Re: Porting patch(1) from NetBSD to FreeBSD (was Re: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too!)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On 10/27/12 2:17 PM, hiren panchasara wrote: > [removing the CC list] > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Pedro Giffuni > wrote: > >> (cc'ing -ports and cutting most of the rest) >> >>> From: Eitan Adler >> .> >>> On 24 October 2012 13:24,

Re: Porting patch(1) from NetBSD to FreeBSD (was Re: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too!)

Hi; On 10/27/2012 22:08, hiren panchasara wrote: On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Pedro Giffuni > wrote: Hello Hiren; On 10/27/2012 16:48, hiren panchasara wrote: ... This is great news Hiren, Thanks! The stress test for this utility is the

Re: Porting patch(1) from NetBSD to FreeBSD (was Re: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too!)

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > Hello Hiren; > > > > On 10/27/2012 16:48, hiren panchasara wrote: > > + Sean, who has been helping me. > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Chris Rees wrote: > >> On 27 October 2012 22:17, hiren panchasara >> wrote: >> > [removing the CC

Re: How to boot FreeBSD and linux from FreeBSD MBR?

On 10/27/2012 02:42, matt wrote: This means you have grub2. It is slow as molasses and has to be the mbr. You could chainload freebsd's partition under a separate entry, like Windows The partition bootcode for FreeBSD will boot it from there. You can also boot loader or kernel directly from grub,

Re: Installing make as pmake when WITH_BMAKE specified (was Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program)

Can someone please explain to me what the original reason is for causing such ridiculously large, far reaching issues? And why people seem to be in a really, really big rush for it? Adrian ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.free

Re: Porting patch(1) from NetBSD to FreeBSD (was Re: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too!)

Hello Hiren; On 10/27/2012 16:48, hiren panchasara wrote: + Sean, who has been helping me. On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Chris Rees > wrote: On 27 October 2012 22:17, hiren panchasara mailto:hiren.panchas...@gmail.com>> wrote: > [removing the CC l

Re: Porting patch(1) from NetBSD to FreeBSD (was Re: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too!)

+ Sean, who has been helping me. On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Chris Rees wrote: > On 27 October 2012 22:17, hiren panchasara > wrote: > > [removing the CC list] > > > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > > > >> (cc'ing -ports and cutting most of the rest) > >> > >> > F

Re: Porting patch(1) from NetBSD to FreeBSD (was Re: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too!)

On 27 October 2012 22:17, hiren panchasara wrote: > [removing the CC list] > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > >> (cc'ing -ports and cutting most of the rest) >> >> > From: Eitan Adler >> .> >> >On 24 October 2012 13:24, Fernando Apesteguía wrote: >> >> Also related to tha

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 19:53:56 +0100, Chris Rees writes: >I'm saying that it's unacceptable to expect people to change their >systems just to make the ports tree work after we have broken it on a >supposedly supported version. But there's no suggestion of that. The ports tree would take care of i

Porting patch(1) from NetBSD to FreeBSD (was Re: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too!)

[removing the CC list] On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > (cc'ing -ports and cutting most of the rest) > > > From: Eitan Adler > .> > >On 24 October 2012 13:24, Fernando Apesteguía wrote: > >> Also related to that, what about writing a section about redports[1] > >> in the p

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 14:23:29 +0100, Chris Rees writes: >We (ab)use the security update mechanism to merge the pmake changes >(:tl and :tu) into releng/7.4 and releng/8.3 (possibly the earlier I originally provided the :tl and :tu patch for something like that (not planning any abuse mind ;-) But

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 18:32:56 +0100, Chris Rees writes: >On 27 October 2012 18:27, Simon J. Gerraty wrote: >> I've tested the ports tree converted to bmake - per the "patch" I >> mentioned on a 7.1 box. It worked for me. Once the ports tree has >What about these? > >[crees@pegasus]~% grep -n :\

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 09:44:36 -0500, Bryan Drewery writes: >Could there be a make.conf/env setting to make bmake run AS pmake in >full compat mode? On by default until all older branches are EoL, then >it can flip and be optional. This has been mentioned before. Firstly, I have changed bmake beha

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On 27 October 2012 19:52, Simon J. Gerraty wrote: > > On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 14:23:29 +0100, Chris Rees writes: >>We (ab)use the security update mechanism to merge the pmake changes >>(:tl and :tu) into releng/7.4 and releng/8.3 (possibly the earlier > > I originally provided the :tl and :tu patch fo

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

>These discussions need backing up with a real roadmap, including detail on >exactly what 8.3 and 7.4 users will have to do to ensure that the ports >tree still works. I've tested the ports tree converted to bmake - per the "patch" I mentioned on a 7.1 box. It worked for me. Once the ports tree

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On 27 October 2012 18:27, Simon J. Gerraty wrote: >>These discussions need backing up with a real roadmap, including detail on >>exactly what 8.3 and 7.4 users will have to do to ensure that the ports >>tree still works. > > I've tested the ports tree converted to bmake - per the "patch" I > menti

Call for review -- rc needs some love!

Hi all, I've tried to have a look at some of the lingering issues in our rc [1] as well as kick up some discussion over some other patches, but looking over the archives of the list it seems that no-one is maintaining it or reviewing patches. Because of this, I'm having a hard time working out ho

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On 10/27/2012 9:40 AM, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 27 October 2012 10:34, Chris Rees wrote: >>> This "weeks" is making a assumptions that users 1. reads ports@ or 2. >>> Update to security/errata patches in a timely manner or 3. Read UPDATING >> >> Quite. This should be at least a few months, otherwi

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On 27 October 2012 10:34, Chris Rees wrote: >> This "weeks" is making a assumptions that users 1. reads ports@ or 2. >> Update to security/errata patches in a timely manner or 3. Read UPDATING > > Quite. This should be at least a few months, otherwise we're making > unreasonable requests of our u

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On 10/27/2012 8:23 AM, Chris Rees wrote: > [trim CC list a little to stop people regretting replying to this thread] > > On 27 October 2012 10:15, Chris Rees wrote: >> >> On 27 Oct 2012 00:35, "Simon J. Gerraty" wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 22:02:00 +0100, Chris Rees writes: In th

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On 27 October 2012 15:32, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 10/27/2012 8:23 AM, Chris Rees wrote: >> [trim CC list a little to stop people regretting replying to this thread] >> >> On 27 October 2012 10:15, Chris Rees wrote: >>> >>> On 27 Oct 2012 00:35, "Simon J. Gerraty" wrote: On Fri,

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

[trim CC list a little to stop people regretting replying to this thread] On 27 October 2012 10:15, Chris Rees wrote: > > On 27 Oct 2012 00:35, "Simon J. Gerraty" wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 22:02:00 +0100, Chris Rees writes: >> >In that case we have a switch time on the order of years,

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

BTW, would it be useful to put a devel/fmake into ports to make it easy for people with older systems to install an up to date version of freebsd make (which groks both sets of toupper/tolower modifiers)? Perhaps a knob to install it or put in a link as /usr/bin/make ?

Re: How to boot FreeBSD and linux from FreeBSD MBR?

On 10/26/12 22:14, Yuri wrote: > When I installed ubuntu on another partition, it overwrote BSD MBR > with grub one. > Now grub boots ubuntu without even asking what to boot. > When I tried to restore BSD MBR, BSD boots but linux doesn't. This is > because there is no bootable PBR in linux partitio

Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program

On 27 Oct 2012 00:35, "Simon J. Gerraty" wrote: > > > On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 22:02:00 +0100, Chris Rees writes: > >In that case we have a switch time on the order of years, not weeks; 8.3 is > >supported until May '14, and unless we get a :tl etc MFC into 8, even > >longer. All this time the ports t