I agree having a packaging@ mailing list would help to discuss about
pkg_install stuff.
We need to summarize the ideas of each one, then discuss about it. Only then
we can specified what needs to be done and how (keeping in mind that we need
to keep compatibility at least as a fallback or directly
On Friday 20 August 2010 05:24:43 Doug Barton wrote:
> The CONFLICTS in ffmpeg are not set correctly. They refer to
> ffmpeg-devel-20* however the port registers itself as
> ffmpeg-2010.07.25_2. If this is fixed portmaster's alternate
dependency
> handling works as expected.
oh... thank you for b
On 20/08/2010, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> 1. SQLite was killed before because of complexity and because it was
> needs another package in base that isn't BSD licensed. That's why
And... both ideas are completely wrong. SQLite can be imported as a
single C file + header, which you must agree is prac
Good day!
How should i trick port's Makefile to get another port's source code
extracted (make extract) and how to get full path to it (with version
number in directory name etc). Application needs source of third-party
application (that in ports) on build stage.
Thanks in advanc
On 20/08/2010 12:05, cvs-...@yandex.ru wrote:
>
>Good day!
>How should i trick port's Makefile to get another port's source code
>extracted (make extract) and how to get full path to it (with version
>number in directory name etc). Application needs source of third-party
>appli
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:05:33 +0400
cvs-...@yandex.ru wrote:
>
>Good day!
>How should i trick port's Makefile to get another port's source
> code extracted (make extract)
See 5.7.9 in the ports handbook.
> and how to get full path to it
Presumably relative to your own port.
__
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>
> And... both ideas are completely wrong. SQLite can be imported as a
> single C file + header, which you must agree is practically the
> optimum, and its license is "public domain" which is, if anything,
> "freer" than BSDL and eminently comp
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 02:09:59PM +0200, Julien Laffaye wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>
> >
> > And... both ideas are completely wrong. SQLite can be imported as a
> > single C file + header, which you must agree is practically the
> > optimum, and its license is "
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Chadwick
To: Jesse Smith
Cc: freebsd-ports
Subject: Re: Converting from jiffies to ticks
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 12:26:45 -0700
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 04:15:39PM -0300, Jesse Smith wrote:
> I am currently trying to port a program from Linux to FreeBSD whi
Anonymous writes:
> David Naylor writes:
>
>>> %%
>>> Index: java/openjdk6/Makefile
>>> @@ -266,3 +267,6 @@ post-install:
>>> @${CAT} ${PKGMESSAGE}
>>>
>>> .include
>>> +
>>> +# XXX: use `?=' in bsd.port.mk
>>> +_MAKE_JOBS=
>>> %%
>>
>> Yes, I prefer this approach. See attached for the p
Garrett Cooper writes:
> The emphasis that Florent made too was to remove crud in pkg_install
> and libpkg and get things down to more of a library form so we could
> develop thin wrappers above pkg_install with logical functions (like
> apt-get, yum, etc does with fetching, whereas rpm does with
2010/8/19 Andres Perera :
> The idea is to add a VERSION field so that automated tools can display
> the entries prior performing the actual upgrade.
>
> Filtering by date isn't exact enough, so the new field will correspond
> with the first version of the port were the "problem" occurs.
>
> Withou
Output from gscan2pdf 0.9.31 when run from a shell:
ti...@kg-v2$ gscan2pdf
Bareword found where operator expected at /usr/local/bin/gscan2pdf line
8849, near "'button"
(Might be a runaway multi-line '' string starting on line 8723)
(Missing operator before button?)
syntax error at /usr/local/
On Aug 19, 2010, at 20:30 , Garrett Cooper wrote:
>This request has been sitting mostly idle for the last 3 months. I
> realize people are busy, but could someone with some time please help
> me work out any issues that might exist with this port, and commit
> this to ports? There are a _lot_
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Ade Lovett wrote:
>
> On Aug 19, 2010, at 20:30 , Garrett Cooper wrote:
>
>> This request has been sitting mostly idle for the last 3 months. I
>> realize people are busy, but could someone with some time please help
>> me work out any issues that might exist w
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> Greetings again. When doing a "make install", it takes *forever* in the
> "Generating RDoc documentation" step. This isn't a big deal the first time,
> but when updating Ruby (such as for the recent security announcement), you
> need to do
At 4:16 PM -0700 8/20/10, Stanislav Sedov wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 18:55:33 -0400
>Eitan Adler mentioned:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> > Greetings again. When doing a "make install", it takes *forever* in the
>> > "Generating RDoc documentation" step. This isn'
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 18:55:33 -0400
Eitan Adler mentioned:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> > Greetings again. When doing a "make install", it takes *forever* in the
> > "Generating RDoc documentation" step. This isn't a big deal the first time,
> > but when updating Rub
On 08/20/2010 16:31, Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 4:16 PM -0700 8/20/10, Stanislav Sedov wrote:
Nonetheless, I'll try to look on what I can do. But I can't promise anything,
because
this is really something that should be done on ruby side.
Thanks. You may get some pushback because other package
Here is the message I get:
===> Creating users and/or groups.
Creating group `saned' with gid `194'.
pw: gid `194' has already been allocated
*** Error code 65
My /etc/group file has this line:
apache:*:194:
Obviously there is a conflict.
Yuri
___
fre
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Yuri wrote:
> Here is the message I get:
> ===> Creating users and/or groups.
> Creating group `saned' with gid `194'.
> pw: gid `194' has already been allocated
> *** Error code 65
>
> My /etc/group file has this line:
> apache:*:194:
>
> Obviously there is a con
On Aug 20, 2010, at 9:27 AM, Anonymous wrote:
> Garrett Cooper writes:
>
>> The emphasis that Florent made too was to remove crud in pkg_install
>> and libpkg and get things down to more of a library form so we could
>> develop thin wrappers above pkg_install with logical functions (like
>> apt-
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 06:50:57PM -0700, Yuri wrote:
> Here is the message I get:
> ===> Creating users and/or groups.
> Creating group `saned' with gid `194'.
> pw: gid `194' has already been allocated
> *** Error code 65
>
> My /etc/group file has this line:
> apache:*:194:
>
> Obviously there
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles. In many cases
these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
build environments. The most common probl
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically schedule removal of ports
that have been judged to have outlived their usefulness. Often,
this is due to a better alternative having become available and/or
the cessation of development on th
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in the
FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users about
ports that are marked as "forbidden" in their Makefiles. Often,
these ports are so marked due to security concerns, such as known
exploits.
An overview of each port, inclu
29 matches
Mail list logo
