New port of Owl Lisp (and soon Blab)
Hi there, I noticed that Aki Helin's excellent Radamsa fuzzer is available in the ports tree, but not its grammar-based counterpart, Blab: https://github.com/aoh/blab, so I started preparing a port for Blab. However, Blab has as a dependency another tool called Owl Lisp: https://github.com/aoh/owl-lisp, so I started porting that, too. The port is for the current version of Owl Lisp (0.1.7), and Aki has agreed to take some of the changes upstream for his next version. My port is available as a tarball here: https://brianmwaters.net/projects/owl-lisp.tar.gz. (It's only about 2k.) Thanks, Brian Waters Burlington, Vermont, USA ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD Port: logstash-1.4.2_1
Hi Albert, I’ve already given logstash 1.5.0 a shot but I realised it’s still affected by a bug that prevents it to function properly on FreeBSD (see this PR I authored: https://github.com/jnr/jnr-ffi/pull/26). Unfortunately, a fixed version of JRuby didn’t make it into logstash 1.5.0 and the patch in the old port won’t work on the new one (see https://github.com/elastic/logstash/issues/3271). As a consequence, my intention currently is waiting for the Logstash developers to ship a version that includes an updated JRuby instead of having to create and test a new patch. I believe it won’t take long because developers are at work and a patch has already been merged: https://github.com/elastic/logstash/commit/827fc6d41815adfb13bbe6032f43d44a0d315784 Cheers, -- Enrico On 27 May 2015, at 01:21, Albert Gabàs | Astabis aga...@astabis.com wrote: Dear Enrico, Please, could you update the port to the latest version - 1.5.0?? Thank you!! -- Albert Gabàs - Astabis Information Risk Management Barcelona: +34 931 980 181 | Madrid: +34 911 333 071 United Kingdom: +44 203 695 2195 | Israel: +97 248 847 344 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Any guidance for gnupg-2.0 - gnupg-2.1 (archived encrypted email)?
On Tue, 26 May 2015 15:37:11 +1000 Kubilay Kocak ko...@freebsd.org wrote On 26/05/2015 12:54 PM, Chris H wrote: On Tue, 26 May 2015 06:59:52 +1000 John Marshall john.marsh...@riverwillow.com.au wrote On Sun, 24 May 2015, 11:13 -0700, David Wolfskill wrote: Last November, I encountered a reason to deviate from that: When security/gnupg became gnupg-2.1, I found that gnupg-2.1 was unable to decrypt some (well, any, in my experience) archived encrypted email messages. I was bitten badly in November when I blindly upgraded security/gnupg and found myself in the new, shiny, non-STABLE version 2.1.0. I can't remember the details, but too much stuff didn't work. I went to the release notes and other places and spent about a day trying to make the best of it. I had some success but ended up reverting security/gnupg - security/gnupg20 after I discovered the following on the GnuPG home page. - 2.0.27 is the stable version suggested for most users, - 2.1.4 is the brand-new modern version with support for ECC and many other new features, and - 1.4.19 is the classic portable version. The STABLE 2.0 branch still works for me and the surprise factor is not as prominent as in 2.1. I have no idea why the main FreeBSD port was switched from STABLE to CURRENT and the STABLE version was relegated to a new version-tagged port. Sorry if this is off-topic but maybe it helps some folks. Isn't the standard way to deal with this in the ports tree, to create category/portname, and category/portname-devel ? Having portname track stable, and the -devel branch track current? Can gnupg be rearranged to follow this method? There are a couple of cases to consider: Note: I will refer to branches as !development, rather than stable/current/release, since often there isn't an absolutely clear distinction, or those designations can be relatively transient. a) Those projects that have many (read 2) supported versions/branches. b) Those projects that maintain 2 versions/branches, latest !development and development (next version) The category/portname and category/portname-devel convention only covers for (b), and is not necessarily a good convention for all cases. For instance ZeroMQ maintains quite a few previous stable branches. Having category/portname move across major/minor versions can (and does) break compatibility for dependent ports. In this case category/portnameXY is a better convention, perhaps with category/portname left to point to a DEFAULT_VERSION, which the user can change. Similar examples include apache, squid, postgresql, php among others. In this case, I'd have opted for gnupg20 and gnupg21 rather than a -devel distinction or moving gnupg across major/minor versions. Personally preference granted, but a considered one. My 2c I completely understand, and very much appreciate your input on this. I also tried to figure how it would even be feasible to rearrange gnupg to follow the stable / -devel track, given that the shoe has already dropped, so to speak -- the new version has already been applied to the gnupg port. But since there appeared to be 1) some compatibility issues, 2) the web site indicates 2.0 is the stable branch, and 3) so many other ports in the ports tree depend on the standard gnupg branch. That maybe the switch to 2.1 might have been a bit premature, and that the standard / -devel route might be the / a solution. That's all. Not trying to be pushy or anything. Just attempting to suggest a possible solution. :) Koobs ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org --Chris -- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
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, you can safely ignore the entry. You will not be e-mailed again for any of the port/version combinations below. Full details can be found at the following URL: http://portscout.freebsd.org/po...@freebsd.org.html Port| Current version | New version +-+ databases/jasperreports | 5.5.2 | 6.1.0 +-+ If any of the above results are invalid, please check the following page for details on how to improve portscout's detection and selection of distfiles on a per-port basis: http://portscout.freebsd.org/info/portscout-portconfig.txt Thanks. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
audio/oss
10.1-RELEASE-p10 #0 r282952 i386 oss-4.2.b2011 After playing of music finishes, I get around 20 of these: kernel trap 22 with interrupts disabled Recompilation nad reinstallation, soundoff soundon didn't help. Same procedure, after removing 'CPUTYPE?=prescott' SOLVED a problem! Domagoj ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: audio/oss
Le 26/05/2015 12:15, rank1see...@gmail.com a écrit : 10.1-RELEASE-p10 #0 r282952 i386 oss-4.2.b2011 After playing of music finishes, I get around 20 of these: kernel trap 22 with interrupts disabled Recompilation nad reinstallation, soundoff soundon didn't help. Same procedure, after removing 'CPUTYPE?=prescott' SOLVED a problem! That's weird, but do you really need OSSv4 from ports? Your sound card isn't supported by default FreeBSD drivers? Regards, David. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: pkg install kodi does not like samba
Well, it's all said in https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177786. I've added samba36-nmblookup as a courtesy for the xmbc/kodi project while ago so it's not depend on full samba package, but now it's going too far in the request to drop nmblookup from samba36 itself.. The real solution(are we done with GSOC projects for this year already?) would be ability to build multiple packages out of one port, since we already have stagedir. So, only one extra step is required, similar the way it's done in Debian. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: Not sure if this is a problem with multimedia/kodi port or if it is with pkg or both: $ pkg install kodi Updating FreeBSD repository catalogue... FreeBSD repository is up-to-date. Updating poudriere repository catalogue... poudriere repository is up-to-date. All repositories are up-to-date. Checking integrity... done (1 conflicting) Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting) The following 13 package(s) will be affected (of 0 checked): Installed packages to be REMOVED: samba36-3.6.25 New packages to be INSTALLED: kodi: 14.2 [FreeBSD] tinyxml: 2.6.2_1 [FreeBSD] samba36-nmblookup: 3.6.25 [FreeBSD] libnfs: 1.3.0_1 [FreeBSD] libcec: 2.2.0 [FreeBSD] libbluray: 0.7.0,1 [FreeBSD] libbdplus: 0.1.2 [FreeBSD] libaacs: 0.8.0 [FreeBSD] libass: 0.12.1 [FreeBSD] sdl2: 2.0.3_4 [FreeBSD] shairplay: 0.9.0.20140422 [FreeBSD] lzo2: 2.09 [FreeBSD] So, pkg wants to replace samba36 with samba36-nmblookup. I think that those packages conflict because samba36 provides a superset of what samba36-nmblookup provides. So, there should be no reason to not just use samba36. Finally, why do we need net/samba-nmblookup at all? Seems like kodi is its only user and it is not a light-weight port already. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
FreeBSD Port: logstash-1.4.2_1
Dear Enrico, Please, could you update the port to the latest version - 1.5.0?? Thank you!! -- Albert Gabàs - Astabis Information Risk Management Barcelona: +34 931 980 181 | Madrid: +34 911 333 071 United Kingdom: +44 203 695 2195 | Israel: +97 248 847 344 ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: New pkg audit / vuln.xml failures (php55, unzoo)
On Sat, May 23, 2015, at 10:30, Roger Marquis wrote: If you find a vulnerability such as a new CVE or mailing list announcement please send it to the port maintainer and ports-sect...@freebsd.org as quickly as possible. They are whoefully understaffed and need our help. Who is ports-secteam? There has been no Call For Help that I've ever seen. If people are needed to process these CVEs so they are entered into VUXML, sign me up to ports-secteam please. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
pkg install kodi does not like samba
Not sure if this is a problem with multimedia/kodi port or if it is with pkg or both: $ pkg install kodi Updating FreeBSD repository catalogue... FreeBSD repository is up-to-date. Updating poudriere repository catalogue... poudriere repository is up-to-date. All repositories are up-to-date. Checking integrity... done (1 conflicting) Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting) The following 13 package(s) will be affected (of 0 checked): Installed packages to be REMOVED: samba36-3.6.25 New packages to be INSTALLED: kodi: 14.2 [FreeBSD] tinyxml: 2.6.2_1 [FreeBSD] samba36-nmblookup: 3.6.25 [FreeBSD] libnfs: 1.3.0_1 [FreeBSD] libcec: 2.2.0 [FreeBSD] libbluray: 0.7.0,1 [FreeBSD] libbdplus: 0.1.2 [FreeBSD] libaacs: 0.8.0 [FreeBSD] libass: 0.12.1 [FreeBSD] sdl2: 2.0.3_4 [FreeBSD] shairplay: 0.9.0.20140422 [FreeBSD] lzo2: 2.09 [FreeBSD] So, pkg wants to replace samba36 with samba36-nmblookup. I think that those packages conflict because samba36 provides a superset of what samba36-nmblookup provides. So, there should be no reason to not just use samba36. Finally, why do we need net/samba-nmblookup at all? Seems like kodi is its only user and it is not a light-weight port already. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
