Re: Generating port changes easily
On 02/27/15 23:34, Kubilay Kocak wrote: On 28/02/2015 3:35 AM, Patrick Powell wrote: I have made some modifications to a port - couple of lines in the Makefile, and an updated pkg-plist. Once upon a time I was shown a script (run_this_script?) to help with updating a port. 1. Copy the original files in the port to XXX.orig (or something) For example cp Makefile Makefile.orig 2. Make your changes For example: vi Makefile 3. Now run this script which will generate a DIFF file which can be posted: run_this_script ... /tmp/changes.shar ? run_this_script ... /tmp/diffs ? 4. Post the generated file to bugzilla with an update request. Ummm... is there such a 'run_this_script' or am I indulging in wishful thinking? If the changes you make are in the ports files, porttools has a `port diff` command (which uses a reference ports tree to create diffs against. You can use /usr/ports as that reference, and in fact I believe that is the default. You can then just port diff path-to-patch-file.diff, ready for attachment into a new bugzilla issue. If the patch is against WRKSRC source code, you can a) cp WRKSRC/file WRKSRC/file.orig b) edit file c) make makepatch (from the port dir) makepatch recursively searches WRKSRC for *.orig files, and automatically creates correctly named patch-foo patch files in /files for you. Hope that helps -- koobs Excellent suggestions, both. I tried port diff AND make makepatch - both seemed to work as advertised. Thanks for the help! -- Patrick Powell Astart Technologies papow...@astart.com1530 Jamacha Rd, Suite X Network and System San Diego, CA 92019 Consulting 858-874-6543 FAX 858-751-2435 Web: www.astart.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
net-mgmt/icinga2 + net-mgmt/monitoring-plugins: check_snmp not working
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Using net-mgmt/icinga2 and net-mgmt/monitoring-plugins for observation of some swithces and routers via check_snmp fails lately with the error on all systems with a CRITICAL - Plugin timed out while executing system call Even those examples taken from the handbook do not work on FreeBSD CURRENT and FreeBSD 10.1-p6 (systems and ports tree uptodate to the most recent sources). I tried the command check_snmp manually as well as the snmpget (implicitely installed from port net-mgmt/net-snmp) and they work well. I suspect that the plugin is missing some variables (community, version, oid or even host address), which are not passed properly by ICINGA2 to the plugin or the handbook of icinga2 claims they're set but in reality they aren't. I need some hints how to debug the call of a specific plugin and what that plugin is provided with (variables) from ICINGA2. I only found some debugging hints and features for ICINGA2 itself, but they do not help much since the logs do not reveal the calling of the plugin. Can someone help with some hints? Thanks in adavance, Oliver -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJU9X7VAAoJEOgBcD7A/5N8yREIAK68nLugEEZBQwQ2QKOsMWf4 Q7gjrNwi5itQNVNX+ryHyg0kuzJSR+imqKDtFYslX/91Z2tgkDjr4G1sGvOD8dVd uaznmLBguRz/PuPGFoQRxTJFhdv8OUGz28EH6JVcXD36huBSMfvUU5Vpd08MXbmM Edb1mgHmmFYAFEYwJSWudXcX0lVR+AN83NnmZJ8hLUcHNM/Ia1kKDGtOh9DZpS1Q b1GexUv7FYlilxUOcf5tnTGTGp/Q7I2oEE66BEzzCJsW48y37k/EiyWmqsT6dLPP SoP9E6jNQy03vdr3Z0D6ZVU5vbs2YPKi+WHmXVri1VHFbZoc8JzqDT/oKpHpUcw= =EIMy -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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: Approving a patch
Hi! I am the maintainer for a port. I received a suggested patch for the port that is good. Did you receive it as part of a problem report in bugzilla or per e-mail ? Hmm, you're maintainer for mail/qpopper, as listed in /usr/ports/INDEX-10. There's a PR: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198224 There used to be a link in the notification email to click on to approve the patch. With the new port system, that is gone (or at least I didn???t find it). I went through the porters manual and didn???t find anything on how to approve a patch. How do I do that? You can go to https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198224 login as bc...@lafn.org and click on the small selector box with '?' besides the maintainer-feedback field. -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 5 years to go ! ___ 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: Approving a patch
On 3/3/2015 1:53 PM, Doug Hardie wrote: I am the maintainer for a port. I received a suggested patch for the port that is good. There used to be a link in the notification email to click on to approve the patch. With the new port system, that is gone (or at least I didn’t find it). I went through the porters manual and didn’t find anything on how to approve a patch. How do I do that? In bugzilla there is a maintainer feedback dropdown. You can change it to a '+' and also leave a comment saying approved. -- Regards, Bryan Drewery signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Approving a patch
I am the maintainer for a port. I received a suggested patch for the port that is good. There used to be a link in the notification email to click on to approve the patch. With the new port system, that is gone (or at least I didn’t find it). I went through the porters manual and didn’t find anything on how to approve a patch. How do I do that? ___ 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: Approving a patch
On 4/03/2015 5:45 PM, Kubilay Kocak wrote: On 4/03/2015 7:11 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: On 3/3/2015 1:53 PM, Doug Hardie wrote: I am the maintainer for a port. I received a suggested patch for the port that is good. There used to be a link in the notification email to click on to approve the patch. With the new port system, that is gone (or at least I didn’t find it). I went through the porters manual and didn’t find anything on how to approve a patch. How do I do that? In bugzilla there is a maintainer feedback dropdown. You can change it to a '+' and also leave a comment saying approved. Canonically and preferred: Set maintainer-approval flag to + *on the attachment/patch*. The maintainer-feedback flag is at the issue/bug scope, not the attachment/patch scope. This of course requires the maintainer-approval flag was set to ? with your email as the value first. Currently this is not automatic, but *should be* if there is an attachment of type: patch in the issue. I'll create an issue for that now for bugmeister@ to look into addressing. Only in cases where maintainer-approval is *not* already set to?, is using the maintainer-feedback flag + comment flow OK. Setting maintainer-feedback is ambiguous, and is used to prove 'acknowledgement' of an issue or question. This is especially the case when there are multiple version of patches, or patches from multiple contributors. In future it will be used to derive maintainer timeouts to kick issues along, and open them up for someone else to make a decision on. tldr; Set the maintainer-approval flag to + -- Regards, Kubilay Bugmeister Further clarification: maintainer-feedback and maintainer-approval are independent and orthogonal. none, one or the other, or both can be used independently and to cumulative effect depending on the issues context and state with regard to what the issue needs to progress. -- Kubilay ___ 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: Approving a patch
On 4/03/2015 7:11 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: On 3/3/2015 1:53 PM, Doug Hardie wrote: I am the maintainer for a port. I received a suggested patch for the port that is good. There used to be a link in the notification email to click on to approve the patch. With the new port system, that is gone (or at least I didn’t find it). I went through the porters manual and didn’t find anything on how to approve a patch. How do I do that? In bugzilla there is a maintainer feedback dropdown. You can change it to a '+' and also leave a comment saying approved. Canonically and preferred: Set maintainer-approval flag to + *on the attachment/patch*. The maintainer-feedback flag is at the issue/bug scope, not the attachment/patch scope. This of course requires the maintainer-approval flag was set to ? with your email as the value first. Currently this is not automatic, but *should be* if there is an attachment of type: patch in the issue. I'll create an issue for that now for bugmeister@ to look into addressing. Only in cases where maintainer-approval is *not* already set to?, is using the maintainer-feedback flag + comment flow OK. Setting maintainer-feedback is ambiguous, and is used to prove 'acknowledgement' of an issue or question. This is especially the case when there are multiple version of patches, or patches from multiple contributors. In future it will be used to derive maintainer timeouts to kick issues along, and open them up for someone else to make a decision on. tldr; Set the maintainer-approval flag to + -- Regards, Kubilay Bugmeister ___ 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
Poudriere testport failure but manual jailed build success
Hi, I've been banging my head for several days on what follows and I've come to the point where I have to get some help. Here's the point. I'm trying to port LizardFS (a distributed file system for Unix/Linux) on FreeBSD and I built a port candidate I would like to submit. But first I needed to be sure everything was OK, so I ran some tests. As of now: - The port builds fine on FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE amd64 host. - portlint does not report any issue (on the same host as above) - port test (from porttools) happily validates the port (on the same host as above) - BUT poudriere fails to build the port. I'm using poudriere 3.1.1 on FreeBSD 11-Current, and failure occurs within a FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE amd64 jail. What basically happens is that the build process runs fine until it reaches man page generation. There, a2x throws an error because xlstproc returns with return code 5 (= error in the stylesheet), whereas it shouldn't. What kills me here is that if I enter the jail after the failure and try to build the port manually, everything builds fine! You'll find poudriere log at the end of this message. Here are the things I tried: 1. As the port uses cmake I thought something broke in the makefiles. It appears I'm able to manually build the port using either: - The makefiles left behind by poudriere in the /wrkdirs tree (this confirms that cmake worked as expected) - A new set of Makefiles in another dir 2. I found several examples of xlstproc throwing errors when it can't get some resources from the internet (mainly DTD files). I made a patch to force xsltproc to run with the --nonet option, but the build failed the same. 3. I also tried to disable parallel make jobs, without success. I'll try to build the port from FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE tomorrow. I don't think it will make a difference but I'll try anyway. Does anybody have a clue about what's going on? Thanks for your time! Marin. BEGIN POUDRIERE LOG build started at Tue Mar 3 22:41:59 CET 2015 port directory: /usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin building for: FreeBSD 101Ramd64-development 10.1-RELEASE-p6 FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE-p6 amd64 maintained by: ma...@olivarim.com ident warning: no id keywords in /usr/local/poudriere/data/.m/101Ramd64-development/ref//usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/Makefile Makefile ident: Poudriere version: 3.1.1 Host OSVERSION: 1100062 Jail OSVERSION: 1001000 ---Begin Environment--- PKGREPOSITORY=/tmp/pkgs PACKAGES=/tmp/pkgs OSVERSION=1001000 UNAME_v=FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE-p6 UNAME_r=10.1-RELEASE-p6 BLOCKSIZE=K MAIL=/var/mail/root STATUS=1 SAVED_TERM=xterm NO_WARNING_PKG_INSTALL_EOL=yes MASTERMNT=/usr/local/poudriere/data/.m/101Ramd64-development/ref FORCE_PACKAGE=yes PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/games:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/root/bin POUDRIERE_BUILD_TYPE=bulk OLDPWD=/usr/local/poudriere/ports/development/sysutils PWD=/ MASTERNAME=101Ramd64-development USER=root HOME=/root POUDRIERE_VERSION=3.1.1 TRYBROKEN=yes LOCALBASE=/usr/local PACKAGE_BUILDING=yes ---End Environment--- ---Begin OPTIONS List--- === The following configuration options are available for lizardfs-admin-2.5.4: DOCS=on: Build and/or install documentation === Use 'make config' to modify these settings ---End OPTIONS List--- --CONFIGURE_ARGS-- --End CONFIGURE_ARGS-- --CONFIGURE_ENV-- XDG_DATA_HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work XDG_CONFIG_HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work TMPDIR=/tmp XDG_DATA_HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work XDG_CONFIG_HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work TMPDIR=/tmp SHELL=/bin/sh CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh --End CONFIGURE_ENV-- --MAKE_ENV-- XDG_DATA_HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work XDG_CONFIG_HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work TMPDIR=/tmp XDG_DATA_HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work XDG_CONFIG_HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work HOME=/wrkdirs/usr/ports/sysutils/lizardfs-admin/work TMPDIR=/tmp NO_PIE=yes SHELL=/bin/sh NO_LINT=YES PREFIX=/usr/local LOCALBASE=/usr/local LIBDIR=/usr/lib CC=cc CFLAGS=-O2 -pipe -fstack-protector -fno-strict-aliasing CPP=cpp CPPFLAGS= LDFLAGS= -fstack-protector LIBS= CXX=c++ CXXFLAGS=-O2 -pipe -fstack-protector -fno-strict-aliasing MANPREFIX=/usr/local BSD_INSTALL_PROGRAM=install -s -o root -g wheel -m 555 BSD_INSTALL_LIB=install -s -o root -g wheel -m 444 BSD_INSTALL_SCRIPT=install -o root -g wheel -m 555 BSD_INSTALL_DATA=install -o root -g wheel -m 0644 BSD_INSTALL_MAN=install -o root -g wheel -m 444 --End MAKE_ENV-- --PLIST_SUB-- DOCS= NO_DOCS=@comment CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=release OSREL=10.1 PREFIX=%D LOCALBASE=/usr/local RESETPREFIX=/usr/local PORTDOCS= PORTEXAMPLES= LIB32DIR=lib
qemu-devel usage
Yeah! I was able to setup qemu-devel(ver 2.20) to use existing qcow2
images from linux. Sort of...
The biggest pain I had was getting networking to play along. No matter
what settings, modules or otherwise I tried, I could not get the VM
image to use an existing tap interface accepting DHCP from my server.
Turns out the problem was rather undocumented and buried in installed files.
The files /usr/local/etc/qemu-if[up|down] are two lines each. One is
the sh-bang, the other is a line saying exec true. And this is the
default installed to the system by the port files. The
qemu-if.sample files are not much help either as they contain the
exact same content. Link(1)(see refs below) makes no mention of the
default ifup|down script files. Would it be prudent to setup an
/etc/qemu folder so users can place their local networking scripts
there? Is this the correct location?
FWIW, my solution was to edit the scripts. I replaced the exec true
in qemu-ifup with /sbin/ifconfig bridge0 addm ${1} up to add a tap to
the existing bridge. In the qemu-ifdown, exec true was replaced with
/sbin/ifconfig ${1} destroy. End result - still need root access to
start VM because of networking.
I didn't have to go to this extreme when I setup qemu networking on a
linux box. However, new OS. :)
From my original setup files for qemu, I had used the -enable-kvm and
-cpu host flags (see 2 below). Qemu on BSD just didn't want to accept
host as a cpu option. The reference did point out how the flag worked,
something I didn't realize. However, it would be really good to have the
host flag to pass along the cpu accelerators to the VM without having
to call them individually. Is anyone working on this?
And on the topic of cpu's, when I get a listing of the supported cpu's (
qemu -cpu help ), it seems the listing is abbreviated. There is no
mention of later cpu types (either intel or AMD). Am I missing something?
Ref (3) talks about using kqemu-kmod. A kqemu-kmod-devel exists in the
ports tree. However, I saw a reference on the KVM page (which I can't
find again : ) talking about how kvm aspects including kqemu were being
absorbed into qemu mainline. Can someone clarify, please. Are there any
kernel modules required for normal usage? Documentation seems a little
sparse for FreeBSD/qemu hosts. Is the -enable-kvm flag mentioned earlier
still required here?
Appreciated!!!
(1) https://wiki.freebsd.org/qemu
(2) http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Tuning_KVM
(3) http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/BSD
___
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
alsa-libs ld cannot find python2.7
Hello, Im new to building. I have done over 2 dozen installs and buildworlds as a hobby to learn more UNIX. I am trying to build multimedia/mpv. I get /usr/bin/ld cannot find -lpython2.7. Surely I want to make the hack by searching some files and pointing ld to the right tree /usr/local. But I am not well versed in the micro scale of configuring yet. So I ask for assistance. Thanks a lot to all. 11.0-CURRENT ___ 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: Poudriere testport failure but manual jailed build success
On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 23:37:30 +0100 Marin Bernard ma...@olivarim.com wrote Hi, I've been banging my head for several days on what follows and I've come to the point where I have to get some help. Here's the point. I'm trying to port LizardFS (a distributed file system for Unix/Linux) on FreeBSD and I built a port candidate I would like to submit. But first I needed to be sure everything was OK, so I ran some tests. As of now: - The port builds fine on FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE amd64 host. - portlint does not report any issue (on the same host as above) - port test (from porttools) happily validates the port (on the same host as above) - BUT poudriere fails to build the port. I'm using poudriere 3.1.1 on FreeBSD 11-Current, and failure occurs within a FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE amd64 jail. What basically happens is that the build process runs fine until it reaches man page generation. There, a2x throws an error because xlstproc returns with return code 5 (= error in the stylesheet), whereas it shouldn't. What kills me here is that if I enter the jail after the failure and try to build the port manually, everything builds fine! You'll find poudriere log at the end of this message. Any reason you couldn't simply lower the risk of failure based on tools you have no control over; by simply creating a valid man page to begin with? In other words; if the man is already properly formatted groff/troff/mandoc (take your pick). You wouldn't ever need to worry again. :) Just a thought, and hope it helps. --Chris .. ___ 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: FreeBSD Port: netqmail-tls-1.06.20110119
On 3/2/2015 1:37 PM, Joel F Rodriguez wrote: Hello, I thought I’d send you a quick email to let you know that this port seems to be full of security holes. While it seems to work in normal operations, I experienced numerous spam attacks caused by an apparent failure of AUTH(STARTTLS). IMHO it's kind of expected with qmail. It's many years unmaintained (in an upstream sense). Every patch except for spamcontrol is unmaintained upstream. Put another way, you may want to try qmail-spamcontrol since it is actively maintained. Folks were authorizing using unknown accounts and passwords (backdoors?) and I faced a flood of spam as a result. I was able to log one account that was being used, and I was unable to block the attack even when I removed the account. These attacks continued even after I updated every email account to use a random 20 char password. The second issue I see here is that anyone that successfully authorizes can send email using any address they wish, which is why I was getting SPAM generated using fake email address as the originator. The port I am using is FreeBSD tahoestores.net 9.2-RELEASE-p10 FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE-p10 #0: Tue Jul 8 10:48:24 UTC 2014 r...@amd64-builder.daemonology.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 and is the version of qmail is netqmail-tls-1.06.20110119. I would be happy to send you more detailed configurations docs. For now, I have had to drop tls support. -- Regards, Bryan Drewery 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 +-+ www/npapi-vlc | 2.0.6 | 2.2.0 +-+ 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
