Re: Xorg initial resolution broken

[Mark Knight]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "[LoN]Kamikaze"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Mark Knight wrote:
>> Just restarted X after various Xorg updates.  Now the server seems to be
>> completely ignoring the "Modes" line in the config file's Screen/Display
>> section and picking its own initial resolution.
>>
>> No problem switching to the desired resolution later on when logged in.
>>
>> Config and log files here:
>>
>>   http://www.knigma.org.uk/scratch/resolution.txt
>>
>> This configuration has worked for years so I'm sure it's down to the
>> Xorg update.  Any ideas please?
>>
>> Cheers,
>
>Set PreferredMode and check for the Virtual screen size in the log, you might
>have to increase that to.

Thanks for the tips.

Setting PreferredMode caused the X server to lockup during start-up
before switching out of text mode and requiring kill -9, until I removed
my HorizSync and VertRefresh lines.

Tried with X -configure afresh and achieved the same effect.

With DDC and without HorizSync and VertRefresh lines PreferredMode is
working but I'm having to use a lower refresh and I've lost the highest
resolution my monitor displays.

So for me the choice seems to be:

  - stick with my old config and sort out resolution when I log in

  - accept lower refresh (75Hz) and lower max resolution (rarely used it
anyway), and use PreferredMode

Cheers,
-- 
Mark A. R. Knight   finger: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +44 7880 556751http://www.knigma.org/
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

portsnap troubles?

[Derkjan de Haan]

Hi,

Can it be that something related to portsnap hangs? I'm not seeing any
updates (i.e. the png security update) come through.


Regards,

Derkjan


___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: portsnap troubles?

[Erwin Lansing]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 10:28:03AM +0200, Derkjan de Haan wrote:
> Hi,

Howyd,
> 
> Can it be that something related to portsnap hangs? I'm not seeing any
> updates (i.e. the png security update) come through.
> 
The server that builds the portsnap data is down due to hardware
problems.  I'm not sure what the status is, but hopefully it will return
soon.

Best,
-erwin

-- 
Erwin Lansing http://droso.org
Security is like an onion.  (o_ _o)
It's made up of several layers   \\\_\   /_///[EMAIL PROTECTED]
And it makes you cry.<) (>[EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpwqblGFgN0S.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Possibly unbuildable ports reminder

[Bill Fenner]

Dear porters,

  This is just a reminder to please periodically check the list of
unbuildable ports at http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/ .
A list by MAINTAINER is

http://people.freebsd.org/~fenner/errorlogs/

so you can easily check the status of ports that you maintain.  In
addition, the list of ports with no MAINTAINER with build problems is

http://people.freebsd.org/~fenner/errorlogs/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Since no one is responsible for these ports, the problem won't get
fixed unless someone on this list takes the initiative.

Thanks for your help!

Bill "annoying port email" Fenner
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: portsnap troubles?

[Simon L. Nielsen]

On 2007.10.14 11:27:13 +0200, Erwin Lansing wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 10:28:03AM +0200, Derkjan de Haan wrote:
> > Hi,
> 
> Howyd,
> > 
> > Can it be that something related to portsnap hangs? I'm not seeing any
> > updates (i.e. the png security update) come through.
> > 
> The server that builds the portsnap data is down due to hardware
> problems.  I'm not sure what the status is, but hopefully it will return
> soon.

Onsite people have been poked, but no status yet.

-- 
Simon L. Nielsen
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: Xorg initial resolution broken

[Randy Pratt]

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 08:10:25 +0100
Mark Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "[LoN]Kamikaze"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >Mark Knight wrote:
> >> Just restarted X after various Xorg updates.  Now the server seems to be
> >> completely ignoring the "Modes" line in the config file's Screen/Display
> >> section and picking its own initial resolution.
> >>
> >> No problem switching to the desired resolution later on when logged in.
> >>
> >> Config and log files here:
> >>
> >>   http://www.knigma.org.uk/scratch/resolution.txt
> >>
> >> This configuration has worked for years so I'm sure it's down to the
> >> Xorg update.  Any ideas please?
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >
> >Set PreferredMode and check for the Virtual screen size in the log, you might
> >have to increase that to.
> 
> Thanks for the tips.
> 
> Setting PreferredMode caused the X server to lockup during start-up
> before switching out of text mode and requiring kill -9, until I removed
> my HorizSync and VertRefresh lines.
> 
> Tried with X -configure afresh and achieved the same effect.
> 
> With DDC and without HorizSync and VertRefresh lines PreferredMode is
> working but I'm having to use a lower refresh and I've lost the highest
> resolution my monitor displays.
> 
> So for me the choice seems to be:
> 
>   - stick with my old config and sort out resolution when I log in
> 
>   - accept lower refresh (75Hz) and lower max resolution (rarely used it
> anyway), and use PreferredMode

I'm having the same default resolution (1280x1024) problem using the
updated xf86-video-mga-1.9.100 driver and additionally am unable to
switch modes using the ctrl-alt-keypad +/- keys (Option "Dont Zoom"
_is_ disabled).

I reverted to the xf86-video-mga-1.4.7 driver and the desktop is
my normal 1024x768 resolution and the mode switch keys work.  Alas,
as my eyes age, the higher resolutions are unreadable.

Are you perhaps using the xf86-video-mga driver?  If so, reverting
to the older version may be another temporary workaround.

Randy
-- 
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

FreeBSD Port: png-1.2.22

[L. Derksen]

Hello,

I did get a message from portaudit that my 'png-1.2.18'-package was a 
security risk. So I updated my portstree with 'portsnap fetch update', 
deleted the png-package (make deinstall) and then tried to install the 
current png-package (1.2.22). Now the tree gives me the message:


===>  png-1.2.18 has known vulnerabilities:
=> png -- multiple vulnerabilities.
  Reference: 


=> Please update your ports tree and try again.
*** Error code 1

Question:
Why is my ports tree not up to date with png-1.2.22? When i do a 
'portsnap fetch update' it gives me that my tree is up to date.


Thanks in advance,
L. Derksen
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

mysql51-server won't start after upgrade

[Jeffrey Williams]

I just upgraded mysql51-server with cvsup and portupgrade.

Now it won't start, and the error I am getting is:
[ERROR] /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: unknown variable 
'innodb_log_arch_dir=/var/db/mysql/'


I have been scanning the release notes, but I haven't found anything 
yet, that indicates that this variable has been deprecated, and it still 
appears in the example my.cnf files.


Anybody know what is going on here?

full log below.

Thanks
Jeff


071014 05:05:12 mysqld_safe Starting mysqld daemon with databases from 
/var/db/mysql

071014  5:05:12  InnoDB: Started; log sequence number 0 3296934308
071014  5:05:12 [ERROR] /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: unknown variable 
'innodb_log_arch_dir=/var/db/mysql/'


071014  5:05:12 [ERROR] Aborting

071014  5:05:12  InnoDB: Starting shutdown...
071014  5:05:14  InnoDB: Shutdown completed; log sequence number 0 
3296934308

071014  5:05:14 [Note] /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: Shutdown complete

071014 05:05:14 mysqld_safe mysqld from pid file 
/var/db/mysql/www.onlineed.com.pid ended

___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: Xorg initial resolution broken

[Mark Knight]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Randy 
Pratt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

I'm having the same default resolution (1280x1024) problem using the
updated xf86-video-mga-1.9.100 driver and additionally am unable to
switch modes using the ctrl-alt-keypad +/- keys (Option "Dont Zoom"
_is_ disabled).

I reverted to the xf86-video-mga-1.4.7 driver and the desktop is
my normal 1024x768 resolution and the mode switch keys work.  Alas,
as my eyes age, the higher resolutions are unreadable.

Are you perhaps using the xf86-video-mga driver?  If so, reverting
to the older version may be another temporary workaround.


Indeed, yes - xf86-video-mga-1.9.100 is the port upgrade the broke it.

The trouble with portupgrade -a is I don't always know what's changed ;)

Cheers,
--
Mark A. R. Knight   finger: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +44 7880 556751http://www.knigma.org/
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: FreeBSD Port: png-1.2.22

[Tobias Roth]

L. Derksen wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I did get a message from portaudit that my 'png-1.2.18'-package was a
> security risk. So I updated my portstree with 'portsnap fetch update',
> deleted the png-package (make deinstall) and then tried to install the
> current png-package (1.2.22). Now the tree gives me the message:
> 
> ===>  png-1.2.18 has known vulnerabilities:
> => png -- multiple vulnerabilities.
>   Reference:
> 
> 
> => Please update your ports tree and try again.
> *** Error code 1
> 
> Question:
> Why is my ports tree not up to date with png-1.2.22? When i do a
> 'portsnap fetch update' it gives me that my tree is up to date.

The portsnap server hardware is experiencing problems at the moment,
this is being worked on.

I figured since the png vulnerability is only DoS, and not code
execution, I'll just wait until the hardware is fixed. If you don't want
to wait, I suggest you get the update manually via cvs:

CVSROOT="[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/ncvs" cvs co png

Cheers,
Tobias
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Smarteiffel is marked broken but is not

[Patrick Lamaiziere]

Hi,

lang/smarteiffel is marked "BROKEN= does not install" on FreeBSD >= 7
but it builds and installs fine, and runs fine too on 7.0-PRERELEASE/i386

Anyway, if I am the only one user of this port we can remove it.
SmartEiffel 1.2r7 seems quite dead.

Regards.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

I don't understand this

[Paul Schmehl]

I upgraded a server from php4 to php5.

First I uninstalled php4.  Then I uninstalled php4-extensions.  Then I 
installed php5.  Then I installed php5-extensions.


Now, when I run portupgrade, I get a ton of complaints about php4 
extensions that can't be updated.


portupgrade -ai
--->  Session started at: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:41:56 -0500
** No need to upgrade 'libltdl-1.5.24' (>= libltdl-1.5.24). (specify -f to 
force)

--->  ** Upgrade tasks 272: 0 done, 1 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed

** Port marked as IGNORE: textproc/php4-ctype:
   cannot install: doesn't work with PHP version : 5 (Doesn't support 
PHP 5)

--->  ** Upgrade tasks 272: 0 done, 161 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed
** No need to upgrade 'pecl-json-1.2.1' (>= pecl-json-1.2.1). (specify -f 
to force)

--->  ** Upgrade tasks 272: 0 done, 162 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed
** No need to upgrade 'php5-curl-5.2.4_1' (>= php5-curl-5.2.4_1). (specify 
-f to force)

--->  ** Upgrade tasks 272: 0 done, 163 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed
** No need to upgrade 'php5-bz2-5.2.4_1' (>= php5-bz2-5.2.4_1). (specify 
-f to force)

--->  ** Upgrade tasks 272: 0 done, 164 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed
** Port marked as IGNORE: lang/php4-overload:
   cannot install: doesn't work with PHP version : 5 (Doesn't support 
PHP 5)

--->  ** Upgrade tasks 272: 0 done, 165 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed
** Port marked as IGNORE: mail/php4-imap:
   cannot install: doesn't work with PHP version : 5 (Doesn't support 
PHP 5)

--->  ** Upgrade tasks 272: 0 done, 166 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed

--->  Packages processed: 0 done, 272 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed
--->  Session ended at: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:42:50 -0500 (consumed 00:00:54)

So, I started uninstalling those ports, but I discovered that the 
uninstall was removing files installed by the php5-extensions install. 
So, I had to uninstall each php4 extension, then uninstall each of the 
corresponding php5 extensions and then reinstall them in order to get the 
ports db straightened out and have the correct files on disk.


Surely there's an easier way to do this?  What did I miss?  And why 
doesn't the php4-extensions port uninstall each of the ports installed?


Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/

Re: make errors in net-snmp-5.3.1

[Sam Fourman Jr.]

On 10/13/07, Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> currebt on amd64
>
>  cc -I../../include -I. -I../../agent -I../../agent/mibgroup
> -I../../snmplib -DAPPLLIB_EXP=/usr/local/lib/perl5/5.8.8/BSDPAN
> -DHAS_FPSETMASK -DHAS_FLOATINGPOINT_H -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe
> -Wdeclaration-after-statement -I/usr/local/include
> -I/usr/local/lib/perl5/5.8.8/mach/CORE -DINET6 -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing
> -pipe -Dfreebsd8 -c mibII/tcpTable.c  -fPIC -DPIC -o mibII/.libs/tcpTable.o
> mibII/tcpTable.c:94:1: warning: "INP_NEXT_SYMBOL" redefined
> In file included from ../../include/net-snmp/net-snmp-config.h:1585,
>  from mibII/tcpTable.c:17:
> ../../include/net-snmp/system/freebsd.h:9:1: warning: this is the
> location of the previous definition
> mibII/tcpTable.c: In function 'tcpTable_load':
> mibII/tcpTable.c:746: error: 'struct xinpcb' has no member named 'xt_tp'
> mibII/tcpTable.c:750: error: 'struct xinpcb' has no member named 'xt_inp'
> *** Error code 1
>
I have this exact same problem, I am trying to compile kde3

Sam Fourman Jr.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: I don't understand this

[Paul Schmehl]

--On October 14, 2007 4:48:54 PM -0500 Josh Tolbert 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


It really is pretty straightforward. You have to get rid of _all_
of php4 before you install php5, then make sure the portsdb is
straightened out. I'm not sure why folks are having so much trouble
with this...

Well, I'll tell you why *I* had trouble with it.  When you run "make 
install clean" on the php?-extensions port, it *installs* the extensions. 
Naturally, I expected that when I ran the uninstall, it would uninstall 
the same ports that it installed previously.  In fact, when you uninstall 
the php4-extensions port, it *says* it uninstalled, but it *does* nothing. 
It doesn't even remove the ports from the ports db - nor does it remove 
the files installed with each extension port.


That's *not* expected behavior for a port.

I had no problem correcting the problem, but I should have had to.  If 
it's not possible to uninstall the extensions ports from php4-extensions, 
then it should tell you that when you try to run deinstall.  For me it was 
a minor inconvenience.  For a newbie, it could be a disaster.


Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/

Re: I don't understand this

[Josh Tolbert]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 04:37:43PM -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> I upgraded a server from php4 to php5.
> 
> First I uninstalled php4.  Then I uninstalled php4-extensions.  Then I 
> installed php5.  Then I installed php5-extensions.
> 
> Now, when I run portupgrade, I get a ton of complaints about php4 
> extensions that can't be updated.

[snip]

> So, I started uninstalling those ports, but I discovered that the 
> uninstall was removing files installed by the php5-extensions install. 
> So, I had to uninstall each php4 extension, then uninstall each of the 
> corresponding php5 extensions and then reinstall them in order to get the 
> ports db straightened out and have the correct files on disk.
> 
> Surely there's an easier way to do this?  What did I miss?  And why 
> doesn't the php4-extensions port uninstall each of the ports installed?

When I did this, I uninstalled the php4-extensions port, then all
the actual php4-extensions. I then uninstalled php4. I had to "force"
remove the old ports since stuff still depends on the ports. I made
sure to get the pecl port that I can't remember the name of now.
Then, I installed php5 and the php5-extensions port. Afterwards, I
did a pkgdb -F to fix all of the deps on old php4 ports that may
be left over. Finally, I tested everything that used php on my
machine. I think I reinstalled some of the ports that depended on
php, but since this all happened about a month ago I don't remember
what I needed to reinstall.

It really is pretty straightforward. You have to get rid of _all_
of php4 before you install php5, then make sure the portsdb is
straightened out. I'm not sure why folks are having so much trouble
with this...

Thanks,

Josh
-- 
Josh Tolbert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ||  http://www.puresimplicity.net/~hemi/

Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor
do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger
is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either
a daring adventure, or nothing.
-- Helen Keller
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: I don't understand this

[Miroslav Lachman]

Paul Schmehl wrote:

--On October 14, 2007 4:48:54 PM -0500 Josh Tolbert 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




It really is pretty straightforward. You have to get rid of _all_
of php4 before you install php5, then make sure the portsdb is
straightened out. I'm not sure why folks are having so much trouble
with this...

Well, I'll tell you why *I* had trouble with it.  When you run "make 
install clean" on the php?-extensions port, it *installs* the 
extensions. Naturally, I expected that when I ran the uninstall, it 
would uninstall the same ports that it installed previously.  In fact, 
when you uninstall the php4-extensions port, it *says* it uninstalled, 
but it *does* nothing. It doesn't even remove the ports from the ports 
db - nor does it remove the files installed with each extension port.


That's *not* expected behavior for a port.

I had no problem correcting the problem, but I should have had to.  If 
it's not possible to uninstall the extensions ports from 
php4-extensions, then it should tell you that when you try to run 
deinstall.  For me it was a minor inconvenience.  For a newbie, it could 
be a disaster.


Maybe you missunderstand phpX-extensions metaport. It install itself as 
phpX-extensions and phpX-something is installed as dependency. If you 
unsinstall phpX-extensions, only this one port is uninstalled and no 
dependency is touched. It is expected behavior!
phpX-extensions is easy way how one can install a bunch of phpX ports in 
one step. portinstall phpX-extensions will install phpX and choosen 
phpX-something and pecl-something.
If you need to unsinstall all php ports, you must unsinstall them 
manualy by pkg_deinstall phpX-\* pecl-\*.
So the right way to do your task was: pkg_deinstall php4-\* pecl-\* && 
portinstall php5-extensions

Isn't it nice and easy?

Miroslav Lachman
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: I don't understand this

[Josh Tolbert]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 05:11:22PM -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> --On October 14, 2007 4:48:54 PM -0500 Josh Tolbert 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >It really is pretty straightforward. You have to get rid of _all_
> >of php4 before you install php5, then make sure the portsdb is
> >straightened out. I'm not sure why folks are having so much trouble
> >with this...
> >
> Well, I'll tell you why *I* had trouble with it.  When you run "make 
> install clean" on the php?-extensions port, it *installs* the extensions. 
> Naturally, I expected that when I ran the uninstall, it would uninstall 
> the same ports that it installed previously.  In fact, when you uninstall 
> the php4-extensions port, it *says* it uninstalled, but it *does* nothing. 
> It doesn't even remove the ports from the ports db - nor does it remove 
> the files installed with each extension port.
> 
> That's *not* expected behavior for a port.
> 
> I had no problem correcting the problem, but I should have had to.  If 
> it's not possible to uninstall the extensions ports from php4-extensions, 
> then it should tell you that when you try to run deinstall.  For me it was 
> a minor inconvenience.  For a newbie, it could be a disaster.

(18:26:23 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/ports/lang/php5-extensions>) $ cat pkg-descr 
This is a "meta-port" to install the extensions for PHP 5.

Defaults to: ctype, dom, iconv, pcre, posix, session, simplexml, sqlite, 
tokenizer and xml.

WWW: http://www.php.net/

- Alex Dupre
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

I don't see where you'd get the impression that it would let you deinstall any
ports from that metaport. All it does is install other ports. Now, if you'd
have done a recursive pkg_delete for ports php?-extensions depends on, it
would have deinstalled all the ports it installed...But you'd be in a world of
hurt in other ways.

Josh
-- 
Josh Tolbert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ||  http://www.puresimplicity.net/~hemi/

Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor
do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger
is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either
a daring adventure, or nothing.
-- Helen Keller
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: Smarteiffel is marked broken but is not

[Kris Kennaway]

Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:

Hi,

lang/smarteiffel is marked "BROKEN= does not install" on FreeBSD >= 7
but it builds and installs fine, and runs fine too on 7.0-PRERELEASE/i386


Check the error log on http://pointyhat.freebsd.org then try to 
determine why you are not seeing that error on your system.


Kris

___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: NOPORTDOCS and man/info pages

[Chess Griffin]

* Andrew Pantyukhin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-13 12:28:10]:

 > 
> > So, my questions are:
> > 
> > Is the above handling of the man and info pages correct?  It seems the
> > answer is no, but just thought I would check.
> 
> Not really, but I guess there may be some special cases that
> warrant the handling (e.g. megabytes of manpages, etc.)
> 
> > How does one choose not to install man and info pages if NOPORTDOCS
> > does not apply to them?  I seem to recall that there is a
> > NO_INSTALL_MANPAGES knob but am not sure if that's the answer or if there
> > is a NO_INSTALL_INFOPAGES.
> 
> Some people tried to respect some knobs, but in general we just
> always install manpages. As for infopages, we usually only
> install them when there are no manpages or if the manpages are
> insufficient.
> 
> > Is is correct procedure to never include man and info pages in the
> > pkg-plist like Porter's Handbook states?
> 
> Sometimes it's necessary to list manpages in plist. E.g. when
> there are different sets of manpages for different languages.
> MANLANG and MAN# can only handle one set across all languages.

Thank you very much, Andrew.

Cheers-

-- 
Chess Griffin
GPG Public Key:  0x0C7558C3
http://www.chessgriffin.com


pgpGH7g6UK54t.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Ports using gcc 4.2 under FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE

[Naram Qashat]

I was wondering if it would be possible to test if a port would work properly 
with GCC 4.2 would help test for FreeBSD 7-CURRENT if I use the lang/gcc42 port 
while under 6.2-RELEASE.  I want to test and see what does and doesn't compile, 
maybe to see if I could help the ports tree for 7-CURRENT before I try to move 
to 7-CURRENT myself.


Thanks,
Naram Qashat
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"