Re: "Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Kevin Oberman
On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote: > On 24 Dec, 2017, at 23:09, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> >> On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> On 24 Dec, 2017, at 22:23, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> >> On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:18 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> On 24 De

Re: "Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Adam Weinberger
On 24 Dec, 2017, at 23:09, Kevin Oberman wrote: On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote: On 24 Dec, 2017, at 22:23, Kevin Oberman wrote: On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:18 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote: On 24 Dec, 2017, at 20:03, Walter Schwarzenfeld wrote: But RUBY_RELVERSION=

Re: "Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Kevin Oberman
On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote: > On 24 Dec, 2017, at 22:23, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> >> On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:18 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> On 24 Dec, 2017, at 20:03, Walter Schwarzenfeld < >> w.schwarzenf...@utanet.at> wrote: >> >> But >> >> RUBY_RELVERSION=

Re: "Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld
Der Problem seems was complete another one. After this I saw default version of ruby is 2.4. Ruby-bdb fails to install. So  I guess it was mix of ruby 2.3 and 2.4 ports. After upgrade to 2.4, no such problems anymore. After upgrade there was no such problem anymore. (But no entry in /usr/por

Re: "Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Adam Weinberger
On 24 Dec, 2017, at 22:23, Kevin Oberman wrote: On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:18 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote: On 24 Dec, 2017, at 20:03, Walter Schwarzenfeld wrote: But RUBY_RELVERSION=2.3.6 RUBY_PORTREVISION= 0 <= RUBY_PORTEPOCH= 1 RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=0 RUBY23=

Re: "Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Kevin Oberman
On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:18 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote: > On 24 Dec, 2017, at 20:03, Walter Schwarzenfeld >> wrote: >> >> But >> >> RUBY_RELVERSION=2.3.6 >> RUBY_PORTREVISION= 0 <= >> RUBY_PORTEPOCH= 1 >> RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=0 >> RUBY23= "" # PLI

Re: "Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Adam Weinberger
On 24 Dec, 2017, at 20:03, Walter Schwarzenfeld wrote: But RUBY_RELVERSION=2.3.6 RUBY_PORTREVISION= 0 <= RUBY_PORTEPOCH= 1 RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=0 RUBY23= "" # PLIST_SUB helpers PORTREVISION=0 confuses pkg version pkg version |grep ruby23 ruby

security/nss vs. TARGET_ARCH=powerpc : error: comparison of constant 18446744073709551615 with expression of type 'unsigned long' is always true

2017-12-24 Thread Mark Millard
[I experiment with using clang as the system compiler on/for powerpc (and powerpc64).] Just an FYI. . . When I attempted to build updated ( -r457194 ) ports in poudriere in my clang-based (32-bit) powerpc environment, security/nss failed with: pqg.c:345:16: error: comparison of constant 18446744

Re: OSS Audio

2017-12-24 Thread blubee blubeeme
On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Sid wrote: > OSS soundcard.h for FreeBSD stable and current > https://svn.freebsd.org/base/stable/11/sys/sys/ > https://svn.freebsd.org/base/head/sys/sys/ > > blubee blubeeme; Mon Dec 11 17:03:10 UTC 2017 > > I'm taking a look at soundcard.h in /usr/include/sys/so

Re: "Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld
But RUBY_RELVERSION=    2.3.6 RUBY_PORTREVISION=  0 <= RUBY_PORTEPOCH= 1 RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=    0 RUBY23= ""  # PLIST_SUB helpers PORTREVISION=0 confuses pkg version pkg version |grep ruby23 ruby23-2.3.6,1   < this is the version which i

Re: "Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld
sorry, was my error, seems I am confused ;-)) puzzled revision and portepoch. ___ 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: "Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld
in my first line was a copy/paste error:  pkg info ruby ruby-2.3.6,1 Name   : ruby Version    : 2.3.6,1 ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "fr

"Confused" PORTREVISION

2017-12-24 Thread Walter Schwarzenfeld
maybe a minor "problem" (I saw it cause portrac find it to update, but it is updated). lang/ruby Name   : ruby Version    : 2.3.6,1 make -V RUBY_PORTREVISION 0 make -V PORTREVISION 0 may be a problem for this condition in the Makefile 84 .if ${PORTREVISION} != 0 85 _SUF

Re: Canberra

2017-12-24 Thread Sid
> blubee blubeeme; Sun Dec 24 06:31:00 UTC 2017 > If you wrote that makefile that removes all the gtk stuff, you can either > try to get it to Marcus and see if he's > willing to use that. > If you'd like me to work on the OSS audio portion, drop me that Makefile > and I'll look at it in a bit.

Re: Are these Emacs ports still useful?

2017-12-24 Thread Joseph Mingrone
Joseph Mingrone writes: > - japanese/egg-canna/Makefile (does not build with emacs versions >= 23) > - japanese/migemo-emacs23 Are you Ok if I remove these ports immediately, since Emacs version 23 was removed from the ports tree in 2014. Joseph signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: License and adopting software

2017-12-24 Thread Sid
If the author doesn't respond, it's best to move on. Either use their GPL, or completely rewrite it, to avoid infringing on their work. It should be in it's own separate files, so it doesn't get absorbed into that other work's more restrictive license, before it is its own work. You'll need to l