I've
included
the proposed application
Makefile as well.
Its all working, but I would like to know if the concepts are sound?
Portlint throws a warning, but I don't se any reasonable way arrount
that:
/usr/ports/distfilesportlint
WARN: Makefile: possible use of absolute pathname /etc/rc.conf.bak.
0 fatal errors and 1 warning found.
Follow Doug's suggest, this will disappear. I agree with him about never
edit rc.conf without our knowledge. You can see in x11/gdm/Makefile for
PKGMESSAGE and x11/gdm/pkg-message to get idea for how to warn users to
add in rc.conf. See below for more feedbacks:
Root
Makefile:
--
# New ports collection makefile for: kissdx
# Date created:20. November 2007
# Whom:Simon I. Rigét
#
# $FreeBSD$
PORTNAME= kissdx
PORTVERSION= 0.13.10a
CATEGORIES= multimedia net
MASTER_SITES= http://freebsd.paragi.dk/kissdx/ \
http://kissdx.vidartysse.net/
DISTNAME= ${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}
You can remove DISTNAME; it's not need and it is on what you want by
default.
MAINTAINER= [EMAIL PROTECTED]
COMMENT= A multimedia streaming server for KiSS/Linksys player
USE_ICONV= yes
# Dependencies of other packeges
LIB_DEPENDS= libdvdread:${PORTSDIR}/multimedia/libdvdread \
libiconv:${PORTSDIR}/converters/libiconv \
Remove libiconv, since the USE_ICONV=yes takes care of that.
gd-2:${PORTSDIR}/graphics/gd
It should be 'gd.4' or just 'gd'.
jpeg-6b_4:${PORTSDIR}/graphics/jpeg
It should be 'jpeg.9' or just 'jpeg'. See here:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/makefile-depend.html#AEN2056
# Man pages
MAN1= kissdx.1
MANCOMPRESSED= yes
Remove MANCOMPRESSED; it is turn on by default.
# RC start and stop service
USE_RC_SUBR= kissdx
# set enviroment variables for port makefile
MAKE_ENV= FreeBSD=defined
# Convert CR/LF to LF in source files
USE_DOS2UNIX= yes
post-patch:
${REINPLACE_CMD} -e 's|Linux|Unix|g' ${WRKSRC}/kissdx.1
${REINPLACE_CMD} -e 's|/etc/|/usr/local/etc/|' ${WRKSRC}/kissdx.1
$(GZIP_CMD) -c ${INSTALL_WRKSRC}/kissdx.1 ${INSTALL_WRKSRC}/kissdx.1.gz
Remove this GZIP_CMD line, it will compressing manpage by default unless
user has MANCOMPRESSED sets to no or set to bzip2 rather than gzip.
$(MKDIR) $(FILESDIR)
$(CP) ${WRKSRC}/kissdx.in ${FILESDIR}
I don't really like to create FILESDIR and move from WRKSRC to FILESDIR.
The WRKDIR/WRKSRC are the place where you work anything inside. However,
move from WRKSRC to FILESDIR might create problem in future so avoid that.
do-install: all
$(INSTALL_PROGRAM) ${INSTALL_WRKSRC}/kissdx ${TARGETDIR}/sbin/kissdx
$(INSTALL_DATA) ${INSTALL_WRKSRC}/kissdx.conf
${TARGETDIR}/etc/kissdx.conf
$(INSTALL_MAN) ${INSTALL_WRKSRC}/kissdx.1.gz
${TARGETDIR}/man/man1/kissdx.1.gz
s/kissdx.1.gz/kissdx.1/g after you modify above, then change from
TARGETDIR to MANPREFIX.
echo kissdx_enabled=\YES\ /etc/rc.conf
do-deinstall:
$(RM) ${TARGETDIR}/sbin/kissdx
$(RM) ${TARGETDIR}/etc/kissdx.conf
$(RM) ${TARGETDIR}/man/man1/kissdx.*
$(RM) ${TARGETDIR}/etc/rc.d/kissdx
$(CP) ${/etc/rc.conf} ${/etc/rc.conf}.bak
${GREP} -v kissdx_ /etc/rc.conf.bak /etc/rc.conf
We don't need the do-deinstall target, so remove all of that. We have
'pkg_delete' and 'make deinstall'.
.include bsd.port.mk
pkg-plist:
sbin/kissdx
etc/kissdx.conf
etc/rc.d/kissdx
Remove 'etc/rc.d/kissdx' since that USE_RC_SUBR takes care of it. So it
will be two lines in pkg-plist, so I suggest you to remove pkg-plist and
use PLIST_FILES in Makefile to take care of these files.
I think that's all for now. Most of answers are in the porter handbook.
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/
Cheers,
Mezz
Application
Makefile:
snip
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD GNOME Team - FreeBSD Multimedia Hat (ports, not src)
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wiki.freebsd.org/multimedia - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Darren Pilgrim wrote: Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting. There have been a number of serious attempts and in depth research into various ports system issues (I still need to wade through a rather long one sent to me privately)... an other question did you read the preamble to this thread at all? (where it says I have volunteered to do the heavy lifting for anything that comes out this discussion [two others privately asked to also be involved]) What he's saying is that there have been many before you who have said and promised the same. Ideas get hashed out and we build amazing bike-sheds, but there has seldom been real product. What you have yet to do is distinguish yourself from history. Sounds like a fancy way of excusing yourself from not wanting to be a part of the process... If you really cared so much why not file (at least privately) a set of serious answers to the survey. As was said in the preamble it is not totally clear if the current system is broken enough (or at all) to warrant any serious changes. Until that is established it totally irresponsible in my mind to purpose any changes (i.e. it is a complex enough system that making adhoc changes carries more risk then reward) In short, patches please. Until then, don't expect enthusiastic encouragement. Depending on the outcome of the survey and followup's to it patches may prove to be insufficient (only a wholesale rewrite will suffice) - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHU6QD358R5LPuPvsRAqMJAKDkpy4gbaa95zwPULpRpYsE+xS+agCgo3FR bDY5GyyAijujcN+JPmJ+nK4= =3XAz -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Miguel Mendez wrote: On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: Hi, As has been hashed out in -ports@ over the last few days there is at least a need to examine weither or not the current ports system should remain as is or potentially be re-engineered in the future (estimates if and when needed vary from ASAP to 10-15 years). I have volunteered to undertake a feasibility/pilot project to examine what changes (if any) are needed in the system (for the purposes of this thread I will not venture any of my own suggestions). I have the following broad questions for people: I already replied to your questions in private but I wonder if you took a look at pkgsrc and the enhancements the OpenBSD people have done the pkg* commands and whether you think borrowing from them would be useful. I am purposelly not looking at any previous solutions right now... If and when it is determined that changes to the current system are needed I will look at them then for ideas of what has not worked. (like the Internet or other large complex systems we don't know how to make it we only know what doesn't work) - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHU6SO358R5LPuPvsRAj2OAKDSH+7nff+SkHAyypYc3OjbyyYuXwCfehta 6PyrvPsFAduJXSBIkS1V8Nc= =1KAL -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
3. What is the single best aspect of the current system? Easy to write ports, or modify those created by others. 4. What is the single worst aspect of the current system? Slowness of pkg_version and make index. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jeremy Messenger wrote: On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:37:22 -0600, David Southwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 02 December 2007 06:41:12 Dan Langille wrote: On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: 3. What is the single best aspect of the current system? Good people doing the heavy lifting 4. What is the single worst aspect of the current system? Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting. 8. How long have you used FreeBSD and/or UNIX in general? Since 1998. Well in this case the people doing the talking are also committing themselves to the lifting so I guess you would say here that the advocates of change are on the side of the angels. I trust you are not dedicated to becoming a permanent member of the opposition!! If so I might be tempted to say the worst aspect of the current system is that there are too many people determined to deny the need for change irrespective of merit. Sad, I second on Dan's answer for #4 question. It's not that we opposite it. It's faith that we don't have. It's not first time for people to keep talk with no action. It's called bikeshed. As I said to Dan this is a fancy sidestepping of the issue for one who has not even taken time to respond to the survey seriously (even privately) - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHU6UN358R5LPuPvsRAkKyAKDny+LyJFdxlL1m0Kds0JANgF/HXACgpT9r 8TYG+fcUtR/SSSHK5kyNykM= =PSdd -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
