[QAT] 366822: 4x leftovers

Update to 1.0.4. PR: 192030 Submitted by: m...@ozzmosis.com - Build ID: 20140831195001-42676 Job owner: f...@freebsd.org Buildtime: 34 hours Enddate: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 06:16

Re: chromium iconify->resurrect

On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 06:02:53PM -0700, Russell L. Carter wrote: > Greetings, > > I am curious if this is a problem that anyone else is seeing. > chromium 37.0.2062.94, current r269700M > > Start up chromium, then immediately iconify it. Then try bringing it > back again. All I get (after a de

wine (-devel) and i386-wine

I read something about two days on www.freshports.org about wine and i386-wine that alters my plans. I tried to build i386-wine from i386 with the idea of using it both from i386 and amd64, in the latter case mounting the i386 partition on /compat/i386. But what I see makes that look not feasib

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

Andrew Berg wrote: > On 2014.09.01 22:09, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > >> That's my point - there was a patch waiting to submit that knowingly >> broke pkg_install at midnight on the day after the EOL... the EOL >> shouldn't be an EOL - because it was really a 'portsnap after this date >> before y

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

On 2014.09.01 22:09, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > That's my point - there was a patch waiting to submit that knowingly > broke pkg_install at midnight on the day after the EOL... the EOL > shouldn't be an EOL - because it was really a 'portsnap after this date > before you upgrade and you're screwed

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

On Sep 1, 2014, at 20:02, Andrew Berg wrote: > On 2014.09.01 21:27, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >> Actually it's an inconvenience for someone like me and you. Not for >> many freebsd users, and certainly not for me 6 months ago if I hadn't >> been writing my own ports oh and what was it, 1.3.6

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

Andrew Berg wrote: > On 2014.09.01 21:27, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > >> Actually it's an inconvenience for someone like me and you. Not for >> many freebsd users, and certainly not for me 6 months ago if I hadn't >> been writing my own ports oh and what was it, 1.3.6 -> 1.3.7? broke >> shit

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

On 2014.09.01 21:27, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Actually it's an inconvenience for someone like me and you. Not for > many freebsd users, and certainly not for me 6 months ago if I hadn't > been writing my own ports oh and what was it, 1.3.6 -> 1.3.7? broke > shit... (badly) ... There were ins

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

On 2014.09.01 21:39, Julian Elischer wrote: > sigh.. when are we as a project, all going to learn that reality in > business is > that you often need to install stuff that is old. Its not always your > choice. > The custommers require it.. > You should try arguing with someone like Bank of Ameri

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

Julian Elischer wrote: > > You should try arguing with someone like Bank of Americas security and > operations > department You work for the same company as me? > some day about whether they want to suddenly upgrade 300 machines > for no real reason (from their perspective). > -- Michelle Sull

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

On 9/1/14, 7:16 PM, Andrew Berg wrote: On 2014.09.01 20:51, Michelle Sullivan wrote: And for the portsnap users? In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users. Sure about that? I'm sure of it. Your issue is with the tree itself, not the tool used to fetch it. Corre

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

Andrew Berg wrote: > On 2014.09.01 20:51, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > And for the portsnap users? >>> In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users. >>> >>> >> Sure about that? >> > I'm sure of it. Your issue is with the tree itself, not

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 03:51:31AM +0200 I heard the voice of Michelle Sullivan, and lo! it spake thus: > > Correct, take a 9.2 install disk, install it, portsnap and then > install pkg on it... Oh wait, you can't.. pkg_install is broken, > and 9.2 install disks don't have pkg in the BaseOS S

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

On 9/1/14, 6:39 PM, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: And for the portsnap users? In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users. Portsnap is a tool that used to obtain a copy of the ports tree. Portsnap is only one way, another way to get a copy of the ports tree is by using subversion a

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

On 2014.09.01 20:51, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >>> And for the portsnap users? >>> >> In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users. >> > Sure about that? I'm sure of it. Your issue is with the tree itself, not the tool used to fetch it. > Correct, take a 9.2 install disk, i

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

On Tuesday, September 02, 2014 3:51:31 AM Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: > >> And for the portsnap users? > > > > In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users. > > Sure about that? > > > Portsnap is a tool that used to obtain a copy of the ports tree. > > try

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: >> And for the portsnap users? >> >> >> > In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users. > Sure about that? > Portsnap is a tool that used to obtain a copy of the ports tree. > try this: portsnap fetch update && cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg && make

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

> > And for the portsnap users? > > In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users. Portsnap is a tool that used to obtain a copy of the ports tree. Portsnap is only one way, another way to get a copy of the ports tree is by using subversion and checking it out by using the svn comm

Re: poudriere and DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES

On 09/01/14 18:29, Chuck Burns wrote: > On Monday, September 01, 2014 5:17:06 PM Russell L. Carter wrote: >> Greetings, >> >> root@terpsichore> cat /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/make.conf >> # >> DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES=YES >> root@terpsichore> >> >> Running poudriere I see that it does indeed conca

Re: poudriere and DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES

On Monday, September 01, 2014 5:17:06 PM Russell L. Carter wrote: > Greetings, > > root@terpsichore> cat /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/make.conf > # > DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES=YES > root@terpsichore> > > Running poudriere I see that it does indeed concatenate > that make.conf into its configuration.

chromium iconify->resurrect

Greetings, I am curious if this is a problem that anyone else is seeing. chromium 37.0.2062.94, current r269700M Start up chromium, then immediately iconify it. Then try bringing it back again. All I get (after a delay of several seconds) is a white canvas in the correct size. Chromium does res

Re: pkg-fallout USE_PACKAGE_DEPENDS_ONLY and SIGERR?

Bryan, Thank you very much, I try to fix it. On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:14:40AM -0500, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 8/29/2014 2:07 AM, Koichiro IWAO wrote: > > Hello, > > > > How can I fix following two pkg-fallout notifications? The one of them > > is about > > dependency, another one is SIGERR.

Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > Hi all, > > The ports tree has been modified to only support pkg(8) as package management > system for all supported version of FreeBSD. > > if you were still using pkg_install (pkg_* tools) you will have to upgrade > your > system. > > The simplest way is > cd /usr/por

poudriere and DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES

Greetings, root@terpsichore> cat /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/make.conf # DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES=YES root@terpsichore> Running poudriere I see that it does indeed concatenate that make.conf into its configuration. But all those rotten, terrible, awful buggy ancient security-nightmare linux-f10 po

Re: www/horde does not run on 10-STABLE - Fatal Error: Could not pack data

On 09/01/14 23:44, Steven Hartland wrote: > Have you made sure you have rebuilt all php libs? Yes, twice, portmaster -fa Also, a fresh install of 10-STABLE yielded same result as upgrading 9. > - Original Message - From: "Per olof Ljungmark" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Monday, September 01, 2

Re: www/horde does not run on 10-STABLE - Fatal Error: Could not pack data

Have you made sure you have rebuilt all php libs? - Original Message - From: "Per olof Ljungmark" To: Cc: Sent: Monday, September 01, 2014 10:14 PM Subject: www/horde does not run on 10-STABLE - Fatal Error: Could not pack data Sorry for the cross-post but this is a bit out of th

www/horde does not run on 10-STABLE - Fatal Error: Could not pack data

Sorry for the cross-post but this is a bit out of the ordinary for me. In short, no matter how I try varoius changes, I am unable to run www/horde-base under latest 10-STABLE. The error is: HORDE: Could not pack data. [pid 80949 on line 154 of "/usr/local/share/pear/Horde/Pack.php"] >From what I

Re: [HEADSUP] The ports tree is now stage only

On 9/1/14 2:27 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: Hi all, The ports tree is now fully staged (only 2% has been left unstaged, marked as broken and will be removed from the ports tree if no PR to stage them are pending in bugzilla). I would like to thank every committer and maintainers for their wor

Re: How to submit a port update?

On 08/31/2014 12:50 AM, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi! > >> The update is mostly some small changes to the code to eliminate clang++ >> and recent g++ warnings along with Eric's typo, which has been >> languishing for a while. I know it's a small thing, but seeing those >> warnings when I compile the

Re: [HEADSUP] The ports tree is now stage only

On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 07:41:34PM +0200, Michael Gmelin wrote: > On Mon, 1 Sep 2014 11:27:00 +0200 > Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > The ports tree is now fully staged (only 2% has been left unstaged, > > marked as broken and will be removed from the ports tree if no PR to > > s

Re: Cant get gimp to use xsane with FreeBSD 10.-RELRASE

On Monday 18 August 2014 21:10:46 I wrote: > The output from gimp --verbose shows the following problem: > > Parsing '/home/mike/.gimp-2.8/pluginrc' > Querying plug-in: '/home/mike/.gimp-2.8/plug-ins/xsane' > /home/mike/.gimp-2.8/plug-ins/xsane: GIMP support missing > Terminating plug-in: '/home/

[HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

Hi all, The ports tree has been modified to only support pkg(8) as package management system for all supported version of FreeBSD. if you were still using pkg_install (pkg_* tools) you will have to upgrade your system. The simplest way is cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg make install then run pkg2n

strange failure when reinstalling multimedia/2mandvd with portupgrade

I've been having a problem reinstalling multimedia/2mandvd with portupgrade for a while now. The build succeeds, but I get an odd error when portupgrade tries to uninstall the old version before it installs the new version. > Compressing man pages (compress-man) ---> Backing up the old versi

[QAT] 366738: 4x leftovers

databases/cego: 2.20.11 -> 2.20.12 - Recovery added for check constraints and foreign keys - Corrections for btree recovery, btree creation was not performed correctly during tableset recovery. Tableset autocorrect mode is enabled on default now ( by define tableset ) Submitted by: Björn Le

Re: [HEADSUP] The ports tree is now stage only

On Mon, 1 Sep 2014 11:27:00 +0200 Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > Hi all, > > The ports tree is now fully staged (only 2% has been left unstaged, > marked as broken and will be removed from the ports tree if no PR to > stage them are pending in bugzilla). > > I would like to thank every committer a

Re: [HEADSUP] The ports tree is now stage only

Le 01/09/2014 11:27, Baptiste Daroussin a écrit : Hi all, The ports tree is now fully staged (only 2% has been left unstaged, marked as broken and will be removed from the ports tree if no PR to stage them are pending in bugzilla). I would like to thank every committer and maintainers for thei

lang/php56

PHP 5.6 was released last month. Is there any update scheduled? Thanks in advance. -- Documento sin título Juanjo Garcia Digital Value S.L. http://www.digitalvalue.es Tel. 96.316.20.89 Fax 96.373.85.07 Ausias March 104, Accs. - Valencia - ___

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

[HEADSUP] The ports tree is now stage only

Hi all, The ports tree is now fully staged (only 2% has been left unstaged, marked as broken and will be removed from the ports tree if no PR to stage them are pending in bugzilla). I would like to thank every committer and maintainers for their work on staging! It allowed us to convert more than