Re: "stable" ports?

On 29/03/2010 17:57, Ivan Voras wrote: > One way to do it, my proposal, would be to maintain a stable "overlay" > of the ports, one for each major supported branch (i.e. 6.x, 7.x, 8.x), > containing ports deemed "important" for some reason. Who would be doing the additional work? I figure we'd nee

Re: Be careful with fdopendir() on RELENG_7

On Mar 29, 2010, at 8:18 PM, Xin LI wrote: Perhaps as an errata? On Mar 29, 2010 7:42 PM, "Garrett Cooper" wrote: On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Xin LI wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:45 PM... Hmm... is it possible to release note it after the fact (or at least release note all ma

Re: Be careful with fdopendir() on RELENG_7

Perhaps as an errata? On Mar 29, 2010 7:42 PM, "Garrett Cooper" wrote: On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Xin LI wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:45 PM... Hmm... is it possible to release note it after the fact (or at least release note all major / outstanding items discovered shortly after

Re: Be careful with fdopendir() on RELENG_7

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Xin LI wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > [...] >>> This isn't a hypothetical concern.  When I initially tried gtar >>> 1.23 on 7.3/amd64, it left a trail of coredumps because of this. >> >>    Is there a bug outstanding for this? >

Re: Be careful with fdopendir() on RELENG_7

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: [...] >> This isn't a hypothetical concern.  When I initially tried gtar >> 1.23 on 7.3/amd64, it left a trail of coredumps because of this. > >    Is there a bug outstanding for this? This has been fixed in RELENG_7 before 7.3-RELEASE but re

Re: Be careful with fdopendir() on RELENG_7

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > There is a silly bug in RELENG_7 up to and including RELENG_7_3: > fdopendir(3) is available in libc, but the prototype is missing > from . > > This can have unexpected consequences.  A configure script can > notice that fdopendir() i

Re: "stable" ports?

Quoting Ivan Voras : Doug Hardie wrote: On 29 March 2010, at 08:57, Ivan Voras wrote: In some cases the burdens are obvious - the maintainer(s) would need to e.g. maintain three versions of the ports - a random example would be e.g. X.Org 7.0 for 6.x, 7.2 for 7.x and 7.4 for 8.x. Another woul

Old ports bugs analyzis

I work on creating system for system and ports autobuilder with custom settings for my FreeBSD machines. I know about many programs, which do same, but I don't like strange depends, which are not controlled by OPTIONS and some another I've analyse ports tree and want to say about. There're lot pro

Be careful with fdopendir() on RELENG_7

There is a silly bug in RELENG_7 up to and including RELENG_7_3: fdopendir(3) is available in libc, but the prototype is missing from . This can have unexpected consequences. A configure script can notice that fdopendir() is available, but due to the missing prototype, the function will be typed

Re: "stable" ports?

Doug Hardie wrote: On 29 March 2010, at 08:57, Ivan Voras wrote: In some cases the burdens are obvious - the maintainer(s) would need to e.g. maintain three versions of the ports - a random example would be e.g. X.Org 7.0 for 6.x, 7.2 for 7.x and 7.4 for 8.x. Another would be keeping PHP 5.2 fo

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 03/29/10 12:21, Adam Vande More wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Doug Barton > wrote: > > Right, that will work, but the * isn't necessary. Portmaster will strip > it internally in any case. > > > Those type of examples in the man pages and UPDATING

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > Right, that will work, but the * isn't necessary. Portmaster will strip > it internally in any case. > Those type of examples in the man pages and UPDATING have never worked for me in tcsh, I've always had to glob it like Garret stated. > p

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

Hi, sysutils/tracker-client fails in configure, fix to port's Makefile: --- sysutils/tracker-client/Makefile.orig 2010-03-29 20:59:36.0 +0200 +++ sysutils/tracker-client/Makefile2010-03-29 21:01:42.0 +0200 @@ -46,7 +46,9 @@ INSTALLS_ICONS=yes USE_AUTOTOOLS= li

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 03/29/10 02:53, Garrett Cooper wrote: > Besides, when I read `glob' I don't think `regular expression'. A > glob is a simplified extension of regular expressions, I wasn't going for a rigorous definition here. :) However, "simplified" is the correct idea. > The previous method I described

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 03/29/10 02:27, Aristedes Maniatis wrote: > On 29/03/10 7:04 PM, Doug Barton wrote: portmaster -r graphics/png >> That won't work, the man page clearly says that it has to be a port >> directory or glob pattern from /var/db/pkg. The "glob pattern" bit of >> that was (unfortunately) broken

Re: "stable" ports?

Alexey Shuvaev wrote: One way to do it, my proposal, would be to maintain a stable "overlay" of the ports, one for each major supported branch (i.e. 6.x, 7.x, 8.x), containing ports deemed "important" for some reason. What is the criteria which port version goes into particular branch? That is

Silent distfiles conflict between graphics/xface.el and mail/x-face-e21.

Hello! Could please someone with emacs knowledge (preferably ports commiter) look into issue http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=141839 Both ports refer distfiles with the same name but of different sizes (and checksums). It looks like one port is a subset of another, but I am not familiar

Re: "stable" ports?

On 29 March 2010, at 08:57, Ivan Voras wrote: > In some cases the burdens are obvious - the maintainer(s) would need to > e.g. maintain three versions of the ports - a random example would be > e.g. X.Org 7.0 for 6.x, 7.2 for 7.x and 7.4 for 8.x. Another would be > keeping PHP 5.2 for 7.x and 8.x

Re: www/firefox not building on my up to date 7.3 Release machines. Works fine on current.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 eculp wrote: > Quoting Florian Smeets : > >> On 3/27/10 2:46 PM, eculp wrote: >>> It seems to stop with mozilla. All ports are up to date. This is the >>> only one that won't build for us on 7.3. >>> >>> c++ -o nsHtml5NamedCharacters.o -c -I../../dist

Re: "stable" ports?

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 05:57:04PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote: > Hi, > > First of all, I'd like to have this particular discussion in the open > with ports developers and maintainers. So please - if you are a "simple" > user, without a port to maintain, you will be given another thread if > anything

"stable" ports?

Hi, First of all, I'd like to have this particular discussion in the open with ports developers and maintainers. So please - if you are a "simple" user, without a port to maintain, you will be given another thread if anything comes out as a result from this discussion. There is a discussion[*] cu

Re: Newer autoconf (2.63+)?

On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:23:48 + (UTC) na...@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) wrote: > We only have autoconf 2.13 and 2.62 in the tree. Upstream authors > are increasingly moving towards and _requiring_ newer versions > (2.63, 2.64, 2.65), and if you have to run autoconf, that is a > problem

Newer autoconf (2.63+)?

We only have autoconf 2.13 and 2.62 in the tree. Upstream authors are increasingly moving towards and _requiring_ newer versions (2.63, 2.64, 2.65), and if you have to run autoconf, that is a problem. Are there any plans to provide a newer autoconf version? -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber

Re: Removal of RC_SUBR and RC_SUBR_SUFFIX

Doug Barton wrote: > As should be obvious by now I'm following through on my previously > stated plans to remove the no longer necessary %%RC_SUBR%% and > %%RC_SUBR_SUFFIX%% from the ports tree. Does it still make sense to use rcvar=`set_rcvar` as recommended by rc.subr(8) or should we just

Re: [RFC] deprecate @exec and @unexec in plists in favor of pre-install and post-install scripts

Garrett Cooper wrote on 2010-03-29: WRT variables, I'm not so concerned about %D %F etc, but I am concerned about the necessity to add script boilerplate (such as snatching pre-post or deinstall-install modes, prefix), and while I haven't thoroughly audited the install scripts in ports, I

Now OK (Re: cvs commit: ports/print/panda/files patch-images.c)

print/panda, which was previously failing is OK after this commit. Thanks for fixing it! A description of the testing process can be found here: http://T32.TecNik93.com/FreeBSD/QA-Tindy/ Thanks for your work on making FreeBSD better, -- QAT - your friendly neighborhood Daemon, preparing a hec

Re: cvs commit: ports/print/panda/files patch-configure

The Restless Daemon identified a linker error while trying to build: panda-0.5.4_4 maintained by po...@freebsd.org Makefile ident: $FreeBSD: ports/print/panda/Makefile,v 1.29 2010/03/28 06:42:45 dinoex Exp $ Excerpt from http://QAT.TecNik93.com/logs/8-STABLE-NPD/panda-0.5.4_4.log : libtool: co

Current unassigned ports problem reports

(Note: an HTML version of this report is available at http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr-summary.cgi?category=ports .) The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsol

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 29/03/2010 11:27, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:15:23 +0200 > Dominic Fandrey wrote: > >> On 28/03/2010 15:38, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: >>> We do _NOT_ recommend updating ports until this commits are all >>> done, and the problems are fixed, except if you want to help >>> testi

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 28/03/2010 15:38, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > We do _NOT_ recommend updating ports until this commits are all done, > and the problems are fixed, except if you want to help testing / fixing. graphics/inkscape needs a dependency fix. diff -Nur inkscape.orig/Makefile inkscape/Makefile --- inkscape

Re: [RFC] deprecate @exec and @unexec in plists in favor of pre-install and post-install scripts

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Florent Thoumie wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Matthias Andree > wrote: >> Am 28.03.2010, 08:14 Uhr, schrieb Garrett Cooper: >> >>> Hi, >>>    As part of taking a look at the differences in our implementation >>> of pkg_install(1) in order to afford an

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 2:27 AM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote: > On 29/03/10 7:04 PM, Doug Barton wrote:  portmaster -r graphics/png >> >> That won't work, the man page clearly says that it has to be a port >> directory or glob pattern from /var/db/pkg. The "glob pattern" bit of >> that was

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 29/03/10 7:04 PM, Doug Barton wrote: portmaster -r graphics/png That won't work, the man page clearly says that it has to be a port directory or glob pattern from /var/db/pkg. The "glob pattern" bit of that was (unfortunately) broken up till version 2.20, which I just committed. I'm confu

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:15:23 +0200 Dominic Fandrey wrote: > On 28/03/2010 15:38, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > > We do _NOT_ recommend updating ports until this commits are all > > done, and the problems are fixed, except if you want to help > > testing / fixing. > > The already committed graphics/im

Re: [RFC] deprecate @exec and @unexec in plists in favor of pre-install and post-install scripts

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 28.03.2010, 08:14 Uhr, schrieb Garrett Cooper: > >> Hi, >>    As part of taking a look at the differences in our implementation >> of pkg_install(1) in order to afford an improvement over the existing >> code, I've looked at various impl

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 03/28/10 19:34, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote: >> On 29/03/10 1:15 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: >>> >>> portmaster -r png- >> >> Is that correct? I haven't seen that notation before (although I might just >> have missed it in the docs). >> >> I w

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 28/03/2010 15:38, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > We do _NOT_ recommend updating ports until this commits are all done, > and the problems are fixed, except if you want to help testing / fixing. The already committed graphics/imlib2 patch does not work, i.e. it compiles, but png doesn't work, with thi

Re: Massive port bloat caused by the recommended en-freebsd-doc

Am 28.03.2010, 22:16 Uhr, schrieb Hiroki Sato: Peter Olsson wrote in <1269804756.2864.94.ca...@x61s>: po> I added no options to the configs that were displayed, just removed some po> (e.g. X11 from ghostscript IIRC). I'm not so concerned with the time po> that passed, I'm just shocked by

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 12:52 AM, Rene Ladan wrote: > 2010/3/29 Garrett Cooper : >> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote: >>> On 29/03/10 1:15 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: portmaster -r png- >>> >>> Is that correct? I haven't seen that notation before (although I might

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 29/03/2010 09:58, Dominic Fandrey wrote: > On 28/03/2010 15:38, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: >> We do _NOT_ recommend updating ports until this commits are all done, >> and the problems are fixed, except if you want to help testing / fixing. > > Fix for graphics/evas-loader-png. Sorry, wrong patch.

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 28/03/2010 15:38, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > We do _NOT_ recommend updating ports until this commits are all done, > and the problems are fixed, except if you want to help testing / fixing. Fix for graphics/evas-loader-png. diff -Nur evas-loader-png.orig/files/patch-src-modules-loaders-png-evas

Re: [RFC] deprecate @exec and @unexec in plists in favor of pre-install and post-install scripts

Am 28.03.2010, 08:14 Uhr, schrieb Garrett Cooper: Hi, As part of taking a look at the differences in our implementation of pkg_install(1) in order to afford an improvement over the existing code, I've looked at various implementations of pkg_install, one being NetBSD's evolution [1]. It's se

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

2010/3/29 Garrett Cooper : > On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote: >> On 29/03/10 1:15 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: >>> >>> portmaster -r png- >> >> Is that correct? I haven't seen that notation before (although I might just >> have missed it in the docs). >> >> I would have used

Re: [ HEADS UP ] Ports unstable for the next 10 days

On 28/03/2010 15:38, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > We do _NOT_ recommend updating ports until this commits are all done, > and the problems are fixed, except if you want to help testing / fixing. A small fix for graphics/php5-gd. It builds without the patch, but doesn't work without it. diff -Nur php5