Re: SVN RELEASE_9_2_0
Today I tripped over another package that had broken dependencies even thought It was supposedly a package that was from 9.2-RELEASE release process. It was celestia, installed from 9.2-release packages, which depended on libpangox.so.1. I tried to roll my own. The build was broken too. My question still stands. Is FreeBSD now building packages prior to the actual tagging of the ports tree as RELEASE_9_2_0? It seems like this is the case since the dates of the packages in the FTP archive pre-date the release date. For many many releases now I have run only unmodified -release with the equivalent ports. And it was good. Now I'm having issues with the quality of the ports. I am concerned that it is due to a failure in the release process. I might be wrong. If I'm not, then my request is to not put the cart before the horse and ship ports labelled in the FTP archive as -release when they are really just a snapshot of a point in time close the release date. That's very unFreeBSD like. i.e.: freeze it build it fix it build it no errors? no changes? tag it ship it It seems like we skipped freeze it, fix it, and check for errors. We just built it and shipped it, then later we tagged it for release. Or maybe we never did the above and I personally just got lucky for 4 major versions. I do seem to recall things like "ports freeze" on the RE schedule. Regards, Jason C. Wells ___ 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: SVN RELEASE_9_2_0
RELEASE_9_2_0 was tagged four hours ago. I hope there will be binaries built from this tag. I actually tried running the pre-tagged 9.2-release ports and ran into some library dependency issues. I chalked it up to being premature on the release and so I reverted to 9.1-release ports. I've been waiting quietly for actual post-tagged ports to be built. The ports built on releng are not release ports. I know the distinction may be small depending on the number of changes from the build date to the release tag date. The timing of the build and tag represent a completely new process. I've historically depended on the quality control of the release process to maintain a coherent system. I also stopped rolling my own several years ago. Thanks, Jason ___ 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"
SVN RELEASE_9_2_0
Is FreeBSD doing something new? I don't see an SVN tag for ports for the 9.2 release. Historically the ports tree was tagged and built a little before -stable got tagged for release. Thanks, Jason ___ 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: openoffice package requires libstdc++.so.6
Garrett Cooper wrote: Did you install OpenOffice from a package? libstdc++.so.6 comes with gcc-3.4+ by default, so why isn't your system finding it...? I should mention that this is the first time I have installed openoffice. I cannot say that openoffice used to work. This is a fresh binary package install of openoffice. 1. Did you do an clean install of FreeBSD 6.x or is it an upgrade? If an upgrade, from what version are you upgrading? The system was a source upgrade from 6.1-RELEASE to 6.2-RELEASE. > 2. Where did you get the package from? Either ftp4.us.freebsd.org or ftp3.us.freebsd.org. I don't recall which. I do have one system with 6.3-RC. The libstdc++ there is also libstdc++.so.5. I just made the world today on that box. I don't have gcc3.4 installed as a port. Here is my system gcc # gcc -v Using built-in specs. Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.6 [FreeBSD] 20060305 I have no idea how my system could be off by one on the major number of this library. I never tinker with that stuff. Regards, Jason ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
openoffice package requires libstdc++.so.6
The prebuilt package openoffice-2.3.1 requires libstdc++.so.6. FreeBSD 6.3 has libstdc++.so.5. I have always rolled my own and am unfamiliar with packages. This particular package would appear to have been built against a librart version that is not installed on FreeBSD-6. If I have somehow erred, please point out my error. Is this package buggy? Shouldn't packages link against /usr/lib/libstdc++.so and so follow the softlinks that the system provides? On my system: $ openoffice.org-2.3.1-scalc /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Shared object "libstdc++.so.6" not found, required by "javaldx" /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Shared object "libstdc++.so.6" not found, required by "pagein" /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Shared object "libstdc++.so.6" not found, required by "soffice.bin" $ ls -la /usr/lib/libstdc++* -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 1585324 Jan 11 05:55 /usr/lib/libstdc++.a lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 14 Jan 11 05:55 /usr/lib/libstdc++.so -> libstdc++.so.5 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 803928 Jan 11 05:55 /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 1577098 Jan 11 05:55 /usr/lib/libstdc++_p.a Thanks, Jason ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Port Version via pkg_add
Garrett Cooper wrote: Please see my earlier post (November / December on [EMAIL PROTECTED]) where I provided a really simple pkg_add(1) patch that keeps all packages fetched with -K. That appears to do the trick. Thanks! Jason C. Wells ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Port Version via pkg_add
Jason C. Wells wrote: How does pkg_add determine what version of a port to add when 'pkg_add -Kr' is used? How can I make pkg_add use 6.3 packages instead of 6.2? Thank you for the previous replies. Now for a follow up. How do I make pkg_add -K keep all dependencies as well as the target package listed on the command line? For example: pkg_add -Kr gnash-0.8.1.tbz ... keeps only gnash and none of the other packages that get downloaded. Thanks, Jason C. Wells ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Port Version via pkg_add
How does pkg_add determine what version of a port to add when 'pkg_add -Kr' is used? How can I make pkg_add use 6.3 packages instead of 6.2? Thanks, Jason ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: All those 'Ports System Re-engrg" posts
Chuck Robey wrote: >>Seeing as no one here who has the ability to do the job also still has >>enough innocence to get snagged into it Teehee! Mark Linimon wrote: He lost me around the "these days, the horsepower to rebuild ports is easily available." He clearly has not idea, whatsoever, of what the current work is. My recent attempts to deal with port management in my own unique (foolish?) way has me considering this conclusion. Let FreeBSD do all the work by taking advantage of binary package installs. Then do my custom patched stuff later. I'm sort of scratching my head as to why I have been rolling my own all these years. (mumble grumble Kerberos mumble grumble) Frankly I am amazed that you can build a large chunk of thousands of ports. Ports have weathered the decade pretty well. I seem to recall Jordan writing that the ports system was never intended to last as long as it did. I think he said the same thing about sysinstall. Later, Jason ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: duration of the ports freeze
Peter Jeremy wrote: On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 03:04:14PM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 07:50:02AM -0800, Jason C. Wells wrote: It wouldn't surprise me if portmanager is hoping that KDE 4.0 will go prime time real soon. That's my big conspiracy theory. package builds out the door. The Razor, and past experience, would suggest that sweeping changes would delay all that significantly. As a corollary, KDE4 will not hit the ports tree until after 7.0 and 6.3 are released. We lucked out last time and got current updates of both gnome and kde. Let me fix my original post. "It would be a pleasant surprise if portmgr were able to take KDE 4.0 to prime time real soon." Later, Jason ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: duration of the ports freeze
Johan van Selst wrote: Although I guess this date is somewhat... ehm... ambitious. This should probably be 7 December. It wouldn't surprise me if portmanager is hoping that KDE 4.0 will go prime time real soon. That's my big conspiracy theory. Later, Jason ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Package Building in the Large
Most of the message below is just rounding out the discussion. There is one significant question on recursion though. Doug Barton wrote: >> I also ended up with shared a library version problem >> in at least one port (grip) in spite of having started my build with a >> completely vacant /usr/local. > > That sounds like a problem with the ports. I can't think of any way > that portmaster would cause that. It might be due to a non-clean /usr/local on the target install host. It was a foo.so.3 is required but foo.so.2 is installed sort of error. I haven't dealt with the installation step in a meaningful way yet. Don't worry about responding to this bit. >> It looks to have good port upgrading abilities, >> but that is not what I am after. What I am trying to do is operate a >> build host and distribute packages from there. > > That is not its primary purpose, but assuming that your systems are > similarly configured, and running an OS version that's fairly close in > age, there is no reason that portmaster shouldn't be able to at least > create the packages that you can then distribute manually. All my systems run a -release and all ports are tagged with the same -release. (With a few odd cases when security issues demand.) A few years ago I decided to stop tracking -stable and just run pure releases. I now spend less time administering my five or so systems. By what you claim, portmaster should suffice. >> I used 'portmaster -GgDt -p /usr/ports/ports $pmarg' for my run >> where $pmarg was the list of 31 ports. > > That's definitely not going to work, for several reasons. The -G > switch should only be used _after_ you've already run portmaster > without it for a given port build. I had manually run 'make config-recursive' previously. I'll do as advised at any rate. > I'm also unsure > what /usr/ports/ports is supposed to be, unless that's a local path > issue. It's a local hierarchy issue. I pushed the ports tree up one level and therein lie 6.2, -current, and the soon to be 7.0 trees. /usr/ports/ports is a link to the tree I was working on in which is /usr/ports/ports-current. Once the FreeBSD portmanager pulls the trigger I will be dealing with 7.0 exclusively. > Assuming that your list of ports is relative to the /usr/ports > directory (e.g., 'archivers/unzip astro/planets', etc.), what I would > do is: > for dir in $pmarg; do > portmaster -BgD -p /usr/ports/$dir > done Aha! I had an error (don't recall exactly) without using -p where the complaint had something to do with not finding something in /usr/ports. So I fired up the manual and then found the -p switch and assumed that was how I told portmaster where the ports tree was stored. I think this is the ticket. I don't have my manpages handy right now but I'll take a closer look. But what about recursion? I held the notion the portmaster did magically delicious recursion and so I thought that providing the list of ports to a single invocation of portmaster would allow portmaster to sort the build order correctly. The code snippet you show would cause portmaster to _forget_ recursion information during each iteration of the loop. My concern was that some dependencies would be built more than once. That's dog slow. > Replace the literal "/usr/ports/" in that string with the actual > location of your ports tree if its different. You probably also want > to add the -v switch in there for the first few runs to familiarize > yourself with what's going on, and review the man page. > Please note, I am not saying that portmaster will definitely be the > right solution for you. However, I do think it's worth pointing out > that if used properly it should at least be able to do what it says it > can do. I'll give it another go. Later, Jason ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Package Building in the Large
Doug Barton wrote: On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Jason C. Wells wrote: What I am trying to do is to build 30 or so packages including the big ones like X, kde, gnome, plus all of their dependencies on a build host and then use pkg_add on various machines. I have had a variety of difficulties with all of the methods I have used thus far (portmaster, portupgrade, homegrown). What problems did you have with portmaster? Did the backup package creation fail in some way? Not all dependencies had a package built for them. For my list of 31 ports that I actually desired to build there was a dependency list (make all-depends-list) of 758 ports. Of those 758 ports there were 427 packages built. I also ended up with shared a library version problem in at least one port (grip) in spite of having started my build with a completely vacant /usr/local. It seems that portmaster is intended to be run on the host where the existing ports are currently installed and where the new ports will be eventually installed. It looks to have good port upgrading abilities, but that is not what I am after. What I am trying to do is operate a build host and distribute packages from there. Not all hosts run the same set of packages. Add the fact that I am finicky about customizing the kerberos dependencies. I am trying to find a good method to build my ports at every minor release (7.0 upcoming) with little user intervention. Perhaps I misunderstand the -g and -b switches. I don't want backup packages of old ports. I already have those. I do want packages for all new ports that are built during a run. I used 'portmaster -GgDt -p /usr/ports/ports $pmarg' for my run where $pmarg was the list of 31 ports. I think portmaster worked as expected. It just didn't do what I desired. Hence my original question to the list. The tinderbox port looks like the right functionality. It also looks heavyweight requiring apache+mysql. I am trying to avoid dealing with extra databases. I spent a lot of time messing around with the database under portupgrade. I have come to the opinion (like the idea behind portmaster) that there are already databases built into the port system. I'd rather just use them in place. I would also like the portmanagers to know that I think they do a bang-up job. I just have my ultra narrow fussy roll your own way of doing things. I am looking for the right method _for me_. All of the above is no criticism. Thanks, Jason C. Wells ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Package Building in the Large
I have been toying with a variety of package building methods lately. My latest effort involves looking into the "Third Party Release Engineering" documented here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/releng-packages/index.html. Where do I start if I am looking for package building tools that the FreeBSD project uses for burning onto ROMs? Is ports/Tools/scripts/release the right place? The dates on the files there seem stale. What I am trying to do is to build 30 or so packages including the big ones like X, kde, gnome, plus all of their dependencies on a build host and then use pkg_add on various machines. I have had a variety of difficulties with all of the methods I have used thus far (portmaster, portupgrade, homegrown). Thanks, Jason C. Wells ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Thunderbird with GSSAPI
After fiddling with knobs and installing combinations of prebuilt binaries for Thunderbird, Heimdal, MIT Kerberos to no avail. I still cannot get Thunderbird to use GSSAPI to authenticate to my IMAP4 server. Is anyone here using Thunderbird with GSSAPI? Did you do anything special to make it work? Thanks, Jason C. Wells ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
6.2 Ports Work Well
I would like to thank the ports team for a good job with the RELEASE_6_2 ports tree. I was able to compile all of KDE and all of Gnome with minimal fuss. The last time I built this stuff I had problems with a variety of dependency issues. I did have a slight bit of fuss building packages recursively. The key difficulty was that the some builds would detect installed libraries and complete successfully. (as they should) The build of several package tarballs would fail because a certain file in the packing list wasn't found. I am pretty sure this was because the installed port wasn't the same version as the one in the ports tree. After the first couple of these errors I did an unconditional deinstall of the ports "world" (my build machine was pretty crufty anyway, having much leftover stuff from 4X days even) and was able to build gnome and KDE and all tarballs without complaint. That's a pretty significant accomplishment from where I sit. Thanks! Portupgrade and friends are able to do a monumental task with some sensibility and grace. I can imagine how hard it is to get a build done on a chunk of software as large as say Windows done when everyone is working for the same organization, using the same tools, languages, compilers and so forth. I have friends up here who vanish when it's build time in Redmond. That the ports crew pulls all the diversity of open source together in a fairly well integrated system is commendable. Later, Jason C. Wells ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Thunderbird with Kerberos
ldd thunderbird-bin doesn't list gssapi, krb5, or sasl. I guess that is why kerberos authentication isn't working for me. (I also changed from uw-imap to cyrus-imap but that is a whole-nother story.) How can I build thunderbird with kerberos support? I use the system heimdal for client and my KDCs. Thanks, Jason C. Wells ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Ports tree is now in a pre-release slush
Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 The ports tree has been tagged for 6.2-RELEASE, and the freeze is now Ack! I started supping the RELEASE_6_2_0 ports tree and cvsup started deleting everything. Is there some sort of latency for when the mirrors get the updated tag? Perhaps I just got (un)lucky. Later, Jason (who only runs -RELEASEs) ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
