Re: FreeBSD Port: python27-2.7.0_1
I think we shall update python2.7 as PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION at least after python-2.7.1 and FreeBSD-8.2 release. wen 2010/11/14 John Hein : > John Hein wrote at 15:55 MDT on Oct 30, 2010: > > Maxim Khitrov wrote at 15:42 -0400 on Oct 30, 2010: > > > On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Sylvain Garrigues > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > I am using FreeBSD 8.1 and I would like to know the reasons > > > > why it has been decided that the default Python installation > > > > is 2.6 and not 2.7. > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > > Add "PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=python2.7" to /etc/make.conf. > > To answer Sylvain's original query, 2.7 is fairly new still. When a > sufficent amount of testing has occurred that indicates 2.7 has no > regressions, then someone will throw the switch. Of course, what > constitutes a sufficient amount of testing is somewhat subjective. So > the more use it gets by early adopters (such as yourself presumably), > the higher the confidence in being able to update the default. > > I've been using python27 for a couple months now without any problems. > To help get the default switched from 2.6 to 2.7, request it and > report any successes (and problems) here and/or submit PRs. > > A search in the PR database for python27 doesn't turn up any > significant problems. > > It will also probably require at least one full ports test build. I > don't know if one has been requested. > ___ > freebsd-pyt...@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-python > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-python-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > -- 真理从来没有战胜过谬误，真理只有在坚持谬误的人死去后才成为真理。 ___ 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"
Conflict between netpipes-4.2 and timelimit-1.7
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 The above two listed ports have a conflict with the installed binary '/usr/local/bin/timelimit' but do not list each-other as a conflict and should be adjusted to reflect the conflict with one-another. $ pkg_info -qW /usr/local/bin/timelimit pkg_info: both netpipes-4.2 and timelimit-1.7 claim to have installed /usr/local/bin/timelimit This could also be said for its manual pages as well. After removing the timelimit-1.7 package and then upgrading netpipes-4.2 ===>>> Creating a backup package for old version netpipes-4.2 tar: man/man1/timelimit.1.gz: Cannot stat: No such file or directory tar: bin/timelimit: Cannot stat: No such file or directory tar: Error exit delayed from previous errors. pkg_create: make_dist: tar command failed with code 256 ===>>> Package creation failed for netpipes-4.2! Though the functionality provided by both timelimit commands are fundamentally the same, timelimit-1.7 offers quite a bit more control over the one that ships with netpipes-4.2 without the need to install files like 'faucet' that may act as a network server. Would it be possible to install the netpipes version of timelimit binary as timelimit-4.2 instead ? or maybe another name so these can coexist ? *** As well, timelimit-1.7 would be a great candidate for import into world since it is your e-std 2 clause BSD license and a 3 file compile. ;) And if noone else wants to maintain it in tree then ill volunteer. *** Regards, - -- jhell,v -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJM323hAAoJEJBXh4mJ2FR+nyAH/AiCStRku/gxLP9urxN1txov JaR7KgaMEiVuuUk5pt/9lOr5sY1tdRmX16CgPzwKfr5pZpC/BBkYpsYHH/QLJ1MC dgUubQoEowe50QmgFFhDDnAnnZ1FEnEWnknPZErKcNAF/td59xeMAzxN7lFZ40dC k1GTozKo7gx6pgYeFcpxCu14ve4LXsEkKfy3lhjMVunbgyjVSMT3NuwKlrYyEIGq +KUknTcaP5VEEg6tM//HS904WGPAtd6sbc62q6TowzYx2DEFx4I8Uf+NRoAjwJaZ KM0HYtwjjE7IRWk2d7CjN9O60tCVbZbzpr5Y9MFzaip4Wk6gLFJw94XpENOobFE= =aywI -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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: python27-2.7.0_1
John Hein wrote at 15:55 MDT on Oct 30, 2010: > Maxim Khitrov wrote at 15:42 -0400 on Oct 30, 2010: > > On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Sylvain Garrigues > wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I am using FreeBSD 8.1 and I would like to know the reasons > > > why it has been decided that the default Python installation > > > is 2.6 and not 2.7. > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Add "PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION=python2.7" to /etc/make.conf. To answer Sylvain's original query, 2.7 is fairly new still. When a sufficent amount of testing has occurred that indicates 2.7 has no regressions, then someone will throw the switch. Of course, what constitutes a sufficient amount of testing is somewhat subjective. So the more use it gets by early adopters (such as yourself presumably), the higher the confidence in being able to update the default. I've been using python27 for a couple months now without any problems. To help get the default switched from 2.6 to 2.7, request it and report any successes (and problems) here and/or submit PRs. A search in the PR database for python27 doesn't turn up any significant problems. It will also probably require at least one full ports test build. I don't know if one has been requested. ___ 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: [www/chromium] Illegal instruction: 4 on Pentium3
H.
Finally, I removed -mss3 and -mpentium4(changed to -msse and
-mpentium3). I could compile and execute chromium on Pentium3
without problem.
@@ -884,8 +884,8 @@
'conditions': [
['branding=="Chromium"', {
'cflags': [
- '-march=pentium4',
- '-msse2',
+ '-march=pentium3',
+ '-msse',
'-mfpmath=sse',
],
}],
From chromium mailing list archive discussion, some Athlon CPU
does not have SSE2. So I thought default compile option was -msse or
remove -msse( and remove -mfpmath=sse). and could set by CFLAGS value
Best Regards,
---
MIHIRA, Sanpei Yoshiro
Tokyo, Japan.
___
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: PR ports/152169
On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 12:34:46 -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: > On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Jake Smith wrote: > > Hello Marco, > > > > I am just wondering if you (or anyone else) can clarify if I created a > > duplicate PR patch for ossec-hids. I notice we both have a PR submitted to > > update the freebsd port to 2.5.1 (ports/152169 and ports/152170), and both > > have the same arrival date, to the second. > > It looks like both of you sent separate PRs at the same time. It may appear that way based on the Arrival-Date:, but it is not true. -- Sahil Tandon ___ 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"
MySQL HandlerSocket plugin port
Hi. I've made port for plugin, but after two days plugin stoped loading in MySQL. http://host129.rax.ru/ports/handlersocket-mysql51-plugin.tar.bz2 Please, test this port on MySQL 5.1. Now it's building from github and doesn't have stable version. Thanks to Sahil Tandon for workaround with mysql sources. ___ 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: xorg-server 1.7.7
on 13/11/2010 21:25 Mark Linimon said the following: > There's this whole "testing" thing :-) So, I thought taht I contributed one test report already :-) > xorg seems to have an amazing ability to introduce regressions, especially > in edge cases/older hardware. Each of the last N updates has been preceded > by a lot of staging/testing, and even so, created a lot of work to clean > everything up. I think that you refer to upgrades of the "Xorg bundle" as a whole. Not sure if we've had any problems like that when upgrading between minor versions of a single module, even such as xorg server. > So, in theory, it's easy, but in practice, it requires someone(s) with a lot > of time and dedication. > > We certainly need one or more such people right now! I agree, but I am not sure how in the ports land we do an application testing in general. That is, I am sure there will be a lot of testers if the port update is actually committed :-) but I am not sure how to test it in advance (given all the possible hardware and software configurations). -- 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"
Re: [www/chromium] Illegal instruction: 4 on Pentium3
On 11/13/2010 16:58, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: Chromium requires sse2 normally, as detailed in this bug report: http://crbug.com/9007 This bug report is related to Chromium 2, but I've run Chromium 4 on PIII on Linux without problems That distro was probably manually removing those flags to support older hardware, but until the OP confirms that this was the fix, doesn't matter. ___ 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: xorg-server 1.7.7
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 05:11:41PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote: > Oh, forgot a need to simply bump port revisions of all xorg driver ports. > That's perhaps a little bit laborious, but doesn't require any special skills. > Or did you have something else in mind? There's this whole "testing" thing :-) xorg seems to have an amazing ability to introduce regressions, especially in edge cases/older hardware. Each of the last N updates has been preceded by a lot of staging/testing, and even so, created a lot of work to clean everything up. So, in theory, it's easy, but in practice, it requires someone(s) with a lot of time and dedication. We certainly need one or more such people right now! mcl ___ 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: PR ports/152169
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Jake Smith wrote: > Hello Marco, > > I am just wondering if you (or anyone else) can clarify if I created a > duplicate PR patch for ossec-hids. I notice we both have a PR submitted to > update the freebsd port to 2.5.1 (ports/152169 and ports/152170), and both > have the same arrival date, to the second. It looks like both of you sent separate PRs at the same time. > What are the chances that would happen Given the large numbers of PRs sent it is quite likely that at least once something like this would happen -- Eitan Adler ___ 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: PR ports/152169
On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 13:20:56 +, Jake Smith wrote: > I am just wondering if you (or anyone else) can clarify if I created a > duplicate PR patch for ossec-hids. I notice we both have a PR > submitted to update the freebsd port to 2.5.1 (ports/152169 and > ports/152170), and both have the same arrival date, to the second. > What are the chances that would happen :) or is there something I > don't understand about how PRs work? It looks like a small GNATS quirk at the time your PRs were processed. You both submitted via the web form, and Marco's PR preceded yours by about seven minutes. -- Sahil Tandon ___ 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: [www/chromium] Illegal instruction: 4 on Pentium3
> Chromium requires sse2 normally, as detailed in this bug report: > > http://crbug.com/9007 This bug report is related to Chromium 2, but I've run Chromium 4 on PIII on Linux without problems -- Regards, Konstantin ___ 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: cvs commit: ports/audio/rsynth Makefile
The Restless Daemon identified a gcc4 error while trying to build: rsynth-2.0_3 maintained by po...@freebsd.org Makefile ident: $FreeBSD: ports/audio/rsynth/Makefile,v 1.28 2010/11/13 15:15:33 dinoex Exp $ Excerpt from http://QAT.TecNik93.com/logs/8-STABLE-NPD/rsynth-2.0_3.log : checking for -lICE... no checking for -ldnet... no checking for -ldnet_stub... no checking for -lnsl... no checking for -lsocket... no checking for -lsocket... (cached) no checking for -lnsl... (cached) no checking for -lX11... yes checking for audio/audiolib.h... -I.: not found grep: conftest.out: No such file or directory yes checking for -laudio... yes checking whether cc needs -traditional... no checking return type of signal handlers... int checking for GNU make... no updating cache ./config.cache creating ./config.status creating Makefile creating config.h linking ./config/freebsdplay.c to hplay.c ===> Building for rsynth-2.0_3 cc -O2 -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing -I. -I. -I/usr/local/include -DDICT_DIR=\"/usr/local/lib/dict\" -c -o say.o say.c In file included from say.c:43: /usr/include/stdio.h:57: error: two or more data types in declaration specifiers In file included from ./useconfig.h:19, from say.c:45: /usr/include/malloc.h:3:2: error: #error " has been replaced by " say.c: In function 'say_phones': say.c:189: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function 'malloc' say.c: In function 'concat_args': say.c:332: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function 'strlen' say.c:333: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function 'malloc' *** Error code 1 Stop in /work/a/ports/audio/rsynth/work/rsynth-2.0. *** Error code 1 Stop in /a/ports/audio/rsynth. build of /usr/ports/audio/rsynth ended at Sat Nov 13 15:24:22 UTC 2010 The tarballed WRKDIR can be found here: http://QAT.TecNik93.com/wrkdirs/8-STABLE-NPD/rsynth-2.0_3.tbz PortsMon page for the port: http://portsmon.freebsd.org/portoverview.py?category=audio&portname=rsynth The build which triggered this BotMail was done under tinderbox-3.3_3; dsversion: 3.2.1 on RELENG_8 on amd64, kern.smp.cpus: 8 with tinderd_flags="-nullfs -plistcheck -onceonly" and ccache support, with the "official" up-to-date Ports Tree, with the following vars set: NOPORTDOCS=yes, NOPORTEXAMPLES=yes, NOPORTDATA=yes, FORCE_PACKAGE=yes. A description of the testing process can be found here: http://T32.TecNik93.com/FreeBSD/QA-Tindy/ Thanks for your work on making FreeBSD better, -- QAT - your friendly neighborhood Daemon, preparing a heck of an error trapping system: - "HMC and EOI?" - "Halt, Melt and Catch fire or Execute Operator Immediately." ___ 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"
PR ports/152169
Hello Marco, I am just wondering if you (or anyone else) can clarify if I created a duplicate PR patch for ossec-hids. I notice we both have a PR submitted to update the freebsd port to 2.5.1 (ports/152169 and ports/152170), and both have the same arrival date, to the second. What are the chances that would happen :) or is there something I don't understand about how PRs work? Jake ___ 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"
