CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: ports
CVSROOT:/cvs Module name:ports Changes by: ajacou...@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/10/06 01:07:17 Modified files: x11/gtk+2 : Makefile distinfo Log message: Bugfix update to gtk+2-2.18.2. (+ some updated translations)
CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: ports
CVSROOT:/cvs Module name:ports Changes by: ben...@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/10/06 03:25:12 Modified files: net/libst : Makefile distinfo Log message: - update libst to 1.9 ok ajacoutot@
CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: ports
CVSROOT:/cvs Module name:ports Changes by: ben...@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/10/06 03:32:50 Modified files: astro/py-metar : Makefile distinfo astro/py-metar/patches: patch-setup_py Log message: - update py-metar to 0.15 - change maintainer - update patch ok ajacoutot@
CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: ports
CVSROOT:/cvs Module name:ports Changes by: ajacou...@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/10/06 09:24:47 Modified files: x11/gnome/devhelp: Makefile x11/gnome/devhelp/patches: patch-src_dh-assistant-view_c Log message: Unbreak: From GNOME bugzilla #588655 g_mapped_file_free() has been deprecated in favor of g_mapped_file_unref(). While here, regen WANTLIB. Breakage reported by jasper@ and naddy@
CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: ports
CVSROOT:/cvs Module name:ports Changes by: st...@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/10/06 09:52:41 Modified files: chinese/xcin25 : Makefile Log message: switch BUILD_DEPENDS from rpm to rpm2cpio to avoid conflicts
CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: ports
CVSROOT:/cvs Module name:ports Changes by: st...@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/10/06 09:50:09 Modified files: chinese/rxvt-big5: Makefile Log message: switch BUILD_DEPENDS from rpm to rpm2cpio as well to avoid conflicts noticed by naddy
CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: ports
CVSROOT:/cvs Module name:ports Changes by: st...@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/10/06 10:03:04 Modified files: emulators/redhat: Makefile.inc Log message: switch BUILD_DEPENDS from rpm to rpm2cpio to avoid conflicts noticed by naddy
CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: ports
CVSROOT:/cvs Module name:ports Changes by: ajacou...@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/10/06 13:20:51 Modified files: x11/gnustep/base: Makefile Log message: regen wantlib
CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: ports
CVSROOT:/cvs Module name:ports Changes by: ajacou...@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/10/06 13:21:28 Modified files: x11/gnustep/make: Makefile distinfo x11/gnustep/make/patches: patch-Instance_bundle_make patch-Instance_framework_make patch-Instance_library_make patch-target_make Log message: Update to gnustep-make-2.2.0
CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: ports
CVSROOT:/cvs Module name:ports Changes by: k...@cvs.openbsd.org2009/10/06 19:53:54 Modified files: devel/jdk/1.7 : Makefile distinfo devel/jdk/1.7/patches: patch-corba_make_common_shared_Compiler-gcc_gmk patch-corba_make_common_shared_Platform_gmk patch-hotspot_make_bsd_makefiles_jsig_make patch-hotspot_make_bsd_makefiles_saproc_make patch-hotspot_make_bsd_makefiles_vm_make patch-hotspot_src_cpu_x86_vm_interp_masm_x86_32_cpp patch-hotspot_src_share_vm_utilities_macros_hpp patch-jdk_make_com_sun_java_pack_Makefile patch-jdk_make_common_Defs-bsd_gmk patch-jdk_make_common_Defs-linux_gmk patch-jdk_make_common_Defs_gmk patch-jdk_make_common_Release_gmk patch-jdk_make_common_shared_Defs-utils_gmk patch-jdk_make_common_shared_Defs_gmk patch-jdk_make_common_shared_Platform_gmk patch-jdk_make_common_shared_Sanity-Settings_gmk patch-jdk_make_common_shared_Sanity_gmk patch-jdk_make_java_instrument_Makefile patch-jdk_make_java_jli_Makefile patch-jdk_make_java_nio_mapfile-bsd patch-jdk_make_java_redist_Makefile patch-jdk_make_java_zip_FILES_c_gmk patch-jdk_make_java_zip_Makefile patch-jdk_make_sun_awt_mawt_gmk patch-jdk_make_sun_font_Makefile patch-jdk_make_sun_splashscreen_FILES_c_gmk patch-jdk_make_sun_splashscreen_Makefile patch-jdk_make_tools_freetypecheck_Makefile patch-jdk_src_share_bin_java_c patch-jdk_src_share_classes_java_awt_GraphicsEnvironment_java patch-jdk_src_share_classes_java_lang_ClassLoader_java patch-jdk_src_share_classes_sun_tools_jar_Main_java patch-jdk_src_share_lib_security_java_security-openbsd patch-jdk_src_share_native_com_sun_java_util_jar_pack_main_cpp patch-jdk_src_share_native_java_lang_fdlibm_include_fdlibm_h patch-jdk_src_share_native_java_util_zip_Inflater_c patch-jdk_src_share_native_sun_awt_medialib_mlib_image_h patch-jdk_src_share_transport_socket_socketTransport_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_back_util_md_h patch-jdk_src_solaris_classes_sun_nio_fs_BsdFileStore_java patch-jdk_src_solaris_classes_sun_nio_fs_BsdFileSystem_java patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_java_lang_UNIXProcess_md_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_java_net_Inet4AddressImpl_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_java_net_Inet6AddressImpl_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_java_util_TimeZone_md_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_sun_awt_awt_GraphicsEnv_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_sun_awt_awt_InputMethod_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_sun_awt_gtk2_interface_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_sun_nio_ch_SctpChannelImpl_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_sun_nio_ch_SctpNet_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_sun_nio_ch_Sctp_h patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_sun_nio_fs_UnixNativeDispatcher_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_sun_nio_fs_genUnixConstants_c patch-jdk_src_solaris_native_sun_xawt_awt_Desktop_c patch-langtools_make_build_xml devel/jdk/1.7/pkg: PLIST-jre PLIST-main Added files: devel/jdk/1.7/patches: patch-jdk_make_com_sun_nio_Makefile patch-jdk_make_com_sun_nio_sctp_Makefile patch-jdk_make_sun_security_ec_Makefile patch-jdk_src_share_classes_sun_awt_OSInfo_java patch-jdk_src_share_native_sun_security_ec_ecc_impl_h
UPDATE: mail/imapproxy
Hi,
This diff updates imapproxy to the release 1.2.6.
Tested on amd64/sparc64.
it seems to be ok from the current maintainer.
Comments ? OK ?
Cheers,
benoit
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/openbsd/ports/mail/imapproxy/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -u -r1.6 Makefile
--- Makefile12 Sep 2007 19:54:48 - 1.6
+++ Makefile6 Oct 2009 05:49:43 -
@@ -2,15 +2,15 @@
COMMENT= caching IMAP proxy to be used with webmail clients
-DISTNAME= up-imapproxy-1.2.5
-PKGNAME= ${DISTNAME:S/^up-//}p1
+DISTNAME= up-imapproxy-1.2.6
+PKGNAME= ${DISTNAME:S/^up-//}
CATEGORIES=mail
HOMEPAGE= http://www.imapproxy.org/
MAINTAINER=Holger Mauermann hol...@mauermann.org
-# GPL
+# GPLv2
PERMIT_PACKAGE_CDROM= Yes
PERMIT_PACKAGE_FTP=Yes
PERMIT_DISTFILES_CDROM=Yes
Index: distinfo
===
RCS file: /cvs/openbsd/ports/mail/imapproxy/distinfo,v
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -r1.3 distinfo
--- distinfo11 Apr 2007 16:06:46 - 1.3
+++ distinfo6 Oct 2009 05:49:43 -
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-MD5 (up-imapproxy-1.2.5.tar.gz) = xt+wn9vYwK+GLdAgSa456Q==
-RMD160 (up-imapproxy-1.2.5.tar.gz) = OuYsroFrdg4fdoZ4xYifbsN5iec=
-SHA1 (up-imapproxy-1.2.5.tar.gz) = B4UfBXw1HgQho1HJSUw8uXETAo4=
-SHA256 (up-imapproxy-1.2.5.tar.gz) =
eJQKF25G+YZjgds4+phzuve3dNzlvEIulRmYkpaGkfg=
-SIZE (up-imapproxy-1.2.5.tar.gz) = 132317
+MD5 (up-imapproxy-1.2.6.tar.gz) = 3sxmk6FJflobxXBOXtKMmw==
+RMD160 (up-imapproxy-1.2.6.tar.gz) = RhOs0/ys3ECQXshpKv06TpVjJYw=
+SHA1 (up-imapproxy-1.2.6.tar.gz) = dfSX4/2kT/FSbEask+XIY79uCWM=
+SHA256 (up-imapproxy-1.2.6.tar.gz) =
L16EG8bIR5n4kNJLmEcm77fM4mwq2Vkjhk3fA1P6OwE=
+SIZE (up-imapproxy-1.2.6.tar.gz) = 134745
Index: pkg/PLIST
===
RCS file: /cvs/openbsd/ports/mail/imapproxy/pkg/PLIST,v
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -r1.3 PLIST
--- pkg/PLIST 12 Sep 2007 19:54:48 - 1.3
+++ pkg/PLIST 6 Oct 2009 05:49:43 -
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
@comment $OpenBSD: PLIST,v 1.3 2007/09/12 19:54:48 brad Exp $
@newgroup _imapproxy:592
@newuser _imapproxy:592:_imapproxy:daemon:IMAP Proxy
Account:/nonexistent:/sbin/nologin
-sbin/imapproxyd
-sbin/pimpstat
+...@bin sbin/imapproxyd
+...@bin sbin/pimpstat
share/doc/imapproxy/
share/doc/imapproxy/README
share/doc/imapproxy/README.ssl
Re: mplayer continued...
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 09:47:07PM -0400, Predrag Punosevac wrote: Edd, can you reproduce my claim on your latest version of MPlayer? It plays the video fine here :\ Odd. -- Best Regards Edd Barrett (Freelance software developer / technical writer / open-source developer) http://students.dec.bmth.ac.uk/ebarrett
NetBSD ports
Hello everybody! Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. -- /BR, Alexander
Re: NetBSD ports
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:12:34PM +0400, Alexander Bubnov wrote: Hello everybody! Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. You can use pkgsrc on OpenBSD. But you won't get support here. Landry
Re: UPDATE: sqlite3
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org wrote: been in a bulk build - ok? Is tcl now a build dependency even with the no_tcl flavor? # env FLAVOR=no_tcl make === sqlite3-3.6.18 depends on: libtool-* - found === Verifying specs: c ncurses pthread readline c === found c.51.1 ncurses.10.0 pthread.11.2 readline.3.0 === Checking files for sqlite-3.6.18 `/usr/ports/distfiles/sqlite-3.6.18.tar.gz' is up to date. (SHA256) sqlite-3.6.18.tar.gz: OK === Extracting for sqlite-3.6.18 === Patching for sqlite-3.6.18 === Configuring for sqlite-3.6.18 configure: loading site script /usr/ports/infrastructure/db/config.site checking build system type... i386-unknown-openbsd4.6 checking host system type... i386-unknown-openbsd4.6 checking for gcc... cc ... configure: creating ./config.status config.status: creating Makefile config.status: creating sqlite3.pc config.status: creating config.h config.status: executing libtool commands === Building for sqlite-3.6.18 tclsh ./tool/mksqlite3h.tcl . sqlite3.h /bin/sh: tclsh: not found *** Error code 127 Stop in /usr/ports/obj/sqlite-3.6.18-no_tcl/sqlite-3.6.18 (line 692 of Makefile). *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/ports/databases/sqlite3 (line 2188 of /usr/ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk). cheers, david
Re: NetBSD ports
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:12:34PM +0400, Alexander Bubnov wrote: Hello everybody! Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. In many cases, supporting everything = supporting nothing well. There are a lot of huge differences between pkgsrc and what we're doing. We try to get binary packages that work (and we often do), we are not limited by general infrastructure choices... The non politically correct version ? we strive for quality, not quantity. Make your choice. As landry put it, we don't support pkgsrc.
Re: NetBSD ports
Many thanks! Now it is clear. 2009/10/6 Marc Espie es...@nerim.net On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:12:34PM +0400, Alexander Bubnov wrote: Hello everybody! Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. In many cases, supporting everything = supporting nothing well. There are a lot of huge differences between pkgsrc and what we're doing. We try to get binary packages that work (and we often do), we are not limited by general infrastructure choices... The non politically correct version ? we strive for quality, not quantity. Make your choice. As landry put it, we don't support pkgsrc. -- /BR, Alexander
Re: UPDATE: sqlite3
On 2009/10/06 11:18, David Coppa wrote: On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org wrote: been in a bulk build - ok? Is tcl now a build dependency even with the no_tcl flavor? Ah, yes it is, unless we ship the generated files. SQLite does not require TCL to run, but a TCL installation is required by the makefiles. SQLite contains a lot of generated code and TCL is used to do much of that code generation. The makefile also requires AWK.
Re: UPDATE: sqlite3
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org wrote: On 2009/10/06 11:18, David Coppa wrote: On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org wrote: been in a bulk build - ok? Is tcl now a build dependency even with the no_tcl flavor? Ah, yes it is, unless we ship the generated files. SQLite does not require TCL to run, but a TCL installation is required by the makefiles. SQLite contains a lot of generated code and TCL is used to do much of that code generation. The makefile also requires AWK. We also need: # ln -s /usr/local/bin/tclsh8.5 /usr/local/bin/tclsh otherwise, it will fail with the same error -dav
Re: NetBSD ports
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:12:34PM +0400, Alexander Bubnov wrote: Hello everybody! Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. You may read about philosophical differences between pkgsrc and our ports system from the interview Mark Espie (the father of OpenBSD ports) gave for the tenth anniversary of pkgsrc http://www.netbsd.org/gallery/10years.html I will give you couple more practical reasons. I was able to bootstrap pkgsrc on 4.4 and consider myself one of the few who in the recent past have played with pkgsrc on OpenBSD. It took some searching of NetBSD mailing lists for me to bootstrap pkgsrc on OpenBSD due to a nasty bug observed by NetBSD developers. Once bootstrap, I could not reliably build any application which required X to run. The problem was of course that NetBSD was still using XFree86. Now there was an option which will allow you to use native X server but that would not make port building any more reliable. Things might have improved a bit as they switched to XOrg. pkgsrc to my knowledge has not been tested by a single pkgsrc developer since 3.7 (according to NetBSD mailing lists). It is kind a fanny that they expect pkgsrc just to work without any testing. Don't you think so? There are two common arguments used by people who in the past (2004 and earlier) have used or at least tried to use pkgsrc on OpenBSD. One is the number of ports (pkgsrc officially has more ported software) and the second one is ability to tweak the application. The first claim doesn't hold the water. Just browse trough pkgsrc and you will see that most of their software is much older than our current port three. Often the pkgsrc has not been updated for ages. Often large peaces of software has been broken in many peaces giving you the impression that they have more stuff. Speaking of tweaking it is absolutely unnecessary for common users. IMHO the one who need real tweaking will have no problem to use OpenBSD ports system and to tweak the specific application to their liking. Speaking non-Wintel architectures I will wage you $100 that I will build more software using our ports three on SGI, SUN, or even VAX than you will be able to do that with pkgsrc. I do not want to sound all negative. pkgsrc is a fine packaging system but I would like to see a person who could reliably build software with it outside of NetBSD and DragonFly platforms. In all honestly it is very portable but that doesn't mean that it can be used on OpenBSD platform or any other platform for that matter without serious testing and bug hunting. You can trace the pain of DragonFly developers from their mailing listand how much effort went into making pkgsrc fully functional on DragonFly after they made the decision to adopt pkgsrc as the official package management. Best, Predrag
Re: Samba 3.4.1 didn't build on Snapshot from 29 Sep.
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 08:31:16PM +1100, Ian McWilliam wrote: Did you apply the patch with patch -E ? Thanks for the hint, it compiles after patch -E. I tried it on a sparc64 machine, too. It works also on sparc64. Thanks for you work on samba. I really need a newer samba in OpenBSD, because two of my customers with OpenBSD Samba-Servers want upgrade their clients to Windows 7 and Windows 7 can't join a Samba 3.0 domain (works only with Samba 3.3+). Regards René -- René Maroufi i...@maroufi.net
Re: NetBSD ports
Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. Just like all the countries in the world should get together for a central governemnt and there would be more love, right?
Re: [Update] Dovecot 1.2.1 with Managesieve
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:40:40PM +0200, Pierre-Emmanuel André wrote:
Hi,
I updated Dovecot to the latest version (1.2.1), added support for
Managesieve and removed the old cmusieve plugin (now it's the dovecot native
sieve plugin).
You must be very carefull if you want to try this update !
Important changes to know:
1) Config file changes:
Read http://wiki.dovecot.org/Upgrading/1.2
2) The new sieve plugin
Please read http://wiki.dovecot.org/LDA/Sieve/Dovecot#configuration
and especially
http://wiki.dovecot.org/LDA/Sieve/Dovecot#Migration_from_CMUSieve
Be very carefull with the old sieve extensions !
For the notify extension, you must edit your sieve scripts (sed, perl,
whatever are your
friends).
For imapflags, i added the line sieve_extensions = +imapflags in the patch
file, so you
just have to uncomment this line in your dovecot.conf.
3) Managesieve
It's not enable by default. You must add managesieve in you dovecot.conf on
the
line protocols =
Tested on @amd64 with sieve scripts.
Diff available here too: http://openbsd.raveland.org/ports/dovecot-1.2.1.diff
(Note: patch -E is required)
Feedback welcome !
Updated diff for the latest version 1.2.6.
Regards,
--
Pierre-Emmanuel André pea at raveland.org
GPG key: 0x7AE329DC
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/mail/dovecot/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.125
diff -u -p -r1.125 Makefile
--- Makefile15 Sep 2009 22:56:16 - 1.125
+++ Makefile6 Oct 2009 15:39:35 -
@@ -5,21 +5,26 @@ SHARED_ONLY= Yes
COMMENT-server= compact IMAP/POP3 server
COMMENT-sieve= Sieve mail filtering for Dovecot
-V_MAJOR= 1.1
-V_DOVECOT= 1.1.19
-V_SIEVE= 1.1.7
+V_MAJOR= 1.2
+V_DOVECOT= 1.2.6
+V_SIEVE= 0.1.12
+V_MANAGESIEVE= 0.11.9
PKGNAME= dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}
PKGNAME-server=dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}
-FULLPKGNAME-sieve= dovecot-sieve-${V_SIEVE}
+FULLPKGNAME-sieve= dovecot-sieve-${V_SIEVE}v0
DISTNAME= dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}
CATEGORIES=mail
MASTER_SITES= ${HOMEPAGE}releases/${V_MAJOR}/
-MASTER_SITES0= ${HOMEPAGE}releases/sieve/
+MASTER_SITES0= http://www.rename-it.nl/dovecot/${V_MAJOR}/
-DISTFILES= dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}.tar.gz \
- dovecot-sieve-${V_SIEVE}.tar.gz:0
+DISTFILES= dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}.tar.gz \
+ dovecot-${V_MAJOR}-sieve-${V_SIEVE}.tar.gz:0 \
+
dovecot-${V_MAJOR}-managesieve-${V_MANAGESIEVE}.tar.gz:0 \
+ ${DIST_MANAGESIEVE}:0
+
+DIST_MANAGESIEVE=
dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}-managesieve-${V_MANAGESIEVE}.diff.gz
HOMEPAGE= http://www.dovecot.org/
@@ -31,8 +36,8 @@ PERMIT_PACKAGE_FTP= Yes
PERMIT_DISTFILES_CDROM=Yes
PERMIT_DISTFILES_FTP= Yes
-WANTLIB-server=c crypto gssapi krb5 rpcsvc ssl z
-WANTLIB-sieve= c
+WANTLIB-server=c crypto gssapi krb5 ssl z
+WANTLIB-sieve= c crypto ssl
MODULES= converters/libiconv
LIB_DEPENDS+= bz2::archivers/bzip2
@@ -48,7 +53,7 @@ CFLAGS+= -I/usr/include/kerberosV -I${LO
USE_LIBTOOL= Yes
# Should be 2.63
-AUTOCONF_VERSION= 2.61
+AUTOCONF_VERSION= 2.62
CONFIGURE_STYLE= autoconf
CONFIGURE_ARGS+= --localstatedir=/var \
--with-gssapi \
@@ -59,10 +64,15 @@ CONFIGURE_ENV= LDFLAGS=-L${LOCALBASE}/
.if !${FLAVOR:L:Mno_sieve}
MULTI_PACKAGES+= -sieve
-SIEVE_DIR= ${WRKDIR}/dovecot-sieve-${V_SIEVE}
+SIEVE_DIR= ${WRKDIR}/dovecot-${V_MAJOR}-sieve-${V_SIEVE}
+MANAGESIEVE_DIR=
${WRKDIR}/dovecot-${V_MAJOR}-managesieve-${V_MANAGESIEVE}
AUTOCONF_DIR+= ${WRKSRC} ${SIEVE_DIR}
+AUTOCONF_DIR+= ${WRKSRC} ${MANAGESIEVE_DIR}
RUN_DEPENDS-sieve= ::${BUILD_PKGPATH}
LIB_DEPENDS-sieve= ${MODLIBICONV_LIB_DEPENDS}
+PATCH_LIST=patch-* managesieve-patch-*
+.else
+PATCH_LIST=patch-* nosieve-patch-*
.endif
.if ${FLAVOR:L:Mbdb}
@@ -93,11 +103,19 @@ CONFIGURE_ARGS+= --with-sqlite
LIB_DEPENDS+= sqlite3::databases/sqlite3
.endif
+
.if !${FLAVOR:L:Mno_sieve}
+pre-patch:
+ cd ${WRKSRC} \
+ gunzip -c ${DISTDIR}/${DIST_MANAGESIEVE} | patch -p1 2 /dev/null
+
post-configure:
(cd ${WRKSRC}; ${MAKE_PROGRAM} dovecot-config)
(cd ${SIEVE_DIR}; ${SETENV} ${CONFIGURE_ENV} \
./configure --with-dovecot=${WRKSRC})
+ (cd ${MANAGESIEVE_DIR}; ${SETENV} ${CONFIGURE_ENV} \
+ ./configure --with-dovecot=${WRKSRC} \
+ --with-dovecot-sieve=${SIEVE_DIR})
.endif
pre-build:
@@ -106,6 +124,7 @@ pre-build:
.if !${FLAVOR:L:Mno_sieve}
post-build:
(cd ${SIEVE_DIR}; ${MAKE_PROGRAM} ${MAKE_FLAGS})
+ (cd ${MANAGESIEVE_DIR}; ${MAKE_PROGRAM} ${MAKE_FLAGS})
.endif
post-install:
@@ -113,16 +132,21 @@ post-install:
${INSTALL_DATA}
Re: mplayer continued...
On Tuesday 06 October 2009 02:32:06 Edd Barrett wrote: On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 09:47:07PM -0400, Predrag Punosevac wrote: Edd, can you reproduce my claim on your latest version of MPlayer? It plays the video fine here :\ Odd. Forgive the stupid question but can you attach the port as it stands now? --STeve Andre'
Re: NetBSD ports
I am sorry. Really, I don't want to have support here. I just would like to know relationship between pkgsrc and original OpenBSD port system. 2009/10/6 Landry Breuil lan...@rhaalovely.net On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:12:34PM +0400, Alexander Bubnov wrote: Hello everybody! Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. You can use pkgsrc on OpenBSD. But you won't get support here. Landry -- /BR, Alexander
Re: NetBSD ports
I am sorry. Really, I don't want to have support here. I just would like to know relationship between pkgsrc and original OpenBSD port system. A lot of English is spoken in India because the British used to be there a long time ago. How does it change anything if you know the relationship?
Re: [Update] Dovecot 1.2.1 with Managesieve
Pierre-Emmanuel André wrote: You must be very carefull if you want to try this update ! I think this information should get wider distribution; I would favor something in MESSAGE-server linking to http://wiki.dovecot.org/Upgrading/1.2 - it's too late for people following -current, but it would be nice for OpenBSD 4.7. Upgrading from OpenBSD 4.4 to 4.5, the first release after dovecot was upgraded from 1.0 to 1.1, I got bitten by a similar lack of warning (either in MESSAGE-server or http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade45.html). -- Matthew Weigel hacker unique idempot . ent
Re: NetBSD ports
Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. Just like all the countries in the world should get together for a central governemnt and there would be more love, right? Yes. Like that - BSD community. I do not think it is Utopia. I think at first there is a need to discussed some general aims and rules which helps to resolve difference opinions. Then do common work together. For example (below just alphabetically sort BSD systems), - FreeBSD would like to be fastest under i386. FreeBSD team can do packages/ports related to i386. - NetBSD would like to be ported under many platforms. This BSD can do all rest work. - OpenBSD would like to be very secure and stable. Blowfish team can implement packages system to build them for N-platform using pkgsrc. I guess cooperation of BSD teams can save time to concentrate for different aims, but not common. BSD community is the power . Unfortunately, I can see divisions like DragonflyBSD. I guess it is bad way. It is just my opinion. What you suggest is absolute rubbish. It is just talk -- not action -- but furthermore you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Re: NetBSD ports
2009/10/6 Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. Just like all the countries in the world should get together for a central governemnt and there would be more love, right? Yes. Like that - BSD community. I do not think it is Utopia. I think at first there is a need to discussed some general aims and rules which helps to resolve difference opinions. Then do common work together. For example (below just alphabetically sort BSD systems), - FreeBSD would like to be fastest under i386. FreeBSD team can do packages/ports related to i386. - NetBSD would like to be ported under many platforms. This BSD can do all rest work. - OpenBSD would like to be very secure and stable. Blowfish team can implement packages system to build them for N-platform using pkgsrc. I guess cooperation of BSD teams can save time to concentrate for different aims, but not common. BSD community is the power . Unfortunately, I can see divisions like DragonflyBSD. I guess it is bad way. It is just my opinion. -- /BR, Alexander
Re: NetBSD ports
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:12:34PM +0400, Alexander Bubnov wrote: I am sorry. Really, I don't want to have support here. I just would like to know relationship between pkgsrc and original OpenBSD port system. There is NO relationship! NetBSD didn't have pkgsrc when Theo forked OpenBSD. OpenBSD ports system was originally inspired by FreeBSD ports. Maybe Mark can recall what he was exactly thinking when he got idea for OpenBSD packaging system. From the top of my head I am not sure if Alistair Crooks was inspired by FreeBSD ports as well but I know that he created NetBSD pkgsrc based on experience he gained creating a packaging system for one of proprietary Unix-es in mid nineteens. That was a paid job by the way. All those information are freely available on the net. Just Google before rubbing people the wrong way. Best, Predrag
Re: NetBSD ports
I agree with you I need much more. 2009/10/6 Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. Just like all the countries in the world should get together for a central governemnt and there would be more love, right? Yes. Like that - BSD community. I do not think it is Utopia. I think at first there is a need to discussed some general aims and rules which helps to resolve difference opinions. Then do common work together. For example (below just alphabetically sort BSD systems), - FreeBSD would like to be fastest under i386. FreeBSD team can do packages/ports related to i386. - NetBSD would like to be ported under many platforms. This BSD can do all rest work. - OpenBSD would like to be very secure and stable. Blowfish team can implement packages system to build them for N-platform using pkgsrc. I guess cooperation of BSD teams can save time to concentrate for different aims, but not common. BSD community is the power . Unfortunately, I can see divisions like DragonflyBSD. I guess it is bad way. It is just my opinion. What you suggest is absolute rubbish. It is just talk -- not action -- but furthermore you don't have a clue what you are talking about. -- /BR, Alexander
Re: NetBSD ports
I am sorry, Thank you for clarification. 2009/10/6 Predrag Punosevac punoseva...@gmail.com On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:12:34PM +0400, Alexander Bubnov wrote: I am sorry. Really, I don't want to have support here. I just would like to know relationship between pkgsrc and original OpenBSD port system. There is NO relationship! NetBSD didn't have pkgsrc when Theo forked OpenBSD. OpenBSD ports system was originally inspired by FreeBSD ports. Maybe Mark can recall what he was exactly thinking when he got idea for OpenBSD packaging system. From the top of my head I am not sure if Alistair Crooks was inspired by FreeBSD ports as well but I know that he created NetBSD pkgsrc based on experience he gained creating a packaging system for one of proprietary Unix-es in mid nineteens. That was a paid job by the way. All those information are freely available on the net. Just Google before rubbing people the wrong way. Best, Predrag -- /BR, Alexander
Re: NetBSD ports
I wanted to say I need to know much more. 2009/10/6 Alexander Bubnov alexander.bub...@gmail.com I agree with you I need much more. 2009/10/6 Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. Just like all the countries in the world should get together for a central governemnt and there would be more love, right? Yes. Like that - BSD community. I do not think it is Utopia. I think at first there is a need to discussed some general aims and rules which helps to resolve difference opinions. Then do common work together. For example (below just alphabetically sort BSD systems), - FreeBSD would like to be fastest under i386. FreeBSD team can do packages/ports related to i386. - NetBSD would like to be ported under many platforms. This BSD can do all rest work. - OpenBSD would like to be very secure and stable. Blowfish team can implement packages system to build them for N-platform using pkgsrc. I guess cooperation of BSD teams can save time to concentrate for different aims, but not common. BSD community is the power . Unfortunately, I can see divisions like DragonflyBSD. I guess it is bad way. It is just my opinion. What you suggest is absolute rubbish. It is just talk -- not action -- but furthermore you don't have a clue what you are talking about. -- /BR, Alexander -- /BR, Alexander
Re: [Update] Dovecot 1.2.1 with Managesieve
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:06:37PM -0500, Matthew Weigel wrote: Pierre-Emmanuel André wrote: You must be very carefull if you want to try this update ! I think this information should get wider distribution; I would favor something in MESSAGE-server linking to http://wiki.dovecot.org/Upgrading/1.2 - it's too late for people following -current, but it would be nice for OpenBSD 4.7. Upgrading from OpenBSD 4.4 to 4.5, the first release after dovecot was upgraded from 1.0 to 1.1, I got bitten by a similar lack of warning (either in MESSAGE-server or http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade45.html). Hum, I'm not for MESSAGE-server. I prefer a warning in http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade47.html#Pkgup and maybe a heads up on Undeadly.. But before, this update must be commited ;) Regards, -- Pierre-Emmanuel André pea at raveland.org GPG key: 0x7AE329DC
Re: NetBSD ports
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 09:08:51PM +0400, Alexander Bubnov wrote: 2009/10/6 Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. Just like all the countries in the world should get together for a central governemnt and there would be more love, right? Yes. Like that - BSD community. I do not think it is Utopia. I think at first there is a need to discussed some general aims and rules which helps to resolve difference opinions. Then do common work together. For example (below just alphabetically sort BSD systems), - FreeBSD would like to be fastest under i386. FreeBSD team can do packages/ports related to i386. - NetBSD would like to be ported under many platforms. This BSD can do all rest work. - OpenBSD would like to be very secure and stable. Blowfish team can implement packages system to build them for N-platform using pkgsrc. I guess cooperation of BSD teams can save time to concentrate for different aims, but not common. BSD community is the power . Unfortunately, I can see divisions like DragonflyBSD. I guess it is bad way. It is just my opinion. -- /BR, Alexander could you please write this kind of mails on monday morning? so we feel a lot better after reading such jokes. -- Intelligence should guide our actions, but in harmony with the texture of the situation at hand -- Francisco Varela
Re: NetBSD ports
stop to jeer! let's finish this discussion. 2009/10/6 Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse jas...@humppa.nl On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 09:08:51PM +0400, Alexander Bubnov wrote: 2009/10/6 Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org Probably I am going to ask a stupid question but it is very interesting for me. Because I would like to help BSD projects. Why OpenBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? I guess work can be faster in case port system is shared between BSD projects including FreeBSD. NetBSD ports are ported to many Oses so I would prefer these port system. Just like all the countries in the world should get together for a central governemnt and there would be more love, right? Yes. Like that - BSD community. I do not think it is Utopia. I think at first there is a need to discussed some general aims and rules which helps to resolve difference opinions. Then do common work together. For example (below just alphabetically sort BSD systems), - FreeBSD would like to be fastest under i386. FreeBSD team can do packages/ports related to i386. - NetBSD would like to be ported under many platforms. This BSD can do all rest work. - OpenBSD would like to be very secure and stable. Blowfish team can implement packages system to build them for N-platform using pkgsrc. I guess cooperation of BSD teams can save time to concentrate for different aims, but not common. BSD community is the power . Unfortunately, I can see divisions like DragonflyBSD. I guess it is bad way. It is just my opinion. -- /BR, Alexander could you please write this kind of mails on monday morning? so we feel a lot better after reading such jokes. -- Intelligence should guide our actions, but in harmony with the texture of the situation at hand -- Francisco Varela -- /BR, Alexander
Re: [Update] Dovecot 1.2.1 with Managesieve
Pierre-Emmanuel André wrote: On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:06:37PM -0500, Matthew Weigel wrote: Pierre-Emmanuel André wrote: You must be very carefull if you want to try this update ! I think this information should get wider distribution; I would favor something in MESSAGE-server linking to http://wiki.dovecot.org/Upgrading/1.2 - it's too late for people following -current, but it would be nice for OpenBSD 4.7. Upgrading from OpenBSD 4.4 to 4.5, the first release after dovecot was upgraded from 1.0 to 1.1, I got bitten by a similar lack of warning (either in MESSAGE-server or http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade45.html). Hum, I'm not for MESSAGE-server. I prefer a warning in http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade47.html#Pkgup and maybe a heads up on Undeadly.. But before, this update must be commited ;) Not every OpenBSD user reads undeadly or the FAQ. One of OpenBSD's strong point has always been to provide accurate documentation with the system. So something in the package itself is mandatory. Then if you want to add more details in the FAQ or tell stories on undeadly, that's fine too. -- Matthieu Herrb
Re: mplayer continued...
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:38:32PM -0400, STeve Andre' wrote: On Tuesday 06 October 2009 02:32:06 Edd Barrett wrote: On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 09:47:07PM -0400, Predrag Punosevac wrote: Edd, can you reproduce my claim on your latest version of MPlayer? It plays the video fine here :\ Odd. Forgive the stupid question but can you attach the port as it stands now? --STeve Andre' Erm. yes, but why? Are you supplying a patch level to patch? Thats where most people mess up applying patches. -- Best Regards Edd Barrett (Freelance software developer / technical writer / open-source developer) http://students.dec.bmth.ac.uk/ebarrett
Samba 3.4.1
Hi I tried to build the ads Flavor on sparc64, too and it worked. I used Windows 7 as a Client for Samba 3.4.1 on OpenBSD/sparc64 as a DC and everything works. Great! Regards René -- René Maroufi i...@maroufi.net
Re: mplayer continued...
On Tuesday 06 October 2009 15:15:34 Edd Barrett wrote: On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:38:32PM -0400, STeve Andre' wrote: On Tuesday 06 October 2009 02:32:06 Edd Barrett wrote: On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 09:47:07PM -0400, Predrag Punosevac wrote: Edd, can you reproduce my claim on your latest version of MPlayer? It plays the video fine here :\ Odd. Forgive the stupid question but can you attach the port as it stands now? --STeve Andre' Erm. yes, but why? Are you supplying a patch level to patch? Thats where most people mess up applying patches. My interest is more humble. I'd like to try it out. --STeve
Re: [Update] Dovecot 1.2.1 with Managesieve
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Pierre-Emmanuel André wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:40:40PM +0200, Pierre-Emmanuel André wrote:
Hi,
I updated Dovecot to the latest version (1.2.1), added support for
Managesieve and removed the old cmusieve plugin (now it's the dovecot
native
sieve plugin).
You must be very carefull if you want to try this update !
Important changes to know:
1) Config file changes:
Read http://wiki.dovecot.org/Upgrading/1.2
2) The new sieve plugin
Please read http://wiki.dovecot.org/LDA/Sieve/Dovecot#configuration
and especially
http://wiki.dovecot.org/LDA/Sieve/Dovecot#Migration_from_CMUSieve
Be very carefull with the old sieve extensions !
For the notify extension, you must edit your sieve scripts (sed, perl,
whatever are your
friends).
For imapflags, i added the line sieve_extensions = +imapflags in the patch
file, so you
just have to uncomment this line in your dovecot.conf.
3) Managesieve
It's not enable by default. You must add managesieve in you dovecot.conf
on the
line protocols =
Tested on @amd64 with sieve scripts.
Diff available here too:
http://openbsd.raveland.org/ports/dovecot-1.2.1.diff
(Note: patch -E is required)
Feedback welcome !
Updated diff for the latest version 1.2.6.
Fixes the path for sieve manpages (spotted by giovanni@, thanks).
--
Pierre-Emmanuel André pea at raveland.org
GPG key: 0x7AE329DC
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/mail/dovecot/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.125
diff -u -p -r1.125 Makefile
--- Makefile15 Sep 2009 22:56:16 - 1.125
+++ Makefile6 Oct 2009 21:02:35 -
@@ -5,21 +5,26 @@ SHARED_ONLY= Yes
COMMENT-server= compact IMAP/POP3 server
COMMENT-sieve= Sieve mail filtering for Dovecot
-V_MAJOR= 1.1
-V_DOVECOT= 1.1.19
-V_SIEVE= 1.1.7
+V_MAJOR= 1.2
+V_DOVECOT= 1.2.6
+V_SIEVE= 0.1.12
+V_MANAGESIEVE= 0.11.9
PKGNAME= dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}
PKGNAME-server=dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}
-FULLPKGNAME-sieve= dovecot-sieve-${V_SIEVE}
+FULLPKGNAME-sieve= dovecot-sieve-${V_SIEVE}v0
DISTNAME= dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}
CATEGORIES=mail
MASTER_SITES= ${HOMEPAGE}releases/${V_MAJOR}/
-MASTER_SITES0= ${HOMEPAGE}releases/sieve/
+MASTER_SITES0= http://www.rename-it.nl/dovecot/${V_MAJOR}/
-DISTFILES= dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}.tar.gz \
- dovecot-sieve-${V_SIEVE}.tar.gz:0
+DISTFILES= dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}.tar.gz \
+ dovecot-${V_MAJOR}-sieve-${V_SIEVE}.tar.gz:0 \
+
dovecot-${V_MAJOR}-managesieve-${V_MANAGESIEVE}.tar.gz:0 \
+ ${DIST_MANAGESIEVE}:0
+
+DIST_MANAGESIEVE=
dovecot-${V_DOVECOT}-managesieve-${V_MANAGESIEVE}.diff.gz
HOMEPAGE= http://www.dovecot.org/
@@ -31,8 +36,8 @@ PERMIT_PACKAGE_FTP= Yes
PERMIT_DISTFILES_CDROM=Yes
PERMIT_DISTFILES_FTP= Yes
-WANTLIB-server=c crypto gssapi krb5 rpcsvc ssl z
-WANTLIB-sieve= c
+WANTLIB-server=c crypto gssapi krb5 ssl z
+WANTLIB-sieve= c crypto ssl
MODULES= converters/libiconv
LIB_DEPENDS+= bz2::archivers/bzip2
@@ -48,7 +53,7 @@ CFLAGS+= -I/usr/include/kerberosV -I${LO
USE_LIBTOOL= Yes
# Should be 2.63
-AUTOCONF_VERSION= 2.61
+AUTOCONF_VERSION= 2.62
CONFIGURE_STYLE= autoconf
CONFIGURE_ARGS+= --localstatedir=/var \
--with-gssapi \
@@ -59,10 +64,15 @@ CONFIGURE_ENV= LDFLAGS=-L${LOCALBASE}/
.if !${FLAVOR:L:Mno_sieve}
MULTI_PACKAGES+= -sieve
-SIEVE_DIR= ${WRKDIR}/dovecot-sieve-${V_SIEVE}
+SIEVE_DIR= ${WRKDIR}/dovecot-${V_MAJOR}-sieve-${V_SIEVE}
+MANAGESIEVE_DIR=
${WRKDIR}/dovecot-${V_MAJOR}-managesieve-${V_MANAGESIEVE}
AUTOCONF_DIR+= ${WRKSRC} ${SIEVE_DIR}
+AUTOCONF_DIR+= ${WRKSRC} ${MANAGESIEVE_DIR}
RUN_DEPENDS-sieve= ::${BUILD_PKGPATH}
LIB_DEPENDS-sieve= ${MODLIBICONV_LIB_DEPENDS}
+PATCH_LIST=patch-* managesieve-patch-*
+.else
+PATCH_LIST=patch-* nosieve-patch-*
.endif
.if ${FLAVOR:L:Mbdb}
@@ -93,11 +103,20 @@ CONFIGURE_ARGS+= --with-sqlite
LIB_DEPENDS+= sqlite3::databases/sqlite3
.endif
+
.if !${FLAVOR:L:Mno_sieve}
+pre-patch:
+ cd ${WRKSRC} \
+ gunzip -c ${DISTDIR}/${DIST_MANAGESIEVE} | patch -p1 2 /dev/null
+
post-configure:
(cd ${WRKSRC}; ${MAKE_PROGRAM} dovecot-config)
(cd ${SIEVE_DIR}; ${SETENV} ${CONFIGURE_ENV} \
- ./configure --with-dovecot=${WRKSRC})
+ ./configure --with-dovecot=${WRKSRC} \
+ --mandir=${LOCALBASE}/man)
+ (cd ${MANAGESIEVE_DIR}; ${SETENV} ${CONFIGURE_ENV} \
+ ./configure --with-dovecot=${WRKSRC} \
+ --with-dovecot-sieve=${SIEVE_DIR})
.endif
pre-build:
@@ -106,6 +125,7 @@
Re: UPDATE: mail/imapproxy
On Tuesday 06 October 2009 01:52:47 Benoit Lecocq wrote: Hi, This diff updates imapproxy to the release 1.2.6. Tested on amd64/sparc64. it seems to be ok from the current maintainer. Comments ? OK ? Cheers, benoit I didn't push for this being commited because it had an issue with threads and using the daemon mode where it would not respond to incoming connections. If I remember correctly looking back it was introduced with some code changes between 1.2.5 and 1.2.6. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Re: splitting ocaml package
On Tuesday 06 October 2009 11:22:41 Antoine Jacoutot wrote: On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote: On 6 Oct 2009, at 15:20, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Vincent Gross wrote: Hi folks, here is a diff that splits ocaml in three packages Why? (I'm not objecting, I just want to know the reason). so that the core ocaml compiler doesnt need x11/tk to be pulled in. That's only really used for ocamlbrowser these days which is in the TK sub-package. Fair enough. But why a doc subpackage? To be honest, I hate having to install a separate package when trying to find documentation on something I have installed... Unless there is a *very* good reason to do so then I fully agree. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Re: NetBSD ports
On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Alexander Bubnov wrote: Yes. Like that - BSD community. I do not think it is Utopia. I think at first there is a need to discussed some general aims and rules which helps to resolve difference opinions. Then do common work together. For example (below just alphabetically sort BSD systems), - FreeBSD would like to be fastest under i386. FreeBSD team can do packages/ports related to i386. - NetBSD would like to be ported under many platforms. This BSD can do all rest work. - OpenBSD would like to be very secure and stable. Blowfish team can implement packages system to build them for N-platform using pkgsrc. I guess cooperation of BSD teams can save time to concentrate for different aims, but not common. BSD community is the power . Unfortunately, I can see divisions like DragonflyBSD. I guess it is bad way. It is just my opinion. Do you know this quote? In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is. -- Jan L.A. van de Snepscheut You shouldn't believe when you read about: OpenBSD - secure NetBSD - portable FreeBSD - fast Make people think these qualities are mutually exclusive and in consequence make assumptions like you made. Teers, -- Daniel Bolgheroni FEI - Faculdade de Engenharia Industrial http://www.dbolgheroni.eng.br/mykey ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) against HTML e-mail X / \
Re: UPDATE: sqlite3
On 2009/10/06 12:14, David Coppa wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org wrote:
On 2009/10/06 11:18, David Coppa wrote:
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org
wrote:
been in a bulk build - ok?
Is tcl now a build dependency even with the no_tcl flavor?
Ah, yes it is, unless we ship the generated files.
SQLite does not require TCL to run, but a TCL installation is required
by the makefiles. SQLite contains a lot of generated code and TCL is
used to do much of that code generation. The makefile also requires
AWK.
We also need:
# ln -s /usr/local/bin/tclsh8.5 /usr/local/bin/tclsh
otherwise, it will fail with the same error
-dav
well, yes, that comes with the .if ${MULTI_PACKAGES:M-tcl}
section. When I get time I'll have to look at why it's disabled
by default on m88k and vax.
Re: UPDATE: sqlite3
So how cool would it be to add tcl to base? Seriously, bsd liscense, small footprint, knock off lots off depencies for ports Ok, crawlng back into my hole
Re: NetBSD ports
Thank you. Understandable. 2009/10/6 Daniel Bolgheroni m...@dbolgheroni.eng.br On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Alexander Bubnov wrote: Yes. Like that - BSD community. I do not think it is Utopia. I think at first there is a need to discussed some general aims and rules which helps to resolve difference opinions. Then do common work together. For example (below just alphabetically sort BSD systems), - FreeBSD would like to be fastest under i386. FreeBSD team can do packages/ports related to i386. - NetBSD would like to be ported under many platforms. This BSD can do all rest work. - OpenBSD would like to be very secure and stable. Blowfish team can implement packages system to build them for N-platform using pkgsrc. I guess cooperation of BSD teams can save time to concentrate for different aims, but not common. BSD community is the power . Unfortunately, I can see divisions like DragonflyBSD. I guess it is bad way. It is just my opinion. Do you know this quote? In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is. -- Jan L.A. van de Snepscheut You shouldn't believe when you read about: OpenBSD - secure NetBSD - portable FreeBSD - fast Make people think these qualities are mutually exclusive and in consequence make assumptions like you made. Teers, -- Daniel Bolgheroni FEI - Faculdade de Engenharia Industrial http://www.dbolgheroni.eng.br/mykey ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) against HTML e-mail X / \ -- /BR, Alexander
