‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday 1 April 2020 16:34, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Hi, Reference:
>
> > From: Lorenzo Salvadore phascolarc...@protonmail.ch
> > Reply-to: Lorenzo Salvadore phascolarc...@protonmail.ch
> > Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 09:56:27 +
>
> Lorenzo Salvadore wrote:
>
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday 1 April 2020 02:22, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Hi ports@
> A libcurses version problem:
>
> Running 13.0-CURRENT with
> /usr/src
> cat .svn_revision 359319
> cat .ctm_status src-cur 14430
> /usr/ports
> cat .svn_revision 529842
> cat .ctm_status ports-
Hello.
Can anyone please take a look at review https://reviews.freebsd.org/D24104 ?
My mentor would like an advice from someone with some expertise about rc scripts
to check if everything is fine.
Also, there is an issue with licensing: if you want to give an advice about
that issue
as well it i
> > Are there any way to know which of installed ports are linked to base
> > ncurses?
> > Best Regards.
>
> All the one with USES=ncurses in ports, otherwise I am sorry but no we have no
> way to track that down.
What about "pkg query -a '%n: %B' | grep ncurses"? Maybe it can not distinguish
betw
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Sunday 28 July 2019 20:56, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jul 2019, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>
> > The description of the commit states:
> > This includes ports
> >
> > - with USE_GCC=yes or USE_GCC=any,
> > - with USES=fortran,
> > - using Mk/bsd.octave
> On 29/05/2019 10:56, Peter Pentchev wrote:
>
> > Hmm, I could be wrong, but isn't ${LOCALBASE} supposed to be where
> > ports find stuffduring the build, and ${PREFIX} where they
> > install the built files? Of course, I haven't actually touched
> > a FreeBSD ports build in years, so I might very
On Sunday 17 March 2019 10:48, Lorenzo Salvadore via freebsd-ports
wrote:
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Saturday 16 March 2019 22:08, Alfred Perlstein alf...@freebsd.org wrote:
>
> > How do I stop these emails?
> > I just retired my commit bit and stopped comm
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Saturday 16 March 2019 22:08, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> How do I stop these emails?
>
> I just retired my commit bit and stopped committing to ports after some
> folks yelled at me for committing to ports without signoff even though I
> was doing ports before
> > Hi!
> >
> > > > SSD or spinning drives ?
> > > >
> > > > > I have 3.6 Gb of RAM and 2 Gb of swap.
> > > >
> > > > Run top and check the state of ARC.
> > > > I think it needs much more RAM.
> > >
> > > I don't think it is a SSD (it has cylinders, sectors etc.).
> > > If you can tell me a way to
> Hi!
>
> > > SSD or spinning drives ?
> > >
> > > > I have 3.6 Gb of RAM and 2 Gb of swap.
> > >
> > > Run top and check the state of ARC.
> > > I think it needs much more RAM.
> >
> > I don't think it is a SSD (it has cylinders, sectors etc.).
> > If you can tell me a way to check it I will be gl
> Hi!
>
> > > > Am I the only poudriere user that notices very long build times on an
> > > > amd64 machine in i386 jails? This does not happen always, but
> > > > frequently enough to be a nuisance.
> > >
> > > Can you say more about the rest of the setup ?
> > > Filesystem type ? Type of storag
> On 31.12.18 21:03, Lorenzo Salvadore via freebsd-ports wrote:
>
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > > Am I the only poudriere user that notices very long build times on an
> > > > amd64 machine in i386 jails? This does not happen always, but
> > >
> Hi!
>
> > Am I the only poudriere user that notices very long build times on an amd64
> > machine in i386 jails? This does not happen always, but frequently enough
> > to be a nuisance.
>
> Can you say more about the rest of the setup ?
>
> Filesystem type ? Type of storage ? Memory size ? Base
Hello.
Am I the only poudriere user that notices very long build times on an amd64
machine in i386 jails? This does not happen always, but frequently enough to be
a nuisance.
More precisely, building some packages in an i386 jail takes ages compared to
the same packages built in an amd64 jail.
> Hi!
>
> > It looks like the patch attached to bug #233772 is needed:
> > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233772
> > It is an update of cad/z88: the user that requested the update
> > asks if the patch will be merged. The patch has been tested
> > with poudriere on 11.2-RELEASE,
Hello.
It looks like the patch attached to bug #233772 is needed:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233772
It is an update of cad/z88: the user that requested the update
asks if the patch will be merged. The patch has been tested
with poudriere on 11.2-RELEASE, 12.0-RELEASE, both
> The qt* ports spreads around in the whole portstree.
>
> It is reasonable to concentrate all these ports in a qt category? I
> think it is easier to find (and also easier to maintain).
Indeed it is a bit annoying for me when I have to update qt* ports.
I don't use portmaster or similar (I don't
> There is a dependency recursion loop in the build process for editors/vim
>
>
> if one selects the GTK3 config menu option. The only way I've found so far to
> get around this is to choose the GTK2 option instead.
> With GTK3 selected, graphics/librsvg2 becomes a dependency, which, in
> turn
> Hello,
>
> Poudriere is installed, poudriere.conf adjusted to my config, then I
> create the firts jail, following handbook/ports-poudriere.html :
>
> > poudriere jail -c -j 12amd64 -v 12.0-STABLE
> >
> >
> >
> > [00:00:00] Creating 12amd64 fs at /usr/
>Hi!
>
>> I am working on creating and adopting some ports and I see that a
>> it is very frequent that distfiles have multiple licenses with the following
>> scheme: the project has one main license (declared in a COPYING or
>> LICENSE file for example) but also many files with their own licenses
Hello!
I am working on creating and adopting some ports and I see that a
it is very frequent that distfiles have multiple licenses with the following
scheme: the project has one main license (declared in a COPYING or
LICENSE file for example) but also many files with their own licenses
(a frequent
> Hello,
>
> For some time, I've had problems building rust with poudriere.
>
> Poudriere log: https://borderworlds.dk/~xi/rust-1.30.0.log.txt
>
> It looks like the system is running out of swap as I get this in
> /var/log/messages:
>
> Oct 30 05:15:31 xindi kernel: pid 68935 (rustc), uid 65534, wa
> Dear all,
>
> normally if I switch to a new release a remove the old jail by using:
>
> poudriere jails -d -j 111amd64
>
> But it seems that it does not remove everything, all the logs are not
> deleted:
> http://pkg.fechner.net/index.html
>
> I created again the jail with:
> poudriere jail -c
> > > So I just saw another post on this list that mentioned the "pkg version
> > > -vL="
> > > command. Now, I've got a /usr/ports tree used by poudriere and run on the
> > > same machine. I svn updated my /usr/ports and kicked off poudriere. When
> > > it
> > > was done I ran "pkg upgrade". But
> So I just saw another post on this list that mentioned the "pkg version -vL="
> command. Now, I've got a /usr/ports tree used by poudriere and run on the
> same machine. I svn updated my /usr/ports and kicked off poudriere. When it
> was done I ran "pkg upgrade". But the "pkg version -vL=" still
> I just updated my ports tree and then proceeded to run: "pkg version -vL="
> which produced this:
>
> suphp-0.7.2_2 ? orphaned: www/suphp
>
> There is nothing about this in either the UPDATING or MOVED files. Has this
> port actually been removed and if so, why?
I have it in my port tree, which
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 12:24:54PM +0000, Lorenzo Salvadore via freebsd-ports
> wrote:
>
> > Hello.
> > I am trying to adopt and update a port which has no license specified.
> > Almost all files are under public domain, but there are some exceptions,
> > no
Hello.
I am trying to adopt and update a port which has no license specified.
Almost all files are under public domain, but there are some exceptions, not all
in the same directories, so I would need to assign to LICENSE_DISTFILES_PD
a value that means "all files are under public domain unless oth
> Todays update and I am using portmaster:
> ===>>> Starting build for ports that need updating <<<===
>
> ===>>> Launching child to install lang/gcc5
>
> ===>>> All >> lang/gcc5 (1/2)
>
> ===>>> Currently installed version: gcc5-5.5.0_4
> ===>>> Port directory: /usr/ports/lang/gcc5
>
> ===>>> Star
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 09:53:32AM +0000, Lorenzo Salvadore via freebsd-ports
> wrote:
>
> > > > While playing with compiling www/chromium, I'm seeing make stop with
> > > > /usr/bin/ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: OPENSSL_cpuid_setup
> > > > T
> > While playing with compiling www/chromium, I'm seeing make stop with
> > /usr/bin/ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: OPENSSL_cpuid_setup
> > This is on a Raspberry Pi 3 running
> > FreeBSD www.zefox.org 12.0-ALPHA7 FreeBSD 12.0-ALPHA7 r338880 GENERIC
> > with ports at
> > 480613
> > World and ker
> > That's the problem, the same code works for earlier version of FreeBSD.
>
> You can try switching back to the old GNU ld via something like "ln
> -fs ld.bfd /usr/bin/ld" and building the port on 12. (Or, set
> WITHOUT_LLD_IS_LD in src.conf.) If that works I'll try to suggest some
> further step
> I am testing both the actual version of brlcad and your changes. Since I have
> a
> slow computer, this will take some time (if someone else with a more powerful
> computer can perform the tests in less time it is welcomed).
I have finished testing. While the actual version of brlcad fails to b
> I am trying to update cad/brlcad there's an open issue on the Bugzilla that
> I'd like to resolve.
>
> I'm getting this error both in poudriere but now it's also showing up when
> trying to build outside of poudriere.
>
> Here is the build log
> https://transfer.sh/bn41v/brlcad-7.26.4_8.log
>
> t
> This issue seemed to have come up in the past:
> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2018-March/068870.html
>
> Jail name: amd64_cur
> Jail version: 12.0-ALPHA7 1200084
> Jail vcs version: r338898
> Jail arch: amd64
> Jail method: svn
> Jail mount: /usr/local/poudriere/jails/amd
> Hi,
>
> In my quest for creating a new port (pgadmin4) I'm having a problem with
> creating a working pkg-plist. Seems to me that at least the created binary
> should be in the pkg-plist file, in my case "bin/pgAdmin4". But when I do
> that, make check-plist results in an error:
>
> ===> Checking
> > Removed that file from those ports and didn't seem to help
>
> Can you tell if installing port lang/python36 alone instead of as a
> dependency works? I think it does not.
> The problem might be at the end of lang/python36/Makefile (from
> line 140 and down). There is a similiar block at the en
> Removed that file from those ports and didn't seem to help
Can you tell if installing port lang/python36 alone instead of as a
dependency works? I think it does not.
The problem might be at the end of lang/python36/Makefile (from
line 140 and down). There is a similiar block at the end of
lang/p
> Maybe I need to stop using portupgrade. What is the best replacement?
I never liked traditional updaters: to me, they seem too complex for a task that
should be rather simple. Thus I wrote one myself: Caronte.
It has not yet been committed to the port tree, but you can find the port
here, waitin
> > It happens only on non x86 no matter version of freebsd. Py-pytest at py36
> > does it for me. Koobs tested it in his arm64 at py36. It’s not the port
> > itself. As the file that touches during build isn’t related to the port The
> > freebsd11 changes to freebsd12 according to jail versio
> It happens only on non x86 no matter version of freebsd. Py-pytest at py36
> does it for me. Koobs tested it in his arm64 at py36. It’s not the port
> itself. As the file that touches during build isn’t related to the port The
> freebsd11 changes to freebsd12 according to jail version
> usr
> Hi,
> There are a number of ports that seem to have their own preferential
> flavour of python, and some for example want to install python27 and
> python36 in the same place, and it's a pain when using portupgrade or
> similar tools.
> I have this in my /etc/make.conf:
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= pytho
> Submitting this here as I believe this may be best place to ask the question
> as I use poudriere to test ports before sending patches
> I am on 12 current. If I’m building a port that can use either py27 or py36
> on an non x86based system the py27 works fine on all my jails. If I test with
>
43 matches
Mail list logo
