Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
from Stari Karp: > On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:24 -0400, Jim Ohlstein wrote: > > On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:10 -0400, Stari Karp wrote: > > > Looks like the new portmaster is coming but what is about Synth? I am > > > the user of Synth and I like to know what the FreeBSD leaders decided, > > > please. > > The "FreeBSD leaders," in their infinite wisdom, decided to can John > > Marino. Synth development will likely go on, geared towards Dragonfly. > > Whether it will support future FreeBSD ports enhancements is anyone's > > guess. Whether gcc6-aux will ever be fixed for 12-CURRENT and 64 bit > > inodes is also anyone's guess. > > Sadly, it is/ > > was the best option for users looking to migrate to a "modern" tool for > > whom poudriere was too much. > I did install Dragonfly too and for my needs is very good. I am buying > a new ssd drive and I will installed os from scratch. And I knew what > happened with John Marino. One problem I had with DragonFlyBSD was that I couldn't mount/read a NetBSD or FreeBSD partition, and FreeBSD and NetBSD couldn't mount/read a DragonFly partition. That was on the DragonFly boot image written to USB stick, last version was somewhere before 4.4. Latest experience (4.4.x) was that DragonFly installation boot image, written to USB stick, hung on boot. I checked ports-mgmt/synth/Makefile for DPorts on github.com and see MAINTAINER= ericturgeon@gmail.com but for pkgsrc-synth/pkgtools/synth in (NetBSD) pkgsrc, MAINTAINER= dr...@marino.st HOMEPAGE= https://github.com/jrmarino/synth I was not behind the scenes to judge who was right and who was wrong in the John Marino debacle. It seems nobody in NetBSD, except John Marino, uses pkg or synth with pkgsrc, so if I try and need help, there would be no community to help. 64-bit inodes are not the only snag in 12-CURRENT. Remember pkgbase, originally planned for 11.0-RELEASE? I'll have to see what I can do with 11-STABLE and let 12-CURRENT wait on hold. Tom ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Finding depends-on ports
On 02/06/2017 20:18, Beeblebrox via freebsd-ports wrote: > I'm running a default-settings ports build from a ports-list file in > poudriere (-f /path/file), which means no options have been defined by > "# make config" or by make.conf (empty /var/db/ports, so can't look > there). > > Is there an easy way to find or back-trace which forward ports depend on > a certain port without running configure for the whole list? The only > thing I could think of is to write a shell script like: > cat file-name | while read line > make -C $line all-depends-list | grep > printf $stuff > outfile If you pull down the ports INDEX by 'make fetchindex' it's a simple matter of cut(1) and grep(1) to find all the ports that depend on some other port. Matching that up to the list of ports you have in your build list is a job for comm(1). Cheers, Matthew signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Finding depends-on ports
I'm running a default-settings ports build from a ports-list file in poudriere (-f /path/file), which means no options have been defined by "# make config" or by make.conf (empty /var/db/ports, so can't look there). Is there an easy way to find or back-trace which forward ports depend on a certain port without running configure for the whole list? The only thing I could think of is to write a shell script like: cat file-name | while read line make -C $line all-depends-list | grep printf $stuff > outfile Regards -- FreeBSD_amd64_12-Current_RadeonKMS Please CC my email when responding, mail from list is not delivered. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
Your use case is very similar to others that manage servers, particularly on behalf of others. We also rebuilt nightly , if any vulnerabilities were discovered we'd test and push to clients' servers. :) Cheers. -- *Disclaimer:* *As implied by email protocols, the information in this message is not confidential. Any intermediary or recipient may inspect, modify (add), copy, forward, reply to, delete, or filter email for any purpose unless said parties are otherwise obligated. Nothing in this message may be legally binding without cryptographic evidence of its integrity and/or confidentiality.* ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:24 -0400, Jim Ohlstein wrote: > On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:10 -0400, Stari Karp wrote: > > Looks like the new portmaster is coming but what is about Synth? I > > am > > the user of Synth and I like to know what the FreeBSD leaders > > decided, > > please. > > > > The "FreeBSD leaders," in their infinite wisdom, decided to can John > Marino. Synth development will likely go on, geared towards > Dragonfly. > Whether it will support future FreeBSD ports enhancements is anyone's > guess. Whether gcc6-aux will ever be fixed for 12-CURRENT and 64 bit > inodes is also anyone's guess. > > Sadly, it is/ > was the best option for users looking to migrate to a "modern" tool > for > whom poudriere was too much. > I did install Dragonfly too and for my needs is very good. I am buying a new ssd drive and I will installed os from scratch. And I knew what happened with John Marino. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 04:29:40PM +0200, Thierry Thomas wrote: > ... > But I have a naive question: if pkg supports flavours, and binary > packages are built for your sets of options, is portmaster still > relevant? > Well, that depends... e.g., on one's set of requirements (and how they are weighted). In my own case, I believe portmaster is still relevant. That said, I doubt that many would have my particular set of requirements -- and that of the few who might, very few would weight them at all similarly. To provide a bit of context: On the systems where I use portmaster, I also maintain private mirrors of the FreeBSD SVN repositories, which are updated (only) overnight. On a daily basis (on these machines -- one of which is a designated "build machine"; the other is my laptop) I: * Update the /usr/ports working copy. * Update the stable/11 /usr/src working copy. * Perform a src-based update to stable/11 (& reboot). * While that is running, fetch the distfiles I'll be needing later (e.g. "portmaster -aF"). * Update all installed ports (e.g., "portmaster -ad"). * Update the "head" slice's /usr/src working copy. * Reboot to the "head" slice. * Perform a src-based update to head (& reboot). * For the build machine, set the default boot slice to stable/11 & poweroff; for the laptop, reboot to stable/11, then use it for the rest of the day. Please note that I am NOT recommending any of this to anyone else. Peace, david -- David H. Wolfskill da...@catwhisker.org Looking forward to telling Mr. Trump: "You're fired!" See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
On 02.06.2017 16:29, Thierry Thomas wrote: Le jeu. 1 juin 17 à 15:45:43 +0200, Torsten Zuehlsdorff écrivait : Just as a short note: there is a complete rewrite of portmaster ongoing. Since its a beast and everything else is very hard there is no public evidence in case of failure. ;) Until now. I've been using portupgrade and then portmaster for a long time. I can understand the need for such tools when you have to build ports with non-default options. But I have a naive question: if pkg supports flavours, and binary packages are built for your sets of options, is portmaster still relevant? No, but most portmaster user do not have the default set of options. And flavours do not change the options of binary packages - as far as i understand. The should solve problems like having multiple ports of the same programm but for php 5.6, 7.0 and 7.1 at the same time. Or for different python or ruby versions. Greetings, Torsten ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
Le jeu. 1 juin 17 à 15:45:43 +0200, Torsten Zuehlsdorff écrivait : > Just as a short note: there is a complete rewrite of portmaster ongoing. > Since its a beast and everything else is very hard there is no public > evidence in case of failure. ;) Until now. I've been using portupgrade and then portmaster for a long time. I can understand the need for such tools when you have to build ports with non-default options. But I have a naive question: if pkg supports flavours, and binary packages are built for your sets of options, is portmaster still relevant? -- Th. Thomas. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
On 06/02/17 06:24, Jim Ohlstein wrote: > [...] > Sadly, it is/ > was the best option for users looking to migrate to a "modern" tool for > whom poudriere was too much. > Meaning no disrespect to anyone who makes positive contributions to the FreeBSD project, let's not forget that synth's dependence on Ada is not to be taken lightly either.-- George signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 01:31:19PM +0200, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote: > If someone likes synth please support it. This. Very much this. mcl ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
Looks like the new portmaster is coming but what is about Synth? I am the user of Synth and I like to know what the FreeBSD leaders decided, please. Thank you. SK ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
On 02.06.2017 12:24, Jim Ohlstein wrote: On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:10 -0400, Stari Karp wrote: Looks like the new portmaster is coming but what is about Synth? I am the user of Synth and I like to know what the FreeBSD leaders decided, please. The "FreeBSD leaders," in their infinite wisdom, decided to can John Marino. Synth development will likely go on, geared towards Dragonfly. Whether it will support future FreeBSD ports enhancements is anyone's guess. While i can follow the critique i want to say: out of experience in various communities - online and offline: if one project is centered around one single person it will fail. Its just a matter of time and exceptions are rarely. If someone likes synth please support it. Programming is just one single part needed to keep a project alive, even a programming-project. If you feel you are not a programmer, but for example a manager, manage to ask people for support, for feedback, for programming, etc. Greetings, Torsten ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 06:10 -0400, Stari Karp wrote: > Looks like the new portmaster is coming but what is about Synth? I am > the user of Synth and I like to know what the FreeBSD leaders > decided, > please. > The "FreeBSD leaders," in their infinite wisdom, decided to can John Marino. Synth development will likely go on, geared towards Dragonfly. Whether it will support future FreeBSD ports enhancements is anyone's guess. Whether gcc6-aux will ever be fixed for 12-CURRENT and 64 bit inodes is also anyone's guess. Sadly, it is/ was the best option for users looking to migrate to a "modern" tool for whom poudriere was too much. -- Jim Ohlstein Professional Mailman Hosting https://mailman-hosting.com/ ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
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 +-+ devel/ocaml-ipaddr | 2.6.1 | 2.8.0 +-+ devel/py-isort | 4.2.5 | 4.2.9 +-+ 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 https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]
On 01.06.2017 18:20, Matthieu Volat wrote: On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 15:45:43 +0200 Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote: [...] Just as a short note: there is a complete rewrite of portmaster ongoing. Since its a beast and everything else is very hard there is no public evidence in case of failure. ;) Until now. I'm currently try to convince all persons already got frustrated by portmaster-programming to come together and work on it. I'm also working at an decent automatic QA for it (and PHP and GitLab). Hi and thanks, is there a name and a public repository for this initiative? Currently not, but i would just name it simple like "portmaster 2". :D The initiative is at the moment offline, besides various emails. I will meet with another person interested in rewrite and discuss it much more within the next weeks. Also there is a lot of paper with architectural notices, QA-requirements and ideas about what should be done and what not. I will do a public announcement, when we start transferring it into the "wild". My current thought is creating a public repo on my private GitLab. I will use a special CI setup, but since it will need high permissions i need some control about what code went it. I welcome of course every help. Beside the programming we need of course extensive testing and i want to improve the documentation on so many level. Greetings, Torsten ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Hosting distfiles on HTTPS w/Let's Encrypt - how?
On Thu, 1 Jun 2017, Adam Weinberger wrote: > I've tried fetching a distfile from my own server (which uses a Let's Encrypt > cert) and it fetches fine in a poudriere jail. I'm suspecting that there's > something unusual in your web server's SSL configuration, or in how you're > generating your LE cert. Do you have any interesting arguments that you're > giving dehydrated or your web server? The only unusual thing in my certificate is that CN belongs to another domain and the domain in question is listed in the subjectAltName along with a primary. On a system with certificate bundle installed the following works fine: fetch https://distfile.net/local-ports-distfiles/INIT.2014-12-24.tgz My port (https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211164) has barely any dependencies, and there is no certificate bundle in the jail. Adam - can you check if something installs NSS CA roots as a dependency in your jail? I think I understand what happens - bare FreeBSD installation has no CA bundles, therefore fetch cannot really do https. Most ports work either because one of the dependencies installs ca root nss or they have a plain HTTP fallback (from distcache if need be). My distfiles are brand new and the distcache does not know them, not there is any HTTP fallback. The question is: do we silently require at least one unencrypted HTTP or FTP distfile source? If not, what should be done to bootstrap certificates for fetch - include somme roots in base, turn off certificate validation, other options? Marcin smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
