Re: Rebuilding png and perl without rebuilding a whole lot of ports twice
Then, from UPDATING file, I could do either portmaster p5- I specifically recommend not doing that, as you'll end up with stuff that's mixed between the old and new versions, which can cause problems. Maybe I could combine these as portmaster -r png- -r perl- Would that work right? Reading the man page can answer that question for you. :) Doug Yes, I read the man page many times, not only portmaster and pkg_info but also csh (which is the same as man tcsh) and sh, looking for for command. In tcsh, I found foreach but not for, but found for command in sh. My worry is rebuilding hplip, gnash, swfdec, seamonkey, xorg-server and some other big ports twice each. I have Sandy Bridge system and want to try the new xorg-server with KMS. I hope portmaster -r png- -r perl- wouldn't rebuild ports with png- and then again with perl- . FreeBSD users tend to trust UPDATING file, so if portmaster p5- doesn't work well, it ought to be corrected. Tom ___ 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
make config no longer being run
Hi, I've installed a new 8.2 Release box and cvsup'd the ports tree from cvsup.uk.freebsd.org. When installing any port, make config is no longer being run when using either portmaster or make itself. It works if I run make config manually. I know the repo has moved from cvs to svn but I cannot find anything else relating to this. Example [root@freebsd8-test /usr/ports/lang/perl5.14]# date; ls -al /var/db/ports Tue Jul 17 10:17:59 SAST 2012 total 4 drwxr-xr-x 2 root wheel 512 Jul 17 10:12 . drwxr-xr-x 9 root wheel 512 Jul 17 08:23 .. [root@freebsd8-test /usr/ports/lang/perl5.14]# make extract === License ART10 GPLv1 accepted by the user === Extracting for perl-5.14.2_2 = SHA256 Checksum OK for perl/perl-5.14.2.tar.bz2. = SHA256 Checksum OK for perl/BSDPAN-2007.tar.bz2. [root@freebsd8-test /usr/ports/lang/perl5.14]# date; ls -al /var/db/ports Tue Jul 17 10:18:18 SAST 2012 total 4 drwxr-xr-x 2 root wheel 512 Jul 17 10:12 . drwxr-xr-x 9 root wheel 512 Jul 17 08:23 .. [root@freebsd8-test /usr/ports/lang/perl5.14]# make config ┌┐ │Options for perl 5.14.2_2 │ │ ┌┐ │ │ │ [ ] DEBUGGING Build with debugging support │ │ │ │ [ ] GDBM Build GDBM_File extension │ │ │ │ [ ] PERL_MALLOCUse Perl malloc │ │ │ │ [X] PERL_64BITINT Use 64 bit integers (on i386) │ │ │ │ [ ] THREADSBuild threaded perl │ │ │ │ [X] PTHREADBuild with -pthread │ │ │ │ [ ] MULTIPLICITY Use multiplicity │ │ │ │ [ ] SITECUSTOMIZE Run-time customization of @INC│ │ │ │ [X] USE_PERL Rewrite links in /usr/bin │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ ├─└┘─┤ │ [ OK ] Cancel │ └┘ [root@freebsd8-test /usr/ports/lang/perl5.14]# date; ls
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? ___ 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: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 7/17/12 7:41 AM, Radim Kolar wrote: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? The answer to that is very complex. And, for each PR, maybe a different answer. for some, there is no maintainer (owned by ports@), you are more than welcome to look through the list of ports owned by port@ and adopt a couple hundred of them. For some, the submitter reported a problem, some problems are upstream, some the submitter. For some, the attached patch does not follow FreeBSD ports guidelines, and until (someone) rewrites it, it just sites. some are suspended waiting on other pr's. So, for each of those open pr's, there is, most likely, different answers. I have (4 or 5?) pr's open, waiting on feedback from submitters or maintainers. If a patch was attached, and the port builds, ant it times out, I'll commit it. So, you want to help? adopt a couple hundreds ports, learn the system, make good patches, and in doing so, you will quickly find out what a lot of these are just sitting there. ___ 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 -- Michael Scheidell, CTO *| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation d: +1.561.948.2259 w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell ___ 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: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
Radim Kolar h...@filez.com: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? More committers does not mean that the backlog will be processed faster, just as more developers on a project does not mean that the project is done faster. ;-) Cheers Marcus ___ 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: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:53:34 +0200 Marcus von Appen articulated: Radim Kolar h...@filez.com: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? More committers does not mean that the backlog will be processed faster, just as more developers on a project does not mean that the project is done faster. ;-) “The race may not always be to the swift nor the victory to the strong, but that's how you bet” Damon Runyon You point is well taken though. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ 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
pkgng team: please update portmaster patch to 3.13.1
The 3.13 patch fails in 7 places. Sorry for not using github -- Anton Shterenlikht Room 2.6, Queen's Building Mech Eng Dept Bristol University University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944 Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423 ___ 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: make config no longer being run
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 12:20:46PM +0200, Gareth Hopkins wrote: Hi, I've installed a new 8.2 Release box and cvsup'd the ports tree from cvsup.uk.freebsd.org. When installing any port, make config is no longer being run when using either portmaster or make itself. It works if I run make config manually. I know the repo has moved from cvs to svn but I cannot find anything else relating to this. Example Thanks for reporting, this is fixed now regards, Bapt pgpBkF8q5z4IK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: pkgng team: please update portmaster patch to 3.13.1
On 7/17/2012 2:49 PM, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: The 3.13 patch fails in 7 places. Sorry for not using github One good reason to integrate the patch with upstream is that it would avoid us this unpleasant work of updating the patch after every release. ___ 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: pkgng team: please update portmaster patch to 3.13.1
On 7/17/2012 11:21 AM, Julien Laffaye wrote: On 7/17/2012 2:49 PM, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: The 3.13 patch fails in 7 places. Sorry for not using github One good reason to integrate the patch with upstream is that it would avoid us this unpleasant work of updating the patch after every release. This has been asked and answered several times ... this can't be integrated until I can test it thoroughly, and I can't do that until I can use it on my systems, and I can't do *that* until (at minimum) the nvidia driver problem is fixed. And all of THAT presupposes that I have time to work on the integration, testing, etc. That said, I have looked at the patch, and there are enough problems with it that I wouldn't want to integrate it as is. When I have time I plan to set up a vbox and test out pkg, at which point I can start looking more carefully at integrating it into portmaster proper. The good news is that the latest is the last revision of portmaster that I have planned for a while. Doug -- Change is hard. ___ 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: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 17 July 2012 04:53, Marcus von Appen m...@freebsd.org wrote: Radim Kolar h...@filez.com: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? More committers does not mean that the backlog will be processed faster, just as more developers on a project does not mean that the project is done faster. ;-) Agreed. However, take a look at the commit bits granted in the past few months: http://www.freebsd.org/news/newsflash.html - we are growing. :) -- 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: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:54:59AM -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? The answer to that is very complex. And, for each PR, maybe a different answer. This is true, but to address the previous question ... It is somewhat difficult to recruit new people who are willing to work within guidelines (both technical and social) and who seem to want to stay for the long-term. portmgr does screen candidates to try to make sure that the quality of the Ports Collection doesn't decline. Each vote is a judgement call. Having said that, we add new committers all the time. OTOH we add new ports all the time, and due to this the backlog seems to remain constant. And again, as scheidell notes, some PRs are more equal than others. 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: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 7/17/2012 23:39, Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:54:59AM -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? The answer to that is very complex. And, for each PR, maybe a different answer. This is true, but to address the previous question ... It is somewhat difficult to recruit new people who are willing to work within guidelines (both technical and social) and who seem to want to stay for the long-term. portmgr does screen candidates to try to make sure that the quality of the Ports Collection doesn't decline. Each vote is a judgement call. Having said that, we add new committers all the time. OTOH we add new ports all the time, and due to this the backlog seems to remain constant. And again, as scheidell notes, some PRs are more equal than others. mcl Hi Mark, I think that's a reasonable assessment about how the backlog seems about the same and how processes just naturally work. But I think it could work better. Let's take my case. I'm a maintainer of several Ada ports and compilers. I'm also a pkgsrc committer, but not a FreeBSD ports committer. I have the same packages in both trees, but the pkgsrc packages (ports) are more current. That's obviously because I can commit to one tree at will but I have to submit PR and get in line for each update at FreeBSD (A quick shout out of appreciation to Frederic who has been tremendously gracious to me over these months). I was thinking about this - I really like how FreeBSD ports enforces to the best of its ability that every port have a maintainer. My name is on several ports and I have pride in my work. Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough? Obviously you might be reluctant to do this on ports that 200 packages depend on, but if you created a tier of contributors below committer but above PR submitter, I think a lot of ports would be maintained more often and there wouldn't be so much of a backlog. The worst case scenario is a contributor turns out to be a little sloppy, doesn't bother to use Tinderbox, etc, and after a couple of incidents you pull his privileges. The benefit you gain from the others would outweigh the incidents. I've seen the response that the committer is responsible for everything he or she commits, but if the community gave them immunity from consequences of maintainer patches, it shouldn't be a problem. I don't expect anything to come of this suggestion, but I've always wondered why more responsibility wasn't given to port maintainers who don't have commit privileges. John ___ 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: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09:50AM +0200, John Marino wrote: Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough? This has been explored on the mailing lists before, however, we don't technically have a way to do either of the following: - let people commit to just some ports - have any patches be autocommitted No one has ever tackled the former problem. The latter problem just seems to me to open up ways for people to abuse the system. It makes me nervous. As a counter-suggestion, with the addition of new hardware to redports, we are starting to see people referencing a correct install/deinstall log that has already been created there. But IMHO we still want to have committers going over the diffs to make sure that e.g. there are no trojans and no undocumented changes in behavior (config file locations, startup scripts, and so forth), at least to the maximum extent feasible. There's some kind of middle ground between letting too many people have commit access, and too few, and we've tried to walk it. I doubt that this explanation will answer your (legitimate) criticsm, however. 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
Bad WWW link for news/suck
Browsing http://www.freshports.org/commits.php , I found a bad WWW link for news/suck: WWW: http://home.comcast.net/~bobyetman/ Result of clicking that link was: Sorry, the page you were looking for could not be found. Suggested Actions Check the URL that you have typed and retry. Tom ___ 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: [HEADS-UP] CVS commit mails from ports
Thank you for your efforts in migrating the ports repository. On 2012-Jul-16 15:22:13 +0200, Beat Gaetzi b...@freebsd.org wrote: The ports tree switched to Subversion this weekend. CVS commit mails will be turned off soon. If you like to receive the ports commit mails from Subversion please subscribe to svn-ports-all@ or svn-ports-head@. I think this could have been handled a bit better. By turned off soon, I would have expected a couple of days to allow people to read this mail and take some action. Instead, the mails were disabled by simon@ 7 hours after this mail. IMHO, the src list migration was handled more cleanly - peter@ just copied the cvs-all and cvs-src list members over to svn-src-all and shortly after, created a cvs-src-old to allow people time to convert any scripts that processed CVS commits. See http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all/2008-October/273101.html http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all/2008-October/273112.html -- Peter Jeremy pgp2Gl1QtOjhV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/slim Makefile pkg-plist ports/x11/slim/files pam.conf slim.sh.in
Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:26:15AM -0400, Henry Hu wrote: For the png problem, I think that we can use png_jmpbuf for any libpng = 1.2.5? It seems to be exist at least from libpng 1.2.5 (http://www.libpng.org/pub/png/libpng-1.2.5-manual.html) so it's safe to use it? Should be. But according to the portability note at http://www.libpng.org/pub/png/libpng.html The libpng 1.5.x series continues the evolution of the libpng API, finally hiding the contents of the venerable and hoary png_struct and png_info data structures inside private (i.e., non-installed) header files. So it is normal to use the new API only for = 1.5.x. Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 01:07:06AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: Yesterday I had looked at the libpng and it seems that this patch should include 1.4.* for the new variant of the setjmp code -- I need some hours to try to build it with png 1.4. Where are we at with this? I'm using the latest png with your patch and it is working fine, although only a few of my backgrounds are PNGs. I had tested it with PNG 1.4.10 -- works fine. So, I had changed the required library version for png from '15' to '1[45]'. The patch was modified accordingly, http://codelabs.ru/fbsd/ports/slim/upgrade-1.3.3-to-1.3.4.diff -- Eygene Ryabinkin,,,^..^,,, [ Life's unfair - but root password helps! | codelabs.ru ] [ 82FE 06BC D497 C0DE 49EC 4FF0 16AF 9EAE 8152 ECFB | freebsd.org ] pgplk92KXQJ7b.pgp Description: PGP signature
