On 2022/03/14 07:46, Mike Fischer wrote: > > > Am 13.03.2022 um 10:23 schrieb Stefan Hagen <[email protected]>: > > > > Mike Fischer wrote (2022-03-13 01:17 CET): > >> Hi ports@, > >> > >> The current version 2.4.0p0 of wp-cli seems pretty old, given that > >> 2.6.0 was released in January. > >> https://make.wordpress.org/cli/2022/01/26/wp-cli-v2-6-0-release-notes/ > >> > >> Version 2.6.0 includes security fixes from version 2.5.0: > >> https://make.wordpress.org/cli/2021/05/19/wp-cli-v2-5-0-release-notes/ > >> > >> The current version 2.4.0p0 also produces a ton of PHP warnings and > >> notices. (For PHP 7.4.28 and WP 5.9.2 on OpenBSD 7.0 stable amd64.) > >> > >> I have manually installed the 2.6.0 version and it fixes the PHP > >> warnings and notices in the otherwise same setup. According to the > >> release notes it also supports PHP 8.1 but I haven’t tried that. > >> > >> Is an update to the port planned? If not can I help? > > > > This is a simple port and I updated it directly with the diff below. > > Thanks! > > > > If you want to learn about creating/updating ports, there's the porter > > handbook: https://www.openbsd.org/faq/ports > > Ok, https://www.openbsd.org/faq/ports/ports.html seems to answer a lot of my > questions. Thanks. > > The VM I am currently using for testing only has a 2.3 GB /usr partition > (default layout for a 20 GB disk). /usr/ports will fit but adding /usr/sys > and /usr/src will not fit. Are /usr/src and /usr/sys needed for ports work? > How big should /usr be at a minimum?
Recommend using a separate filesystem for /usr/ports. On an existing machine if you don't want to juggle partitions you could use e.g. /home/ports with PORTSDIR=/home/ports in /etc/mk.conf - you probably want to point the build dir away from the default in that case, maybe WRKOBJDIR=/usr/obj/ports - when the kernel crashes during a build you will be happier not to have too many disk writes in flight on your /home filesystem :) > Is working via SSH on a remote machine going to cause any problems? (Other > than -current possibly having issues from time to time.) For testing ports using X you might have issues with X connections forwarded over the network. But otherwise no. > If I understand things correctly in theory working on stable is an option > (for simple updates such as wp-cli or new ports) until changes need to be > submitted. Then -current is mandatory? At this time I have never used > -current so I am sightly leery about stability. Updates for commit need to be against -current. Sometimes they are also backported to -stable but not without an equivalent in -current first. -current is not intended to be unstable - it's not a separate branch where things are tested and then maybe ported to a "stable" branch, it's the only actively developed branch and is expected to work. Naturally it's less tested than releases but isn't usually a problem. You will quite often need to update packages after updating base if you're running -current (especially if you want to install a new package). And reading/skimming the source-changes mailing list is advisable - it will give you a feel for times when you might want to hold off updating for a few days (often not a bad idea during some hackathons, for example, at least on machines which you need to be working at the time).
