Re: [Fink-devel] Transition of packages from system-openssl-dev
On Oct 18, 2015, at 4:21 PM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote: > > Regardless of your choice, they won't be buildable on 10.11 unless the > system-openssl-dev BuildDependency is updated/removed. Understood - I was already pinged by a NUT user running 10.11. Both of my packages are updated. Doesn't look like my wiki account from 2009 is still active, so could someone else please cross "nut" and "python-ldap-py27" off of the list? Thanks. -- Charles Lepple clepple@gmail -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Transition of packages from system-openssl-dev
On 10/18/2015 1:27 PM, Charles Lepple wrote: > On Oct 14, 2015, at 5:19 PM, Alexander Hansen > wrote: >> >> For people who want to test this out for their packages, but don’t always >> live on the bleeding edge and use git master, I recommend using branch_0_39, >> because you can then use “fink selfupdate” to get newer fink releases as >> usual. > > Should we hold off on committing updated info files? I saw that a few > packages on the list on the wiki are crossed out already. Or should we commit > them as "restrictive", then update the license field after 0.39.x+1 lands? Either solution is fine. If your stuff actually needs OpenSSL, the new License types should be in the next fink release (release date unknown) and it's up to you if you want to wait or mark them as Restrictive temporarily. Regardless of your choice, they won't be buildable on 10.11 unless the system-openssl-dev BuildDependency is updated/removed. Hanspeter -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Transition of packages from system-openssl-dev
> On Oct 18, 2015, at 11:27, Charles Lepple wrote: > > On Oct 14, 2015, at 5:19 PM, Alexander Hansen > wrote: >> >> For people who want to test this out for their packages, but don’t always >> live on the bleeding edge and use git master, I recommend using branch_0_39, >> because you can then use “fink selfupdate” to get newer fink releases as >> usual. > > Should we hold off on committing updated info files? I saw that a few > packages on the list on the wiki are crossed out already. Or should we commit > them as "restrictive", then update the license field after 0.39.x+1 lands? > > -- > Charles Lepple > clepple@gmail > > > I’d advocate going ahead with updates and updating the license later. I’d hoped to release fink-0.39.2 this weekend, but stuff got in the way. -- Alexander Hansen, Ph.D. Fink User Liaison -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Transition of packages from system-openssl-dev
On Oct 14, 2015, at 5:19 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote: > > For people who want to test this out for their packages, but don’t always > live on the bleeding edge and use git master, I recommend using branch_0_39, > because you can then use “fink selfupdate” to get newer fink releases as > usual. Should we hold off on committing updated info files? I saw that a few packages on the list on the wiki are crossed out already. Or should we commit them as "restrictive", then update the license field after 0.39.x+1 lands? -- Charles Lepple clepple@gmail -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] make 4.x vs fink on 10.11
On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Jack Howarth
wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Jack Howarth
> wrote:
>
>> Looking a bit more at the failures of make 4.x under fink, I noticed that
>> fink uses the perl system() call and MacPorts uses tcl's system() call as
>> well. However the perl documentation has the following comment...
>>
>> Since system does a fork and wait it may affect a SIGCHLD handler. See
>> perlipc for details.
>>
>> This may be critical to the bug as the diff of main.c in make 3.8.2 to
>> 4.1 shows following additional code...
>>
>> +#ifndef WINDOWS32
>> +#ifdef HAVE_FCNTL
>> +# define FD_OK(_f) ((fcntl ((_f), F_GETFD) != -1) || (errno != EBADF))
>> +#else
>> +# define FD_OK(_f) 1
>> +#endif
>> + /* Create a duplicate pipe, that will be closed in the SIGCHLD
>> + handler. If this fails with EBADF, the parent has closed the
>> pipe
>> + on us because it didn't think we were a submake. If so, print a
>> + warning then default to -j1. */
>> + else if (!FD_OK (job_fds[0]) || !FD_OK (job_fds[1])
>> + || (job_rfd = dup (job_fds[0])) < 0)
>> +{
>> + if (errno != EBADF)
>> +pfatal_with_name (_("dup jobserver"));
>> +
>> + O (error, NILF,
>> + _("warning: jobserver unavailable: using -j1. Add '+' to
>> parent make rule."));
>> + job_slots = 1;
>> + job_fds[0] = job_fds[1] = -1;
>> +}
>> +#endif
>>
>> So far, I am not seeing the make failures when using the older fink make
>> 3.82 packaging on 10.11. Also, note that the errors we are seeing with make
>> 4.1 are of the form..
>>
>> make: INTERNAL: Exiting with 1 jobserver tokens available; should be 8!
>>
>> ...where the jobs are being lowered expectedly from 8 to 1 exactly as the
>> comment in main.c states. As far as I can tell, the code section above is
>> the only place in make 4.1 where job_slots is reset to 1.
>> Jack
>> ps The MacPorts developers pointed that their system() isn't actually the
>> stock tcl one but a custom version...
>>
>> http://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/base/src/pextlib1.0/system.c
>>
>> which uses fork().
>>
>
> FYI, MacPorts have been using there own system() call for 12 years or
> more. The first version with the system call placed in its own file (before
> all the sandbox support was added) is about 6 years old.
>
>
> http://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/base/src/pextlib1.0/system.c?rev=53831
>
> and might be a good starting point for a c-version of system() which would
> work under perl.
>
Actually, MacPorts use of their own system() call dates back 13 years...
http://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/base/src/pextlib1.0/Pextlib.c?rev=214
--
___
Fink-devel mailing list
Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
List archive:
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] make 4.x vs fink on 10.11
On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Jack Howarth
wrote:
> Looking a bit more at the failures of make 4.x under fink, I noticed that
> fink uses the perl system() call and MacPorts uses tcl's system() call as
> well. However the perl documentation has the following comment...
>
> Since system does a fork and wait it may affect a SIGCHLD handler. See
> perlipc for details.
>
> This may be critical to the bug as the diff of main.c in make 3.8.2 to 4.1
> shows following additional code...
>
> +#ifndef WINDOWS32
> +#ifdef HAVE_FCNTL
> +# define FD_OK(_f) ((fcntl ((_f), F_GETFD) != -1) || (errno != EBADF))
> +#else
> +# define FD_OK(_f) 1
> +#endif
> + /* Create a duplicate pipe, that will be closed in the SIGCHLD
> + handler. If this fails with EBADF, the parent has closed the
> pipe
> + on us because it didn't think we were a submake. If so, print a
> + warning then default to -j1. */
> + else if (!FD_OK (job_fds[0]) || !FD_OK (job_fds[1])
> + || (job_rfd = dup (job_fds[0])) < 0)
> +{
> + if (errno != EBADF)
> +pfatal_with_name (_("dup jobserver"));
> +
> + O (error, NILF,
> + _("warning: jobserver unavailable: using -j1. Add '+' to
> parent make rule."));
> + job_slots = 1;
> + job_fds[0] = job_fds[1] = -1;
> +}
> +#endif
>
> So far, I am not seeing the make failures when using the older fink make
> 3.82 packaging on 10.11. Also, note that the errors we are seeing with make
> 4.1 are of the form..
>
> make: INTERNAL: Exiting with 1 jobserver tokens available; should be 8!
>
> ...where the jobs are being lowered expectedly from 8 to 1 exactly as the
> comment in main.c states. As far as I can tell, the code section above is
> the only place in make 4.1 where job_slots is reset to 1.
> Jack
> ps The MacPorts developers pointed that their system() isn't actually the
> stock tcl one but a custom version...
>
> http://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/base/src/pextlib1.0/system.c
>
> which uses fork().
>
FYI, MacPorts have been using there own system() call for 12 years or more.
The first version with the system call placed in its own file (before all
the sandbox support was added) is about 6 years old.
http://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/base/src/pextlib1.0/system.c?rev=53831
and might be a good starting point for a c-version of system() which would
work under perl.
--
___
Fink-devel mailing list
Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
List archive:
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
