[patch] net/etherboot doesn't compile with gcc4

2008-02-20 Thread Jeremie Le Hen
>Submitter-Id: current-users >Originator:Jeremie Le Hen >Organization: >Confidential: no >Synopsis: [patch] net/etherboot doesn't compile with gcc4 >Severity: non-critical >Priority: low >Category: ports >Class: sw-bug >Release: FreeBSD 7.0 i386 >Enviro

Re: Fix for FreeBSD-SA-08:01.pty appears to break net/omnitty?

2008-02-20 Thread Marcus Alves Grando
Rong-En Fan wrote: Hi, On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 06:12:59PM -0800, David Wolfskill wrote: On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 10:07:07AM +0800, Rong-En Fan wrote: FYI, this is fixed in omnitty 0.3.0_1. Thanks! Should I file a PR against misc/compat6x (because its version of libutil.so is apparently still

mail/mail-notification patch 117710 commit?

2008-02-20 Thread Mark Evenson
mail/mail-notification has been broken for a while. The patch attached to [117710][1] worked for me on a fresh ports tree as of 20080220. Perhaps it should be committed/moved into the right queue? [1]: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/117710 -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> &

I've started to hate portupgrade

2008-02-20 Thread Angelo Turetta
Every new version has such *evident* regressions! Beside needlessly repackaging ports that fail build when doing "-a -p" (obviously non repeatable by the developers), and sometimes failing to reinstall a package if the install phase fails (also non reproducible, but happening nonetheless in pr

Re: I've started to hate portupgrade

2008-02-20 Thread Dominic Fandrey
Angelo Turetta wrote: Every new version has such *evident* regressions! Beside needlessly repackaging ports that fail build when doing "-a -p" (obviously non repeatable by the developers), and sometimes failing to reinstall a package if the install phase fails (also non reproducible, but happ

Portupgrade not running get_notinstalled_depends (2.4.3_1, 2 vs 2.4.3_2, 2)

2008-02-20 Thread James
hihi. I was wondering what sort of problems the following change to portupgrade was solving: -- sem 2008-02-11 16:17:39 UTC FreeBSD ports repository Modified files: ports-mgmt/portupgrade Makefile ports

FreeBSD Port: timeseal-1.0 - Bad system call

2008-02-20 Thread peter bird
Please can you help with this? pulsarity# uname -a FreeBSD pulsarity.demax.sk 7.0-RC1 FreeBSD 7.0-RC1 #1: Wed Feb 6 11:45:51 CET 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PULS i386 pulsarity# timeseal Bad system call pulsarity# kldstat Id Refs AddressSize Name 18 0xc040

Re: I've started to hate portupgrade

2008-02-20 Thread Gerard
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:25:32 +0100 Angelo Turetta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Every new version has such *evident* regressions! > > Beside needlessly repackaging ports that fail build when doing "-a > -p" (obviously non repeatable by the developers), and sometimes > failing to reinstall a packag

Re: Portupgrade not running get_notinstalled_depends (2.4.3_1, 2 vs 2.4.3_2, 2)

2008-02-20 Thread Pav Lucistnik
James píše v st 20. 02. 2008 v 09:32 -0600: > hihi. I was wondering what sort of problems the following change to > portupgrade was solving: > > -- > > sem 2008-02-11 16:17:39 UTC > > FreeBSD ports repository >

Re: Portupgrade not running get_notinstalled_depends (2.4.3_1, 2 vs 2.4.3_2, 2)

2008-02-20 Thread James
2008/2/20 Pav Lucistnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > It was installing dependent ports that does not needed to be getting > installed. To be more precise, a build dependency of already > up-to-date port in a dependency chain of an outdated port. I see. Great. Thanks for the information, Pav. --