Re: using security/openssl in a port
On 1/5/18 5:09 PM, Eugene Grosbein wrote: > On 05.01.2018 09:44, Matthew Luckie wrote: > >> My main worry is that I could not find a single port that apparently >> depends on security/openssl. I'm worried that its more complicated than >> simply declaring a dependency on security/openssl on particular freebsd >> versions because other ports that use openssl might link against it >> without registering a dependency. Is my worry misplaced? > > Why don't you read the Porter's Handbook? It has answers to all your > questions: > > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/uses-ssl.html I already said that I considered USES = ssl and that it didn't seem to address my concerns. Can you please point me at a port that depends on OpenSSL from ports using USES = ssl (or whatever this page of the porters handbook is trying to tell me to do). Thanks, Matthew signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: using security/openssl in a port
On 01/05/18 15:37, Chris H wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:11:00 +1300 "Matthew Luckie" said
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I maintain a port that has a new release which requires openssl 1.0.2 to
>> build. FreeBSD 10.3 and 10.4 both have openssl 1.0.1, and 11 onwards
>> have 1.0.2. Is there a magic way to have this port depend on ports
>> openssl for freebsd releases without openssl 1.0.2? I ran
>>
>> find /usr/ports -exec grep "security/openssl" {} \; -print
>>
>> and didn't find anything that I could use as a recipe. USES = ssl
>> doesn't seem to be it either.
>>
>> Matthew
> Hello Matthew,
> Have a look at ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk
> In there you will find some clues for defining rules for building
> for specific (bsd)OS versions -- like >=X, or .if OSREL <=XX ...
> As well as only permitting build/install when the correct version
> of security/openssl is found in the systems ports tree.
> It's well commented, and should give you some good options to try.
> It will also give some good clues to search the ports tree for. Where
> you can simply copy someone else's work verbatim. :-)
>
> You might also try the following alternative for searching;
> cd /usr/ports
> find . | xargs
>
> HTH
My main worry is that I could not find a single port that apparently
depends on security/openssl. I'm worried that its more complicated than
simply declaring a dependency on security/openssl on particular freebsd
versions because other ports that use openssl might link against it
without registering a dependency. Is my worry misplaced?
Matthew
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
using security/openssl in a port
Hi,
I maintain a port that has a new release which requires openssl 1.0.2 to
build. FreeBSD 10.3 and 10.4 both have openssl 1.0.1, and 11 onwards
have 1.0.2. Is there a magic way to have this port depend on ports
openssl for freebsd releases without openssl 1.0.2? I ran
find /usr/ports -exec grep "security/openssl" {} \; -print
and didn't find anything that I could use as a recipe. USES = ssl
doesn't seem to be it either.
Matthew
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: FreeBSD port graphics/xfig: patch to fix packaging with DOCS disabled (was Re: please revert graphics/xfig r354029)
Please commit. Thanks Guido for doing the digging on this one.
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 05:34:14PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> On 05/31/14 17:09, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 05:00:34PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> >> On 05/31/14 16:35, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >>> On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 03:31:34PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> On 05/31/14 02:08, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > Can someone please revert r354029 for graphics/xfig?
> > This revision breaks the ability to install the port.
> >
> > cd /usr/ports/graphics/xfig
> > svn merge -r 354029:340725 .
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> I did commit the revision you mention. I just tested the port and it
> installs fine.
> >>>
> >>> Not on my system, which is an up-to-date freebsd-current.
> >>>
> >>
> >> After some digging I found out the port is broken when the DOCS option
> >> is disabled.
> >>
> >> I'm cooking a fix I'll get to you soon.
> >>
> >> Please always report if using custom options when reporting a problem.
> >>
> >
> > I forgot I had the DOCS option unset as it was unset ages ago
> > and updates have always worked. The question is "why are changes
> > to a port committed without proper testing?" Yes, "proper
> > testing" should include testing of the effects of (un)setting
> > individual Makefile options.
> >
>
> I'm going to fix it. I'm attaching a patch and CCing the maintainer to
> get his approval. Can you test this patch too and report back? Thanks!
>
> Please understand we all make mistakes from time to time.
>
> Also remember that this is a volunteer project and such a thorough
> testing as the one you are asking for isn't always possible with the
> resources at hand.
>
> for m...@luckie.org.nz:
>
> A problem has been reported in the xfig port when trying to install it
> with the DOCS option disabled.
>
> I've created a patch which fixes the problem, can you approve it?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> --
> Guido Falsi
> Index: Makefile
> ===
> --- Makefile (revision 355988)
> +++ Makefile (working copy)
> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> USE_XORG=ice sm x11 xaw xext xi xmu xpm xt
> USE_CSTD=gnu89
> CFLAGS+= -Wno-return-type
> +INSTALL_TARGET= install install.libs
>
> MAKE_ENV+= DOCSDIR=${DOCSDIR} CHMOD=${CHMOD} TAR=${TAR}
> MAKE_ARGS+= INSTALLFLAGS="${COPY}" \
> @@ -38,7 +39,7 @@
> .include
>
> .if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MDOCS}
> -INSTALL_TARGET= install install.libs install.html
> +INSTALL_TARGET+= install.html
> .endif
>
> .if ! ${PORT_OPTIONS:MI18N} || ! ${PORT_OPTIONS:MDOCS}
pgp4xAJ_lDsM9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
www/gallery2
Hi, Could someone please commit and close http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=177689 There's a supplied patch in the PR and the PR is in maintainer timeout. Matthew signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
