Re: [HEADSUP]: Partial ports thaw
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 11:26:24AM +0200, Erwin Lansing wrote: The ports tree is now tagged and partially thawed. Until 8.1 is released, sweeping commits still need explicit approval from portmgr to assure that tags can be slipped for potential security issues. For more information what constitutes a sweeping change, see the portmgr web pages[1]. With the release out the door, the ports tree is again free for all. Thank you for your patience. -erwin -- Erwin Lansing http://droso.org Prediction is very difficult especially about the futureer...@freebsd.org pgpZSktxZqpos.pgp Description: PGP signature
Updating Dazuko
Is there any chance that Dazuko could be updated. DazukoFS 3.1.3 is now the official stable release. The port version is seriously deprecated, dazuko-2.3.7 and it is marked as broken on FreeBSD = 8. -- Jerry ✌ freebsd-ports.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ When I do something wrong, I plead ignorance. If it comes to a trial I just show up and prove my case! Anonymous ___ 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: Updating Dazuko
2010/7/24 Jerry freebsd-ports.u...@seibercom.net: Is there any chance that Dazuko could be updated. DazukoFS 3.1.3 is now the official stable release. The port version is seriously deprecated, dazuko-2.3.7 and it is marked as broken on FreeBSD = 8. -- Jerry ✌ freebsd-ports.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ When I do something wrong, I plead ignorance. If it comes to a trial I just show up and prove my case! Anonymous Hi New version of dazuko (3.x) works only with Linux kernels because it was rewrite from scratch time ago. A 2.3.8 legacy version was released on January and maybe it could works with few modifications on FreeBSD 8.x. I expect finishing some things for commit some changes to ports tree and I could see if new legacy version of dazuko works with FreeBSD 8.x. Greetings ACM ___ 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
?? lang/python27 ?? Why is this even here ?
# New ports collection makefile for:python26 # Date created: 3 July 2003 # Whom: Hye-Shik Chang pe...@freebsd.org # # $FreeBSD: ports/lang/python27/Makefile,v 1.166 2010/05/12 12:13:06 wen Exp $ PORTNAME= python26 PORTVERSION=2.6.5 Use it, or remove it ? Regards, -- jhell,v ___ 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: ?? lang/python27 ?? Why is this even here ?
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 7:49 PM, jhell jh...@dataix.net wrote: # New ports collection makefile for: python26 # Date created: 3 July 2003 # Whom: Hye-Shik Chang pe...@freebsd.org # # $FreeBSD: ports/lang/python27/Makefile,v 1.166 2010/05/12 12:13:06 wen Exp $ PORTNAME= python26 PORTVERSION= 2.6.5 It's a repocopy - in cases like this, instead of starting a fresh file at version 1.1, one of the cvs administrators copies the files from the old port so that the history is maintained. So, the copy happened, but a committer hasn't actually upgraded the port yet. It's discussed in the committers guide: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.html#AEN1391 -- Rob Farmer Use it, or remove it ? Regards, -- jhell,v ___ 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@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ?? lang/python27 ?? Why is this even here ?
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 22:49:55 -0400, jhell wrote: # New ports collection makefile for:python26 # Date created: 3 July 2003 # Whom: Hye-Shik Chang pe...@freebsd.org # # $FreeBSD: ports/lang/python27/Makefile,v 1.166 2010/05/12 12:13:06 wen Exp $ PORTNAME= python26 PORTVERSION=2.6.5 Use it, or remove it ? http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/147784 -- Sahil Tandon sa...@freebsd.org ___ 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: ?? lang/python27 ?? Why is this even here ?
On 07/24/2010 23:38, Rob Farmer wrote: On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 7:49 PM, jhell jh...@dataix.net wrote: # New ports collection makefile for:python26 # Date created: 3 July 2003 # Whom: Hye-Shik Chang pe...@freebsd.org # # $FreeBSD: ports/lang/python27/Makefile,v 1.166 2010/05/12 12:13:06 wen Exp $ PORTNAME= python26 PORTVERSION=2.6.5 It's a repocopy - in cases like this, instead of starting a fresh file at version 1.1, one of the cvs administrators copies the files from the old port so that the history is maintained. So, the copy happened, but a committer hasn't actually upgraded the port yet. It's discussed in the committers guide: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.html#AEN1391 No offense but I already know this. I do appreciate the time you took to explain this with the additional link. Thank you. I guess I should have made it more clear. +===+ | This happened?: 2010/05/12 12:13:06 | | And the date now: 2010/07/25 00:08:51 | +===+ This is more than 2 months that nothing has been done with this port. Unless I am wrong and the repo-copy is recent with an old date but I thought that the ident(1) line was/is/should be updated when this happens?. After a repo-copy I would have thought that these lines should have been updated to establish the new port and for whom created it, which would then be re-committed bumping the version to 1.167 and recent date so there is no confusion. # New ports collection makefile for:python26 # Date created: 3 July 2003 # Whom: Hye-Shik Chang pe...@freebsd.org A nice part about it is you can switch your ORIGIN to that and be all set for the upgrade. ;) Any way I just wanted to give a heads up for this as it seemed pretty odd as things like this usually happen and get updated all about the same time that a repo-copy happens this has been in ports that I know of for more than ~1.5 weeks without any sort of update. Regards, PS: These were not followed from the link above. When a port has been repo copied: 1. Do a force commit on the files of the copied port, stating repository copy was performed. 2. Upgrade the copied port to the new version. Remember to change the LATEST_LINK so there are no duplicate ports with the same name. In some rare cases it may be necessary to change the PORTNAME instead of LATEST_LINK, but this should only be done when it is really needed -- e.g. using an existing port as the base for a very similar program with a different name, or upgrading a port to a new upstream version which actually changes the distribution name, like the transition from textproc/libxml to textproc/libxml2. In most cases, changing LATEST_LINK should suffice. -- jhell,v ___ 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
