Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 18 Jul 2012 07:44, "John Marino" wrote: > > On 7/18/2012 00:43, Mark Linimon wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09:50AM +0200, John Marino wrote: >>> >>> Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized >>> quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough? >> >> >> This has been explored on the mailing lists before, however, we don't >> technically have a way to do either of the following: >> >> - let people commit to "just some" ports >> - have any patches be autocommitted >> >> No one has ever tackled the former problem. The latter problem just >> seems to me to open up ways for people to abuse the system. It makes >> me nervous. > > > Well, between the two I would suggest a combination of "let people autocommit patches to "just some" ports". > > Reasons - Don't have to hassle with the logistics of giving a limited commit bit, risk getting the permissions wrong, and removing it after the maintainer retires. > > You'd have to create an automatic system that could verify the patches apply cleanly (or maybe just accept file replacements), and that the files came from maintainer. A public/private key system should do that. All you'd need to do is is map keys to ports and not accept any files outside of the allowed area. Removing that mapping is a lot easier than tweaking commit privileges. > > Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I think. It also does away with the QA aspect that committers currently provide. I'd like to repeat that people sufficiently familiar with the ports system to QA patches generally ends up with a commit bit fairly quickly. 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: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 7/18/2012 12:19, Chris Rees wrote: On 18 Jul 2012 07:44, "John Marino" wrote: Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I think. It also does away with the QA aspect that committers currently provide. I'd like to repeat that people sufficiently familiar with the ports system to QA patches generally ends up with a commit bit fairly quickly. Chris I wouldn't assume people that become this proficient necessarily want a commit bit. The whole point of my proposal is give and take. Yes, you take away "QA" responsibility from an entire pool of committers and make it the primary responsibility of this new class of maintainer on a per port basis (and not nearly all ports either). I was proposing that your gains (much less PRs, more often maintained ports) far outweigh the liabilities. I would be selective who gets assigned to this new class. They should have a body of work that instills confidence that they can handle QA. You don't get something for nothing and it's not hard to revoke the privilege if a person can't handle it. John ___ 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: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 18 Jul 2012 11:33, "John Marino" wrote: > > On 7/18/2012 12:19, Chris Rees wrote: >> >> On 18 Jul 2012 07:44, "John Marino" wrote: >>> >>> Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I >> >> think. >> >> It also does away with the QA aspect that committers currently provide. >> I'd like to repeat that people sufficiently familiar with the ports system >> to QA patches generally ends up with a commit bit fairly quickly. >> >> Chris > > > > I wouldn't assume people that become this proficient necessarily want a commit bit. > > The whole point of my proposal is give and take. > Yes, you take away "QA" responsibility from an entire pool of committers and make it the primary responsibility of this new class of maintainer on a per port basis (and not nearly all ports either). I was proposing that your gains (much less PRs, more often maintained ports) far outweigh the liabilities. I would be selective who gets assigned to this new class. They should have a body of work that instills confidence that they can handle QA. > > You don't get something for nothing and it's not hard to revoke the privilege if a person can't handle it. You are making a good point, but I'm trying to explain that the 'body of work' for proposing a new developer is no greater than the standard you suggest. We do have developers who only commit to their own ports; while it's generally hoped that they work on PRs too, it's not a requirement. These would fall under the category of 'super maintainers' if you like. For further reading, Google 'Solutions for the PR load problem'. 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"
Weird problem with bsdadminscrips
I got this on one of my machines (9.0-RELEASE): => bsdadminscripts-6.1.1.tar.gz doesn't seem to exist in /usr/ports/distfiles/. => Attempting to fetch http://heanet.dl.sourceforge.net/project/bsdadminscripts/bsdadminscripts/bsdadminscripts-6.1.1.tar.gz bsdadminscripts-6.1.1.tar.gz 100% of 72 kB 150 kBps ===> Extracting for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1 => SHA256 Checksum OK for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1.tar.gz. ===> Patching for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1 ===> Applying FreeBSD patches for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1 ===> Configuring for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1 ===> Installing for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1 ===> Generating temporary packing list ===> Checking if sysutils/bsdadminscripts already installed Unknown parameter 'yes'. installing: %%MAN%%/man1/bsdadminscripts.1.gz eval: bsdadminscripts.1: not found installing: %%DATADIR%%/buildflags.awk eval: buildflags.awk: not found installing: %%PREFIX%%/etc/buildflags.conf.sample eval: buildflags.conf.sample: not found installing: %%DATADIR%%/buildflags.mk eval: buildflags.mk: not found installing: %%MAN%%/man1/buildflags.awk.1.gz eval: buildflags.awk.1: not found installing: %%MAN%%/man1/buildflags.conf.1.gz eval: buildflags.conf.1: not found installing: %%MAN%%/man1/buildflags.mk.1.gz eval: buildflags.mk.1: not found installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/distviper eval: distviper: not found installing: %%MAN%%/man1/distviper.1.gz eval: distviper.1: not found installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/pkg_libchk eval: pkg_libchk: not found installing: %%MAN%%/man1/pkg_libchk.1.gz eval: pkg_libchk.1: not found installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/pkg_upgrade eval: pkg_upgrade: not found installing: %%MAN%%/man1/pkg_upgrade.1.gz eval: pkg_upgrade.1: not found installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/pkg_validate eval: pkg_validate: not found installing: %%MAN%%/man1/pkg_validate.1.gz eval: pkg_validate.1: not found installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig eval: portconfig: not found installing: %%MAN%%/man1/portconfig.1.gz eval: portconfig.1: not found installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart eval: rcstart: not found installing: %%MAN%%/man1/rcstart.1.gz eval: rcstart.1: not found installing: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/uma eval: uma: not found installing: %%MAN%%/man1/uma.1.gz eval: uma.1: not found installing: %%PREFIX%%/etc/uma.conf.sample eval: uma.conf.sample: not found hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstatus hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstop hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcrestart hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rconestart hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rconestatus hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rconestop hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rcstart -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/rconerestart hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portbuild hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portclean hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portfetch hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portpackage hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig-recursive hardlinking: %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portconfig -> %%PREFIX%%/sbin/portfetch-recursive ===> Registering installation for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1 ===> Cleaning for bsdadminscripts-6.1.1_1 As you see variables are not expanded. Have no problems with other ports on the same system. Have no problem with this port on other machines. What to look for? Thanks. -- Regards, Ruslan Tinderboxing kills... the drives. ___ 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: Weird problem with bsdadminscrips
Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote on 18.07.2012 14:48: As you see variables are not expanded. Have no problems with other ports on the same system. Have no problem with this port on other machines. What to look for? Thanks. Ok, answering to myself. It was because of NOPORTDOCS=yes NOPORTEXAMPLES=yes in /etc/make.conf (left from old times). Commenting them off solves the problem. -- Regards, Ruslan Tinderboxing kills... the drives. ___ 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: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 7/18/2012 12:40, Chris Rees wrote: You are making a good point, but I'm trying to explain that the 'body of work' for proposing a new developer is no greater than the standard you suggest. We do have developers who only commit to their own ports; while it's generally hoped that they work on PRs too, it's not a requirement. These would fall under the category of 'super maintainers' if you like. For further reading, Google 'Solutions for the PR load problem'. A very interesting read and essentially addresses the topic I started, with a different implementation. You've been consistent in your concern, but maybe what I'm getting at is that these "super maintainers" don't need to be held to the same standard as someone with a commit bit. Hopefully they are every bit as capable as a committer, but if they are only interested in maintaining say < 10 ports and those ports aren't in the critical path of more important ports, what's the harm in handing the reins to a slightly less experienced person that wants to do it esp. with a large PR backlog? If it passes lint and tinderbox checks, it's got to have some (acceptable) quality level. Over time and with experience the maintainer will improve anyway, especially if he/she is also directly any PRs against the port. That's another topic -- these super maintainers should be able to close PRs as well on their ports. Speaking for myself, I think I'd make a good super-maintainer and I think the quality would be very high on my ports. I know I'm not alone. John ___ 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: make failed for editors/libreoffice
Hello. I've tried to update but it will not build and the suggested procedure to fix the problem does not work for me. Please see below. Thanks tail_build deliver Module 'tail_build' delivered successfully. 0 files copied, 0 files unchanged --- Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry ! For more help with debugging build errors, please see the section in: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development internal build errors: ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/testtools/source/bridgetest it seems that the error is inside 'testtools', please re-run build inside this module to isolate the error and/or test your fix: --- /usr/local/bin/bash cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3 source ./Env.Host.sh cd testtools rm -Rf /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/testtools/unxfbsd.pro # optional module 'clean' build when the problem is isolated and fixed exit and re-run 'make' from the top-level gmake[1]: *** [build] Fel 1 gmake[1]: Lämnar katalogen "/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3" gmake: *** [source-env-and-recurse] Fel 2 *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice. ===>>> make failed for editors/libreoffice ===>>> Aborting update ===>>> Update for editors/libreoffice failed ===>>> Aborting update __ cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3 /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3:source ./Env.Host.sh SRC_ROOT=/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3: Command not found. OOO_SHELL=/usr/local/bin/bash: Command not found. JAVA_HOME=NO_JAVA_HOME: Command not found. L10N_MODULE=/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/translations: Command not found. WITH_LANG_LIST=en-US: Command not found. PROGRESSBARCOLOR=126,170,23: Command not found. PROGRESSSIZE=319,10: Command not found. PROGRESSPOSITION=164,225: Command not found. PROGRESSFRAMECOLOR=207,208,211: Command not found. OOO_VENDOR=FreeBSD ports 3.5.5: Command not found. OOODMAKEMODE=YES: Command not found. PRODUCTVERSION=3.5: Command not found. CALL_CDECL=TRUE: Command not found. NO_REC_RES=TRUE: Command not found. SO3=TRUE: Command not found. SOLAR_PLUGIN=TRUE: Command not found. UPDATER=YES: Command not found. VCL=TRUE: Command not found. ENABLEUNICODE=TRUE: Command not found. NO_BSYMBOLIC=TRUE: Command not found. EXTERNAL_WARNINGS_NOT_ERRORS=TRUE: Command not found. PRODUCT=full: Command not found. PROEXT=.pro: Command not found. UNIXWRAPPERNAME=libreoffice: Command not found. PRODUCTNAME=LibreOffice: Command not found. INSTALLDIRNAME=libreoffice: Command not found. PREFIXDIR=/usr/local: Command not found. INSTALLDIR=/usr/local/lib/libreoffice: Command not found. LIBDIR=/usr/local/lib: Command not found. DATADIR=/usr/local/share: Command not found. MANDIR=/usr/local/man: Command not found. DOCDIR=/usr/local/share/doc/libreoffice: Command not found. DO_FETCH_TARBALLS=NO: Command not found. SYSTEM_MOZILLA_HEADERS=NO: Command not found. BUILD_VER_STRING=FreeBSD ports 3.5.5: Command not found. DEFAULT_TO_ENGLISH_FOR_PACKING=yes: Command not found. ENABLE_GTK=TRUE: Command not found. GTK_CFLAGS=-D_THREAD_SAFE -D_REENTRANT -I/usr/local/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/local/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/local/include/cairo -I/usr/local/include/gdk-pixbuf-2.0 -I/usr/local/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/local/include/gio-unix-2.0/ -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/local/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/local/include/pixman-1 -I/usr/local/include/freetype2 -I/usr/local/include/libpng15 : Command not found. GTK_LIBS=-pthread -L/usr/local/lib -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -latk-1.0 -lpangocairo-1.0 -lXext -lXrender -lXinerama -lXi -lXrandr -lXcursor -lXcomposite -lXdamage -lpangoft2-1.0 -lgio-2.0 -lXfixes -lcairo -lX11 -lpango-1.0 -lfreetype -lfontconfig -lgdk_pixbuf_xlib-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lm -lgobject-2.0 -lgthread-2.0 -lglib-2.0 : Command not found. GTHREAD_CFLAGS=-D_REENTRANT -I/usr/local/include/glib-2.0 : Command not found. GTHREAD_LIBS=-pthread -L/usr/local/lib -lgthread-2.0 -lglib-2.0 : Command not found. ENABLE_STATIC_GTK=FALSE: Command not found. ENABLE_CAIRO_CANVAS=TRUE: Command not found. ENABLE_OPENGL=TRUE: Command not found. ENABLE_NSPLUGIN=NO: Command not found. ENABLE_PDFIMPORT=YES: Command not found. ENABLE_MINIMIZER=YES: Command not found. ENABLE_PRESENTER_SCREEN=YES: Command not found. ENABLE_REPORTBUILDER=NO: Command not found. ENABLE_SCRIPTING_BEANSHELL=NO: Command not found. ENABLE_SCRIPTING_JAVASCRIPT=NO: Command not found. ENABLE_SCRIPTING_PYTHON=YES: Command not found. ENABLE_QUICKSTART_LI
Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice
Leslie Jensen writes: > I've tried to update but it will not build and the suggested procedure > to fix the problem does not work for me. What version of clang do you have installed? ___ 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"
SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice
I was forced to deinstall clang 3.1 because Libre office wanted to install devel-clang 3.2 Lowell Gilbert skrev:Leslie Jensen writes: > I've tried to update but it will not build and the suggested procedure > to fix the problem does not work for me. What version of clang do you have installed? ___ 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-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
libreoffice fails to build
On a system running: FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0: Wed Jul 18 08:15:22 EDT 2012 amd64 and system clang (3.1), libreoffice 3.5.5 gets stuck at: = (1/1) Building module sal = Entering /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/inc Entering /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/typesconfig Entering /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/rtl/source Entering /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/textenc Entering /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/osl/all Entering /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/android Entering /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/osl/unx Entering /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/util Making:libuno_sal.so.3 : ERROR: /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version GLIBCXX_3.4.15 required by ../unxfbsd.pro/lib/check_libuno_sal.so.3 not found dmake: Error code 1, while making '../unxfbsd.pro/lib/libuno_sal.so.3' This error persists after doing: /usr/local/bin/bash cd /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3 source ./Env.Host.sh cd sal rm -Rf /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/sal/unxfbsd.pro # optional module 'clean' build I though this had been fixed? Robert Huff ___ 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: SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2012-07-18 10:57:58 -0400, Leslie Jensen wrote: > I was forced to deinstall clang 3.1 because Libre office wanted to > install devel-clang 3.2 I found that it does not build with clang-devel, yet. :-( It is not clang's fault actually and I am working on a fix. Please stay tuned. Jung-uk Kim -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlAG94AACgkQmlay1b9qnVP3eACfQQ0pIcZhKobMdQH5G1dPa8Qn NAwAoIpg+paSaqK8oAtUzxSn6MgrgNv2 =96xO -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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: SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice
Jung-uk Kim writes: > It is not clang's fault actually and I am working on a fix. Please > stay tuned. One issue is that different problems have been presenting with very similar symptoms, so that it's hard to help people who need technical assistance. I don't see anything we can do about that, unfortunately. ___ 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: make failed for editors/libreoffice
On 18 Jul 2012 12:55, "Leslie Jensen" wrote: > > > Hello. > > I've tried to update but it will not build and the suggested procedure to fix the problem does not work for me. > > Please see below. > > Thanks > > > > > > > > tail_build deliver > Module 'tail_build' delivered successfully. 0 files copied, 0 files unchanged > > > --- > Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry ! > For more help with debugging build errors, please see the section in: > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development > > internal build errors: > > ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/testtools/source/bridgetest > > it seems that the error is inside 'testtools', please re-run build > > inside this module to isolate the error and/or test your fix: > --- > > /usr/local/bin/bash > cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3 > source ./Env.Host.sh > cd testtools > rm -Rf /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3/testtools/ unxfbsd.pro # optional module 'clean' > build > > when the problem is isolated and fixed exit and re-run 'make' from the top-level > gmake[1]: *** [build] Fel 1 > gmake[1]: Lämnar katalogen "/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3" > > gmake: *** [source-env-and-recurse] Fel 2 > *** Error code 1 > > Stop in /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice. > *** Error code 1 > > Stop in /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice. > > ===>>> make failed for editors/libreoffice > ===>>> Aborting update > > ===>>> Update for editors/libreoffice failed > ===>>> Aborting update > > __ > > > cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3 > /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3:source ./ Env.Host.sh > SRC_ROOT=/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.5.3: Command not found. > Two problems; you forgot to run bash first, so csh is choking on the syntax in the file, and you aren't root. Hopefully these pointers might help fix build; I'll try to get you a package too. 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"
Bug in dns/fpdns
The ports version of dns/fpdns seems to have this[1] bug: $ fpdns ns1.isc-sns.net. Net::DNS::Header::data: no such method at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.16.0/Net/DNS/Fingerprint.pm line 668. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830449 -- Greg Rivers ___ 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: libreoffice fails to build
On 07/18/2012 08:46, Robert Huff wrote: > > On a system running: > > FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0: Wed Jul 18 08:15:22 EDT 2012 amd64 > > and system clang (3.1), libreoffice 3.5.5 Built cleanly for me last night on r238444. Are you sure your world is current enough to get the latest clang fixes? Doug -- Change is hard. ___ 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: SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2012-07-18 14:11:46 -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote: > Jung-uk Kim writes: > >> It is not clang's fault actually and I am working on a fix. >> Please stay tuned. > > One issue is that different problems have been presenting with > very similar symptoms, so that it's hard to help people who need > technical assistance. I don't see anything we can do about that, > unfortunately. Yes, it is really hard for me to fix all supported releases. :-( Anyway, here is the patch for testing: http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/libreoffice-clang3.2.diff cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/files fetch http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/libreoffice-clang3.2.diff patch -p0 < libreoffice-clang3.2.diff rm *.diff *.orig cd .. make clean make Let me know if it does not work. Jung-uk Kim -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlAHNwEACgkQmlay1b9qnVNHGACgjqHgF8WeX0s42f7+Qn6KYPAt 9jUAn1cegWFt7XTiOQSVvY/mJFd0MXFJ =eE4j -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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"
[FYI] C++ compilers vs. __cplusplus (was Re: SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 While I was tackling LibreOffice build issues, I found something interesting about __cplusplus. Basically, different C++ compilers may have different __cplusplus definitions and it may cause some strangeness. Clang, for example, used to set it to 1 but now it is set to C++ standard value since this commit: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=rev&revision=156113 This is what I got from head: GCC: % cpp --version cpp (GCC) 4.2.1 20070831 patched [FreeBSD] Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. % cpp -x c++ -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus #define __cplusplus 1 % cpp -x c++ -std=gnu++98 -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus #define __cplusplus 1 Clang 3.1: % clang-cpp --version FreeBSD clang version 3.1 (branches/release_31 156863) 20120523 Target: x86_64-unknown-freebsd10.0 Thread model: posix % clang-cpp -x c++ -std=c++98 -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus #define __cplusplus 199711L % clang-cpp -x c++ -std=c++0x -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus #define __cplusplus 201103L % clang-cpp -x c++ -std=gnu++98 -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus #define __cplusplus 1 % clang-cpp -x c++ -std=gnu++0x -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus #define __cplusplus 1 Clang 3.2 snapshot (ports/lang/clang-devel): % /usr/local/bin/clang++ --version clang version 3.2 (trunk) Target: amd64-portbld-freebsd10.0 Thread model: posix % /usr/local/bin/clang++ -E -x c++ -std=c++98 -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus #define __cplusplus 199711L % /usr/local/bin/clang++ -E -x c++ -std=c++0x -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus #define __cplusplus 201103L % /usr/local/bin/clang++ -E -x c++ -std=gnu++98 -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus #define __cplusplus 199711L % /usr/local/bin/clang++ -E -x c++ -std=gnu++0x -dM /dev/null | grep __cplusplus #define __cplusplus 201103L and so on and so forth... This causes very subtle issues depending on compiler versions and FreeBSD versions. For example, NULL may be defined differently because stable/9 and head have this: #if __cplusplus >= 201103L #define NULLnullptr #elif defined(__GNUG__) && defined(__GNUC__) && __GNUC__ >= 4 #define NULL__null #else #if defined(__LP64__) #define NULL(0L) #else #define NULL0 #endif /* __LP64__ */ #endif /* __GNUG__ */ Before that, we had this: #if defined(__GNUG__) && defined(__GNUC__) && __GNUC__ >= 4 #define NULL__null #else #if defined(__LP64__) #define NULL(0L) #else #define NULL0 #endif /* __LP64__ */ #endif /* __GNUG__ */ What a mess... Jung-uk Kim -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlAHR/IACgkQmlay1b9qnVNd0QCfX1NPpOfc+haRebvmBb1+nMSY KAUAn3A6vKEaV0FQy82gysnV79UdejMf =7G3Z -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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: SV: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2012-07-18 18:21:53 -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On 2012-07-18 14:11:46 -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote: >> Jung-uk Kim writes: > >>> It is not clang's fault actually and I am working on a fix. >>> Please stay tuned. > >> One issue is that different problems have been presenting with >> very similar symptoms, so that it's hard to help people who need >> technical assistance. I don't see anything we can do about that, >> unfortunately. > > Yes, it is really hard for me to fix all supported releases. :-( > > Anyway, here is the patch for testing: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/libreoffice-clang3.2.diff The patch updated: http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/libreoffice-clang3.2_2.diff Basically, you need to revert two patches, i.e., patch-solenv__gbuild__platform__unxgcc.mk and patch-solenv__inc__unxgcc.mk. It didn't work for old releases. :-( Jung-uk Kim -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlAHS5UACgkQmlay1b9qnVM+5gCdGGuh3dp+tuH5miuQoY+gTey5 nQsAn3754EnZYX86X+IrFpYdlIy5LOMW =qc1O -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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: libreoffice fails to build
Doug Barton writes: > >On a system running: > > > > FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0: Wed Jul 18 08:15:22 EDT 2012 amd64 > > > >and system clang (3.1), libreoffice 3.5.5 > > Built cleanly for me last night on r238444. Are you sure your > world is current enough to get the latest clang fixes? System and ports were updated (by csup) at 00:01 US Eastern time today. Recent enough? Robert Huff ___ 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: libreoffice fails to build
On 19 Jul 2012 01:09, "Robert Huff" wrote: > > > Doug Barton writes: > > > >On a system running: > > > > > > FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0: Wed Jul 18 08:15:22 EDT 2012 amd64 > > > > > >and system clang (3.1), libreoffice 3.5.5 > > > > Built cleanly for me last night on r238444. Are you sure your > > world is current enough to get the latest clang fixes? > > System and ports were updated (by csup) at 00:01 US Eastern > time today. > Recent enough? I don't wish to patronise, but you did also make world too, right? 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"
