Re: FreeBSD-SA-11:07.chroot and ProFTPD 1.3.3g
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Xin Li wrote: On 01/04/12 10:10, Henk van Oers wrote: [make world again] But still it's not working :( Could you please do: grep __FreeBSD_libc_enter_restricted_mode /usr/lib/libc.so And see if the output would be: Binary file /usr/lib/libc.so matches [root@dee ~]# grep __FreeBSD_libc_enter_restricted_mode /usr/lib/libc.so Binary file /usr/lib/libc.so matches [root@dee ~]# ls -al /usr/lib/libc.so* lrwxrwxrwx 1 root wheel 14 Jan 4 05:22 /usr/lib/libc.so -> /lib/libc.so.7 [root@dee ~]# ls -al /lib/libc.so* -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 1068344 Jan 4 05:21 /lib/libc.so.7 This is in the jail where proftpd is used On the host: -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 1068344 Jan 4 05:14 /lib/libc.so.7 And: Jan 4 05:31:54 dee proftpd[22094]: 81.18.162.68 - ProFTPD 1.3.3g (maint) (built Wed Jan 4 2012 05:30:17 CET) standalone mode STARTUP proftpd is linked to this libc. Thank you for looking into this. -- Henk ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: linux-f10-nss_ldap: my first port - be gentle :)
On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 09:52:40 +1000
Da Rock wrote:
> On 01/04/12 23:27, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> > On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 22:31:51 +1000
> > Da Rock wrote:
> >
> >> I've been advised I should attempt to port this for general use to
> >> FreeBSD. I've been operating it manually very successfully now in a
> >> number of operations. This is, however, my first attempt at a port and I
> >> would like some guidance to see if I've done this right.
> >>
> >> I was advised to copy the essential parts from a similar port, so I've
> >> used archivers/linux-f10-ucl. This is my Makefile:
> >>
> >> # New ports collection makefile for:archivers/linux-f10-nss_ldap
> >> # Date created:2012-01-04
> >> # Whom:rskinner
> >> #
> >> # $FreeBSD$
> >> #
> >>
> >> PORTNAME=nss_ldap
> >> PORTVERSION=1.03
> >> CATEGORIES=security linux
> >> MASTER_SITES=
> >> CRITICAL/rpm/${LINUX_RPM_ARCH}/fedora/${LINUX_DIST_VER}
> >> PKGNAMEPREFIX=linux-f10-
> >> DISTNAME=${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}-${RPMVERSION}
> >>
> >> MAINTAINER=emulat...@freebsd.org
> >> COMMENT=nss_ldap library (Linux Fedora 10)
> >>
> >> CONFLICTS=
> >>
> >> USE_LINUX_RPM=yes
> >> LINUX_DIST_VER=10
> >> RPMVERSION=8.fc9
> >> USE_LDCONFIG=yes
> >>
> >> PLIST_FILES=usr/lib/libnss_ldap.so.2 usr/lib/libnss_ldap.so
> >> usr/lib/libnss_ldap-264.so
> >> DOCSDIR=${PREFIX}/usr/share/doc/${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}
> >> PORTDOCS=COPYING NEWS README THANKS TODO
> >> DESCR=${.CURDIR}/../${PORTNAME}/pkg-descr
> >>
> >> .include
> >>
> >> And I have a pkg-descr file.
> >>
> >> Am I on the right track? I'm following the porters handbook as well.
> >>
> > Doesn't pass portlint.
> >
> > Can't fetch the RPM file.
> >
> > Otherwise, a pretty good start.
> Ok, thats good so far then. Thanks for the assessment.
>
> Now, what's portlint?
>
/usr/ports/ports-mgmt/portlint. It does syntax checking on the Makefile
and checks things like correct checksums in distfile. You run it in the
port's directory.
> And I have a question or two about the rpm. Do I need to script
> something to just extract the files needed, or is it already in the mk
> files already somewhere?
>
I suspect that setting USE_LINUX_RPM= yes in Makefile should be all
you need, but I've never done a RPM port. Some seem to use only
LINUX_RPM_ARCH= i386, which is the only option at the moment since
we don't have a AMD64 Linux base port.
> And how do I work out the url for fetching the rpm? This particular one
> is a moving target as the distro is already eol. Is it stored on the
> FreeBSD servers? Or what do I do here?
>
That could be a problem. Maybe a committer could host it for you. I'm
hosting flwm-1.00.tgz, although I don't think it's used anymore.
> In the porters handbook it mentions checksums and "make makesum" - does
> that mean I have to put it in the ports tree to try it?
>
I just update Makefile, fetch the tarball and then run "make makesum"
before generating diffs or making a tarball of the port.
> And is pkg-message scripted or do I just create it?
>
See the comment in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk. There are lots of very
informative comments in that file.
--
Gary Jennejohn
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: linux-f10-nss_ldap: my first port - be gentle :)
On 5 Jan 2012 04:13, "Janketh Jay" wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi guys! > > On 01/04/2012 08:19 PM, Chad Perrin wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 12:20:45PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > >> On 01/05/12 12:11, Chad Perrin wrote: > >>> > >>> The best way to learn, I think, is to get yourself a mentor and jump in. > >>> That's how I'm doing it (and yeah, that means I'm not the right person to > >>> mentor you). > >> > >> Thats what I'm looking for, alright. I've been looking for a few > >> years now. Any suggestions? > > > > Ask on this list, I guess. > > > > Hey -- does anyone (qualified) want to mentor Da Rock as a port > > maintainer? > > > >As much as I hate to toss Chris Rees "under the bus" on this, he's > be EXTREMELY helpful to me when creating ports that have small hiccups > like this. He's very knowledgeable. While he might be a bit too busy to > be a "mentor", I'm sure he wouldn't have a problem pointing you in the > right direction(s) if you have questions about ports. He'll most likely > reply to this with what he thinks about it... I'll answer any questions to the list that I can ;) Chris ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: linux-f10-nss_ldap: my first port - be gentle :)
On 4 Jan 2012 23:58, "Da Rock" wrote: > > On 01/05/12 01:41, Chad Perrin wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 02:27:57PM +0100, Gary Jennejohn wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 22:31:51 +1000 Da Rock >>> wrote: I was advised to copy the essential parts from a similar port, so I've used archivers/linux-f10-ucl. This is my Makefile: >> >> [snip] >> >>> Doesn't pass portlint. >>> >>> Can't fetch the RPM file. >>> >>> Otherwise, a pretty good start. >> >> It also lacks license information. >> > How do I set that? Its linux so its GPL. > What??? Licensing is up to the individual projects, not the kernel! Can you double-check the choice? There'll be a COPYING file on the tarball or similar. Chris ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: linux-f10-nss_ldap: my first port - be gentle :)
--On January 5, 2012 12:22:45 PM +1000 Da Rock wrote: Ok. I've been working through the handbook step by step, and I'm stuck at checksums so I probably haven't yet reached that part yet. I'll check it out now To get the checksums, type make fetch to download the packages and then make makesum to get the checksums. This is a critical step for a port. You need to make sure the checksum matches what the site says it should be, because everyone who builds that port will be expecting that to be correct. They're counting on that checksum to ensure that they don't download a compromised copy of the software. -- Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer. *** "It is as useless to argue with those who have renounced the use of reason as to administer medication to the dead." Thomas Jefferson "There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them." George Orwell ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
FreeBSD Port: f2c-20060810_3 - Missing Extract depend unzip
Hello,
In FreeBSD 9.0, "unzip" was added to the base install. As a result, the
PORT fails to extract properly, because it is trying to use
/usr/local/bin/unzip, instead of the built in /usr/bin/unzip.
The reason is the "EXTRACT_DEPENDS=unzip:${PORTSDIR}/archivers/unzip"
line in the Makefile, because "unzip" is found, so archivers/unzip port
is not installed, and the ${UNZIP_CMD} attempts to run /usr/local/bin/unzip.
I'd recommend either setting EXTRACT_DEPENDS=/usr/local/bin/unzip, or
using the USE_ZIP variable, which does that automatically. This will
force the install of the additional archivers/unzip port.
Alternatively, checking for /usr/bin/unzip and using that instead of
${UNZIP_CMD} will allow that use without installing another port.
Thanks,
-Jason
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
status report on ports and clang
As of early December, I have been able to get FreeBSD's secondary ports cluster (pointyhat-west.isc.FreeBSD.org) to the point where it is able to more quickly build the entire ports tree with clang as the default compiler. You can see the current state here: http://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsAndClang It includes a link to the most recent run on amd64-9: http://pointyhat-west.isc.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-errorlogs/e.9-exp-clang.20111218074840.pointyhat-west/index-reason.html You can see that on that run, 18256 packages were built (out of 22938 in INDEX), and there were 1208 errors. For comparison, a recent similar (but not exact) amd64-9 run on the original pointyhat resulted in 21154 packages and 15 errors. Under the heading #Known_port_problems, I haved listed the broken ports that have the largest number of ports depending on them. IMHO fixing these should be the highest priority, as they will unblock around 1000 other ports when they are fixed. Now that we have these results, and will be updating them regularly, it's less necessary to send PRs noting that port XYZ doesn't build on clang. However, PRs with patches are always welcomed :-) Thanks. mcl ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD Port: f2c-20060810_3 - Missing Extract depend unzip
Hi Jason
Ok, hopefully I'll fix it in this weekend.
or - if clean patch is available and you're a committer, please commit.
thanks
Nakata Maho
From: Jason Hall
Subject: FreeBSD Port: f2c-20060810_3 - Missing Extract depend unzip
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 18:56:04 -0500
> Hello,
>
> In FreeBSD 9.0, "unzip" was added to the base install. As a result,
> the PORT fails to extract properly, because it is trying to use
> /usr/local/bin/unzip, instead of the built in /usr/bin/unzip.
>
> The reason is the "EXTRACT_DEPENDS=unzip:${PORTSDIR}/archivers/unzip"
> line in the Makefile, because "unzip" is found, so archivers/unzip
> port is not installed, and the ${UNZIP_CMD} attempts to run
> /usr/local/bin/unzip.
>
> I'd recommend either setting EXTRACT_DEPENDS=/usr/local/bin/unzip, or
> using the USE_ZIP variable, which does that automatically. This will
> force the install of the additional archivers/unzip port.
>
> Alternatively, checking for /usr/bin/unzip and using that instead of
> ${UNZIP_CMD} will allow that use without installing another port.
>
> Thanks,
> -Jason
>
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Feasibility of splitting out web components of lang/php5
I do package build systems that support a variety of types of end systems. (Nearly) all of them use php in some form or another, but a substantial portion of them don't have web servers, and therefore don't need the cgi, apache module, or the apache dependency that comes with them. What would make my life a whole lot simpler is if lang/php5 were the command line version, and the cgi and apache modules were separate ports. Is this feasible? Doug -- You can observe a lot just by watching. -- Yogi Berra Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/ ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Feasibility of splitting out web components of lang/php5
On Thu, 05 Jan 2012, 20:20 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > What would make my life a whole lot simpler is if lang/php5 were the > command line version, and the cgi and apache modules were separate > ports. Is this feasible? Don't the port's knobs work for you? If I set the CGI knob off, I get what I think you want. OPTIONS=CLI "Build CLI version" on \ CGI "Build CGI version" on \ FPM "Build FPM version (experimental)" off \ APACHE "Build Apache module" off \ AP2FILTER " Use Apache 2.x filter interface (experimental)" off \ DEBUG "Enable debug" off \ SUHOSIN "Enable Suhosin protection system" on \ MULTIBYTE "Enable zend multibyte support" off \ IPV6 "Enable ipv6 support" on \ MAILHEAD "Enable mail header patch" off \ LINKTHR "Link thread lib (for threaded extensions)" off -- John Marshall pgp0fJW2HTzZO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Feasibility of splitting out web components of lang/php5
On 01/05/2012 21:45, John Marshall wrote: > On Thu, 05 Jan 2012, 20:20 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: >> What would make my life a whole lot simpler is if lang/php5 were the >> command line version, and the cgi and apache modules were separate >> ports. Is this feasible? > > Don't the port's knobs work for you? Um, I understand how options work, but thank you for your response. If I wasn't clear about what I'm looking for I apologize for the confusion. I want to have the command line (only) version of php, AND the web stuff, on the same package building system. That way I can support all my end systems with the same sets of packages. Doug -- You can observe a lot just by watching. -- Yogi Berra Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/ ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Feasibility of splitting out web components of lang/php5
On Fri, 6 Jan 2012 16:45:53 +1100 John Marshall wrote: > On Thu, 05 Jan 2012, 20:20 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > > What would make my life a whole lot simpler is if lang/php5 were the > > command line version, and the cgi and apache modules were separate > > ports. Is this feasible? > > Don't the port's knobs work for you? If I set the CGI knob off, I get > what I think you want. > They are works for all (I think). But Doug ask about _separate_ ports 2 Doug: IIRC long time ago was www/mod_php[45], but It was removed by ade@. It might be worth restore them? (personally I'm interested in php_fpm slave port) > OPTIONS= CLI "Build CLI version" on \ > CGI "Build CGI version" on \ > FPM "Build FPM version (experimental)" off \ > APACHE "Build Apache module" off \ > AP2FILTER " Use Apache 2.x filter interface > (experimental)" off \ DEBUG "Enable debug" off \ > SUHOSIN "Enable Suhosin protection system" on \ > MULTIBYTE "Enable zend multibyte support" off \ > IPV6 "Enable ipv6 support" on \ > MAILHEAD "Enable mail header patch" off \ > LINKTHR "Link thread lib (for threaded extensions)" > off > -- wbr, tiger ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
