FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date
Dear port maintainer, The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more of your ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity to check each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate, submit/commit an update. If any ports have already been updated, you can safely ignore the entry. You will not be e-mailed again for any of the port/version combinations below. Full details can be found at the following URL: http://portscout.freebsd.org/po...@freebsd.org.html Port| Current version | New version +-+ math/glm| 0.9.8.4 | 0.9.8.5 +-+ textproc/py-pyx12 | 2.3.1 | 2.3.3 +-+ If any of the above results are invalid, please check the following page for details on how to improve portscout's detection and selection of distfiles on a per-port basis: http://portscout.freebsd.org/info/portscout-portconfig.txt Thanks. ___ 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"
Re: gtkmm30 fails to build under 10.3
writes: > [Default] On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 22:46:44 +0200, Jan Beich > wrote: > >> writes: >> >>> Package dependency requirement 'giomm-2.4 >= 2.49.1' could not be >>> satisfied. $ pkg which -o /usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/giomm-2.4.pc /usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/giomm-2.4.pc was installed by package devel/glibmm >>> Package dependency requirement 'gtk+-3.0 >= 3.22.0' could not be >>> satisfied. $ pkg which -o /usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/gtk+-3.0.pc /usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/gtk+-3.0.pc was installed by package x11-toolkits/gtk30 Repeat for every such error then reinstall the affected ports. -- The ports tree allows a lot of flexibility but there's no handholding if you desync it or do partial upgrades. So, use a tool that properly tracks dependencies: poudriere or synth. ___ 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"
Re: gtkmm30 fails to build under 10.3
[Default] On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:45:58 +0200, Jan Beich wrote: > writes: > >> [Default] On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 22:46:44 +0200, Jan Beich >> wrote: >> >>> writes: >>> Package dependency requirement 'giomm-2.4 >= 2.49.1' could not be satisfied. > >$ pkg which -o /usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/giomm-2.4.pc >/usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/giomm-2.4.pc was installed by package devel/glibmm We might be talking at crossed purposes, here. The makefile did indeed install 2.4, but that's not 2.49.1 (note that it's "2.49" not "2.4.9"). 2.49 is not visible in my freshly-updated-just-before-these-build-attempts ports tree. . The version number seems goofed up. Why would it ever imagine that 2.4 is 2.49? There doesn't seem to be a rule that version numbers are truncated to 1 digit after the decimal point. > Package dependency requirement 'gtk+-3.0 >= 3.22.0' could not be satisfied. > >$ pkg which -o /usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/gtk+-3.0.pc >/usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/gtk+-3.0.pc was installed by package >x11-toolkits/gtk30 Again, unless I'm misunderstanding something, 3.0 is not 3.22, and that discrepancy is what it's complaining about. > >Repeat for every such error then reinstall the affected ports. ___ 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"
Re: gtkmm30 fails to build under 10.3
[Default] On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 07:12:36 -0400, I wrote: >[Default] On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:45:58 +0200, Jan Beich > wrote: > >> writes: >> >>> [Default] On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 22:46:44 +0200, Jan Beich >>> wrote: >>> writes: > Package dependency requirement 'giomm-2.4 >= 2.49.1' could not be > satisfied. >> >>$ pkg which -o /usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/giomm-2.4.pc >>/usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/giomm-2.4.pc was installed by package >>devel/glibmm > >We might be talking at crossed purposes, here. The makefile did >indeed install 2.4, but that's not 2.49.1 (note that it's "2.49" >not "2.4.9"). 2.49 is not visible in my >freshly-updated-just-before-these-build-attempts ports tree. . > >The version number seems goofed up. Why would it ever imagine >that 2.4 is 2.49? There doesn't seem to be a rule that version >numbers are truncated to 1 digit after the decimal point. Okay, I'd not noticed til now that there does seem to be a truncate convention, which seems counterproductive t'me. So what looks like v2.4 could be v2.4 or v2.49 or even, theoretically, v2.4. Not much information in a single digit. But in any event it's not 2.49, and the "2.4" I installed is the only "2.4" in the ports tree. Reinstalling won't help. ___ 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"
Re: gtkmm30 fails to build under 10.3
On Thu, 17 Aug 2017, scratch65...@att.net wrote: [Default] On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 07:12:36 -0400, I wrote: [Default] On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:45:58 +0200, Jan Beich wrote: writes: [Default] On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 22:46:44 +0200, Jan Beich wrote: writes: Package dependency requirement 'giomm-2.4 >= 2.49.1' could not be satisfied. $ pkg which -o /usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/giomm-2.4.pc /usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig/giomm-2.4.pc was installed by package devel/glibmm We might be talking at crossed purposes, here. The makefile did indeed install 2.4, but that's not 2.49.1 (note that it's "2.49" not "2.4.9"). 2.49 is not visible in my freshly-updated-just-before-these-build-attempts ports tree. . The version number seems goofed up. Why would it ever imagine that 2.4 is 2.49? There doesn't seem to be a rule that version numbers are truncated to 1 digit after the decimal point. Okay, I'd not noticed til now that there does seem to be a truncate convention, which seems counterproductive t'me. So what looks like v2.4 could be v2.4 or v2.49 or even, theoretically, v2.4. Not much information in a single digit. Have you checked the Makefile of devel/glibmm? The version actually is 2.50.1 so it should match 'giomm-2.4 >= 2.49.1'. You obviously have an old version installed. 'pkg version -n glibmm'? But in any event it's not 2.49, and the "2.4" I installed is the only "2.4" in the ports tree. Reinstalling won't help. Just try what jbeich@ told you. Or use pkg! -- Herbert ___ 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"
Re: how to build mpich with gcc?
Hi Dewayne Thanks for the hint. I've done this years ago, but haven't needed custom ports for a while. For me net/mpich/Makefile.local with USE_GCC=7 was the best option. Thanks Anton ___ 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"
Re: gtkmm30 fails to build under 10.3
[Default] On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:19:11 +0200 (CEST), "Herbert J. Skuhra" wrote: >Just try what jbeich@ told you. Or use pkg! The problem is twofold, really: it's the makefile that should satisfy the dependencies, but it doesn't; and evidently nobody ever bothered to test the bits to see whether they would build even when someone fills in the many gaps by hand. Although giomm is installed by glibmm, and I've installed the latest-and-greatest glibmm, that didn't help: it also wanted a newer gio, which is installed by linux-base-c6. Now I've upgraded that, but the build still fails because it doesn't like the gio bits installed by c6. And c6 wanted 2 scratch files mounted, so I did that too, and again rebooted to get everything on the same page. But now, after doing all that, I find that one of those changes broke xfce. The terminal emulator won't run: i/o error. Evidently these gtk ports were released untested, which was very unprofessional and did nobody any favors. If the maintainers are too busy to test-and-bless the bits for which they're responsible (I'm not criticising; I can *easily* understand how that could be so!), THE PORTS SHOULD BE STRUCK OFF, NOT DISTRIBUTED. ___ 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"
gtkmm24 fails to link because libGL.so.1 not found
Another case where the makefile is at fault. The only place there's a libGL.so.1 as such is in /compat/linux, but I wasn't able to modify the makefile successfully to point at that subtree. First I tried an additional -L switch, and then an -R. Neither worked. If I should have used something else, I hope someone will clue me up because they're the only two I know for the ld loader.. ___ 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"
FreeBSD Port: stlink-1.3.1
Hi guys, Stlink has a new v1.4.0 new release. Kind regards, Jerry Jacobs ___ 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"
Re: qemu-aarch64-static
(Redirected from https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2017-August/278443.html ) Andrea Venturoli writes: >> # file date >> date: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, MIPS, MIPS-III version 1 (FreeBSD), >> statically linked, FreeBSD-style, for FreeBSD 10.0 (127), >> stripped >> # ./date Thu Aug 17 19:51:56 CEST 2017 > >> # file date >> date: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, ARM aarch64, version 1 (FreeBSD), >> dynamically linked, interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1, for FreeBSD >> 11.1, FreeBSD-style, not stripped >> # ./date >> Unable to load interpreter > > Is this the expected behaviour? Yep. Link the binary (i.e. "date") statically or run it inside jail/chroot. Otherwise, /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 references the host system, which on amd64 wouldn't recognize aarch64 shared libraries. > I read, on https://wiki.freebsd.org/QemuUserModeHowTo, that "Currently > only "TARGET=mips TARGET_ARCH=mips64 and "TARGET=arm > TARGET_ARCH=armv6" has enough machine dependent code in place to do > everything described below", but OTOH it seems people are using > poudriere to cross build aarch64 ports (which is what I'd like to do). That page is a bit out of date. Nowadays building for aarch64 is as simple as $ pkg install poudriere qemu-user-static $ service qemu_user_static onestart $ poudriere jail -cj 111aarch64 -a arm64.aarch64 -v 11.1-RELEASE $ poudriere bulk -j 111aarch64 category/port To speed up port builds you may want to consider using native cross-toolchain by creating a jail with -x flag. ___ 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"
curl: CARES or THREADED_RESOLVER
I see a recent ports bug for curl has now been fixed, but requires a new config option of either CARES or THREADED_RESOLVER ( if i recall, a lot of us deselected threaded resolver when it broke curl in 2014) how is now best, to pre select a default of either on 'many' machines, without a make config on each? thanks Paul. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com ___ 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"
