Temmuz Yonetim Zirveleri - Son Kayitlar
TEMMUZ 2008 YONETIM ZIRVELERI: SON KAYITLAR I.K. YONETICILERI ICIN SOSYAL GUVENLIK REFORMU SEMPOZYUMU WORKSHOP: CALISMA YASAMINDA YENI HUKUKSAL UYGULAMALAR 23 – 24 Temmuz / Grand Cevahir Kongre Merkezi / 725 YTL+KDV IS HAYATINDA KADIN PROFESYONELLER ZIRVESI BIYIKSIZ PROFESYONELLER ZIRVESI Is Hayatinin ve Yonetimin Her Yonunde, Her Yerinde Kadin Yoneticiler ve Calisanlar Icin “Yetkinlik Gelistirme“ Platformu 25 – 26 Temmuz 2008 – Grand Cevahir Kongre Merkezi - 900 YTL + KDV Konusmacilar: Prof. Dr. Tekin AKGEYIK / Prof. Dr. Ahmet SELAMOGLU / Yrd. Doc. Dr. Sayim YORGUN / Yrd. Doc. Dr. Onat OZTURK / Zafer ERKOC Oturum Konulari: Programin Amaci Calisma Yasaminda Yeni Hukuksal Uygulamalar Zirvesinin amaci, katilimcilari is hukuku ve sosyal guvenlik alaninda son donemlerde meydana gelen hukuksal degisimlere iliskin olarak bilgilendirmek ve degisimlerin sirketlere yansimalarini tartismaktir. Bu acidan Zirve, mevzuattaki degisimlerin isyerine etkisini, getirdigi yenilikleri ve yukumlulukleri tartismayi, bu degisimlere dikkatleri cekmeyi hedeflemektedir. Katilimcilar bu Zirve ile yeni gelismeleri takip etme firsatlari edinirken, yasal sorumluluklarina iliskin duzenlemeleri de tartisma olanagina kavusacaklardir. Programin Katilimcilari Calisma Yasaminda Yeni Hukuksal Durum Zirvesi, her duzeydeki yonetici ve sorumluluklari ilgilendiren bir icerige sahiptir. Bu nedenle Zirve insan kaynaklari yoneticileri, uzmanlari ve profesyonelleri yaninda her duzeydeki yonetici ve profesyonelin katilabilmesine olanak saglayacak bir icerikte tasarlanmistir. KISA VADELI SIGORTA KOLLARINDA YENI YUKUMLULUKLER (1) Yeni Yasanin Getirdikleri ve Farkliliklari (2) Kisa Uzun Vadeli Sigorta Kollari (3) Is Kazasi ve Meslek Hastaligi (4) Is Kazasi Sayilan Haller (5) Meslek Hastaliginin Degisen Konsepti (6) Is Kazasi ve Meslek Hastaligi Bildirim ve Bildirim Kosullari (7) Is Kazasi ve Meslek Hastaligi Sigortasindan Yapilan Parasal Yardimlar (8) Gecici Is Goremezlik Odeneginin Miktari ve Suresi (9) Surekli Isgoremezlik Geliri (10) Surekli Isgoremezlik Gelirine Hak Kazanma Kosulu (11) Evlenme ve Cenaze Odenegi (12) Hastalik Sigortasi: Tanimi ve Saglanan Haklar, Yararlanma Kosullari (13) Analik Sigortasi: Tanimi ve Saglanan Haklari, Yararlanma Kosullari UZUN VADELI SIGORTA KOLLARINDAKI REFORM DUZENLEMELERI (1) Malulluk Sigortasi (2) Malulluk Kavrami (3) Malulluk Primi ve Ayligi (4) Yaslilik Sigortasi (5) Emeklilik Yasi (6) Emeklilik Primi (7) Emeklilige Hak Kazanma ve Emekli Olma Proseduru (8) Yaslilik Ayliginin Hesabi (9) Malulluk ve Emeklilik (10) Yaslilik Ayliginin Baslamasi ve Kesilmesi (11) Yaslilik Toptan Odemesi ve Ihya ISTIHDAM PAKETI & ISSIZLIK SIGORTASI REFORMU SEMPOZYUMU (1) Istihdam Paketinin Kapsami (2) Getirdigi Avantajlar ve Firsatlar (3) Avantajlardan Yararlanmak icin Gerekli Kosullar (4) Kidem Tazminati Kalkiyor mu? Son Durum (5) Issizlik Sigortasi Reformunun Getirdigi Yenilikler (6) Yararlanma Kosullarinda Degisim (7) Issizlik Odeneginde Artis (8) Reformun Sonuclari SENDIKACILIK & TOPLU PAZARLIK YASALARINDA REFORM SEMPOZYUMU (1) Yeni Sendikacilik Reformunun Kapsami (2) Sendikacilik Yasasinda Yapilan Degisiklikler (3) Toplu Pazarlik, Grev ve Lokavt Yasasindaki Reform Degiskenleri (4) Toplu Pazarlik Yetkisi Degisiyor mu? (5) Toplu Pazarligin Duzeyine Iliskin Reform Hukumleri (6) Grev Alandaki Degisimler (7) Grevin Kapsami ve Duzeyi Hangi Yonde Degisiyor Konusmacilar: ALMILA DALKILIC, ARZUHAN BULUT, AYDIN GOLE, AYSENUR YAZICI, BELGIN AYTEKIN, BUKET TUNAKAN, Av. CEYDA CIMILLI AKAYDIN, CIGDEM TUNC, COLPAN ILHAN ALISIK, DUYGU SUCUKA, Yrd. Doc. Dr. EBRU NURLUOGLU, Doc. Dr. ERHAN YASAR, Prof. Dr. HAKAN YONEY, IDIL DENIZCILER DINC, ILHAN UCKAN, INCI ILHAN, Prof. Dr. JALE ORAN, JALE YANILMAZ, Dr. MURAT BILGILI, Psktr. Dr. MUZAFFER UYAR, NECDET UYGURER, NURDAN ONEREN, OZGUL TUNCER, OZKAN KAYMAK, OZLEM AYSOY, PERIHAN YAZICI, PINAR OZDEMIR HOTIC, SIBEL ATASOY, UMIT FERAH Oturum Konulari: - Yeni Dunya Duzeninde Gelecek Is Hayatinda Kadinlara Neler Getiriyor? - Is Hayati ve Kadin; Kavramlarin Tum Boyutlari - Kariyer, Mentorluk, Yol Haritalari Destekcisi Uluslararasi Olusumlar ve Kadin Yoneticiler - Cam Tavan - Orta Yonetimdeki Kadin Yoneticinin Ust Duzeye Hazirlanmasi ve PQ: Profesyonel Zeka - Pembe Yakali Yonetimi, Gercekler, Farklar, Ip Uclari - Aile Sirketinde Kadin Yonetici Olmak - Erkek Tarzli Kadin Yoneticiler, Kadin Tarzli Erkek Yoneticiler, Nedenler, Avantajlar/Dezavantajlar, Idare ve Denge Teknikleri - Kadin Yonetici Icin Erkek Agirlikli Gruplari Yonetme Teknik ve Becerileri, Uygulama Atolyesi - Satis ve Satin Alma Ekiplerinde Kadin/Erkek Takimlari, Neden Sart ? - Yonetilen Erkegin Nedensiz Gibi Gorunen Tepkilerinin Kokeni, Erkegin Dusunce ve Davranislarini Etkileyen Yas, Sosyokulturel, Cografik Faktorlerin Irdelenmesi - Profesyonel Kariyerlerde Kadin Psikolojik Profilleri - Savasci Kadin Bakis Acisiyla Ofiste Bir Savunma Sporu Olarak iletisim Teknikleri - Biyiklilari Yaya Birakacak Sunum Teknikleri ve Becerileri
www/elinks update to 0.11.4
Hello,
The current version of elinks in ports is 0.11.2.
Several critical bugs were fixed in 0.11.3, 0.11.4 and in the git tree, see:
http://elinks.or.cz/release.html
Here's an update of the elinks port to 0.11.4 + relevant bug fixes from git.
Tested on i386 and amd64 without X11.
Best regards,
--
Frank Denis - j [at] pureftpd.org - http://00f.net - http://www.cotery.com
diff -urN elinks/Makefile elinks.new/Makefile
--- elinks/Makefile Tue Jul 15 17:06:54 2008
+++ elinks.new/Makefile Tue Jul 15 17:06:34 2008
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
# $OpenBSD: Makefile,v 1.9 2007/09/15 20:38:21 merdely Exp $
COMMENT= full-featured text WWW browser
-DISTNAME= elinks-0.11.2
+DISTNAME= elinks-0.11.4
EXTRACT_SUFX= .tar.bz2
CATEGORIES=www
MASTER_SITES= http://elinks.cz/download/
diff -urN elinks/distinfo elinks.new/distinfo
--- elinks/distinfo Tue Jul 15 17:06:54 2008
+++ elinks.new/distinfo Tue Jul 15 17:06:34 2008
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-MD5 (elinks-0.11.2.tar.bz2) = Wo+Dr7Unz0Q/WLNyE2qB/A==
-RMD160 (elinks-0.11.2.tar.bz2) = qdk4z9+nG+KCt1luH+1Xl/Lv1qU=
-SHA1 (elinks-0.11.2.tar.bz2) = R2acOOHl67NQFampqPnImIIb1Ag=
-SHA256 (elinks-0.11.2.tar.bz2) = kayJRxXvzeeFSN/kcDrnAvCPtKlBhyiOuborMCWNVYU=
-SIZE (elinks-0.11.2.tar.bz2) = 2497270
+MD5 (elinks-0.11.4.tar.bz2) = iANqUY68TxFQp+FLKfnY2w==
+RMD160 (elinks-0.11.4.tar.bz2) = A0HAG0cn122GTLqop8brtjfN6hw=
+SHA1 (elinks-0.11.4.tar.bz2) = Tt38152j4OPaHBhmaO+AT1/sUM0=
+SHA256 (elinks-0.11.4.tar.bz2) = WG4JVmjO2PufKVjGuNpmJFJV0vd/YAdV5rbQC0twV7Q=
+SIZE (elinks-0.11.4.tar.bz2) = 2479650
diff -urN elinks/patches/patch-configure elinks.new/patches/patch-configure
--- elinks/patches/patch-configure Tue Jul 15 17:06:54 2008
+++ elinks.new/patches/patch-configure Tue Jul 15 17:06:34 2008
@@ -1,31 +1,16 @@
-$OpenBSD: patch-configure,v 1.2 2006/10/21 17:56:48 jasper Exp $
configure.orig Sun Jan 29 08:10:47 2006
-+++ configure Thu Oct 19 12:52:57 2006
-@@ -17103,7 +17103,7 @@ if test -z "$disable_lua"; then
+$OpenBSD$
+--- configure.orig Tue Jul 15 16:20:59 2008
configure Tue Jul 15 16:22:20 2008
+@@ -17623,7 +17623,7 @@ if test -z "$disable_lua"; then
for luadir in "$withval" "" /usr /usr/local; do
- for suffix in "" 50 51; do
+ for suffix in "" 50; do
if test "$cf_result" = no; then
- LUA_LIBS="-llua$suffix -llualib$suffix -lm"
+ LUA_LIBS="-llua$suffix -lm"
if test ! -z "$luadir"; then
LUA_LIBS="-L$luadir/lib $LUA_LIBS"
-@@ -17127,10 +17127,10 @@ int
- main ()
- {
- lua_State *L = lua_open();
-- lua_baselibopen(L);
-- lua_mathlibopen(L);
-- lua_strlibopen(L);
-- lua_tablibopen(L);
-+ luaopen_base(L);
-+ luaopen_math(L);
-+ luaopen_string(L);
-+ luaopen_table(L);
- lua_pushboolean(L, 1);
- lua_close(L);
- ;
-@@ -22892,10 +22892,6 @@ ALL_CFLAGS="$CFLAGS $CPPFLAGS"
+@@ -23672,10 +23672,6 @@ ALL_CFLAGS="$CFLAGS $CPPFLAGS"
diff -urN elinks/patches/patch-src_config_conf_c
elinks.new/patches/patch-src_config_conf_c
--- elinks/patches/patch-src_config_conf_c Thu Jan 1 01:00:00 1970
+++ elinks.new/patches/patch-src_config_conf_c Tue Jul 15 17:06:34 2008
@@ -0,0 +1,882 @@
+$OpenBSD$
+--- src/config/conf.c.orig Fri Jun 20 22:19:54 2008
src/config/conf.c Tue Jul 15 16:56:22 2008
+@@ -56,16 +56,63 @@
+ * value to an option, but sometimes you may want to first create the option
+ * ;). Then this will come handy. */
+
++struct conf_parsing_state {
++ /** This part may be copied to a local variable as a bookmark
++ * and restored later. So it must not contain any pointers
++ * that would have to be freed in that situation. */
++ struct conf_parsing_pos {
++ /** Points to the next character to be parsed from the
++ * configuration file. */
++ unsigned char *look;
+
+-/* Skip comments and whitespace,
+- * setting [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the number of lines skipped. */
+-static unsigned char *
+-skip_white(unsigned char *start, int *line)
++ /** The line number corresponding to #look. This is
++ * shown in error messages. */
++ int line;
++ } pos;
++
++ /** When ELinks is rewriting the configuration file, @c mirrored
++ * indicates the end of the part that has already been copied
++ * to th
Re: bug in mini_sendmail
On Sun 2008.07.13 at 09:44 +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > I'd be more in favour of removing mini_sendmail and pointing > people at femail instead, it's quite a lot more sane... agreed. can we just do this? objections?
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 05:13:17PM -0700, andrew fresh wrote: > On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 05:21:13PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote: > > I'm still experiencing frequent, very reproducible crashes on my > > i386 laptop with intel graphics. I haven't been able to narrow it down > > to self-signed certs, large cgi outputs, or anything else. I can > > definitely cause a crash on-demand via sites (mostly internal) that > > operate fine in FF2. Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats about normal for firefox in my experience. I do notice a fair speedup. -- Best Regards Edd http://students.dec.bmth.ac.uk/ebarrett
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 05:13:17PM -0700, andrew fresh wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 05:21:13PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote: >> > I'm still experiencing frequent, very reproducible crashes on my >> > i386 laptop with intel graphics. I haven't been able to narrow it down >> > to self-signed certs, large cgi outputs, or anything else. I can >> > definitely cause a crash on-demand via sites (mostly internal) that >> > operate fine in FF2. > > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > about normal for firefox in my experience. Agreed. I'd say it's about time to get both versions into ports. There are a few known issues that no one has addressed. It crashed for the first time today when I installed a self signed cert from exchange. Avoiding that it's played youtube with gnash-0.8.3, on a drm enabled kernel and worked well until that. Brandon > I do notice a fair speedup. > > -- > > Best Regards > Edd > > http://students.dec.bmth.ac.uk/ebarrett > >
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 05:13:17PM -0700, andrew fresh wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 05:21:13PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote: > > > I'm still experiencing frequent, very reproducible crashes on my > > > i386 laptop with intel graphics. I haven't been able to narrow it down > > > to self-signed certs, large cgi outputs, or anything else. I can > > > definitely cause a crash on-demand via sites (mostly internal) that > > > operate fine in FF2. > > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? After the yacc fix from otto@ firefox 3 at least builds on sparc64. When doing make install I get: $ make install ===> Installing mozilla-firefox-3.0 from /usr/ports/packages/sparc64/all/ Segmentation fault (core dumped) **| 100% mozilla-firefox-3.0: complete --- mozilla-firefox-3.0 --- system(/bin/sh, -c, cd /usr/local/mozilla-firefox && env HOME=/tmp LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/mozilla-firefox ./regxpcom) failed: exit(139) Please see /usr/local/mozilla-firefox/README.OpenBSD for information about running Firefox on OpenBSD. $ sudo gdb regxpcom -c regxpcom.core [...] (gdb) bt #0 0x4c806ee4 in _dl_bind () from /usr/libexec/ld.so #1 0x4c802f94 in _dl_bind_start_0 () from /usr/libexec/ld.so #2 0x4c802f94 in _dl_bind_start_0 () from /usr/libexec/ld.so Previous frame identical to this frame (corrupt stack?) I built firefox with DEBUG="-g -O0". I move quite slowly as compiling takes quite long and needs lots of resources. I ran low on disk space several times. > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > about normal for firefox in my experience. > > I do notice a fair speedup. Regards, Markus
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > about normal for firefox in my experience. > > I do notice a fair speedup. Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with self-signed certificates. -ME
Re: bug in mini_sendmail
* Okan Demirmen wrote: > On Sun 2008.07.13 at 09:44 +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > I'd be more in favour of removing mini_sendmail and pointing > > people at femail instead, it's quite a lot more sane... > > agreed. can we just do this? objections? > I object. We still use mini_sendmail. Leave it where it is and let users make the choice, please.
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 15 20:33:11 2008 > X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-Envelope-To: ports@openbsd.org > From: Mike Erdely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: ports@openbsd.org > Subject: Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0 > Mail-Followup-To: Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ports@openbsd.org > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Disposition: inline > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) > X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.93/6815/Thu Apr 17 19:56:17 2008 on > mail.erdelynet.com > X-Virus-Status: Clean > X-Loop: ports@openbsd.org > Precedence: bulk > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > > > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > > about normal for firefox in my experience. > > > > I do notice a fair speedup. > > Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > self-signed certificates. Yup, and i've got a fix for that. I'll send it later today.
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > > > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > > about normal for firefox in my experience. > > > > I do notice a fair speedup. > > Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > self-signed certificates. >From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release.
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:53 PM, Martynas Venckus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 15 20:33:11 2008 >> X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> X-Envelope-To: ports@openbsd.org >> From: Mike Erdely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Cc: ports@openbsd.org >> Subject: Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0 >> Mail-Followup-To: Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ports@openbsd.org >> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> MIME-Version: 1.0 >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> Content-Disposition: inline >> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) >> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.93/6815/Thu Apr 17 19:56:17 2008 on >> mail.erdelynet.com >> X-Virus-Status: Clean >> X-Loop: ports@openbsd.org >> Precedence: bulk >> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? >> > >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is >> > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats >> > about normal for firefox in my experience. >> > >> > I do notice a fair speedup. >> >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with >> self-signed certificates. > > Yup, and i've got a fix for that. > > I'll send it later today. Yay!
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? >> > >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is >> > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats >> > about normal for firefox in my experience. >> > >> > I do notice a fair speedup. >> >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with >> self-signed certificates. > > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. Agreed, the proper course should be to have both until the time comes to do away with 2.x Brandon
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
* Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > > > > > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > > > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > > > about normal for firefox in my experience. > > > > > > I do notice a fair speedup. > > > > Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > > self-signed certificates. > > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. there are still quite some issues with firefox 3, we had to go back to ff 2 at a large site because of these. certificates is only one problem area. there are other incompatabilities, e.g. with typo 3 sites (admin part). i would recommend against having firefox 3 only. when can stay at firefox 2, maybe there is not even to much sense in having both versions right now.
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 15 20:59:15 2008 > From: Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ports@openbsd.org > Subject: Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0 > Mail-Followup-To: Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ports@openbsd.org > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Disposition: inline > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) > X-MailScanner-ID: 0C4CA208335.59917 > X-DMAT-MailScanner: Found to be clean > X-DMAT-MailScanner-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-Loop: ports@openbsd.org > Precedence: bulk > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > > > > > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > > > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > > > about normal for firefox in my experience. > > > > > > I do notice a fair speedup. > > > > Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > > self-signed certificates. > > >From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. Of course not. FF3 was not tested enough.
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tuesday 15 July 2008 13:42:19 Brandon Mercer wrote: > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > >> > > >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > >> > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > >> > about normal for firefox in my experience. > >> > > >> > I do notice a fair speedup. > >> > >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > >> self-signed certificates. > > > > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. > > Agreed, the proper course should be to have both until the time comes > to do away with 2.x > Brandon IMO this is not realistic. We either stick with 2.x or go with 3.x, but not create a mess with both. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 15 July 2008 13:42:19 Brandon Mercer wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: >> >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? >> >> > >> >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is >> >> > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats >> >> > about normal for firefox in my experience. >> >> > >> >> > I do notice a fair speedup. >> >> >> >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with >> >> self-signed certificates. >> > >> > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to >> > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it >> > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. >> > >> > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too >> > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. >> >> Agreed, the proper course should be to have both until the time comes >> to do away with 2.x >> Brandon > > IMO this is not realistic. We either stick with 2.x or go with 3.x, but not > create a mess with both. Lets see what this patch that comes through does for things. If you don't want to have both in ports then we should focus on fixing the 3.0 stuff so that it's stable. I enjoy having my RAM back :). Brandon
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 10:26:39PM +0300, Martynas Venckus wrote: > - images rendered incorrectly on nvidia cards with 24 bits, due to > incompatibilities between nvidia drivers and x; workaround: > DefaultDepth 16 I have the same problem on intel X3100 graphics on Lenovo T61. DefaultDepth 16 solves it though for now.
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 15 21:15:32 2008 > From: Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Brandon Mercer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0 > User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 > Cc: Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ports@openbsd.org > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > X-comstyle-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more > information > X-MailScanner-ID: 4D88E98467.BABAF > X-comstyle-MailScanner: Found to be clean > X-comstyle-MailScanner-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-Loop: ports@openbsd.org > Precedence: bulk > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Tuesday 15 July 2008 13:42:19 Brandon Mercer wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > > >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > >> > > > >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > > >> > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > > >> > about normal for firefox in my experience. > > >> > > > >> > I do notice a fair speedup. > > >> > > >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > > >> self-signed certificates. > > > > > > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > > > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > > > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > > > > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > > > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. > > > > Agreed, the proper course should be to have both until the time comes > > to do away with 2.x > > Brandon > > IMO this is not realistic. We either stick with 2.x or go with 3.x, but not > create a mess with both. There's nothing wrong with having it in tree. I think the best way to handle this was suggested by pval, a while ago. Import it (www/mozilla-firefox3, or www/mozilla-firefox-devel), but not link to the builds yet. When we decide it's stable enough, reimport as www/mozilla-firefox. This would be easier both for me to work on further, and for people to test.
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tuesday 15 July 2008 15:00:27 Martynas Venckus wrote: > > From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 15 21:15:32 2008 > > From: Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Brandon Mercer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0 > > User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 > > Cc: Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ports@openbsd.org > > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > MIME-Version: 1.0 > > Content-Type: text/plain; > > charset="iso-8859-1" > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Content-Disposition: inline > > X-comstyle-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more > > information X-MailScanner-ID: 4D88E98467.BABAF > > X-comstyle-MailScanner: Found to be clean > > X-comstyle-MailScanner-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > X-Loop: ports@openbsd.org > > Precedence: bulk > > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > On Tuesday 15 July 2008 13:42:19 Brandon Mercer wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > > >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > > >> > > > > >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume > > > >> > is made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. > > > >> > Thats about normal for firefox in my experience. > > > >> > > > > >> > I do notice a fair speedup. > > > >> > > > >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > > > >> self-signed certificates. > > > > > > > > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > > > > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > > > > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > > > > > > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > > > > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. > > > > > > Agreed, the proper course should be to have both until the time comes > > > to do away with 2.x > > > Brandon > > > > IMO this is not realistic. We either stick with 2.x or go with 3.x, but > > not create a mess with both. > > There's nothing wrong with having it in tree. > > I think the best way to handle this was suggested by pval, a while > ago. Import it (www/mozilla-firefox3, or www/mozilla-firefox-devel), > but not link to the builds yet. > > When we decide it's stable enough, reimport as www/mozilla-firefox. > > This would be easier both for me to work on further, and for people > to test. Has anyone actually tested FF2 with newer NSPR/NSS to make sure there are no compatability issues? -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 15 22:12:53 2008 > From: Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Martynas Venckus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0 > User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 > Cc: ports@openbsd.org > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > X-comstyle-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more > information > X-MailScanner-ID: 7192698436.0C36B > X-comstyle-MailScanner: Found to be clean > X-comstyle-MailScanner-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-Spam-Status: No > > On Tuesday 15 July 2008 15:00:27 Martynas Venckus wrote: > > > From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 15 21:15:32 2008 > > > From: Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: "Brandon Mercer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0 > > > User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 > > > Cc: Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ports@openbsd.org > > > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > MIME-Version: 1.0 > > > Content-Type: text/plain; > > > charset="iso-8859-1" > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > Content-Disposition: inline > > > X-comstyle-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more > > > information X-MailScanner-ID: 4D88E98467.BABAF > > > X-comstyle-MailScanner: Found to be clean > > > X-comstyle-MailScanner-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > X-Loop: ports@openbsd.org > > > Precedence: bulk > > > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > On Tuesday 15 July 2008 13:42:19 Brandon Mercer wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > > > > >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > > > >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume > > > > >> > is made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. > > > > >> > Thats about normal for firefox in my experience. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I do notice a fair speedup. > > > > >> > > > > >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > > > > >> self-signed certificates. > > > > > > > > > > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > > > > > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > > > > > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > > > > > > > > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > > > > > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. > > > > > > > > Agreed, the proper course should be to have both until the time comes > > > > to do away with 2.x > > > > Brandon > > > > > > IMO this is not realistic. We either stick with 2.x or go with 3.x, but > > > not create a mess with both. > > > > There's nothing wrong with having it in tree. > > > > I think the best way to handle this was suggested by pval, a while > > ago. Import it (www/mozilla-firefox3, or www/mozilla-firefox-devel), > > but not link to the builds yet. > > > > When we decide it's stable enough, reimport as www/mozilla-firefox. > > > > This would be easier both for me to work on further, and for people > > to test. > > Has anyone actually tested FF2 with newer NSPR/NSS to make sure there > are no compatability issues? Yup. Mozilla 1.8-branch products can use the new nspr and nss interfaces. I've heard from some poeple that they work fine, i myself tested in-tree firefox, minimo, seamonkey, and xulrunner with it.
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
I disagree. We should have both versions available in packages; preferably both would work on the same system too. I have been playing with FF3 and I'd have to say that minus the speedup overall the browser took a step backwards. What particularly ticked me off was: * outlook like popup in the right-hand corner to notify that a download completed (now there is some information one *has* to see) Not only is that beyond irritating there is no obvious way to turn off. I had to turn it off in about:config which brings me to the second irritant. I'd like to therefore set browser.download.manager.showAlertOnComplete = false * When one enter about:config a warning shows up that says: "if you click here you can void your warranty. What warranty??? When I launched the browser the first time I already had to accept a license that explicitly says "no warranty"; wtf? To fix that we can set these by default: general.warnOnAboutConfig = false browser.EULA.3.accepted = true * While trying to make FF3 a better browser for OpenBSD we might as well set plugin.default_plugin_disabled = false to remove the annoying message that scrolls down your screen at snails pace asking if you want to install a friggin non-existing plug-in. * I'd also like to get the old icons back. The new ones are not only ugly they are fuzzy as well. I also liked them better before when they were the right size. The new version the icons are basically touching the frame they are in (like X on tabs) These are only a few things that I noticed in the new browser. I have more but I'd like to get the debate going... /marco On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 01:54:42PM -0400, Brad wrote: > On Tuesday 15 July 2008 13:42:19 Brandon Mercer wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > > >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > >> > > > >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > > >> > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > > >> > about normal for firefox in my experience. > > >> > > > >> > I do notice a fair speedup. > > >> > > >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > > >> self-signed certificates. > > > > > > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > > > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > > > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > > > > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > > > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. > > > > Agreed, the proper course should be to have both until the time comes > > to do away with 2.x > > Brandon > > IMO this is not realistic. We either stick with 2.x or go with 3.x, but not > create a mess with both. > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. >
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:54:50PM -0400, Brad wrote: > On Tuesday 15 July 2008 15:00:27 Martynas Venckus wrote: > > > From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 15 21:15:32 2008 > > > From: Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: "Brandon Mercer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0 > > > User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 > > > Cc: Edd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ports@openbsd.org > > > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > MIME-Version: 1.0 > > > Content-Type: text/plain; > > > charset="iso-8859-1" > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > Content-Disposition: inline > > > X-comstyle-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more > > > information X-MailScanner-ID: 4D88E98467.BABAF > > > X-comstyle-MailScanner: Found to be clean > > > X-comstyle-MailScanner-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > X-Loop: ports@openbsd.org > > > Precedence: bulk > > > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > On Tuesday 15 July 2008 13:42:19 Brandon Mercer wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > > > > >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > > > >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume > > > > >> > is made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. > > > > >> > Thats about normal for firefox in my experience. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I do notice a fair speedup. > > > > >> > > > > >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > > > > >> self-signed certificates. > > > > > > > > > > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > > > > > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > > > > > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > > > > > > > > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > > > > > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. > > > > > > > > Agreed, the proper course should be to have both until the time comes > > > > to do away with 2.x > > > > Brandon > > > > > > IMO this is not realistic. We either stick with 2.x or go with 3.x, but > > > not create a mess with both. > > > > There's nothing wrong with having it in tree. > > > > I think the best way to handle this was suggested by pval, a while > > ago. Import it (www/mozilla-firefox3, or www/mozilla-firefox-devel), > > but not link to the builds yet. > > > > When we decide it's stable enough, reimport as www/mozilla-firefox. > > > > This would be easier both for me to work on further, and for people > > to test. > > Has anyone actually tested FF2 with newer NSPR/NSS to make sure there > are no compatability issues? I didn't use FF2 much since then, but I have it and a bunch of other ports built against the updated dependencies. I guess I will now test FF2 with that, an excuse to ditch FF3 for now since there is no Tab Mix Plus for it yet ;) > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. -- viq
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
Oh and I forgot to mention the obviously retarded "click here 17 times to accept this certificate" thing. I know of no about:config setting to turn that off. On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 01:58:25PM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote: > I disagree. > > We should have both versions available in packages; preferably both > would work on the same system too. > > I have been playing with FF3 and I'd have to say that minus the speedup > overall the browser took a step backwards. What particularly ticked me > off was: > * outlook like popup in the right-hand corner to notify that a > download completed (now there is some information one *has* to see) > Not only is that beyond irritating there is no obvious way to turn > off. I had to turn it off in about:config which brings me to the > second irritant. > > I'd like to therefore set > browser.download.manager.showAlertOnComplete = false > > * When one enter about:config a warning shows up that says: "if you > click here you can void your warranty. What warranty??? When I > launched the browser the first time I already had to accept a license > that explicitly says "no warranty"; wtf? > > To fix that we can set these by default: > general.warnOnAboutConfig = false > browser.EULA.3.accepted = true > > * While trying to make FF3 a better browser for OpenBSD we might as well > set plugin.default_plugin_disabled = false to remove the annoying > message that scrolls down your screen at snails pace asking if you > want to install a friggin non-existing plug-in. > > * I'd also like to get the old icons back. The new ones are not only > ugly they are fuzzy as well. I also liked them better before when > they were the right size. The new version the icons are basically > touching the frame they are in (like X on tabs) > > These are only a few things that I noticed in the new browser. I have > more but I'd like to get the debate going... > > /marco > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 01:54:42PM -0400, Brad wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 July 2008 13:42:19 Brandon Mercer wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > > >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > > >> > > > > >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > > > >> > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > > > >> > about normal for firefox in my experience. > > > >> > > > > >> > I do notice a fair speedup. > > > >> > > > >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > > > >> self-signed certificates. > > > > > > > > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > > > > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > > > > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > > > > > > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > > > > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. > > > > > > Agreed, the proper course should be to have both until the time comes > > > to do away with 2.x > > > Brandon > > > > IMO this is not realistic. We either stick with 2.x or go with 3.x, but not > > create a mess with both. > > > > -- > > This message has been scanned for viruses and > > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > > believed to be clean. > > >
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > about normal for firefox in my experience. Very much fucked up on arm. Most of the time, it crashes with SIGILL. And the funny thing is that it seems to crash a little bit less often for Martynas than for me (on the very same armish box), even after removing ~/.mozilla. Martynas already found and fixed some bugs, but it still crashes. And then there's still the regxpcom segfault on macppc (again: someone willing to help here?). With those problems (even if I give a shit on firefox running on arm), I think firefox3 is far from beeing used in the wild; I wouldn't trust it on i386 or amd64 either. Ciao, Kili
Re: UPDATE: mozilla-firefox-3.0
On Tuesday 15 July 2008 13:54:42 Brad wrote: > IMO this is not realistic. We either stick with 2.x or go with 3.x, but not > create a mess with both. The only reason I said this is because I was worried there would be compatability issues with newer NSPF/NSS. FF2 is already enough of a shit show. It does not need to get any worse. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
UPDATE: Bochs 2.3.7
Here is a update to Bochs 2.3.7. Another release with
huge performance improvements and a lot of bug fixes.
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/emulators/bochs/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.42
diff -u -p -r1.42 Makefile
--- Makefile10 Apr 2008 03:39:54 - 1.42
+++ Makefile14 Jul 2008 04:09:04 -
@@ -3,14 +3,14 @@
COMMENT= x86 machine simulator
-DISTNAME= bochs-2.3.6
+DISTNAME= bochs-2.3.7
CATEGORIES=emulators
MASTER_SITES= ${MASTER_SITE_SOURCEFORGE:=bochs/}
HOMEPAGE= http://bochs.sourceforge.net/
-# LGPL
+# LGPLv2.1+
PERMIT_PACKAGE_CDROM= Yes
PERMIT_PACKAGE_FTP=Yes
PERMIT_DISTFILES_CDROM=Yes
@@ -39,7 +39,6 @@ CONFIGURE_ARGS+= --enable-debugger \
--enable-port-e9-hack \
--enable-readline
WANTLIB+= curses readline
-CFLAGS+= -DMAGIC_BREAKPOINT
.endif
.if ${FLAVOR:L:Mno_x11}
Index: distinfo
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/emulators/bochs/distinfo,v
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -u -p -r1.10 distinfo
--- distinfo10 Apr 2008 03:39:54 - 1.10
+++ distinfo12 Jul 2008 16:43:41 -
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-MD5 (bochs-2.3.6.tar.gz) = W2Zvtk18z5uqASLsFaP0uQ==
-RMD160 (bochs-2.3.6.tar.gz) = uByAk8FH0NdcsYqVRAftP3RRqj8=
-SHA1 (bochs-2.3.6.tar.gz) = NnWxxaMkhUuZi7dRjHJ52y/s2MM=
-SHA256 (bochs-2.3.6.tar.gz) = EbQCbwcXJm0BxZo/lQRgd7wEaUmqdS0PB3Oysg37Fqo=
-SIZE (bochs-2.3.6.tar.gz) = 3951132
+MD5 (bochs-2.3.7.tar.gz) = ouX5IlBb8Wyr02u51XGixA==
+RMD160 (bochs-2.3.7.tar.gz) = tMnLjnd8TkhPZTCFeDvOlkWAT+A=
+SHA1 (bochs-2.3.7.tar.gz) = 5ofGl6i+g5audRBtDNYUm9Uspn0=
+SHA256 (bochs-2.3.7.tar.gz) = d/J/7a3GQx3woG7iJiWagEQ1JK6dIhyXxZhuP3knuwQ=
+SIZE (bochs-2.3.7.tar.gz) = 3989982
Index: patches/patch-bx_debug_dbg_main_cc
===
RCS file: patches/patch-bx_debug_dbg_main_cc
diff -N patches/patch-bx_debug_dbg_main_cc
--- patches/patch-bx_debug_dbg_main_cc 10 Apr 2008 03:39:54 - 1.1
+++ /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -
@@ -1,12 +0,0 @@
-$OpenBSD: patch-bx_debug_dbg_main_cc,v 1.1 2008/04/10 03:39:54 fgsch Exp $
bx_debug/dbg_main.cc.orig Wed Mar 26 19:46:26 2008
-+++ bx_debug/dbg_main.cc Wed Mar 26 19:47:59 2008
-@@ -1070,7 +1070,7 @@ void bx_dbg_xlate_address(bx_lin_address laddr)
- bx_phy_address paddr;
- laddr &= BX_CONST64(0xf000);
-
-- bx_bool paddr_valid = BX_CPU(which_cpu)->dbg_xlate_linear2phy(laddr,
&paddr);
-+ bx_bool paddr_valid = BX_CPU(dbg_cpu)->dbg_xlate_linear2phy(laddr, &paddr);
- if (paddr_valid) {
- dbg_printf("linear page 0x" FMT_ADDRX " maps to physical page 0x%08x\n",
laddr, paddr);
- }
Index: pkg/PLIST
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/emulators/bochs/pkg/PLIST,v
retrieving revision 1.17
diff -u -p -r1.17 PLIST
--- pkg/PLIST 10 Apr 2008 03:39:54 - 1.17
+++ pkg/PLIST 12 Jul 2008 17:34:14 -
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
@comment $OpenBSD: PLIST,v 1.17 2008/04/10 03:39:54 fgsch Exp $
-bin/bochs
-bin/bxcommit
-bin/bximage
[EMAIL PROTECTED] bin/bochs
[EMAIL PROTECTED] bin/bxcommit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] bin/bximage
@man man/man1/bochs-dlx.1
@man man/man1/bochs.1
@man man/man1/bxcommit.1
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
UPDATE: libmng 1.0.10
Here is a update to libmng 1.0.10.
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/graphics/libmng/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -p -r1.18 Makefile
--- Makefile4 Jan 2008 17:48:35 - 1.18
+++ Makefile15 Jul 2008 21:57:56 -
@@ -2,9 +2,9 @@
COMMENT= Multiple-image Network Graphics (MNG) reference library
-DISTNAME= lm1009
-PKGNAME= libmng-1.0.9p1
-SHARED_LIBS= mng 3.0
+DISTNAME= lm010010
+PKGNAME= libmng-1.0.10
+SHARED_LIBS= mng 3.1
CATEGORIES=graphics
MASTER_SITES= ${MASTER_SITE_SOURCEFORGE:=libmng/}
EXTRACT_SUFX= .zip
Index: distinfo
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/graphics/libmng/distinfo,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -p -r1.7 distinfo
--- distinfo5 Apr 2007 16:19:57 - 1.7
+++ distinfo15 Jul 2008 21:04:12 -
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-MD5 (lm1009.zip) = wXn4/j+e8ZTOiRc8gXcXDg==
-RMD160 (lm1009.zip) = fZRPw2iUltNng03/oW4fzIDsu6s=
-SHA1 (lm1009.zip) = 3c+DnpAwxcvqI6Dj7xTUTcH0igI=
-SHA256 (lm1009.zip) = gWQV1lmzVURVezpMcOb3+Lt+g6gFp2dWH7vWiEfeBw0=
-SIZE (lm1009.zip) = 1010727
+MD5 (lm010010.zip) = gF/cAB/2pnPWxaTaZWEeiw==
+RMD160 (lm010010.zip) = 56pSxBTJPx/ixdGNF/FOTVjWCJk=
+SHA1 (lm010010.zip) = 6iKNRi/ipijAACvZMGGknnOQjIg=
+SHA256 (lm010010.zip) = NIAMi6J5T5K2pYe51qr1PGhQNxN/6AQV1+nMz+UV8YY=
+SIZE (lm010010.zip) = 1012724
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Ruby 1.9 port
Is anyone working on a ruby 1.9 port? If so, I'd like to test it. If not, I'll start working on one. Jeremy
Re: UPDATE: libmng 1.0.10
Brad wrote: > Here is a update to libmng 1.0.10. It works for me. Tested on amd64. Kevin
Re: hw.sensors support for sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm
Josh Elsasser wrote:
I have implemented support in gkrellm for reading and displaying the
hw.sensors sysctls. Only sensors for temperature, fan speed, and DC
voltage are supported due to limitations in gkrellm.
Comments, bugs, suggestions?
diff -u -rP sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm/patches/patch-src_sensors_c
mystuff/sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm/patches/patch-src_sensors_c
--- sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm/patches/patch-src_sensors_cWed Dec 31
16:00:00 1969
+++ mystuff/sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm/patches/patch-src_sensors_cSat Jul
5 17:10:32 2008
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+$OpenBSD$
+--- src/sensors.c.orig Sat Oct 20 11:04:07 2007
src/sensors.c Sat Jul 5 15:50:46 2008
+@@ -2759,7 +2759,7 @@ create_sensors_tab(GtkWidget *tab_vbox)
+
+ box = gkrellm_gtk_framed_vbox(vbox1, _("Factor"), 4, FALSE, 0, 2);
+ gkrellm_gtk_spin_button(box, &factor_spin_button, 1.0,
+- -1000.0, 1000.0, 0.01, 1.0, 4, 60,
++ -1000.0, 1000.0, 0.01, 1.0, 6, 60,
+ cb_correction_modified, NULL, FALSE, NULL);
+
+ box = gkrellm_gtk_framed_vbox(vbox1, _("Offset"), 4, FALSE, 0, 2);
diff -u -rP sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm/patches/patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c
mystuff/sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm/patches/patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c
--- sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm/patches/patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_cSat Jul
12 09:23:45 2008
+++ mystuff/sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm/patches/patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c
Sat Jul 12 09:14:12 2008
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-$OpenBSD: patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c,v 1.9 2008/07/01 10:17:35 ajacoutot Exp $
src/sysdeps/openbsd.c.orig Sat Jul 7 01:54:22 2007
-+++ src/sysdeps/openbsd.c Tue Jul 1 10:48:13 2008
+$OpenBSD: patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c,v 1.7 2007/10/26 22:56:57 ajacoutot Exp $
+--- src/sysdeps/openbsd.c.orig Fri Jul 6 16:54:22 2007
src/sysdeps/openbsd.c Sat Jul 12 09:14:03 2008
@@ -53,41 +53,71 @@ gkrellm_sys_main_cleanup(void)
#include
#include
@@ -93,7 +93,133 @@
/* = */
/* Proc monitor interface */
-@@ -293,7 +323,7 @@ gkrellm_sys_sensors_init(void)
+@@ -259,41 +289,122 @@ gkrellm_sys_mem_init(void)
+
+
+ /* = */
+-/* Sensor monitor interface - not implemented */
++/* Sensor monitor interface */
+
++#include
++#include
++#include
++#include
++
++static gboolean
++get_sensor(int dev, int type, int num, gfloat *val)
++{
++ int mib[5] = { CTL_HW, HW_SENSORS };
++ struct sensor sen;
++ size_t len = sizeof(sen);
++
++ mib[2] = dev;
++ mib[3] = type;
++ mib[4] = num;
++ if (sysctl(mib, 5, &sen, &len, NULL, 0) == -1 ||
++ (SENSOR_FINVALID|SENSOR_FUNKNOWN) & sen.flags)
++ return FALSE;
++
++ *val = (gfloat)sen.value;
++ return TRUE;
++}
++
+ gboolean
+ gkrellm_sys_sensors_get_temperature(gchar *device_name, gint id,
+ gint iodev, gint interface, gfloat *temp)
+- {
+- return FALSE;
+- }
++{
++ return get_sensor(id, iodev, interface, temp);
++}
+
+ gboolean
+ gkrellm_sys_sensors_get_fan(gchar *device_name, gint id,
+ gint iodev, gint interface, gfloat *fan)
+- {
+- return FALSE;
+- }
++{
++ return get_sensor(id, iodev, interface, fan);
++}
+
+ gboolean
+ gkrellm_sys_sensors_get_voltage(gchar *device_name, gint id,
+ gint iodev, gint interface, gfloat *volt)
+- {
+- return FALSE;
++{
++ return get_sensor(id, iodev, interface, volt);
++}
++
++static gboolean
++add_sensdev(int dev, struct sensordev *sensdev)
++{
++ static enum sensor_type stypes[] =
++ { SENSOR_TEMP, SENSOR_FANRPM, SENSOR_VOLTS_DC };
++ static gint gtypes[] =
++ { SENSOR_TEMPERATURE, SENSOR_FAN, SENSOR_VOLTAGE };
++ static gfloat fac[] = { 0.01, 1.0, 0.01 };
++ static gfloat off[] = { -273.15, 0.0, 0.0 };
++ char name[32];
++ int mib[5] = { CTL_HW, HW_SENSORS };
++ struct sensor sen;
++ size_t len = sizeof(sen);
++ int idx, num;
++ gboolean found = FALSE;
++
++ mib[2] = dev;
++ for (idx = 0; sizeof(stypes) / sizeof(stypes[0]) > idx; idx++) {
++ mib[3] = stypes[idx];
++ for (num = 0; sensdev->maxnumt[stypes[idx]] > num; num++) {
++ mib[4] = num;
++ len = sizeof(sen);
++ if (sysctl(mib, 5, &sen, &len, NULL, 0) == -1) {
++ if (ENOENT != errno)
++ return FALSE;
++ continue;
++ }
++ if (SENSOR_FINVALID & sen.flags)
++ continue;
++ snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "%s.%s%d", sensdev->xname,
++ sensor_type_s[stypes[idx]], num);
++
Re: hw.sensors support for sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 04:59:04AM +0200, Dawe wrote:
> Josh Elsasser wrote:
>> I have implemented support in gkrellm for reading and displaying the
>> hw.sensors sysctls. Only sensors for temperature, fan speed, and DC
>> voltage are supported due to limitations in gkrellm.
>>
>> Comments, bugs, suggestions?
Pretty nice, works fine here @i386 with acpitz0.temp0. Inserting the
battery allows to show acpibat0.volt0/1 too, it'd be even better if it
could show acpibat0.watthour* (battery capacity), but i understand there
are limitations in gkrellm.
You forgot to bump PKGNAME btw, so here's an updated diff against
anoncvs this time. I also removed the irrelevant sysutils/gkrellm
CATEGORY, there's no point in having a category for a single package (i
shall do the same for gkrellm/plugins too btw)
Did you send it to maintainer first (i know he's off this week but i can
handle this patch) ? And most important, did you send this patch
upstream for inclusion, so we don't have to keep it for years in our
tree ?
Thanks for you work,
Landry
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.39
diff -u -p -r1.39 Makefile
--- Makefile1 Jul 2008 10:17:35 - 1.39
+++ Makefile16 Jul 2008 06:31:12 -
@@ -7,9 +7,9 @@ COMMENT-client= single process stack of
V= 2.3.1
DISTNAME= gkrellm-${V}
-PKGNAME-main= gkrellm-server-${V}p1
-PKGNAME-client=gkrellm-${V}p2
-CATEGORIES=sysutils sysutils/gkrellm
+PKGNAME-main= gkrellm-server-${V}p2
+PKGNAME-client=gkrellm-${V}p3
+CATEGORIES=sysutils
MAINTAINER=Antoine Jacoutot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: patches/patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c
===
RCS file:
/cvs/ports/sysutils/gkrellm/gkrellm/patches/patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c,v
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -p -r1.9 patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c
--- patches/patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c 1 Jul 2008 10:17:35 - 1.9
+++ patches/patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c 16 Jul 2008 06:31:13 -
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-$OpenBSD: patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c,v 1.9 2008/07/01 10:17:35 ajacoutot Exp $
src/sysdeps/openbsd.c.orig Sat Jul 7 01:54:22 2007
-+++ src/sysdeps/openbsd.c Tue Jul 1 10:48:13 2008
+$OpenBSD: patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c,v 1.7 2007/10/26 22:56:57 ajacoutot Exp $
+--- src/sysdeps/openbsd.c.orig Fri Jul 6 16:54:22 2007
src/sysdeps/openbsd.c Sat Jul 12 09:14:03 2008
@@ -53,41 +53,71 @@ gkrellm_sys_main_cleanup(void)
#include
#include
@@ -93,7 +93,133 @@ $OpenBSD: patch-src_sysdeps_openbsd_c,v
/* = */
/* Proc monitor interface */
-@@ -293,7 +323,7 @@ gkrellm_sys_sensors_init(void)
+@@ -259,41 +289,122 @@ gkrellm_sys_mem_init(void)
+
+
+ /* = */
+-/* Sensor monitor interface - not implemented */
++/* Sensor monitor interface */
+
++#include
++#include
++#include
++#include
++
++static gboolean
++get_sensor(int dev, int type, int num, gfloat *val)
++{
++ int mib[5] = { CTL_HW, HW_SENSORS };
++ struct sensor sen;
++ size_t len = sizeof(sen);
++
++ mib[2] = dev;
++ mib[3] = type;
++ mib[4] = num;
++ if (sysctl(mib, 5, &sen, &len, NULL, 0) == -1 ||
++ (SENSOR_FINVALID|SENSOR_FUNKNOWN) & sen.flags)
++ return FALSE;
++
++ *val = (gfloat)sen.value;
++ return TRUE;
++}
++
+ gboolean
+ gkrellm_sys_sensors_get_temperature(gchar *device_name, gint id,
+ gint iodev, gint interface, gfloat *temp)
+- {
+- return FALSE;
+- }
++{
++ return get_sensor(id, iodev, interface, temp);
++}
+
+ gboolean
+ gkrellm_sys_sensors_get_fan(gchar *device_name, gint id,
+ gint iodev, gint interface, gfloat *fan)
+- {
+- return FALSE;
+- }
++{
++ return get_sensor(id, iodev, interface, fan);
++}
+
+ gboolean
+ gkrellm_sys_sensors_get_voltage(gchar *device_name, gint id,
+ gint iodev, gint interface, gfloat *volt)
+- {
+- return FALSE;
++{
++ return get_sensor(id, iodev, interface, volt);
++}
++
++static gboolean
++add_sensdev(int dev, struct sensordev *sensdev)
++{
++ static enum sensor_type stypes[] =
++ { SENSOR_TEMP, SENSOR_FANRPM, SENSOR_VOLTS_DC };
++ static gint gtypes[] =
++ { SENSOR_TEMPERATURE, SENSOR_FAN, SENSOR_VOLTAGE };
++ static gfloat fac[] = { 0.01, 1.0, 0.01 };
++ static gfloat off[] = { -273.15, 0.0, 0.0 };
++ char name[32];
++ int mib[5] = { CTL_HW, HW_SENSORS };
++ struct sensor sen;
++ size_t len = sizeof(sen);
++ int idx, num;
++ gboolean found = FALSE;
++
++ mib[2] = dev;
++ for (idx = 0; sizeof(stypes) / sizeof(stypes[0]) > idx; idx++) {
++ mib[3] = stypes[idx];
++
