Re: mplayer update effort
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 07:27:03AM +0200, Simon Bertrang wrote: > On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:03:26AM +, Jacob Meuser wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 04:17:44PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Our in tree version of MPlayer is ancient. I noticed this when trying > > > smplayer last week and it told me so. I CC'd the maintainer of mplayer > > > in and I have not heard anything, so I attempted to take an update on > > > myself. > > > > is anyone using bktr(4) support in mplayer? it's kinda awkward and > > confusing, as it does both video and audio in the same "driver", > > even though bktr(4) does not have any audio interface ... > > > > Well, at least there's > "Brooktree BT878 Audio" rev 0x02 at pci0 dev 8 function 1 not configured > ... > > We're using mplayer to watch TV but I wasn't able to look at the audio > part yet, but having support for it would be nice. Currently the TV > card has it's own cable to the external mixer (hardware). Yep, i used it extensively with a bktr0 at pci0 dev 4 function 0 "Brooktree BT848" rev 0x12: ivec 0x7d8 using mplayer -tv device=/dev/bktr0:driver=bsdbt848:input=1,audioid=1 tv:// to watch what was sent on composite input of the card. worked really nice at that point... to bad bktr is only i386/amd64, i'd have like to make it work on sparc64 (didnt test macppc yet). Landry
Re: UPDATE: databases/openldap 2.3.39 -> 2.4.9
Hi, On Thu, 09.07.2009 at 22:16:58 +0200, Henning Brauer wrote: > * Stuart Henderson [2009-07-09 21:14]: > > Me too, but if something pulls in 2.3 as a BUILD or LIB depend, and > > something else pulls in 2.4 > > is this really going to happen? I don't know either, but bad memories about the qmail-ldap and pure-ftpd problems, caused by OpenLDAP's API changes, creep back into my mind. It's not entirely out of the question that they did it again, maybe on a bigger scale, when they went from 2.3 to 2.4. Therefore, I don't expect an upgrade to 2.4 being a drop-in replacement, even if the database was already in [bh]db format. -- Kind regards, --Toni++
Re: UPDATE: databases/openldap 2.3.39 -> 2.4.9
* Stuart Henderson [2009-07-10 02:12]: > On 2009/07/09 22:16, Henning Brauer wrote: > > * Stuart Henderson [2009-07-09 21:14]: > > > Me too, but if something pulls in 2.3 as a BUILD or LIB depend, and > > > something else pulls in 2.4 > > > > is this really going to happen? > > i don't know. > > i can definitely foresee a time where things will start needing > 2.4 client libs. can't these depend on openldap-2.4 and everything else on openldap-* then? don't get me wrong, I really can't judge. I just don't wanna see overdesigned complexity to solve a non-issue. -- Henning Brauer, h...@bsws.de, henn...@openbsd.org BS Web Services, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg & Amsterdam
Re: mplayer update effort
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 09:33:56AM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote: > On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 07:27:03AM +0200, Simon Bertrang wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:03:26AM +, Jacob Meuser wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 04:17:44PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > Our in tree version of MPlayer is ancient. I noticed this when trying > > > > smplayer last week and it told me so. I CC'd the maintainer of mplayer > > > > in and I have not heard anything, so I attempted to take an update on > > > > myself. > > > > > > is anyone using bktr(4) support in mplayer? it's kinda awkward and > > > confusing, as it does both video and audio in the same "driver", > > > even though bktr(4) does not have any audio interface ... > > > > > > > Well, at least there's > > "Brooktree BT878 Audio" rev 0x02 at pci0 dev 8 function 1 not configured > > ... > > > > We're using mplayer to watch TV but I wasn't able to look at the audio > > part yet, but having support for it would be nice. Currently the TV > > card has it's own cable to the external mixer (hardware). > > Yep, i used it extensively with a > bktr0 at pci0 dev 4 function 0 "Brooktree BT848" rev 0x12: ivec 0x7d8 > using mplayer -tv device=/dev/bktr0:driver=bsdbt848:input=1,audioid=1 tv:// > to watch what was sent on composite input of the card. worked really > nice at that point... to bad bktr is only i386/amd64, i'd have like to > make it work on sparc64 (didnt test macppc yet). well, that doesn't really use the audio part of the bktr support in mplayer. it's only used for mencoder, when recording. but, people are obviously using the bktr support, so I guess I'll make it use sndio instead of OSS. -- jake...@sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
Re: UPDATE: databases/openldap 2.3.39 -> 2.4.9
Stuart Henderson wrote: On 2009/07/10 12:34, Henning Brauer wrote: * Stuart Henderson [2009-07-10 02:12]: On 2009/07/09 22:16, Henning Brauer wrote: * Stuart Henderson [2009-07-09 21:14]: Me too, but if something pulls in 2.3 as a BUILD or LIB depend, and something else pulls in 2.4 is this really going to happen? i don't know. i can definitely foresee a time where things will start needing 2.4 client libs. can't these depend on openldap-2.4 and everything else on openldap-* then? the packages would have to be built against the right libraries... hmmm... just noticed that libldap-2.3.so.* is installed and also a symlink libldap-so.*. I wonder how much would break if we remove the symlink. that's another thing to try when I can get a bulk build machine together then. I have a server with a lot of diskspace, 12GB RAM (only 3.2GB is being used), and is currently running AMD64 4.5 -stable. I have a spare set of drives (eight 450GB drives) that I can use to install -current and do a bulk build. Will that be of any help or do you need the server at your location? server2$ df -h Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/sd0a 15.7G 67.3M 14.9G 0%/ /dev/sd1a 504G2.0K479G 0%/corp /dev/sd0h 243G120G111G52%/home /dev/sd1f 136G2.0K130G 0%/private /dev/sd1b 504G2.0K479G 0%/src /dev/sd1d 504G2.0K479G 0%/storage /dev/sd0g 15.7G6.0K 15.0G 0%/tmp /dev/sd0d 63.0G 12.6G 47.2G21%/usr /dev/sd0e 31.5G 14.6M 29.9G 0%/var /dev/sd0f 31.5G 39.9M 29.9G 0%/var/www hw.machine=amd64 hw.model=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5405 @ 2.00GHz hw.ncpu=4 hw.byteorder=1234 hw.pagesize=4096 hw.disknames=sd0,sd1,cd0 hw.diskcount=3 hw.sensors.cpu0.temp0=36.00 degC hw.sensors.cpu1.temp0=36.00 degC hw.sensors.cpu2.temp0=36.00 degC hw.sensors.cpu3.temp0=36.00 degC hw.sensors.mfi0.drive0=online (sd0), OK hw.sensors.mfi0.drive1=online (sd1), OK hw.cpuspeed=1995 hw.vendor=Dell Inc. hw.product=PowerEdge 2900 hw.serialno=G6GH1J1 hw.uuid=44454c4c-3600-1047-8048-c7c04f314a31 hw.physmem=3483697152 hw.usermem=3483488256 -- Vijay Sankar, M.Eng., P.Eng. ForeTell Technologies Limited 59 Flamingo Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, Canada R3J 0X6 Phone: (204) 885-9535, E-Mail: vsan...@foretell.ca
Re: UPDATE: databases/openldap 2.3.39 -> 2.4.9
On 2009/07/10 12:34, Henning Brauer wrote: > * Stuart Henderson [2009-07-10 02:12]: > > On 2009/07/09 22:16, Henning Brauer wrote: > > > * Stuart Henderson [2009-07-09 21:14]: > > > > Me too, but if something pulls in 2.3 as a BUILD or LIB depend, and > > > > something else pulls in 2.4 > > > > > > is this really going to happen? > > > > i don't know. > > > > i can definitely foresee a time where things will start needing > > 2.4 client libs. > > can't these depend on openldap-2.4 and everything else on openldap-* > then? the packages would have to be built against the right libraries... hmmm... just noticed that libldap-2.3.so.* is installed and also a symlink libldap-so.*. I wonder how much would break if we remove the symlink. that's another thing to try when I can get a bulk build machine together then.
Re: UPDATE: databases/openldap 2.3.39 -> 2.4.9
On 2009/07/10 06:11, Vijay Sankar wrote: > Stuart Henderson wrote: > >that's another thing to try when I can get a bulk build machine > >together then. > I have a server with a lot of diskspace, 12GB RAM (only 3.2GB is > being used), and is currently running AMD64 4.5 -stable. I have a > spare set of drives (eight 450GB drives) that I can use to install > -current and do a bulk build. Will that be of any help or do you > need the server at your location? thanks Vijay and Rod for the kind offers, sorry I should have made myself clearer though, that was a "Stuart finding time to gather various bits in scattered machines in ~/Attic and put them into one machine" problem rather than an actual lack of said bits ;-) (things like already having a full set of distfiles make it a lot more convenient to work on my own lan).
vim +python
hi there, i would like to use the python calltips vim plugin http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1074 but it lists as a requirement vim compiled with +python would it be possible to add this to the makefile? or does it make the compilation of vim way more complicated (like having python as a libdepend or something like that)? -f -- so easy, a child can do it. child sold seperately.
Re: vim +python
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:39 PM, frantisek holop wrote: > hi there, > > i would like to use the python calltips vim plugin > http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1074 > > but it lists as a requirement vim compiled with +python > > would it be possible to add this to the makefile? > or does it make the compilation of vim way more complicated > (like having python as a libdepend or something like that)? Looks like it already has a python flavor: FLAVORS=huge gtk2 athena motif no_x11 perl python ruby Brandon
Re: [update] hplip-3.9.6b
Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jul 2009, Dawe wrote: > >> Antoine Jacoutot wrote: >>> On Mon, 6 Jul 2009, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: Ports tree is locked so this is a good time to test this... >>> New diff. >>> The port is now cut into 5 subpackages (ala Fedora). >>> >> hpijs on amd64 still seems to work for me, using apsfilter and a crappy >> old deskjet 920c. > > Cool, thanks for testing! > >> But I need to get new ink before I can test any further... > > Ok, let me know how this goes... > Alright, new ink and new hpijs work just fine.
Re: vim +python
hmm, on Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:43:13PM -0500, Brandon Mercer said that > On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:39 PM, frantisek holop wrote: > > hi there, > > > > i would like to use the python calltips vim plugin > > http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1074 > > > > but it lists as a requirement vim compiled with +python > > > > would it be possible to add this to the makefile? > > or does it make the compilation of vim way more complicated > > (like having python as a libdepend or something like that)? > > Looks like it already has a python flavor: > FLAVORS= huge gtk2 athena motif no_x11 perl python ruby do i have to compile it myself? i think there's no python version in packages... $ sudo pkg_add -i vim No packages available in the PKG_PATH Ambiguous: choose package for vim 0: 1: vim-7.2.190p1-gtk2 2: vim-7.2.190p1-no_x11 -f -- what we do not understand we do not possess. -- goethe
Re: vim +python
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 7:19 PM, frantisek holop wrote: > do i have to compile it myself? > i think there's no python version in packages... Ports. http://openbsd.org/faq/faq15.html#Ports -- Samuel 'Shardz' Baldwin - staticfree.info/~samuel
Re: vim +python
hmm, on Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 07:56:43PM -0400, Samuel Baldwin said that > On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 7:19 PM, frantisek holop wrote: > > do i have to compile it myself? > > i think there's no python version in packages... > > Ports. http://openbsd.org/faq/faq15.html#Ports i'll take that's a yes to my question? :] ($ env FLAVOR="python" make vim) -f -- nothing can go wrong now, go wrong, gow rong, grong!
Re: vim +python
hmm, on Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 02:38:20AM +0200, frantisek holop said that > ($ env FLAVOR="python" make vim) of course i meant "make install" -f -- words are not food, though sometimes we must eat them.
/usr/ports/graphics/png
OpenBSD machine 4.5 200907101811#0 i386 OpenBSD 4.5 (200907101811) #0: Fri Jul 10 19:11:46 UTC 2009 r...@machine:/sys/arch/i386/compile/200907101811 Problem can be reproduced until variable 'MANZ=1' commented in /etc/mk.conf . -- 4625 png-1.2.33.log.gz Description: log
Re: /usr/ports/graphics/png
On Saturday 11 July 2009 00:24:40 4625 wrote: > OpenBSD machine 4.5 200907101811#0 i386 > OpenBSD 4.5 (200907101811) #0: Fri Jul 10 19:11:46 UTC 2009 > r...@machine:/sys/arch/i386/compile/200907101811 > > Problem can be reproduced until variable 'MANZ=1' commented in > /etc/mk.conf . > > -- > 4625 Yes, stop fiddling with things you should not be fiddling with. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
