About ganglia-monitor-core and ganglia-webfrontend in FreeBSD ports tree
Dear Sir, I found the following ports in FreeBSD are maintained by you： 1. /usr/ports/sysutils/ganglia-monitor-core 2. /usr/ports/sysutils/ganglia-webfrontend In Feb. 08, 2012, the Ganglia Project has released v3.3.1 and v3.3.2 will coming soon. Could you please update the ganglia-monitor-core and ganglia-webfrontend in FreeBSD port tree to version 3.3.1 or 3.3.2 ? Best Regards! James Chang ___ 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"
CFT: mplayer and mencoder updates
Hi list, on http://bsdistfiles.googlecode.com/files/m20120323.tar.bz2 you can find the draft of updates to the mplayer and mencoder ports. Please have a look, play with it and let me know what you think. I tested it on 8-STABLE i386 and amd64 only so far, so I hope it works for 9 and 10 as well. The plan is for this to hit the ports tree soon after 8.3 is released. As always, comments, suggestions and especially patches are more than welcome. Best regards Riggs ___ 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"
why :: in ports makefile ?
I have never seen this before, and I wanted to know what it does.
diff -ruN /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.org/Makefile
/tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile
--- /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.org/Makefile 2012-02-08 00:17:28.0
+0900
+++ /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile 2012-03-06 08:55:28.445163638 +0900
@@ -219,7 +219,7 @@
.endif
@${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/spamc/libspamc.h ${PREFIX}/include
-post-install:
+post-install::
.if defined (WITH_SPAMC)
@${STRIP_CMD} ${PREFIX}/bin/spamc
.endif
(this patch was sent to me by the maintainer of ja-p5-Mail-SpamAssassin. I
suggested that he change his port to a slave port so that it would be easier to
follow, and he has done a good job.
I just wanted to know what the differences are in the port Makefile between a
':' and a '::'
Does this have to do with slave port(ish) things? does this force it to
execute? what is it?
Pardon my ignorance, I have just never seen this before in any port I have
maintained, or worked on.
(reference this PR for context)
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
>*| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation
d: +1.561.948.2259
w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: why :: in ports makefile ?
On 03/23/2012 03:28 PM, Michael Scheidell wrote:
I have never seen this before, and I wanted to know what it does.
diff -ruN /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.org/Makefile
/tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile
--- /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.org/Makefile 2012-02-08 00:17:28.0
+0900
+++ /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile 2012-03-06 08:55:28.445163638 +0900
@@ -219,7 +219,7 @@
.endif
@${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/spamc/libspamc.h ${PREFIX}/include
-post-install:
+post-install::
.if defined (WITH_SPAMC)
@${STRIP_CMD} ${PREFIX}/bin/spamc
.endif
(this patch was sent to me by the maintainer of ja-p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.
I suggested that he change his port to a slave port so that it would be
easier to follow, and he has done a good job.
I just wanted to know what the differences are in the port Makefile
between a ':' and a '::'
Does this have to do with slave port(ish) things? does this force it to
execute? what is it?
Pardon my ignorance, I have just never seen this before in any port I
have maintained, or worked on.
(reference this PR for context)
From `man make`
: A target is considered out-of-date if its modification time
is less than those of any of its sources. Sources for a
target accumulate over dependency lines when this operator
is used. The target is removed if make is interrupted.
::If no sources are specified, the target is always
re-created. Otherwise, a target is considered out-of-date
if any of its sources has been modified more recently than
the target. Sources for a target do not accumulate over
dependency lines when this operator is used.
The target will not be removed if make is interrupted.
___
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: why :: in ports makefile ?
O : A target is considered out-of-date if its modification time is less than those of any of its sources. Sources for a target accumulate over dependency lines when this operator is used. The target is removed if make is interrupted. ::If no sources are specified, the target is always re-created. Otherwise, a target is considered out-of-date if any of its sources has been modified more recently than the target. Sources for a target do not accumulate over dependency lines when this operator is used. The target will not be removed if make is interrupted. ok, but in the context of a slave port, I did get this answer (from portlint). putting in :: did make portlint happy. "/usr/home/scheidell/ports/ports/japanese/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/../../mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile", line 237: warning: duplicate script for target "post-install" ignored make: fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue ___ 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" -- Michael Scheidell, CTO >*| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation d: +1.561.948.2259 w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell ___ 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: why :: in ports makefile ?
> I have never seen this before, and I wanted to know what it does.
>
> diff -ruN /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.org/Makefile
> /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile
> --- /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.org/Makefile2012-02-08 00:17:28.0
> +0900
> +++ /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile2012-03-06 08:55:28.445163638
> +0900
> @@ -219,7 +219,7 @@
> .endif
> @${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/spamc/libspamc.h ${PREFIX}/include
>
> -post-install:
> +post-install::
> .if defined (WITH_SPAMC)
> @${STRIP_CMD} ${PREFIX}/bin/spamc
> .endif
>
> (this patch was sent to me by the maintainer of ja-p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.
> I suggested that he change his port to a slave port so that it would be
> easier to follow, and he has done a good job.
>
> I just wanted to know what the differences are in the port Makefile
> between a ':' and a '::'
>
> Does this have to do with slave port(ish) things? does this force it to
> execute? what is it?
>
> Pardon my ignorance, I have just never seen this before in any port I have
> maintained, or worked on.
>
> (reference this PR for context)
>
>
>
>
>
from make manapage
(http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=make&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD+9.0-RELEASE&arch=default&format=html):
::If no sources are specified, the target is always re-created.
Otherwise, a target is considered out-of-date if any of its sources
has been modified more recently than the target. Sources for a
target do not accumulate over dependency lines when this operator is
used. The target will not be removed if make is interrupted.
This is typically used in ports for pre-everything target, but have never
seen it on post-install. I don't see why the :: is necessary, either, as
':' should do in this case.
-jgh
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: why :: in ports makefile ?
>> I have never seen this before, and I wanted to know what it does.
>>
>> diff -ruN /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.org/Makefile
>> /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile
>> --- /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.org/Makefile 2012-02-08 00:17:28.0
>> +0900
>> +++ /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile 2012-03-06 08:55:28.445163638
>> +0900
>> @@ -219,7 +219,7 @@
>> .endif
>> @${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/spamc/libspamc.h ${PREFIX}/include
>>
>> -post-install:
>> +post-install::
>> .if defined (WITH_SPAMC)
>> @${STRIP_CMD} ${PREFIX}/bin/spamc
>> .endif
>>
>> (this patch was sent to me by the maintainer of ja-p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.
>> I suggested that he change his port to a slave port so that it would be
>> easier to follow, and he has done a good job.
>>
>> I just wanted to know what the differences are in the port Makefile
>> between a ':' and a '::'
>>
>> Does this have to do with slave port(ish) things? does this force it to
>> execute? what is it?
>>
>> Pardon my ignorance, I have just never seen this before in any port I
>> have
>> maintained, or worked on.
>>
>> (reference this PR for context)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> from make manapage
> (http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=make&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD+9.0-RELEASE&arch=default&format=html):
>
> ::If no sources are specified, the target is always re-created.
> Otherwise, a target is considered out-of-date if any of its sources
> has been modified more recently than the target. Sources for a
> target do not accumulate over dependency lines when this operator is
> used. The target will not be removed if make is interrupted.
>
> This is typically used in ports for pre-everything target, but have never
> seen it on post-install. I don't see why the :: is necessary, either, as
> ':' should do in this case.
>
> -jgh
Unless, of course, the maintainer wants to override the master target of
the same name. I believe this may be the intention.
-jgh
___
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"
named/bind98... rather ports usage and base interaction.
Hey Doug, Do you know of anything we could do to stop the following from happening ? If you set world to build without BIND and it is your intention to use bind from ports... upon running (make delete-old) from source it attempts to remove empty directories from /etc/named/*. When doing this it can only remove empty directories and since master & slave usually will have something in it on most systems dynamic gets removed but left to be re-created from /etc/rc.d/named on the next boot. Do you think it would be possible to "for say" create a USING_BIND_FROM_PORTS make.conf var that could be compared during the (make delete-old) stage so it does not attempt to do anything with /etc/named/* ? but yet still allow it to operate on the rest of the stale files. Thanks. -- ;s =; ___ 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: named/bind98... rather ports usage and base interaction.
On 23 Mar 2012 15:41, "Jason Hellenthal" wrote: > > > Hey Doug, > > Do you know of anything we could do to stop the following from happening > ? > > If you set world to build without BIND and it is your intention to use > bind from ports... upon running (make delete-old) from source it > attempts to remove empty directories from /etc/named/*. When doing this > it can only remove empty directories and since master & slave usually > will have something in it on most systems dynamic gets removed but left > to be re-created from /etc/rc.d/named on the next boot. > > Do you think it would be possible to "for say" create a > USING_BIND_FROM_PORTS make.conf var that could be compared during the > (make delete-old) stage so it does not attempt to do anything with > /etc/named/* ? but yet still allow it to operate on the rest of the > stale files. > Would it be too hackish to have a file .keepme in the dynamic directory? 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: named/bind98... rather ports usage and base interaction.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 04:52:48PM +, Chris Rees wrote: > On 23 Mar 2012 15:41, "Jason Hellenthal" wrote: > > > > > > Hey Doug, > > > > Do you know of anything we could do to stop the following from happening > > ? > > > > If you set world to build without BIND and it is your intention to use > > bind from ports... upon running (make delete-old) from source it > > attempts to remove empty directories from /etc/named/*. When doing this > > it can only remove empty directories and since master & slave usually > > will have something in it on most systems dynamic gets removed but left > > to be re-created from /etc/rc.d/named on the next boot. > > > > Do you think it would be possible to "for say" create a > > USING_BIND_FROM_PORTS make.conf var that could be compared during the > > (make delete-old) stage so it does not attempt to do anything with > > /etc/named/* ? but yet still allow it to operate on the rest of the > > stale files. > > > > Would it be too hackish to have a file .keepme in the dynamic directory? > I think that would be fine. But there are other cases too like if named.conf is still in its generic form then it would be removed as well as some other files that still may be of use for bind from ports. I think a more proper way would be to ignore neccesary base system files like /etc/named /var/named. This would make it easier for someone that was using base bind for a while to make an easy transition over ports bind without having to worry about the effects of delete-old. -- ;s =; ___ 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"
How useful is %%DATADIR%%, anyway?
Hi all,
(tl;dr at the bottom)
Just as a thought, I decided to try stripping out all mentions of
%%DATADIR%%, %%DOCSDIR%% etc from pkg-plist, and replacing them with
PORTDOCS=*, PORTDATA=* in the Makefiles etc.
[crees@pegasus]/tmp/portss% df -h /tmp/ports*
Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity
Mounted on
dumpster/tmp/ports20G478M 19G 2%
/tmp/ports
dumpster/tmp/portss 20G444M 19G 2%
/tmp/portss
[crees@pegasus]/tmp/portss% expr 444 - 478
-34
[crees@pegasus]/tmp/portss% expr 3400 / 478 # Calculate percentage
space reduction
7
The main rationale for having files in static plists, as far as I can
see is that one can grep the plists for files they've found lying
around if pkg which doesn't come up with anything which is clearly
useful for files in /usr/local/bin or similar.
However, if a file is in DATADIR, it'll be in a directory called
/usr/local/share/${PORTNAME}, so it's pointless keeping these files in
plists for that reason alone.
===
tl;dr it saves about 34M, or 7% of the ports tree checkout if we use
the PORTDOCS/DATA/EXAMPLES macros, which is definitely noticeable.
I propose modifying the Porter's Handbook to discourage use of
%%PORTDOCS%% etc in static plists, and encourage the use of PORTDOCS
etc macros instead. No need to actually convert existing ports (large
amount of churn), but as far as I can see, these lines are a waste of
space and bandwidth.
Anyone disagree?
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: How useful is %%DATADIR%%, anyway?
On 3/23/12 4:14 PM, Chris Rees wrote: Hi all, Just as a thought, I decided to try stripping out all mentions of %%DATADIR%%, %%DOCSDIR%% etc from pkg-plist, and replacing them with PORTDOCS=*, PORTDATA=* in the Makefiles etc. Don't forget EXAMPLESDOC! I propose modifying the Porter's Handbook to discourage use of %%PORTDOCS%% etc in static plists, and encourage the use of PORTDOCS want to take a stab at this one? <*http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/165820> you are saying that instead of * +%%PORTDOCSDOCSDIR%% in the plist, this one, you could basically eliminate plist-file (save 2k on the disk?) and put them in PLIST_FILES in Makefile. what if the 'docs' are in a strange place? like this port? how would this port be fixed? -- Michael Scheidell, CTO >*| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation d: +1.561.948.2259 w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell ___ 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: How useful is %%DATADIR%%, anyway?
On 23 March 2012 21:12, Michael Scheidell wrote:
>
>
> On 3/23/12 4:14 PM, Chris Rees wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>
>> Just as a thought, I decided to try stripping out all mentions of
>> %%DATADIR%%, %%DOCSDIR%% etc from pkg-plist, and replacing them with
>> PORTDOCS=*, PORTDATA=* in the Makefiles etc.
>
> Don't forget EXAMPLESDOC!
PORTEXAMPLES ;)
>
>> I propose modifying the Porter's Handbook to discourage use of
>> %%PORTDOCS%% etc in static plists, and encourage the use of PORTDOCS
>
>
> want to take a stab at this one?
>
> <*http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/165820>
>
> you are saying that instead of
> *
>
> +%%PORTDOCSDOCSDIR%% in the plist, this one, you could basically
> eliminate plist-file (save 2k on the disk?)
> and put them in PLIST_FILES in Makefile.
Almost. PORTDOCS=* in the Makefile basically uses find on ${DOCSDIR}
and sticks it into TMPPLIST. The advantage is that we then have one
line in the Makefile instead of up to 2000 in pkg-plist.
> what if the 'docs' are in a strange place? like this port?
> how would this port be fixed?
Force the port to install docs to the correct place, as per hier :)
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: How useful is %%DATADIR%%, anyway?
On 3/23/12 6:27 PM, Chris Rees wrote:
Almost. PORTDOCS=* in the Makefile basically uses find on ${DOCSDIR}
and sticks it into TMPPLIST. The advantage is that we then have one
line in the Makefile instead of up to 2000 in pkg-plist.
thats frekeing magic.. how did it find the source in $WRKDIR/specs?
Seriously, how did the macro find it?
(my question wasn't about where it was going to WRITE it, but how do I
tell it where to find it. I could not find a ${docsdir} macro in any
config, Makefile(.in}am). nothing.
cd work/libXaw-1.0.8/
%grep -i docsdir *
%grep -i docsdir -R ./
ps:
someone important, or on x11 group: so that we save a few bytes on 8.3
ports dvd:
please check out http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/165820
and commit.
I changed the Makefile and pkg-plist.
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
>*| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation
d: +1.561.948.2259
w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell
___
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: How useful is %%DATADIR%%, anyway?
On 3/24/2012 00:31, Michael Scheidell wrote:
>
>
> On 3/23/12 6:27 PM, Chris Rees wrote:
>> Almost. PORTDOCS=* in the Makefile basically uses find on ${DOCSDIR}
>> and sticks it into TMPPLIST. The advantage is that we then have one
>> line in the Makefile instead of up to 2000 in pkg-plist.
>
> thats frekeing magic.. how did it find the source in $WRKDIR/specs?
It doesn't. It looks at ${DOCSDIR}. See add-plist-docs target in
Mk/bsd.port.mk.
As such the requirement for this to work, is that docs are installed in
${DOCSDIR}. If a port has a valid reason to not install documentation
into ${PREFIX}/share/doc/${PORTNAME} then DOCSDIR should be set in the
port's Makefile.
Same applies to PORTDATA and PORTEXAMPLES and their respective DATADIR
and EXAMPLESDIR.
I think even more space can be saved if a PORTWWW is introduced, though
PORTWWW=* should be used more carefully as WWWDIR can be dynamic.
--
Mel
___
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: boinc-einsteinathome-4.18_4,2
Hi guys, am hoping you may be able to assist with an enquiry my FreeBSD 9.0 machine is fitted with an NVIDIA GEForce 210 card is it possible to utilize its CUDA GPU operability into boinc_setiathome_enhanced 6.12_1 regards, Dave Whytcross ___ 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"
luakit port
Hi List ! This is my first port, then please do not mind if you find any errors, I'm still learning how to create ports ;) This port is of Luakit (www.luakit.org). Is a light browser (see pkg-desc): Luakit is a highly configurable, micro-browser framework based on the WebKit web content engine and the GTK+ toolkit. It is very fast, extensible by Lua and licensed under the GNU GPLv3 license. It is primarily targeted at power users, developers and any people with too much time on their hands who want to have fine-grained control over their web browsers behaviour and interface. WWW: http://luakit.org Please, test this port and if someone wants to adopt and commit to do, I'll be happy! Source: http://mundounix.com.br/~gugabsd/luakit-ports.tar.gz PS: Very thanks garga, is a nice tool !!! Thanks --- Luiz Gustavo Costa (Powered by BSD) *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+ mundoUnix - Consultoria em Software Livre http://www.mundounix.com.br ICQ: 2890831 / MSN: cont...@mundounix.com.br Tel: 55 (21) 4063-7110 / 8194-1905 / (11) 4063-0407 Blog: http://www.luizgustavo.pro.br ___ 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"
