When I install some ports via portmaster (sysutils/cbsd as sample), I
have many errors during check packages:
# pkg che -B
Checking all packages: 3%
pkg: fstat() failed for(/usr/local/cbsd/bin/cbsdsh/.depend): No such
file or directory
pkg: fstat() failed for(/usr/local/cbsd/bin/cbsdsh
Guido Falsi wrote on 2020/12/29 08:49:
> This is intentional behaviour, hand there are good reasons for this.
>
> Anyway poudriere has the CHECK_CHANGED_DEPS option which can be disabled and
> should restrict this behavior. I have never tested it though, I don't think
> the risk of getting and i
On 29/12/20 00:07, Tatsuki Makino wrote:
Where should I hang out to reply? :)
poudriere has weaknesses in updating packages such as libxml and glib.
When run all at once, all packages that depend on the package being updated and
all packages that depend on the package being removed will be remo
To add to the extremes, it is enough to be able to topologically sort in some
way.
#!/bin/tcsh
foreach origin (`pkg version -vPL= | cut -f 1 -w | xargs pkg
some-topological-sort-command-can-someone-make-this -o`)
make -C /usr/ports/${origin:q} clean
make -C /usr/ports/${origin:q} build deinstall
Where should I hang out to reply? :)
poudriere has weaknesses in updating packages such as libxml and glib.
When run all at once, all packages that depend on the package being updated and
all packages that depend on the package being removed will be removed.
The text is not clear :), but qt5-webk
Am 28.12.20 um 22:07 schrieb Michael Grimm:>> On 28. Dec 2020, at 21:41,
Stefan Esser wrote:
Poudriere works best on sufficiently powerful build servers and it
often requires rebuilding dependencies over hours when I just want to
test a new port before committing it.
Excuse me, but that is no
Hi
> On 28. Dec 2020, at 21:41, Stefan Esser wrote:
>
> Poudriere works best on sufficiently powerful build servers and it
> often requires rebuilding dependencies over hours when I just want to
> test a new port before committing it.
Excuse me, but that is not true in this generality. I do run
use
tmpfs or ccache either. I migrated from portmaster when it was
abandoned several years ago and don't think I'll come back,
especially if new portmaster will be written on bash. The idea behind
portmaster was zero dependencies, so it doesn't brake after major
upgrades.
You are
On 12/27/20 4:00 AM, LuMiWa via freebsd-ports wrote:
> The subject is 'portmaster new development' but again start pushing
> poudriere to FreeBSD users. I do not use zfs file system and I do not
> use poudriere and I do not want to use on my computer for building some
> p
On 2020-12-28 05:16, Stefan Esser wrote:
Am 28.12.20 um 11:11 schrieb abi via freebsd-ports:> I build my ports in
poudriere
in VM without zfs or ssd on pre-Sandy
Bridge CPU. I don't have enough memory or disk space, so I don't use tmpfs
or ccache either. I migrated from portmaste
>> Bridge CPU. I don't have enough memory or disk space, so I don't use
> >> tmpfs or ccache either. I migrated from portmaster when it was
> >> abandoned several years ago and don't think I'll come back,
> >> especially if new portmaster will be writt
On 28.12.2020 16:16, Stefan Esser wrote:
Am 28.12.20 um 11:11 schrieb abi via freebsd-ports:> I build my ports
in poudriere in VM without zfs or ssd on pre-Sandy
Bridge CPU. I don't have enough memory or disk space, so I don't use
tmpfs or ccache either. I migrated from portmaste
Am 28.12.20 um 11:11 schrieb abi via freebsd-ports:> I build my ports in
poudriere in VM without zfs or ssd on pre-Sandy
Bridge CPU. I don't have enough memory or disk space, so I don't use
tmpfs or ccache either. I migrated from portmaster when it was abandoned
several years
On 28.12.2020 12:44, David Gessel wrote:
Original Message
Subject: Re: portmaster new development
From: LuMiWa via freebsd-ports
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Date: 2020-12-27 02:00+0300
On Sun, 27 Dec 2020 11:16:23 +0100
Michael Grimm wrote:
Matthias Apitz wrote:
El
Original Message
Subject: Re: portmaster new development
From: LuMiWa via freebsd-ports
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Date: 2020-12-27 02:00+0300
On Sun, 27 Dec 2020 11:16:23 +0100
Michael Grimm wrote:
Matthias Apitz wrote:
El día domingo, diciembre 27, 2020 a las 09
On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 07:23:59PM -0800, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> ... An improved portmaster arouses my interest. Maybe modify the name so it
> can be added to the ports tree and coexist with the "official" portmaster.
> Desired features/options would be to keep going rather
Am 27.12.20 um 06:04 schrieb Thomas Mueller:
And as portsnap user I have a question: Do they planning deprecation of
portmaster too?
No, I'm actively working on portmaster and have rewritten it from
scratch for better performance (and additional features, e.g. building
in a clean c
of the poudriere jail (I have some of
> > them) and the ports options stay there, as well the make.conf
> > options in /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/freebsd-head-make.conf
>
>
> I am following stable, and my jail's name has been set to stable.
>
> All of poudriere
Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día domingo, diciembre 27, 2020 a las 09:22:42a. m. +0100, Kurt Jaeger
> escribió:
>> That works as well. I have a checkout of the ports tree, use
>> make config to define non-default port options. This stores the
>> selected OPTIONs in /var/db/ports/, and poudriere us
El día domingo, diciembre 27, 2020 a las 09:22:42a. m. +0100, Kurt Jaeger
escribió:
> Hi!
>
> > How is poudriere in that regard? I never used poudriere, have been
> > intimidated by not wanting to use zfs or dialog4ports, or such an elaborate
> > setup just to update one or a few ports.
>
>
On 27 Dec, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> How is poudriere in that regard? I never used poudriere, have been
>> intimidated by not wanting to use zfs or dialog4ports, or such an
>> elaborate setup just to update one or a few ports.
>
> poudriere is really, really useful. Because it delivers a com
Hi!
> How is poudriere in that regard? I never used poudriere, have been
> intimidated by not wanting to use zfs or dialog4ports, or such an elaborate
> setup just to update one or a few ports.
poudriere is really, really useful. Because it delivers a complete,
consistent package repo of all t
> > And as portsnap user I have a question: Do they planning deprecation of
> > portmaster too?
> No, I'm actively working on portmaster and have rewritten it from
> scratch for better performance (and additional features, e.g. building
> in a clean chroot jail, sim
01.08.2020 3:24, @lbutlr wrote:
> When postmaster displays the package messages after installing, it calls
> less, which forces you to hit 'q' to exit, and when you quit less, it clear
> the buffer on the screen and returns you to the display of the compile
> process.
>
> Is there anyway to ch
Additional.
PAGER=cat
Even more compact than more. But the options are different.
PAGER=true
It doesn't show anything completely.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, se
PAGER=more portmaster...
I do this with mergemaster. Somehow someone decided that the behavior of less
is the best and made it the default a while ago.
Probably this https://reviews.freebsd.org/D13465
Something about "the nineties", but no further rationale.
Regards,
Ronald.
Van
On 31 Jul 2020, at 14:24, @lbutlr wrote:
> Is there anyway to change this behavior so that less is called with -E /
> --QUIT-AT_EOF?
Never mind, I dididn’t think of it as a user-level issue.
export MANPAGER='less -s -X -F'
export PAGER='less -s -X -F'
--
Against stupidity the gods themselv
When postmaster displays the package messages after installing, it calls less,
which forces you to hit 'q' to exit, and when you quit less, it clear the
buffer on the screen and returns you to the display of the compile process.
Is there anyway to change this behavior so that less is called with
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 02:50:04PM +0100, Jan Beich wrote:
> "Thomas Mueller" writes:
>
> >> This is why we practically beg people to use poudriere. There seems to
> >> be a pervasive misconception that poudriere is "advanced" and
> >> po
> Unequally, actually. portmaster still has some developers putting in
> the hard work to keep it running. portupgrade hasn't had much focused
> development in many years and should probably be removed from the
> tree. There are some problems with building on a live system
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 7:56 PM Thomas Mueller wrote:
>
>
> > This is why we practically beg people to use poudriere. There seems to
> > be a pervasive misconception that poudriere is "advanced" and
> > portmaster is simple or straightforward. That notion is co
"Thomas Mueller" writes:
>> This is why we practically beg people to use poudriere. There seems to
>> be a pervasive misconception that poudriere is "advanced" and
>> portmaster is simple or straightforward. That notion is completely and
>> totally
.6
gcc9-9.2.0
py37-setuptools-41.4.0_1
And how long is python 27 deprecated?
I am portmaster user too because I have a single FreeBSD machine and I
do not want to destroying hard drive with poudriere.
--
“good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while
bad p
On 01/01/2020 22:03, George Mitchell wrote:
> Assuming you can get poudriere to work. Even by today's standards,
> a low-cost PC is not going to have the juice to support it. And to
> reiterate, the ports framework itself MUST work standalone.
Rubbish. I maintain my own poudriere repo on a mach
On 01 Jan 2020, at 16:57, Adam Weinberger wrote:
> Ok, let’s stop there. Nobody is going to get fired, and insulting
What?
No, seriously, what?
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To uns
On 2/01/2020 7:37 am, @lbutlr wrote:
Portmaser -L errors out with
make: "/usr/ports/Mk/Uses/ssl.mk" line 97: You are using an unsupported SSL
provider openssl
Make.conf:
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=ssl=openssl apache=2.4 php=7.2 perl5=5.28 mysql=10.1m
Worked fine on Saturday, maybe Friday.
Tracked
> This is why we practically beg people to use poudriere. There seems to
> be a pervasive misconception that poudriere is "advanced" and
> portmaster is simple or straightforward. That notion is completely and
> totally backwards. Poudriere makes managing ports as simple
> On Jan 1, 2020, at 15:49, @lbutlr wrote:
>
You are right that there wasn't a warning, and that was a major
mistake that should not have happened. security/openssl and
security/openssl111 should have contained messages about this switch.
>>>
>>> Since openssl updated about a week
, inputting a dependency that breaks other
>> packages, or my favorite, failing to update dependencies.
>
> If we'd remove portmaster, we'd loose a relevant part of our
> user-base, that's why is has not been removed. This caused
> other issues, as you are wel
or my favorite, failing to update dependencies.
If we'd remove portmaster, we'd loose a relevant part of our
user-base, that's why is has not been removed. This caused
other issues, as you are well aware.
But there's no easy solution given the amount of volunteer skill
on is apparent. I really do think that your FreeBSD life will
> be simpler if you switch from portmaster to poudriere.
It is not that simple, of course. This will take quite a lot of work, and a lot
of time, for something that I deal with a handful of times a year. This means
that for the f
## George Mitchell (george+free...@m5p.com):
> Assuming you can get poudriere to work. Even by today's standards,
> a low-cost PC is not going to have the juice to support it. And to
> reiterate, the ports framework itself MUST work standalone.
The pain you'll experience (eventually) from the b
## @lbutlr (krem...@kreme.com):
> I have /usr/ports/security/openssl111 and no /usr/ports/security/openssl
> which doesn’t sound like what you said.
You're missing
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision&sortby=date&revision=521745
By the way, base openssl is at 1.1.1d in FreeBSD 12.1.
On 2020-01-01 16:23, Franco Fichtner wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
>> On 1. Jan 2020, at 10:18 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>> [...]
>> This is why we practically beg people to use poudriere.
>
> Let me stop you right here and say: ports Framework itself is
> suffering from this wishful attitude
PLUS UMPTE
On Jan 1, 2020, at 14:23, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>
> Hi Adam,
>
>> On 1. Jan 2020, at 10:18 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 1:51 PM @lbutlr wrote:
>>>
>>> On 01 Jan 2020, at 13:46, Franco Fichtner wrote:
> On 1. Jan 2020, at 9:42 PM, @lbutlr
Hi Adam,
> On 1. Jan 2020, at 10:18 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 1:51 PM @lbutlr wrote:
>>
>> On 01 Jan 2020, at 13:46, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
On 1. Jan 2020, at 9:42 PM, @lbutlr wrote:
On 01 Jan 2020, at 13:40, Franco Fichtner wrote:
s
> pretty hostile.
>
> Name : openssl
> Version: 1.0.2u,1
> Installed on : Sun Dec 22 08:13:27 2019 MST
>
> There was nothing at all on the 22nd about “WARNING THIS WILL BREAK
> EVERYTHING IN A WEEK” which to mean seems like it should have been made su
On 01 Jan 2020, at 13:46, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 1. Jan 2020, at 9:42 PM, @lbutlr wrote:
>>
>> On 01 Jan 2020, at 13:40, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>>> security/openssl was removed before, now security/openssl111 has become
>>> security/openssl.
>>
>> Ugh.
>>
>>> A bit too eager f
> On 1. Jan 2020, at 9:42 PM, @lbutlr wrote:
>
> On 01 Jan 2020, at 13:40, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>> security/openssl was removed before, now security/openssl111 has become
>> security/openssl.
>
> Ugh.
>
>> A bit too eager for my taste, but that's why we all have private trees,
>> don't
On 01 Jan 2020, at 13:40, Franco Fichtner wrote:
> security/openssl111 has become security/openssl.
I have /usr/ports/security/openssl111 and no /usr/ports/security/openssl which
doesn’t sound like what you said.
--
'Pcharn'kov!' Footnote: 'Your feet shall be cut off and be buried
se
On 01 Jan 2020, at 13:40, Franco Fichtner wrote:
> security/openssl was removed before, now security/openssl111 has become
> security/openssl.
Ugh.
> A bit too eager for my taste, but that's why we all have private trees, don't
> we. ;)
This is going to go poorly, if previous attempts to upd
security/openssl was removed before, now security/openssl111 has become
security/openssl.
A bit too eager for my taste, but that's why we all have private trees, don't
we. ;)
Cheers,
Franco
> On 1. Jan 2020, at 9:37 PM, @lbutlr wrote:
>
> Portmaser -L errors out with
>
> make: "/usr/ports
Portmaser -L errors out with
make: "/usr/ports/Mk/Uses/ssl.mk" line 97: You are using an unsupported SSL
provider openssl
Make.conf:
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=ssl=openssl apache=2.4 php=7.2 perl5=5.28 mysql=10.1m
Worked fine on Saturday, maybe Friday.
--
i wasn't born a programmer. i became one bec
The setup of the clean environment for the package builds is easy to extract
and I have considered adding that feature to portmaster, to support building
of ports that currently fail if a previous version is installed (generally
caused by include paths that prefer installed headers over those in
On Wed, 19 Sep 2018, the wise RW via freebsd-ports wrote:
I presume that's because you use a restricted set of packages. Without
flavor support portupgrade can't always get the port directory from the
origin.
The are currently 782 ports installed on this system. Didn't have much
difficulties
On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 14:14:42 +0200 (CEST)
Marco Beishuizen wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Sep 2018, the wise Thomas Mueller wrote:
>
> > This discussion of portmaster prompts me to ask, what is the status
> > of portupgrade?
> >
> > I used portupgrade at first but subsequen
Hi!
> Why is Ada only available on i386/amd64?
Because nobody provided fixes for the build on other platforms up to now.
--
p...@freebsd.org +49 171 3101372 2 years to go !
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.
On Wed, 19 Sep 2018, the wise Thomas Mueller wrote:
This discussion of portmaster prompts me to ask, what is the status of
portupgrade?
I used portupgrade at first but subsequently switched to portmaster.
I still use portupgrade daily and it works fine. Afaik the maintainer is
adding
Excerpt from STefan Esser:
> I have been using a portmaster-rewrite for many months, which is ready
> for release except for some performance tuning. (The portmaster in ports
> is not un-maintainable, but it's hard to modify a monolithic 4000 line
> shell script that uses gl
Am 18.09.18 um 14:05 schrieb Matthias Fechner:
> Dear Stefan,
>
> Am 17.09.2018 um 14:31 schrieb Stefan Esser:
>> But the behavior of portmaster will not be changed.
>> RUN_DEPENDS are dependencies required to run a port, not dependencies
>> required to install a port.
Dear Stefan,
Am 17.09.2018 um 14:31 schrieb Stefan Esser:
> But the behavior of portmaster will not be changed.
> RUN_DEPENDS are dependencies required to run a port, not dependencies
> required to install a port.
>
>
> And I do not care whether bsd.port.mk treats RUN_DEPENDS
; Stop.
> make[1]: stopped in /usr/ports/sysutils/rsyslog8
> *** Error code 1
>
> I’ve disabled the MySQL output for now, but this disconnect between MySQL and
> Maria seems to be happening with a lot of ports.
>
> Is there anything I can do to restore the MySQL output fo
Hi,
* @lbutlr [180917 22:51]:
> I am using MariaDB 10.0 on FreeBSD 11.3
> When trying to update rsyslogd via postmaster I get:
> checking for mysql_config... mysql_config
> checking for mysql_init in -lmysqlclient... no
> configure: error: in `/usr/ports/sysutils/rsyslog8/work/rsyslog-8.37.0':
I am using MariaDB 10.0 on FreeBSD 11.3
When trying to update rsyslogd via postmaster I get:
checking for mysql_config... mysql_config
checking for mysql_init in -lmysqlclient... no
configure: error: in `/usr/ports/sysutils/rsyslog8/work/rsyslog-8.37.0':
configure: error: MySQL library is missing
Am 17.09.18 um 07:47 schrieb Matthias Fechner:
> Am 10.09.18 um 12:16 schrieb Mathieu Arnold:
>> Reading Mk/bsd.port.mk at line 5274, run-depends are installed before
>> do-install runs.
>
> thanks, I see it the same way and created a PR for it, to get this fixed
> in
Am 10.09.18 um 12:16 schrieb Mathieu Arnold:
> Reading Mk/bsd.port.mk at line 5274, run-depends are installed before
> do-install runs.
thanks, I see it the same way and created a PR for it, to get this fixed
in portmaster.
Gruß,
Matthias
--
"Programming today is a race betwe
Am 12.09.18 um 07:58 schrieb Matthias Fechner:
> Dear Stefan, Dear Mathieu,
>
> Am 10.09.18 um 14:10 schrieb Stefan Esser:
>> This is a design decision in portmaster that has existed for at least
>> a decade.
>>
>> Use INSTALL_DEPENDS if you depend on a port being
Dear Stefan, Dear Mathieu,
Am 10.09.18 um 14:10 schrieb Stefan Esser:
> This is a design decision in portmaster that has existed for at least
> a decade.
>
> Use INSTALL_DEPENDS if you depend on a port being available and upgraded
> before your port's do-install is invoke
ll:
> (cd ${WRKSRC} && ${RM} Gemfile.lock && bundle install --local)
> ${FIND} ${WRKSRC} -name '*.orig' -delete
> ...
>
> that all gems available in the system do match the version required by
> the Gemfile.
> Poudriere works fine w
gems available in the system do match the version required by
> the Gemfile.
> Poudriere works fine with this, but portmaster fails.
> Regarding the documentation RUN_DEPENDS packages should be installed
> before the install is happening.
> Is this install related to the do-install tar
undle install --local)
${FIND} ${WRKSRC} -name '*.orig' -delete
...
that all gems available in the system do match the version required by
the Gemfile.
Poudriere works fine with this, but portmaster fails.
Regarding the documentation RUN_DEPENDS packages should be installed
before the instal
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 08:30:38PM +0200, Stefan Esser wrote:
> Sorry, this was my fault and I hope it is fixed with the follow-up commit
> to portmaster version 3.19-10.
Thanks! Works for me now.
--
meta
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailin
On Fri, 18 May 2018 22:46:15 +0200
Stefan Esser wrote:
> I'm working on a completely new re-implementation of portmaster and
> the new version will get these points right. Fixing the current port
> version is too hard and wasted effort, since only the features and
> command
Am 18.05.18 um 22:17 schrieb Rozhuk Ivan:
> On Fri, 18 May 2018 20:30:38 +0200
> Stefan Esser wrote:
>
>> Sorry, this was my fault and I hope it is fixed with the follow-up
>> commit to portmaster version 3.19-10.
>>
>
> Sorry for offtopic, but if portmaster
On Fri, 18 May 2018 20:30:38 +0200
Stefan Esser wrote:
> Sorry, this was my fault and I hope it is fixed with the follow-up
> commit to portmaster version 3.19-10.
>
Sorry for offtopic, but if portmaster install some build dep or run dep
if does not mark it as autoinstalled, and:
pkg
Thanks, fixes problem for me.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Am 18.05.18 um 17:13 schrieb Koichiro Iwao:
> Hi,
>
> I'm building devel/qt5-make by portmaster. Somehow portmaster incorrectly
> detects gcc6 and uses g++ despite it is actually installed as g++6. If I >
> build it without portmaster, clang++ is used and build finish
I got another error with portmaster and qt5-qmake:
qt5-qmake
/usr/local/lib/compat/libstdc++.so.6: version CXXABI_1.3.8 required by
/ram/usr/ports/devel/qt5-qmake/work/qtbase-everywhere-src-5.10.1/bin/qmake
not found
but works in the port
Hi,
I'm building devel/qt5-make by portmaster. Somehow portmaster
incorrectly detects gcc6 and
uses g++ despite it is actually installed as g++6. If I build it without
portmaster, clang++
is used and build finishes successfully.
$ pkg info | grep gcc
gcc-ecj-4.5Ec
missing because texinfo was built but not installed.
> > But I was able to recover with pkg install after checking my repository.
> > With portmaster, I need to specify ports by category/portname rather than
> > just portname, for example
> > portmaster www/seamonkey
&
Am 30.04.18 um 12:33 schrieb Thomas Mueller:
> Current portmaster, even before FLAVORS, was clumsy upgrading a large number
> of ports, especially when there is an upgrade of perl or png.
The author of portmaster decided to abort the upgrade of all remaining ports,
if any dependency fail
iku
> when make info was missing because texinfo was built but not installed.
>
> But I was able to recover with pkg install after checking my repository.
>
> With portmaster, I need to specify ports by category/portname rather than
> just portname, for example
> portmaster ww
On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 10:33:48 +, Thomas Mueller stated:
>from STefan Esser:
>
>> I used to be a portupgrade user, long ago (years before the introduction
>> of the new package tools), but then mobed over to using portmaster.
>
>> When the package system (PKG-NG)
from STefan Esser:
> I used to be a portupgrade user, long ago (years before the introduction
> of the new package tools), but then mobed over to using portmaster.
> When the package system (PKG-NG) war completely reworked, I heard that
> portupgrade was better adapted to the new to
Am 30.04.18 um 05:45 schrieb Kevin Oberman:
> portmaster(8) operates very similarly to portupgrade(8). There are some
> differences that can bite you, though, so read the man page first.
I used to be a portupgrade user, long ago (years before the introduction
of the new package tools), bu
Am 10.01.18 um 17:29 schrieb Lev Serebryakov:
>
> I have system with pre-FLAVORed ports installed, and try to update
> ports with new version of "portmaster". My "/etc/make.conf" contains:
>
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python2=2.7
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS
On 10.01.2018 23:59, Stefan Esser wrote:
> $ PYTHON3_DEFAULT=3.4 make pretty-flavors-package-names
> py27: py27-py-1.5.2
> py34: py34-py-1.5.2
>
> I'll try to get this feature implemented in portmaster, but it may
> take a few days ...
But ports system complains about
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 21:59:17 +0100 Stefan Esser wrote:
> Am 10.01.18 um 21:30 schrieb Stefan Esser:
>> Am 10.01.18 um 17:29 schrieb Lev Serebryakov:
>>> I have system with pre-FLAVORed ports installed, and try to update
>>> ports with new version of "portmaste
quot; to
denote a list of all supported flavors and e.g. PKG_FLAVORS for those that
are selected for the package builders, but FLAVORS for the selected set and
ALL_FLAVORS for the complete set will do as well ...)
I'm not going to work-around such deficiencies in the design of FLAVORs in
portm
chrieb Stefan Esser:
>> Am 10.01.18 um 17:29 schrieb Lev Serebryakov:
>>> I have system with pre-FLAVORed ports installed, and try to update
>>> ports with new version of "portmaster". My "/etc/make.conf"
>contains:
>>>
>>&g
Am 10.01.18 um 21:30 schrieb Stefan Esser:
> Am 10.01.18 um 17:29 schrieb Lev Serebryakov:
>> I have system with pre-FLAVORed ports installed, and try to update
>> ports with new version of "portmaster". My "/etc/make.conf" contains:
>>
>> DEFAULT_
Am 10.01.18 um 17:29 schrieb Lev Serebryakov:
> I have system with pre-FLAVORed ports installed, and try to update
> ports with new version of "portmaster". My "/etc/make.conf" contains:
>
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python2=2.7
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=
I have system with pre-FLAVORed ports installed, and try to update
ports with new version of "portmaster". My "/etc/make.conf" contains:
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python2=2.7
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python3=3.4
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python=3.4
But "portmaster -a&q
Stefan Esser is very quick =>
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision&revision=458299
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...
Only info, I have already mailed the maintainer:
Portmaster should have 3.18_8. Makefile shows 3.18_7.
portmaster --version 3.18_6.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=224407
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
you've got installed on your host. I have to say that
> > the only lines that have been flagged for me are due to the port
> > binary altering files configuration files, which should have been
> > located in /var instead of /usr/local.
> >
> > Cheers.
> > --
files, which should have been
> located in /var instead of /usr/local.
>
> Cheers.
> --
> Jonathan Chen
I have a file called ports.txt, which I used for portmaster. It
contains the master list of ports for this machine, and has the
following lines in it:
benchmarks/iperf
ftp
On 19 December 2017 at 08:52, Kurt Buff wrote:
> I'm seeing a lot of this in the daily security email after switching:
>
> Checking for packages with mismatched checksums:
> db5-5.3.28_6:
> /usr/local/share/doc/db5/api_reference/C/BDB-C_APIReference.pdf
>
> On one of my machines, it goes
I don't think this is related to portmaster or synth. The mismatched checksums
list is produced by /usr/local/etc/periodic/security/460.pkg-checksum, and it
seems (for me) to have started after a ports update in mid-November.
The parameter to suppress the outp
1 - 100 of 1736 matches
Mail list logo
