Re: Port version problem
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 07:16:38AM -0500 I heard the voice of Matthew D. Fuller, and lo! it spake thus: > > I recommend "ignore it, it doesn't matter". Or alternately phrased, use "-l'<'" instead of "-L=", like I always do. There are various reasons I'd have installed a newer version than INDEX has, like NEW_XORG, and even version I'd have installed a newer version than in the ports tree at all, like on a port I maintain and have updated but hasn't gotten committed yet. I only care to hear about stuff where I'm _behind_; if I'm _ahead_ that's the rest of the world's problem, not mine :) -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fulle...@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream. ___ 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: Port version problem
On 2014-03-23 13:02, Jerry wrote: > On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 12:42:22 +0100, Matthias Andree stated: > >> Am 23.03.2014 12:39, schrieb Jerry: >> >>> /usr/sbin/portsnap fetch update >>> /usr/local/sbin/portsdb -u >>> /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= >>> >>> I just reran those command and it produced the exact same results. >> >> portsdb is irrelevant here, did you check portsnap output, did it >> succeed? Is your system clock plausible? Did portsnap rebuild the >> INDEX file? >> >> Otherwise, try: make fetchindex -C /usr/ports > > I tried your suggestion with negative results. Any other ideas? > As Matthew has already written you are running with WITH_NEW_XORG but the INDEX is generated without this flag. >From x11-servers/xorg-server/Makefile .if defined(WITH_NEW_XORG) XORG_VERSION= 1.12.4 XORG_REVISION= 4 .else XORG_VERSION= 1.7.7 XORG_REVISION= 11 ... If you run only the command $> pkg version -vL= it should calculate the version correct. -- Regards, olli ___ 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: Port version problem
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 08:02:41AM -0400 I heard the voice of Jerry, and lo! it spake thus: > > I tried your suggestion with negative results. Any other ideas? Yes, the one I already sent :) You're running WITH_NEW_XORG, which changes the versions of various X ports. Either explicitly enabled yourself, or implicitly on a version (recent -CURRENT) new enough. And no INDEX builder is running a version with that set, so it shows the OLD_XORG versions. I recommend "ignore it, it doesn't matter". Only other likely solution is building INDEX yourself, which is expensive and you'll just forget it next time anyway. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fulle...@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream. ___ 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: Port version problem
On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 12:42:22 +0100, Matthias Andree stated: > Am 23.03.2014 12:39, schrieb Jerry: > > > /usr/sbin/portsnap fetch update > > /usr/local/sbin/portsdb -u > > /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= > > > > I just reran those command and it produced the exact same results. > > portsdb is irrelevant here, did you check portsnap output, did it > succeed? Is your system clock plausible? Did portsnap rebuild the > INDEX file? > > Otherwise, try: make fetchindex -C /usr/ports I tried your suggestion with negative results. Any other ideas? -- Jerry ___ 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: Port version problem
Am 23.03.2014 12:39, schrieb Jerry: > /usr/sbin/portsnap fetch update > /usr/local/sbin/portsdb -u > /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= > > I just reran those command and it produced the exact same results. portsdb is irrelevant here, did you check portsnap output, did it succeed? Is your system clock plausible? Did portsnap rebuild the INDEX file? Otherwise, try: make fetchindex -C /usr/ports ___ 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: Port version problem
On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 12:15:31 +0100, olli hauer stated: /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= > On 2014-03-23 12:05, Jerry wrote: > > When I ran the following command after updating my port's tree: > > > > /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= > > > > It produced the following output: > > > > dri-9.1.7_3,2 > succeeds index (index has > > 7.6.1_3,2) libEGL-9.1.7 > succeeds index (index > > has 7.6.1) libGL-9.1.7> succeeds index (index > > has 7.6.1_4) libdrm-2.4.50 > succeeds index > > (index has 2.4.17_1) xf86-video-ati-7.2.0_1 > succeeds > > index (index has 6.14.6_1) xf86-video-intel-2.21.15_1 > > > succeeds index (index has 2.7.1_6) xorg-server-1.12.4_4,1 > > > succeeds index (index has 1.7.7_11,1) > > > > How is that even possible? I don't recall seeing anything in UPDATING > > that referred to this. > > > > > The param -I checks against /usr/ports/INDEX(-n) to speed up comparing. > > Do you use portsnap or cvs to update the ports tree? > > portsnap should automatically update the INDEX file unless the setting > in /etc/portsnap.conf was changed. > > In case subversion is used, the INDEX is only updated with the following > command $> make fetchindex -C /usr/ports I ran the following commands in this order: /usr/sbin/portsnap fetch update /usr/local/sbin/portsdb -u /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= I just reran those command and it produced the exact same results. -- Jerry ___ 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: Port version problem
On Sunday, March 23, 2014, 6:15:31 AM, olli wrote: > On 2014-03-23 12:05, Jerry wrote: >> When I ran the following command after updating my port's tree: >> >> /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= >> >> It produced the following output: >> >> dri-9.1.7_3,2 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_3,2) >> libEGL-9.1.7 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1) >> libGL-9.1.7> succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_4) >> libdrm-2.4.50 > succeeds index (index has 2.4.17_1) >> xf86-video-ati-7.2.0_1 > succeeds index (index has 6.14.6_1) >> xf86-video-intel-2.21.15_1 > succeeds index (index has 2.7.1_6) >> xorg-server-1.12.4_4,1 > succeeds index (index has 1.7.7_11,1) >> >> How is that even possible? I don't recall seeing anything in UPDATING that >> referred to this. >> > The param -I checks against /usr/ports/INDEX(-n) to speed up comparing. > Do you use portsnap or cvs to update the ports tree? > portsnap should automatically update the INDEX file unless the > setting in /etc/portsnap.conf was changed. > In case subversion is used, the INDEX is only updated with the following > command $>> make fetchindex -C /usr/ports Or rebuild indexes from the ports directory: # cd /usr/ports && make index -- Duane Hill duih...@gmail.com "If at first you don't succeed, so much for sky diving." ___ 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: Port version problem
On 2014-03-23 12:05, Jerry wrote: > When I ran the following command after updating my port's tree: > > /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= > > It produced the following output: > > dri-9.1.7_3,2 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_3,2) > libEGL-9.1.7 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1) > libGL-9.1.7> succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_4) > libdrm-2.4.50 > succeeds index (index has 2.4.17_1) > xf86-video-ati-7.2.0_1 > succeeds index (index has 6.14.6_1) > xf86-video-intel-2.21.15_1 > succeeds index (index has 2.7.1_6) > xorg-server-1.12.4_4,1 > succeeds index (index has 1.7.7_11,1) > > How is that even possible? I don't recall seeing anything in UPDATING that > referred to this. > The param -I checks against /usr/ports/INDEX(-n) to speed up comparing. Do you use portsnap or cvs to update the ports tree? portsnap should automatically update the INDEX file unless the setting in /etc/portsnap.conf was changed. In case subversion is used, the INDEX is only updated with the following command $> make fetchindex -C /usr/ports ___ 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: Port version problem
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 07:05:13AM -0400 I heard the voice of Jerry, and lo! it spake thus: > > dri-9.1.7_3,2 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_3,2) > libEGL-9.1.7 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1) > libGL-9.1.7> succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_4) > libdrm-2.4.50 > succeeds index (index has 2.4.17_1) > xf86-video-ati-7.2.0_1 > succeeds index (index has 6.14.6_1) > xf86-video-intel-2.21.15_1 > succeeds index (index has 2.7.1_6) > xorg-server-1.12.4_4,1 > succeeds index (index has 1.7.7_11,1) > > How is that even possible? I'd say you're running WITH_NEW_XORG. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fulle...@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream. ___ 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: Port version problem
On 3/23/2014 12:05 PM, Jerry wrote: When I ran the following command after updating my port's tree: /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= It produced the following output: dri-9.1.7_3,2 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_3,2) libEGL-9.1.7 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1) libGL-9.1.7> succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_4) libdrm-2.4.50 > succeeds index (index has 2.4.17_1) xf86-video-ati-7.2.0_1 > succeeds index (index has 6.14.6_1) xf86-video-intel-2.21.15_1 > succeeds index (index has 2.7.1_6) xorg-server-1.12.4_4,1 > succeeds index (index has 1.7.7_11,1) How is that even possible? I don't recall seeing anything in UPDATING that referred to this. You have to update the INDEX too. ___ 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: Port version problem
Am 23.03.2014 12:05, schrieb Jerry: > When I ran the following command after updating my port's tree: > > /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= > > It produced the following output: > > dri-9.1.7_3,2 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_3,2) > libEGL-9.1.7 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1) > libGL-9.1.7> succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_4) > libdrm-2.4.50 > succeeds index (index has 2.4.17_1) > xf86-video-ati-7.2.0_1 > succeeds index (index has 6.14.6_1) > xf86-video-intel-2.21.15_1 > succeeds index (index has 2.7.1_6) > xorg-server-1.12.4_4,1 > succeeds index (index has 1.7.7_11,1) > > How is that even possible? I don't recall seeing anything in UPDATING that > referred to this. > pkg does not update your ports tree nor the INDEX file, but pkg version checks against the ports tree. A "portsnap fetch update" should fix that - but might show a few ports requiring an update because the pkgs are built once weekly, whereas portsnap information is updated much more frequently. ___ 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"
Port version problem
When I ran the following command after updating my port's tree: /usr/sbin/pkg version -vIL= It produced the following output: dri-9.1.7_3,2 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_3,2) libEGL-9.1.7 > succeeds index (index has 7.6.1) libGL-9.1.7> succeeds index (index has 7.6.1_4) libdrm-2.4.50 > succeeds index (index has 2.4.17_1) xf86-video-ati-7.2.0_1 > succeeds index (index has 6.14.6_1) xf86-video-intel-2.21.15_1 > succeeds index (index has 2.7.1_6) xorg-server-1.12.4_4,1 > succeeds index (index has 1.7.7_11,1) How is that even possible? I don't recall seeing anything in UPDATING that referred to this. -- Jerry ___ 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"
Wierd port version problem
I'm upgrading ftp/proftpd. The new release is 1.3.1rc1. I have this in the makefile: PORTNAME= proftpd DISTVERSION=1.3.1rc1 PORTREVISION= Make fetches the sources with no problem, but when I start the build I noticed the version had been changed to 1.3.1.r1. Further when I tried a portupgrade it built and installed fine, but didn't change the version at all. It regestered the new port with the old number. Listing the results (+:done / -:ignored / *:skipped / !:failed) + ftp/proftpd (proftpd-1.3.0_5) I obviously can't change the name or it won't fetch the sources. Also removing PORTREVISION= doesn't change anything. Anybody seen this problem before? Beech -- --- Beech Rintoul - Sys. Administrator - [EMAIL PROTECTED] /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Alaska Paradise Travel \ / - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail | 201 East 9Th Avenue Ste.310 X - NO Word docs in e-mail | Anchorage, AK 99501 / \ - Please visit Alaska Paradise - http://www.alaskaparadise.com --- pgpkii9r02qde.pgp Description: PGP signature
