On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 06:03:39PM -0500, Mark Linimon wrote:
> IMHO you should wait until we are ready to do a test-run on pointyhat.
> Otherwise you are going to be finding problems one-at-a-time that we
> can otherwise find out in bulk.
Thats a point, ok.
> To reiterate: there is very active w
When a port installs dependencies prior to building and the -j flag is set for
make, portupgrade somehow breaks installing dependencies. If I simply do
# cd /usr/ports/category/port
# make install -j 4
it works fine, but the command
# portinstall category/port -m '-j 4'
does not work if depend
[LoN]Kamikaze wrote:
> When a port installs dependencies prior to building and the -j flag is set
> for make, portupgrade somehow breaks installing dependencies. If I simply do
>
> # cd /usr/ports/category/port
> # make install -j 4
>
> it works fine, but the command
>
> # portinstall category/
Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
> [LoN]Kamikaze wrote:
>> When a port installs dependencies prior to building and the -j flag is set
>> for make, portupgrade somehow breaks installing dependencies. If I simply do
>>
>> # cd /usr/ports/category/port
>> # make install -j 4
>>
>> it works fine, but the co
Hi,
I've been using portmanager for a while but one of the sudden
portmanager dumped core:
#portmanager -u
...
...
00494 bitstream-vera-1.10_2 /x11-fonts/bitstream-vera
00493 glitz-0.4.4_1 /graphics/glitz
00492 libthai-0.1.5_1 /devel/libthai
00491 automake-1.9.6 /devel/automake19
00490 au
On Sat, 22 Jul 2006, [LoN]Kamikaze wrote:
L> > -j is not supported for ports.
L> >
L>
L> Well, it should be, with all the multi-core CPUs coming. And all other
L> targets work fine with -j. It's solely the install target that's broken.
L>
L> Is there any reason why it is not supported?
Too ma
Mr Alexus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Lowell Gilbert wrote:
>> "alexus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>
>>> ===> Building for gettext-0.14.5_2
>>> Making all in autoconf-lib-link
>>> Making all in m4
>>> Making all in tests
>>> Making all in gettext-runtime
>>> make all-recursive
>>> Maki
Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Jul 2006, [LoN]Kamikaze wrote:
>
> L> > -j is not supported for ports.
> L> >
> L>
> L> Well, it should be, with all the multi-core CPUs coming. And all other
> L> targets work fine with -j. It's solely the install target that's broken.
> L>
> L> Is ther
When running slapd on a valilla FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE
/var/log/debug.log is rotating frequently.
It seems that the default loglevel is set to 256; correct?
Is this the default for openldap?
I've been grepping through the sources but was unable
to verify my hypothesis. How can I know the actual defa
Thierry Lacoste wrote:
> It seems that the default loglevel is set to 256; correct?
> Is this the default for openldap?
> I've been grepping through the sources but was unable
> to verify my hypothesis. How can I know the actual default loglevel?
http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin23/slapdconfig.ht
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 12:43:40PM -0400, Jim Trigg wrote:
> On Fri, July 21, 2006 12:10 pm, Donald J. O'Neill wrote:
> > On Friday 21 July 2006 09:45, Jim Trigg wrote:
> >> On Fri, July 21, 2006 2:22 am, Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
> >> > Jim Trigg wrote:
> >> >> I'm setting up a new system with 6.1-
> BTW, I apologize for this is not at all a portupgrade issue, but an issue
> of the ports system.
It is an issue with individual ports -- actually not the "port" (e.g.
Makefile framework, pkg-*) but the individual applications (IIUC).
> Well, at least the ports system itself should not be broken
Thanks a lot.
> > It seems that the default loglevel is set to 256; correct?
> > Is this the default for openldap?
> > I've been grepping through the sources but was unable
> > to verify my hypothesis. How can I know the actual default loglevel?
>
> http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin23/slapdconfig.
On Jul 17, 2006, at 7:49 PM, Anish Mistry wrote:
On Monday 17 July 2006 19:05, Anthony Agelastos wrote:
On Jul 16, 2006, at 11:19 PM, John Merryweather Cooper wrote:
Anthony Agelastos wrote:
On Jul 16, 2006, at 10:08 PM, John Merryweather Cooper wrote:
Anthony Agelastos wrote:
On Jul 16, 20
On Jul 22, 2006, at 9:32 PM, Anthony Agelastos wrote:
On Jul 17, 2006, at 7:49 PM, Anish Mistry wrote:
On Monday 17 July 2006 19:05, Anthony Agelastos wrote:
On Jul 16, 2006, at 11:19 PM, John Merryweather Cooper wrote:
Anthony Agelastos wrote:
On Jul 16, 2006, at 10:08 PM, John Merryweathe
On Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 11:55:23PM +0200, Thierry Lacoste wrote:
> > So, Correct, yes. However that loglevel records the activity of the
> > server in about the same level of detail as you'ld hope to see from any
> > other network server.
> With no negative impact on performance for a loaded produ
16 matches
Mail list logo
