Re: a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper'
23.09.2014 20:26, Bob Willcox пишет: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:35:59AM -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote: >> On 2014-09-23 10:08, Bob Willcox wrote: >>> So, what does this message mean (I get no output): >>> >>> a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper' >>> >>> and how to I fix it? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Bob >> print/libpaper >> >> is the port for it. > > I think I figured it out. I needed to link /usr/local/etc/papersize.letter to > /etc/local/etc/papersize. Wasn't obvious from the a2ps manpage or the error > message produced though. There is a print/papersize-default-letter port for the matter: - % make -C /usr/ports search name=papersize-default-letter Port: papersize-default-letter-0.0.20120302_1 Path: /usr/ports/print/papersize-default-letter Info: Default paper size configuration file for libpaper Maint: h...@freebsd.org B-deps: libpaper-1.1.24.3 R-deps: libpaper-1.1.24.3 WWW: - -- WBR, Boris Samorodov (bsam) FreeBSD Committer, http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve ___ 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: x11-servers/xorg-server
On 09/23/14 22:46, Patrick Powell wrote: On 09/22/14 23:50, Kevin Oberman wrote: On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:19 PM, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: On 09/22/14 16:38, Patrick Powell wrote: On 09/21/14 16:52, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: On 09/21/14 18:12, Robert_Burmeister wrote: William A. Mahaffey III wrote On 09/21/14 11:41, Robert_Burmeister wrote: On 13.09.2014 22:10, Robert Burmeister wrote: FreeBSD 10.1 i386 xorg-server 1.12.4_9,1 and 1.12.4_1,1 Still don't have mouse support after upgrade from 1.12.4_8,1 [ 1786.822] (EE) Failed to load module "mouse" (module does not exist, 0) Have you installed x11-drivers/xf86-input-mouse? [ 1786.825] (EE) Failed to load module "kbd" (module does not exist, 0) And x11-drivers/xf86-input-keyboard? ___ Installing x11-drivers/xf86-input-mouse and x11-drivers/xf86-input-keyboard fixed the problem, however, I don't understand why upgrading from xorg-server 1.12.4_8,1 to xorg-server 1.12.4_9,1 would require new drivers, or lose the ones it had. I would think these drivers would/should be a dependency for xorg-server in the Ports system... ___ I have had that same problem verbatim the last 2 x-server upgrades I did, & that was the fix, (re?)install the kbd & mouse drivers. I (pkg-)upgraded this A.M., no such issues -- Even more interesting... x11-drivers/xf86-input-mouse and x11-drivers/xf86-input-keyboard have xorg-server as a dependency, and so cannot be a circular dependency. I'm guessing that the mouse and keyboard drivers got deleted as dependents of xorg-server during the upgrade, but there are no dependencies in my desktop build process that require that they be put back, even through a complete system recompile. I'm thinking 'x11-drivers/xorg-drivers' and 'x11/xorg-minimal' should be bumped when xorg-server is upgraded. (When my current recompile is done, I will check that my xorg-drivers didn't get removed as well.) I am using pkg, no ports, no recompiling FBSD 9.3, BTW Just a thought - check to make sure that the x11-drivers/xf86-input-keyboard port on the PKGng server you are using was actually rebuilt for the new version of xorg-server. I had this problem a couple of weeks ago and the X log file hinted that the keyboard driver was not compatible with the version of xorg-server. At the time I thought that this was due to a lag in the PKGng server building the new drivers so I compiled and installed the x11-drivers/xf86-input-keyboard. The problem went away. This appears to be the same sort of issue. Perhaps the driver(s) are not getting rebuilt for the new version of xorg-server? Or perhaps this is related to packages on the 'with_new_xorg' PKGng server versus packages on the standard PKGng server? ___ freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-x11 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-x11-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Would that (drivers not getting rebuilt right) be a pkg problem or an X11 problem (or something else) ? Just checking -- William A. Mahaffey III It's a ports issue. The ports system (which is used by pkg) depends on incrementing version numbers to tell when a port has been updated and needs to be rebuilt or when a port needs updating because a dependency has been updated in a way that affects the port. The former is typically the result of a change to a port that changes hte version number. The later is a bump of the PORT_REVISION to indicate to the ports system that some change that did not come from a change upstream, but local to FreeBSD requires a port rebuild. In this case, it does not work. The actual version number has not changed as the upstream version has not changed. PORT_REVISION would result in the ports being rebuilt, but that does not play with the definition of WITH_NEW_XORG. I somehow needs to be bumped when any system sets WITH_NEW_XORG and I don't see any way in hte current structure to do this. It is the result of having two parallel ports trees. One possible fix is to have code in the Makefile to check WITH_NEW_XORG and, if it is defined, use a different PORT_REVISION. If the old Xorg driver gets a bump of PORT_REVESION, the new one would, as well, but I don't see any reason this could not be done as both numbers are in the same Makefile and should be only a few lines apart. something like: . if defined(WITH_NEW_XORG) PORT_REVISION=2 . else PORT_REVISION=1 . endif This may break the index, so I'm not sure it would work as simply as this, but I bet it could be made to work, -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailm
Re: FreeBSD Port: x11-servers/xorg-server
On 09/22/14 23:50, Kevin Oberman wrote: On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:19 PM, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: On 09/22/14 16:38, Patrick Powell wrote: On 09/21/14 16:52, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: On 09/21/14 18:12, Robert_Burmeister wrote: William A. Mahaffey III wrote On 09/21/14 11:41, Robert_Burmeister wrote: On 13.09.2014 22:10, Robert Burmeister wrote: FreeBSD 10.1 i386 xorg-server 1.12.4_9,1 and 1.12.4_1,1 Still don't have mouse support after upgrade from 1.12.4_8,1 [ 1786.822] (EE) Failed to load module "mouse" (module does not exist, 0) Have you installed x11-drivers/xf86-input-mouse? [ 1786.825] (EE) Failed to load module "kbd" (module does not exist, 0) And x11-drivers/xf86-input-keyboard? ___ Installing x11-drivers/xf86-input-mouse and x11-drivers/xf86-input-keyboard fixed the problem, however, I don't understand why upgrading from xorg-server 1.12.4_8,1 to xorg-server 1.12.4_9,1 would require new drivers, or lose the ones it had. I would think these drivers would/should be a dependency for xorg-server in the Ports system... ___ I have had that same problem verbatim the last 2 x-server upgrades I did, & that was the fix, (re?)install the kbd & mouse drivers. I (pkg-)upgraded this A.M., no such issues -- Even more interesting... x11-drivers/xf86-input-mouse and x11-drivers/xf86-input-keyboard have xorg-server as a dependency, and so cannot be a circular dependency. I'm guessing that the mouse and keyboard drivers got deleted as dependents of xorg-server during the upgrade, but there are no dependencies in my desktop build process that require that they be put back, even through a complete system recompile. I'm thinking 'x11-drivers/xorg-drivers' and 'x11/xorg-minimal' should be bumped when xorg-server is upgraded. (When my current recompile is done, I will check that my xorg-drivers didn't get removed as well.) I am using pkg, no ports, no recompiling FBSD 9.3, BTW Just a thought - check to make sure that the x11-drivers/xf86-input-keyboard port on the PKGng server you are using was actually rebuilt for the new version of xorg-server. I had this problem a couple of weeks ago and the X log file hinted that the keyboard driver was not compatible with the version of xorg-server. At the time I thought that this was due to a lag in the PKGng server building the new drivers so I compiled and installed the x11-drivers/xf86-input-keyboard. The problem went away. This appears to be the same sort of issue. Perhaps the driver(s) are not getting rebuilt for the new version of xorg-server? Or perhaps this is related to packages on the 'with_new_xorg' PKGng server versus packages on the standard PKGng server? ___ freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-x11 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-x11-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Would that (drivers not getting rebuilt right) be a pkg problem or an X11 problem (or something else) ? Just checking -- William A. Mahaffey III It's a ports issue. The ports system (which is used by pkg) depends on incrementing version numbers to tell when a port has been updated and needs to be rebuilt or when a port needs updating because a dependency has been updated in a way that affects the port. The former is typically the result of a change to a port that changes hte version number. The later is a bump of the PORT_REVISION to indicate to the ports system that some change that did not come from a change upstream, but local to FreeBSD requires a port rebuild. In this case, it does not work. The actual version number has not changed as the upstream version has not changed. PORT_REVISION would result in the ports being rebuilt, but that does not play with the definition of WITH_NEW_XORG. I somehow needs to be bumped when any system sets WITH_NEW_XORG and I don't see any way in hte current structure to do this. It is the result of having two parallel ports trees. One possible fix is to have code in the Makefile to check WITH_NEW_XORG and, if it is defined, use a different PORT_REVISION. If the old Xorg driver gets a bump of PORT_REVESION, the new one would, as well, but I don't see any reason this could not be done as both numbers are in the same Makefile and should be only a few lines apart. something like: . if defined(WITH_NEW_XORG) PORT_REVISION=2 . else PORT_REVISION=1 . endif This may break the index, so I'm not sure it would work as simply as this, but I bet it could be made to work, -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-x11 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-x11-unsubscr
Suggestion on how to add search order to multiple reponsitories
Currently there does not appear to be simple way to specify the
order that repositories searched for packages, or at least there
is none documented as such that I can find.
Suppose we add a 'repo_order' field to the repository specification, i.e. -
FreeBSDMyStuff: {
URL: http://myserver/${ABI}/latest
ENABLED: yes
MIRROR_TYPE: SRV
repo_order: 1
}
FreeBSD: {
URL: http://pkg.freebsd.org/${ABI}/latest
ENABLED: yes
MIRROR_TYPE: SRV
repo_order: 2
}
When doing a search for packages, the found/discovered packages
would be sorted by the value of the order field. By default, if
there is no value for the order field then this entry would come
last. If there are two entries with no or the same order value
then they would be sorted on the repo name, as is currently done.
Also, when displaying repositories, i.e. - pkg -v -v, you would
sort the display entries by the repo_order field as well.
Just to jumpstart this effort I am attaching a set of patches for
pkg-1.4.0.pre-alpha15. This implements the basic functionality to
add repo_order to the repository definitions and adds support to
display the repo_order when doing 'pkg search'.
I would happy to add this ordering functionality to other parts of
the pkg support, but I need a bit of help with the current code.
From my understanding/reading/crystal ball gazing/looking at the
code entrails, it appears that when doing a 'pkg install X' the X
is first used to determine the set of packages in question. Once
these have been determined there is a rather intimidating (recursive
as well?) procedure which is used to determine any dependencies.
Somewhere in this process there is a place where the listed/named
repositories are searched for candidates for dependencies. It
appears at a casual reading that the repositories are searched in
the reverse order they were put in the reponsitory list and candidates
found during the search are then added to the dependency list as
they are found. This has the effect of having entries found in
earlier listed repositories overwrite those found in later listed
respositories (I thought this was VERY clever!).
Rather than modify this code, I would suggest adding a 'repository
ordering' step or routine. Just after the repositories are
found/listed, the repository list should be sorted (stably) using
the name and the repo_order field. That is, all of the repositories
with a lower repo_order value would be moved ahead of those with
lower repo_order values, while preserving the order for those with
the same repo_order value.
If this is done and the algorithm for searching the repositories
is as I have outlined it, then you should get the desired repository
priority effect. And perhaps no other code changes would be required.
I hope. Perhaps. Maybe.
*** pkg-1.4.0.pre-alpha15/docs/pkg_printf.3 Mon Sep 15 13:18:26 2014
--- pkg-1.4.0.pre-alpha15.orig/docs/pkg_printf.3Sun Jun 8 12:59:52 2014
***
*** 644,655
Valid only during operations when one version of a package is being
replaced by another.
.Vt struct pkg *
- .It Cm %Z
- Repository Order (repo_order) [integer] value.
- Value is set in the repository information and is limited to 0-100 (default
100).
- When selecting packages for installation, repositories with lower order
numbers
- are searched before packages with higher order numbers.
- .Vt struct pkg *
.It Cm %a
Autoremove flag [boolean]
.Vt struct pkg *
--- 644,649
*** pkg-1.4.0.pre-alpha15/docs/pkg.conf.5 Mon Sep 15 13:33:02 2014
--- pkg-1.4.0.pre-alpha15.orig/docs/pkg.conf.5 Sun Sep 14 15:11:40 2014
***
*** 271,279
.Va hw.ncpu
is used.
Default: 0.
- .It Cm REPO_ORDER: integer [1-100, default 100]
- Repositories with lower repo_order values are examined before reponsitories
with
- larger repo_order values.
.El
.Sh REPOSITORY CONFIGURATION
To use a repository you will need at least one repository
--- 271,276
***
*** 422,438
.Sy REPOS_DIR
search path, with individual repository configuration files in the
same directory processed in alphabetical order.
! This search order is modified by the
! .Sy repo_order
! value; repositories with smaller
! .Sy repo_order
! values are searched befor repositories with larger
! .Sy repo_order
! values.
! Packages found earlier in the search order take precedence,
! meaning that
! if the same package is available from several repositories
! the first one found in the search order will be used.
This behaviour may be overridden per-package by adding a
.Sy repository
annotation to the installed package.
--- 419,427
.Sy REPOS_DIR
search path, with individual repository configuration files in the
same directory processed in alphabetical order.
! Earlier files take precedence, meaning that packages will be downloaded
! from them preferentially where the same package is available from several
! repositories.
This behaviour may be overr
Re: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Patrick Gibson wrote: > > The port I was trying to install was lang/v8 (3.18.5). I don't see anything > in the Makefile that says it needs a particular version of pkg, but maybe > it's hidden somewhere else. > The MINIMAL_PKG_VERSION variable in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk triggers this behavior for all ports. -- Craig ___ 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: [Patch] Using MACHINE_ARCH identifiers in pkg
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 08:18:45AM -0700, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > Baptiste, have you had a chance to look at this? I'd like to at least > merge the changes to the bootstrapper in base so that it doesn't seg > fault at start on armeb, but want to make sure the URLs are finalized > before doing that. > -Nathan > Integrated in master will be for sure in 1.4.0 and probably 1.3.9 For the boostrap yes it will be great to merge it as well regards, Bapt pgp6dEtwt5w0c.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Patrick Gibson wrote: > The port I was trying to install was lang/v8 (3.18.5). I don't see > anything in the Makefile that says it needs a particular version of pkg, > but maybe it's hidden somewhere else. Either way, something seems broken or > not well thought out. This is an up-to-date 10.0 system with a very vanilla > configuration. I think it's the ports system *itself* that now requires it, not particular ports. Again, see /usr/ports/UPDATING. (That said, I will not argue that ports has shortcomings; it feels rather primitive after years of using MacPorts. But these shortcomings mostly fall out of the ports system itself --- and it's entirely possible that addressing them requires things like the new pkg, given that ports are installed via pkg.) -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net ___ 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: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
Patrick Gibson wrote: > Either way, something seems broken or not well thought out. It also appears to have broken Tinderbox, BTW. If I got that wrong, forget I said anything. But if it's right: nice job! AvW -- Imbibo, ergo sum. pgpj_I26hh29b.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote: > > I would guess that, since 1.3.8 needs to rebuild the package database, > earlier versions of pkg can't safely install it? The port is likely special > in that it uses the just-built pkg to install itself instead of relying on > the installed one (otherwise you couldn't bootstrap-install pkg at all). > The port I was trying to install was lang/v8 (3.18.5). I don't see anything in the Makefile that says it needs a particular version of pkg, but maybe it's hidden somewhere else. Either way, something seems broken or not well thought out. This is an up-to-date 10.0 system with a very vanilla configuration. ___ 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: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Patrick Gibson wrote: > Okay, I've found that the latest ports tree has 1.3.8 in ports-mgmt/pkg, so > I'm installing it from source. Still baffled why it wasn't working. Was it > not sent up to the official pkg servers? > I would guess that, since 1.3.8 needs to rebuild the package database, earlier versions of pkg can't safely install it? The port is likely special in that it uses the just-built pkg to install itself instead of relying on the installed one (otherwise you couldn't bootstrap-install pkg at all). -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net ___ 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: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 2:02 AM, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > > >> root:/tmp # portupgrade -nr dbus > >> ---> Session started at: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:08:37 +0200 > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dbus: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/eggdbus: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: sysutils/policykit: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/gconf2: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dbus-glib: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: sysutils/polkit: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dconf: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ---> Listing the results (+:done / -:ignored / *:skipped / !:failed) > >> - devel/dbus (marked as IGNORE) > >> - devel/eggdbus (marked as IGNORE) > >> - sysutils/policykit (marked as IGNORE) > >> - devel/gconf2 (marked as IGNORE) > >> - devel/dbus-glib (marked as IGNORE) > >> - sysutils/polkit (marked as IGNORE) > >> - devel/dconf (marked as IGNORE) > >> ---> Packages processed: 0 done, 7 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed > >> ---> Session ended at: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:08:37 +0200 (consumed > 00:00:00) > >> > >> root:/tmp # portupgrade pkg > >> > >> root:/tmp # pkg upgrade pkg > >> Updating FreeBSD repository catalogue... > >> FreeBSD repository is up-to-date. > >> All repositories are up-to-date. > >> Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting) > >> Your packages are up to date. > >> > >> root:/tmp # > >> > >> what am I missing? > >> > > > > You are using portupgrade so first upgrade pkg with portupgrade > > > > > > Just a thought here - why (like .rpm and .deb - and the reason I hate > them so much) are you making the package manager version a dependency of > a package? I can understand if there are new features that you may need > to use a later version to get those features, but making a package > dependent on the package manager rather than displaying a warning that a > feature is missing is the brain dead way that plagues upgrades for > redhat and debian. Of course if your intent is to make FreeBSD into > another Linux distro just with a different kernel, continue. > > -- > Michelle Sullivan > http://www.mhix.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" > "pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. You must upgrade pkg(8) first" I'm not using portupgrade, and I'm having the same issue. I've run `pkg upgrade pkg` (a command that would be useful to include in the message about needing to upgrade pkg seeing as it's not even in the man page!), but it only updates to 1.3.7. ... Okay, I've found that the latest ports tree has 1.3.8 in ports-mgmt/pkg, so I'm installing it from source. Still baffled why it wasn't working. Was it not sent up to the official pkg servers? Patrick ___ 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"
On Docs option and custom build target
Hi,
I have a Makefile for an application that provides both examples and
documentation. I created the two options in the Makefile (both enabled
by default).
The package doesn't provide any flags stock like --with-docs or
--with-examples, so I have a custom target like this:
do-build:
@cd ${BUILD_WRKSRC}/ && ${MAKE}
.if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MDOCS}
@cd ${BUILD_WRKSRC}/ && ${MAKE_CMD} doc
.endif
(Just FYI, the enabling/disabling of the examples is done in the
post-patch target by modifying a CMakeList.txt...)
I tried the four combinations of the options through port test and
everything went fine.
However, when I try to run this in poudriere, I get the following error:
make[1]: don't know how to make doc. Stop
make[1]: stopped in /wrkdirs/usr/ports/graphics/code-eli/work/.build
*** Error code 2
Since it builds the normal package, and it tries to execute make doc,
it was able to change the directory to BUILD_WRKSRC.
I assume I'm doing something fundamentally wrong, but I can't figure
out what it is.
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
___
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: stopped in /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins: Permission denied
On 09/23/14 21:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote: > FreeBSD 10.1-BETA2 GENERIC amd64 > > Building nrpe > > gmake[7]: Entering directory > `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3/plugins-root' > install -s -o root -g wheel -m 555 check_dhcp > /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_dhcp > true > /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_dhcp > chmod ug=rx,u+s > /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_dhcp > install -s -o root -g wheel -m 555 check_icmp > /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_icmp > true > /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_icmp > chmod ug=rx,u+s > /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_icmp > gmake[7]: Nothing to be done for `install-data-am'. > gmake[7]: Leaving directory > `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3/plugins-root' > gmake[6]: Leaving directory > `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3/plugins-root' > Making install in po > gmake[6]: Entering directory > `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3/po' > /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/share > gmake[6]: execvp: > /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/share: > Permission denied > gmake[6]: *** [install-data-yes] Error 127 > gmake[6]: Leaving directory > `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3/po' > gmake[5]: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 > gmake[5]: Leaving directory > `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3' > *** Error code 2 > > Stop. > make[4]: stopped in /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins > *** Error code 1 I can confirm that r368988 and r368988 breaks the build, at least here. Reverted to previous and builds fine. I'll chack back in a day and file a PR if it is still broken. //per ___ 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"
[Bug 193849] www/xpi-conkeror builds from very old source code
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193849 --- Comment #10 from r004 --- What is the difference between using xulrunner from firefox port (which port is that exactly; does it mean installing the whole firefox and thus more dep.) and using libxul? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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"
[Bug 193849] www/xpi-conkeror builds from very old source code
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193849 --- Comment #9 from Jan Beich --- Created attachment 147614 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=147614&action=edit |poudriere testport -P| log (10.0R amd64, FIREFOX=on) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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"
stopped in /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins: Permission denied
FreeBSD 10.1-BETA2 GENERIC amd64 Building nrpe gmake[7]: Entering directory `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3/plugins-root' install -s -o root -g wheel -m 555 check_dhcp /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_dhcp true /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_dhcp chmod ug=rx,u+s /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_dhcp install -s -o root -g wheel -m 555 check_icmp /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_icmp true /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_icmp chmod ug=rx,u+s /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/libexec/nagios/check_icmp gmake[7]: Nothing to be done for `install-data-am'. gmake[7]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3/plugins-root' gmake[6]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3/plugins-root' Making install in po gmake[6]: Entering directory `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3/po' /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/share gmake[6]: execvp: /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/stage/usr/local/share: Permission denied gmake[6]: *** [install-data-yes] Error 127 gmake[6]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3/po' gmake[5]: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 gmake[5]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins/work/nagios-plugins-2.0.3' *** Error code 2 Stop. make[4]: stopped in /usr/ports/net-mgmt/nagios-plugins *** Error code 1 Ideas anyone? Thanks, //per ___ 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"
[Bug 193849] www/xpi-conkeror builds from very old source code
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193849 --- Comment #8 from Jan Beich --- The build log also hints about CHANGES from 20140922. It's up to the maintainer to decide when to pull the plug on partial updates. ===> Building package for conkeror-20140812 pkg-static: Warning: @dirrm is deprecated please use @dir while >> Files or directories left over: @dirrm /prefix is a false positive from PREFIX!=LOCALBASE, likely either bsd.port.mk or pkg(8) bug. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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"
[Bug 193849] www/xpi-conkeror builds from very old source code
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193849
--- Comment #7 from Jan Beich ---
Created attachment 147610
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=147610&action=edit
|poudriere testport -P| log (9.3R i386)
It seems the Porter's Handbook agrees with portlint(1) but I cannot find actual
rationale. However, looking at DISTVERSION implementation it should work fine
with both set. And attached smoke test log confirms my conjecture.
$ portlint -C
FATAL: Makefile: either PORTVERSION or DISTVERSION must be specified, not both.
1 fatal error and 0 warnings found.
Porter's Handbook says:
> Only one of PORTVERSION and DISTVERSION can be set at a time. If DISTVERSION
> does not derive a correct PORTVERSION, do not use DISTVERSION, set
> PORTVERSION to the right value and set DISTNAME with PORTNAME with either
> some computation of PORTVERSION or the verbatim upstream version.
# Mk/bsd.port.mk has
.if defined(PORTVERSION)
.if ${PORTVERSION:M*[-_,]*}x != x
IGNORE=PORTVERSION ${PORTVERSION} may not contain '-' '_' or ','
.endif
DISTVERSION?=${PORTVERSION:S/:/::/g}
.elif defined(DISTVERSION)
PORTVERSION=
${DISTVERSION:tl:C/([a-z])[a-z]+/\1/g:C/([0-9])([a-z])/\1.\2/g:C/:(.)/\1/g:C/[^a-z0-9+]+/./g}
.endif
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
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: a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper'
On 2014-09-23 11:26, Bob Willcox wrote: On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:35:59AM -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote: On 2014-09-23 10:08, Bob Willcox wrote: > So, what does this message mean (I get no output): > > a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper' > > and how to I fix it? > > Thanks, > Bob print/libpaper is the port for it. I think I figured it out. I needed to link /usr/local/etc/papersize.letter to /etc/local/etc/papersize. Wasn't obvious from the a2ps manpage or the error message produced though. Thanks for putting me on the right track!! Bob Cool -- Glad I could help, as well as seeing more FreeBSD activity here in the Austin area! -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 214-642-9640 (c) E-Mail: l...@lerctr.org US Mail: 108 Turvey Cove, Hutto, TX 78634-5688 ___ 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: a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper'
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:35:59AM -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote: > On 2014-09-23 10:08, Bob Willcox wrote: > > So, what does this message mean (I get no output): > > > > a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper' > > > > and how to I fix it? > > > > Thanks, > > Bob > print/libpaper > > is the port for it. I think I figured it out. I needed to link /usr/local/etc/papersize.letter to /etc/local/etc/papersize. Wasn't obvious from the a2ps manpage or the error message produced though. Thanks for putting me on the right track!! Bob > -- > Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler > Phone: +1 214-642-9640 (c) E-Mail: l...@lerctr.org > US Mail: 108 Turvey Cove, Hutto, TX 78634-5688 -- Bob Willcox| Nothing is more admirable than the fortitude with which b...@immure.com | millionaires tolerate the disadvantages of their wealth. Austin, TX | -- Nero Wolfe ___ 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"
[Bug 193849] www/xpi-conkeror builds from very old source code
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193849 --- Comment #6 from roo4...@gmail.com --- also your are right about the source link. thank you -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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"
[Bug 193849] www/xpi-conkeror builds from very old source code
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193849 --- Comment #5 from roo4...@gmail.com --- Dear Jan; Is you diff the final and production ready version? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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: a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper'
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:35:59AM -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote: > On 2014-09-23 10:08, Bob Willcox wrote: > > So, what does this message mean (I get no output): > > > > a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper' > > > > and how to I fix it? > > > > Thanks, > > Bob > print/libpaper > > is the port for it. Thanks for your reply. However, I do have that port installed (just reinstalled it to be certain) but I get the same result. Is there something more besides installing print/libpaper I need to do to enable it? Bob -- Bob Willcox| Nothing is more admirable than the fortitude with which b...@immure.com | millionaires tolerate the disadvantages of their wealth. Austin, TX | -- Nero Wolfe ___ 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"
[Bug 193849] www/xpi-conkeror builds from very old source code
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193849 Jan Beich changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #147601|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #4 from Jan Beich --- Created attachment 147602 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=147602&action=edit update to 20140812 snapshot Doh, the following URL is easier to work with. http://repo.or.cz/w/conkeror.git/snapshot/d87d0b8.tar.gz -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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: a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper'
On 2014-09-23 10:08, Bob Willcox wrote: So, what does this message mean (I get no output): a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper' and how to I fix it? Thanks, Bob print/libpaper is the port for it. -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 214-642-9640 (c) E-Mail: l...@lerctr.org US Mail: 108 Turvey Cove, Hutto, TX 78634-5688 ___ 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"
a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper'
So, what does this message mean (I get no output): a2ps: unknown medium `libpaper' and how to I fix it? Thanks, Bob -- Bob Willcox| Nothing is more admirable than the fortitude with which b...@immure.com | millionaires tolerate the disadvantages of their wealth. Austin, TX | -- Nero Wolfe ___ 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"
[Bug 193849] www/xpi-conkeror builds from very old source code
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193849 Jan Beich changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #147572|0 |1 is obsolete|| CC||jbe...@vfemail.net --- Comment #3 from Jan Beich --- Created attachment 147601 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=147601&action=edit update to 20140812 snapshot git master is a moving target, better use a commit hash or tag so distfile checksum wouldn't change over time. Here's a trick. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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: When poudriere jails become stuck in a loop
2014-09-23 15:43, Beeblebrox wrote: I have 3 zpools. When I reported this, I had 4G RAM, now I have 8G. This error no longer happens, so ı must assume that it's a RAM issue (< 4G with zpool). 2014-07-18 16:34, Beeblebrox wrote: It just occurred to me that I should mention I use core unlocking. My CPU: AMD-AthlonII-X3-460, with 4th core unlocked making it an X4-460. On the other hand, I have seen two poudriere jails stuck in loops at the same time (out of running 4), which may not mean much since instructions from jail are picked up by any available core. Something else I have noticed lately is that my 4G swap keeps running out of space: "swap_pager_getswapspace(4): failed". This is probably a result of the stuck jail and not a cause IMHO. ... or ZFS ARC & memory backpressure problem, still unfixed in 10-STABLE and CURRENT: Bug 187594 - [zfs] [patch] ZFS ARC behavior problem and fix https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187594 Mark ___ 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"
[Bug 193849] www/xpi-conkeror builds from very old source code
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193849 roo4...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|maintainer-feedback+|maintainer-feedback- -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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"
[Bug 193849] www/xpi-conkeror builds from very old source code
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193849 --- Comment #2 from roo4...@gmail.com --- if we use http://repo.or.cz/w/conkeror.git?a=snapshot;h=master;sf=tgz' -O conkeror-master.tar.gz in the Makefile we would have the latest snapshot at any time. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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: When poudriere jails become stuck in a loop
I have 3 zpools. When I reported this, I had 4G RAM, now I have 8G. This error no longer happens, so ı must assume that it's a RAM issue (< 4G with zpool). Regards. - FreeBSD-11-current_amd64_root-on-zfs_RadeonKMS -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/When-poudriere-jails-become-stuck-in-a-loop-tp5929736p5951383.html Sent from the freebsd-ports mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ 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: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 11:09:38 +0200, Baptiste wrote: >On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:02:11AM +0200, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >> Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> > >> >> root:/tmp # portupgrade -nr dbus >> >> ---> Session started at: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:08:37 +0200 >> >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dbus: >> >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/eggdbus: >> >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: sysutils/policykit: >> >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/gconf2: >> >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dbus-glib: >> >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: sysutils/polkit: >> >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dconf: >> >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> >> ---> Listing the results (+:done / -:ignored / *:skipped / !:failed) >> >> - devel/dbus (marked as IGNORE) >> >> - devel/eggdbus (marked as IGNORE) >> >> - sysutils/policykit (marked as IGNORE) >> >> - devel/gconf2 (marked as IGNORE) >> >> - devel/dbus-glib (marked as IGNORE) >> >> - sysutils/polkit (marked as IGNORE) >> >> - devel/dconf (marked as IGNORE) >> >> ---> Packages processed: 0 done, 7 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed >> >> ---> Session ended at: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:08:37 +0200 (consumed >> >> 00:00:00) >> >> >> >> root:/tmp # portupgrade pkg >> >> >> >> root:/tmp # pkg upgrade pkg >> >> Updating FreeBSD repository catalogue... >> >> FreeBSD repository is up-to-date. >> >> All repositories are up-to-date. >> >> Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting) >> >> Your packages are up to date. >> >> >> >> root:/tmp # >> >> >> >> what am I missing? >> >> >> > >> > You are using portupgrade so first upgrade pkg with portupgrade >> > >> > >> >> Just a thought here - why (like .rpm and .deb - and the reason I hate >> them so much) are you making the package manager version a dependency of >> a package? I can understand if there are new features that you may need >> to use a later version to get those features, but making a package >> dependent on the package manager rather than displaying a warning that a >> feature is missing is the brain dead way that plagues upgrades for >> redhat and debian. Of course if your intent is to make FreeBSD into >> another Linux distro just with a different kernel, continue. >> > >There are new feature, that is why, the required version will be only bumped >when there will be new features used by the ports tree, not on every pkg bump > >regards, >Bapt I apologise if this isn't the right place to provide this feedback, but I just ran into this same problem while trying to reinstall mariadb 5.5 under 9.2. The way pkg was made mandatory didn't conform to industry best-practice, which is to schedule by release version not some arbitrary date. Pkg should have been made available in, say, v8.0, but not made mandatory until, say, v10.0 regardless of the date v10.0 was released. The mandate should definitely not have splashed back onto earlier versions. There's another problem that's very noticeable, and we see it here. The whole purpose of a makefile is to make it unnecessary for every human to check dependencies and update them by hand. Makefiles have no other reason for existing. But, even though they are extremely complex and hard to modify successfully, FreeBSD makefiles still don't even try to handle updating all dependencies, which is why portmaster and portupgrade had to be written. But they should handle all updating, because that's why they exist. If they can't handle them, then perhaps pulling in hundreds or thousands of snippets of code from all around the planet is the wrong model today, and the functionality should be aggregated into a few larger libraries. And of course that's aside from the issue already raised by Michelle about whether a utility tool that won't be a link module should ever be a dependency at all. best regards, Margaret ___ 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: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Florent Peterschmitt < flor...@peterschmitt.fr> wrote: > I'm curious to know how you get into this mess with Debian or RH > distros. What version of these distros? > > And are you sure it is impossible to uprade only the PM (package > manager) and keep other packages like they currently are? > > Never had to reinstall a system for a security upgrade because of > dependency loop. Sounds very strange to me. > Debian unstable can be a scary, scary place sometimes. For RH it sounds weird, but maybe Fedora Rawhide gets into such states too. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net ___ 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"
devel/mingw32-gcc build difficulties
I've been trying to put together an update to devel/mingw32-gcc to bring it to gcc 4.8.1 (the current version that the official MinGW gcc is at). I'm not sure if poudriere is part of my issues or not, but here goes. When building under a 9.x jail, the port pollutes PREFIX with /usr/local/mingw32/lib/COPIED and /usr/local/mingw32/sys-include/. I've no idea why they are left behind with 9.x (and I believe also 8.x as a previous redports build by rene@ seen here: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191291#c2 shows) when they aren't left behind on 10.x or 11.x, but at the very least, these can be deleted in a post-build target without issues. When building under a 10.x jail, though, the mingw32-gcc port seems to be clobbering some of the .a files that were installed by the devel/mingw32-bin-msvcrt port. At first, I thought it might've been because I had built a 10.x jail that was slightly newer than the world, but after rebuilding my 10.x jail to be 10.0-RELEASE (and thus no longer newer than my world), it still happens. I'm unable to get the build to finish under 10.x because /usr/local/mingw32/lib/libuser32.a from mingw32-bin-msvcrt contains nothing but nulls at the point where it tries to build libgcc_s_dw2-1.dll. Searching through the build log shows nothing pertaining to this other than it trying to link to the archive with -luser32. The archive isn't broken in mingw32-bin-msvcrt itself since I can install that and go into the jail and see that it has proper contents. All in all, I would really like to push out an update to the port, but the 10.x difficulty is a stopping point currently. Thanks in advance, Naram Qashat ___ 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: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
Le 23/09/2014 11:44, Michelle Sullivan a écrit : > Florent Peterschmitt wrote: >> Le 23/09/2014 11:02, Michelle Sullivan a écrit : >> >>> Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >>> [...] You are using portupgrade so first upgrade pkg with portupgrade >>> Just a thought here - why (like .rpm and .deb - and the reason I hate >>> them so much) are you making the package manager version a dependency of >>> a package? I can understand if there are new features that you may need >>> to use a later version to get those features, but making a package >>> dependent on the package manager rather than displaying a warning that a >>> feature is missing is the brain dead way that plagues upgrades for >>> redhat and debian. Of course if your intent is to make FreeBSD into >>> another Linux distro just with a different kernel, continue. >>> >>> >> >> What is the problem of upgrading the package manager first and then >> upgrade the rest of the world without any problem? >> >> > Not disagreeing with you... but making dependencies like this leads to > everything relying on the package manager being a particular version.. > which in my opinion is wrong... the package manager is not part of the > software you're installing... and shouldn't be part of a dependency tree > - particularly when building your own ports. This makes sense. > *Every* time a Redhat and Debian system screwed up that I have had, was > caused by the package manager needing to be updated before a particular > package, then all the other dependent packages needed to be upgraded, > and the libraries and you end up with the catch 22 of the package > manager can't be installed because the package manager is too old and > you end up with a half working system that needs to be re-installed > because you needed to apply a security fix to a perl module! Now > FreeBSD has one advantage (currently) ... the package manager is not > part of the OS, it in itself is a port.. however that has half changed > already and in what, another month? it's going to be part of the OS... Yes but it doesn't manage the system, only port packages. > Yeah sure keep building pkg-static so it can be installed independently, > but be aware that one does not want to get into dependency loops or > having to upgrade everything just for one security fix - particularly > when working with the ports tree and not the package manager... some > people have production servers that need a security fix, not an upgrade > of everything. > I'm curious to know how you get into this mess with Debian or RH distros. What version of these distros? And are you sure it is impossible to uprade only the PM (package manager) and keep other packages like they currently are? Never had to reinstall a system for a security upgrade because of dependency loop. Sounds very strange to me. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date
Dear port maintainer, The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more of your ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity to check each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate, submit/commit an update. If any ports have already been updated, you can safely ignore the entry. You will not be e-mailed again for any of the port/version combinations below. Full details can be found at the following URL: http://portscout.freebsd.org/po...@freebsd.org.html Port| Current version | New version +-+ graphics/linux-f10-sdl_ttf | 2.0.8- | 2.0.11- +-+ www/groupoffice | 3.7.24 | 6.0.26 +-+ If any of the above results are invalid, please check the following page for details on how to improve portscout's detection and selection of distfiles on a per-port basis: http://portscout.freebsd.org/info/portscout-portconfig.txt Thanks. ___ 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: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
On 23.09.2014 16:09, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> Just a thought here - why (like .rpm and .deb - and the reason I hate >> them so much) are you making the package manager version a dependency of >> a package? I can understand if there are new features that you may need >> to use a later version to get those features, but making a package >> dependent on the package manager rather than displaying a warning that a >> feature is missing is the brain dead way that plagues upgrades for >> redhat and debian. Of course if your intent is to make FreeBSD into >> another Linux distro just with a different kernel, continue. >> > > There are new feature, that is why, the required version will be only bumped > when there will be new features used by the ports tree, not on every pkg bump Please, please do document what new features resulted in MINIMAL_PKG_VERSION bump. And please, delay bumping of MINIMAL_PKG_VERSION until packages of pkg itself are available from the repo. Eugene Grosbein ___ 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: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
Florent Peterschmitt wrote: > Le 23/09/2014 11:02, Michelle Sullivan a écrit : > >> Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> >>> [...] >>> You are using portupgrade so first upgrade pkg with portupgrade >>> >>> >>> >> Just a thought here - why (like .rpm and .deb - and the reason I hate >> them so much) are you making the package manager version a dependency of >> a package? I can understand if there are new features that you may need >> to use a later version to get those features, but making a package >> dependent on the package manager rather than displaying a warning that a >> feature is missing is the brain dead way that plagues upgrades for >> redhat and debian. Of course if your intent is to make FreeBSD into >> another Linux distro just with a different kernel, continue. >> >> > > What is the problem of upgrading the package manager first and then > upgrade the rest of the world without any problem? > > Not disagreeing with you... but making dependencies like this leads to everything relying on the package manager being a particular version.. which in my opinion is wrong... the package manager is not part of the software you're installing... and shouldn't be part of a dependency tree - particularly when building your own ports. *Every* time a Redhat and Debian system screwed up that I have had, was caused by the package manager needing to be updated before a particular package, then all the other dependent packages needed to be upgraded, and the libraries and you end up with the catch 22 of the package manager can't be installed because the package manager is too old and you end up with a half working system that needs to be re-installed because you needed to apply a security fix to a perl module! Now FreeBSD has one advantage (currently) ... the package manager is not part of the OS, it in itself is a port.. however that has half changed already and in what, another month? it's going to be part of the OS... Yeah sure keep building pkg-static so it can be installed independently, but be aware that one does not want to get into dependency loops or having to upgrade everything just for one security fix - particularly when working with the ports tree and not the package manager... some people have production servers that need a security fix, not an upgrade of everything. -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.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: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:02:11AM +0200, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > > >> root:/tmp # portupgrade -nr dbus > >> ---> Session started at: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:08:37 +0200 > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dbus: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/eggdbus: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: sysutils/policykit: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/gconf2: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dbus-glib: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: sysutils/polkit: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dconf: > >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. > >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first > >> ---> Listing the results (+:done / -:ignored / *:skipped / !:failed) > >> - devel/dbus (marked as IGNORE) > >> - devel/eggdbus (marked as IGNORE) > >> - sysutils/policykit (marked as IGNORE) > >> - devel/gconf2 (marked as IGNORE) > >> - devel/dbus-glib (marked as IGNORE) > >> - sysutils/polkit (marked as IGNORE) > >> - devel/dconf (marked as IGNORE) > >> ---> Packages processed: 0 done, 7 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed > >> ---> Session ended at: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:08:37 +0200 (consumed 00:00:00) > >> > >> root:/tmp # portupgrade pkg > >> > >> root:/tmp # pkg upgrade pkg > >> Updating FreeBSD repository catalogue... > >> FreeBSD repository is up-to-date. > >> All repositories are up-to-date. > >> Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting) > >> Your packages are up to date. > >> > >> root:/tmp # > >> > >> what am I missing? > >> > > > > You are using portupgrade so first upgrade pkg with portupgrade > > > > > > Just a thought here - why (like .rpm and .deb - and the reason I hate > them so much) are you making the package manager version a dependency of > a package? I can understand if there are new features that you may need > to use a later version to get those features, but making a package > dependent on the package manager rather than displaying a warning that a > feature is missing is the brain dead way that plagues upgrades for > redhat and debian. Of course if your intent is to make FreeBSD into > another Linux distro just with a different kernel, continue. > There are new feature, that is why, the required version will be only bumped when there will be new features used by the ports tree, not on every pkg bump regards, Bapt pgpcVS7P2u0sO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
Le 23/09/2014 11:02, Michelle Sullivan a écrit : > Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> [...] >> You are using portupgrade so first upgrade pkg with portupgrade >> >> > > Just a thought here - why (like .rpm and .deb - and the reason I hate > them so much) are you making the package manager version a dependency of > a package? I can understand if there are new features that you may need > to use a later version to get those features, but making a package > dependent on the package manager rather than displaying a warning that a > feature is missing is the brain dead way that plagues upgrades for > redhat and debian. Of course if your intent is to make FreeBSD into > another Linux distro just with a different kernel, continue. > What is the problem of upgrading the package manager first and then upgrade the rest of the world without any problem? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available?
Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >> root:/tmp # portupgrade -nr dbus >> ---> Session started at: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:08:37 +0200 >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dbus: >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/eggdbus: >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: sysutils/policykit: >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/gconf2: >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dbus-glib: >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: sysutils/polkit: >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/dconf: >> pkg(8) must be version 1.3.8 or greater, but you have 1.3.7. >> You must upgrade pkg(8) first >> ---> Listing the results (+:done / -:ignored / *:skipped / !:failed) >> - devel/dbus (marked as IGNORE) >> - devel/eggdbus (marked as IGNORE) >> - sysutils/policykit (marked as IGNORE) >> - devel/gconf2 (marked as IGNORE) >> - devel/dbus-glib (marked as IGNORE) >> - sysutils/polkit (marked as IGNORE) >> - devel/dconf (marked as IGNORE) >> ---> Packages processed: 0 done, 7 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed >> ---> Session ended at: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:08:37 +0200 (consumed 00:00:00) >> >> root:/tmp # portupgrade pkg >> >> root:/tmp # pkg upgrade pkg >> Updating FreeBSD repository catalogue... >> FreeBSD repository is up-to-date. >> All repositories are up-to-date. >> Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting) >> Your packages are up to date. >> >> root:/tmp # >> >> what am I missing? >> > > You are using portupgrade so first upgrade pkg with portupgrade > > Just a thought here - why (like .rpm and .deb - and the reason I hate them so much) are you making the package manager version a dependency of a package? I can understand if there are new features that you may need to use a later version to get those features, but making a package dependent on the package manager rather than displaying a warning that a feature is missing is the brain dead way that plagues upgrades for redhat and debian. Of course if your intent is to make FreeBSD into another Linux distro just with a different kernel, continue. -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.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"
