Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 01:00:47PM +0100, Lars Engels wrote:
> Is anyone aware of pkg_updating(1)? It's in base for 2 years.
No, thanks for the hint.
--
Eygene Ryabinkin,,,^..^,,,
[ Life's unfair - but root password helps! | codelabs.ru ]
[ 82FE 06BC
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Lars Engels wrote:
> Picking a random mail from this thread...
>
> Is anyone aware of pkg_updating(1)? It's in base for 2 years.
>
Thanks, this is very useful!
--
Regards,
Torfinn Ingolfsen
___
freebsd-ports@freebs
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 10:59:04AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 12/27/2010 23:07, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> > I had shown the simple shell script that will parse the UPDATING and
> > present the entries for the given port if the fall into the "last N
> > days" category. If you had missed it -- p
Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 04:31:08PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> You bring up a very good point here that someone in #bsdports also
> mentioned, that having UPDATING in xml would allow us to easily produce
> an HTML version of the file for use on the web site.
Yes, third-party that may use the UPDATI
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 16:38:57 -0800
Doug Barton wrote:
> On 12/28/2010 15:10, RW wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 10:55:04 -0800
> > Doug Barton wrote:
> > on perl). At the moment, I read it once, make a mental note, and
> > come back to it when I need it. I don't think a portaudit style
> > tool
On 12/28/2010 15:10, RW wrote:
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 10:55:04 -0800
Doug Barton wrote:
When I wrote, "we need a tool with striking similarities to
portaudit" without providing the details I was assuming that people
are already familiar with it, how it works, etc.
I don't think it's quite as s
On 12/28/2010 12:31, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
Doug, good day.
Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 10:55:04AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
Do either of you actually have any familiarity at all with how portaudit
works, and/or how it is integrated into the ports infrastructure? Based
on what you've written today my
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 10:55:04 -0800
Doug Barton wrote:
> When I wrote, "we need a tool with striking similarities to
> portaudit" without providing the details I was assuming that people
> are already familiar with it, how it works, etc.
I don't think it's quite as simple as dealing with vulnera
Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 11:31:13PM +0300, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> But in order to move this activity any further, I'll need for a
> constructive feedback. I think that I'll try to summarize the current
> thoughts at the FreeBSD Wiki, will post the link once I'll do that.
http://wiki.freebsd.org/Ey
Doug, good day.
Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 10:55:04AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> Do either of you actually have any familiarity at all with how portaudit
> works, and/or how it is integrated into the ports infrastructure? Based
> on what you've written today my guess is "no."
I am sorry, but you're
On 12/27/2010 23:07, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
I had shown the simple shell script that will parse the UPDATING and
present the entries for the given port if the fall into the "last N
days" category. If you had missed it -- ping me, I'll show it to you
once again.
Did you even read my post? I sp
Eygene, Peter, jhell,
Do either of you actually have any familiarity at all with how portaudit
works, and/or how it is integrated into the ports infrastructure? Based
on what you've written today my guess is "no." When I wrote, "we need a
tool with striking similarities to
portaudit" without p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/27/2010 20:57, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 12/25/2010 03:16, David Demelier wrote:
> | Hi,
> |
> | A lot of people always forget to read UPDATING (that's normal we'll are
> | humans).
> |
> | Each entry in UPDATING is like "AFFECTS: users of net-mgmt
Peter, good day.
Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 10:27:55AM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> - I personally would prefer a human-readable file (and yes, I *can*
> read XML; that doesn't mean it's easy or I *want* to :)
> ...so how about a JSON representation? Human-readable, human-editable,
> but still
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 10:07:18AM +0300, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 05:57:53PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> > The Real AnswerTM is that we need a tool with striking similarities to
> > portaudit. The basic idea would be that UPDATING entries would be done
> > in xml, and then th
Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 05:57:53PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> The Real AnswerTM is that we need a tool with striking similarities to
> portaudit. The basic idea would be that UPDATING entries would be done
> in xml, and then the user can either run portupdating (or whatever the
> name ends up being,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/25/2010 03:16, David Demelier wrote:
| Hi,
|
| A lot of people always forget to read UPDATING (that's normal we'll are
| humans).
|
| Each entry in UPDATING is like "AFFECTS: users of net-mgmt/flowd" so if
| an update of net-mgmt/flowd is avai
Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 07:38:14PM -0600, Ade Lovett wrote:
> Just be prepared for infrastructural changes, for which working out a
> specific AFFECTS line would take longer than the patch itself, to
> simply say:
>
> AFFECTS: *
The point is taken, thanks! Updated script is attached. It
- adds ha
On Dec 25, 2010, at 10:25 , Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> And, for sure, it will be good to enforce the AFFECTS line
> to contain the full port origin (or shell glob of it).
Just be prepared for infrastructural changes, for which working out a specific
AFFECTS line would take longer than the patch i
David, good day.
Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 12:16:05PM +0100, David Demelier wrote:
> Each entry in UPDATING is like "AFFECTS: users of net-mgmt/flowd" so if
> an update of net-mgmt/flowd is available and a *recent* entry in
> UPDATING talks about then print the message.
>
> This can prevent a lot of
On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 12:16:05PM +0100, David Demelier wrote:
> A lot of people always forget to read UPDATING (that's normal we'll are
> humans).
>
> Each entry in UPDATING is like "AFFECTS: users of net-mgmt/flowd" so if
> an update of net-mgmt/flowd is available and a *recent* entry in
> U
On Sat, 2010-12-25 at 12:16 +0100, David Demelier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A lot of people always forget to read UPDATING (that's normal we'll are
> humans).
>
> Each entry in UPDATING is like "AFFECTS: users of net-mgmt/flowd" so if
> an update of net-mgmt/flowd is available and a *recent* entry in
>
Hi,
A lot of people always forget to read UPDATING (that's normal we'll are
humans).
Each entry in UPDATING is like "AFFECTS: users of net-mgmt/flowd" so if
an update of net-mgmt/flowd is available and a *recent* entry in
UPDATING talks about then print the message.
This can prevent a lot
23 matches
Mail list logo
