After yet more inactivity, I am reassigning asterisk16 to f...@kasimir.com
with portmgr hat. Thank you both for your patience.
mcl
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send an
This is a snapshot of the 'top' command that shows Java at 100%.
Basically it means that the system is more in this state then functional
and I can't understand why!
Can anyone help me??
Otherwise I will have to start looking at migrating this service away
from BSD and much more costlier
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 11:37:13AM +0300, Kaya Saman wrote:
> This is a snapshot of the 'top' command that shows Java at 100%.
>
> Basically it means that the system is more in this state then
> functional and I can't understand why!
>
> Can anyone help me??
You should probably spend a bit o
Thanks a lot Jeremy for the response!!
On 17/09/2010 11:56, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
[...]
You should probably spend a bit of time in a debugger (specifically a
Java debugger) figuring out if your code is spinning or not. Debugging
anything under Tomcat/Java is a PITA, and I say that from experie
on 17/09/2010 11:56 Jeremy Chadwick said the following:
> I don't think you understand how Solaris's VM behaves with ZFS. It
> behaves very differently than FreeBSD. On Solaris/OpenSolaris with ZFS,
> you'll see the ARC taking up as much memory as possible -- but unlike
> FreeBSD (AFAIK), when a
Thanks in advance for any help on this one
david
gmake[3]: Entering directory
`/usr/ports/devel/pwlib/work/ptlib_v1_12_0/src/ptlib/unix'
c++ -O1 -I/usr/ports/devel/pwlib/work/ptlib_v1_12_0/include -
I/usr/local/include -D_REENTRANT -pthread -fno-exceptions -O1 -
I/usr/ports/devel/pwlib/work/p
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:19:00PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 17/09/2010 11:56 Jeremy Chadwick said the following:
> > I don't think you understand how Solaris's VM behaves with ZFS. It
> > behaves very differently than FreeBSD. On Solaris/OpenSolaris with ZFS,
> > you'll see the ARC taking
on 17/09/2010 12:42 Jeremy Chadwick said the following:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:19:00PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> on 17/09/2010 11:56 Jeremy Chadwick said the following:
>>> I don't think you understand how Solaris's VM behaves with ZFS. It
>>> behaves very differently than FreeBSD. On S
- Original Message -
From: "Jeremy Chadwick"
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:19:00PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 17/09/2010 11:56 Jeremy Chadwick said the following:
> I don't think you understand how Solaris's VM behaves with ZFS. It
> behaves very differently than FreeBSD. On Solaris/Op
on 17/09/2010 12:49 Steven Hartland said the following:
>
> My experience is no this is no longer the case at least on stable + patches
> mentioned on thread:-
> "zfs very poor performance compared to ufs due to lack of cache?"
And at least one of those is a patch to prevent ZFS from giving memor
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:53:09PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 17/09/2010 12:42 Jeremy Chadwick said the following:
> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:19:00PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >> on 17/09/2010 11:56 Jeremy Chadwick said the following:
> >>> I don't think you understand how Solaris's VM
On 17/09/2010 13:07, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:53:09PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 17/09/2010 12:42 Jeremy Chadwick said the following:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:19:00PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 17/09/2010 11:56 Jeremy Chadwick said the followi
When building the meta port xorg I get an error saying
libxml2-2.7.7.tar.gz "local modification time does not match remote"
Ports tree is updated with portsnap update.
Any advise ?
Thanks
/Leslie
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://l
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 03:52:01PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
> When building the meta port xorg I get an error saying
>
> libxml2-2.7.7.tar.gz "local modification time does not match remote"
>
> Ports tree is updated with portsnap update.
>
> Any advise ?
Can't reproduce...
# pkg_info | grep
On 2010-09-17 16:25, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 03:52:01PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
When building the meta port xorg I get an error saying
libxml2-2.7.7.tar.gz "local modification time does not match remote"
Ports tree is updated with portsnap update.
Any advise ?
C
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 04:36:20PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
> On 2010-09-17 16:25, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> >On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 03:52:01PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
> >>When building the meta port xorg I get an error saying
> >>
> >>libxml2-2.7.7.tar.gz "local modification time does not m
It looks to me like the tarball you have in /usr/ports/distfiles,
probably from a previous build attempt, it incomplete or corrupt. The
checksum validation failure is proof of this. I'm betting the file on
your system is too small.
ls -l /usr/ports/distfiles/gnome2/libxml2-2.7.7.tar.gz should
Hi,
I've just meet a problem with x11/nvidia-driver by installing it with:
make install -DNOPORTDOCS
The vdpau include files were not installed (vdpau.h and vdpau_x11.h):
ls /usr/local/include/vdpau/
vdpau*.h
I believe their is a problem in the Makefile on this line:
"@${LN} -sf ${DOCSDIR}/vdpau
Olivier Cochard-Labbé writes:
> Hi,
>
> I've just meet a problem with x11/nvidia-driver by installing it with:
> make install -DNOPORTDOCS
>
> The vdpau include files were not installed (vdpau.h and vdpau_x11.h):
> ls /usr/local/include/vdpau/
> vdpau*.h
>
> I believe their is a problem in the Ma
On 09/17/2010 00:41, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 9/16/2010 6:15 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 9/16/2010 3:35 PM, Anonymous wrote:
>>> Dominic Fandrey writes:
>>>
On 16/09/2010 19:17, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
> * Dominic Fandrey (kamik...@bsdforen.de) wrote:
>
>> Just out of curiosity, wh
After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
registering the files it installed already I found out that it is
installing to / ~! ugh.
Why is ${PREFIX} being used and not ${LOCALBASE} ???
--
jhell,v
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.or
2010/9/17 jhell :
>
> After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
> registering the files it installed already I found out that it is
> installing to / ~! ugh.
>
> Why is ${PREFIX} being used and not ${LOCALBASE} ???
>
> --
>
> jhell,v
> _
While building kde4-4.5.1, I get this error:
# make install clean
===> kde4-4.5.1 depends on file: /usr/local/kde4/bin/kdebugdialog -
not found ===>Verifying install
for /usr/local/kde4/bin/kdebugdialog in /usr/ports/x11/kdebase4-runtime
===> kdebase-runtime-4.5.1 depends on file: /usr/loc
There is an apparent size mismatch in the "audio/espeak" port:
/usr/ports/audio/espeak $ sudo make
===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
===> License check disabled, port has not defined LICENSE
=> espeak-1.44.05-source.zip doesn't seem to exist in /usr/ports/distfiles/.
=> Attem
Around 3 weeks ago, I had asked on the list about how to compile
FreeRADIUS 2 with support for e-directory. I had been hoping to get an
answer back by now from someone with a success story of using FreeRADIUS
2
on FreeBSD with Novell E-Directory for a backend. With the (very) old
freeradius1 po
On 9/17/2010 10:49 AM, jhell wrote:
After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
registering the files it installed already I found out that it is
installing to / ~! ugh.
Why is ${PREFIX} being used and not ${LOCALBASE} ???
LOCALBASE is where the ports can find things th
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 09:21:46PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
> 2010/9/17 jhell :
> >
> > After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
> > registering the files it installed already I found out that it is
> > installing to / ~! ugh.
> >
> > Why is ${PREFIX} being used and no
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 01:49:37PM -0400, jhell wrote:
>
> After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
> registering the files it installed already I found out that it is
> installing to / ~! ugh.
>
> Why is ${PREFIX} being used and not ${LOCALBASE} ???
I reverted to the p
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Anonymous wrote:
> Try to replace the line with
>
> �...@${install_data} ${WRKSRC}/doc/vdpau*.h ${PREFIX}/include/vdpau
>
Thanks !
Works great :-)
Regards,
Olivier
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://list
Jerry writes:
> There is an apparent size mismatch in the "audio/espeak" port:
and the date is more recent than the port change, as well.
Looks like the release was re-rolled upstream, without
changing the version number.
You can probably get away with grabbing the new distfile,
updating distin
On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 17:04:51 -0400
Lowell Gilbert articulated:
> Jerry writes:
>
> > There is an apparent size mismatch in the "audio/espeak" port:
>
> and the date is more recent than the port change, as well.
> Looks like the release was re-rolled upstream, without
> changing the version num
Hi,
> [2010/9/17 Lowell Gilbert ]
> Jerry writes:
>
>> There is an apparent size mismatch in the "audio/espeak" port:
> [...]
> Or you can wait for nivit@ to go through it and make an official fix.
Just fixed. Thank you for the report.
--
Nicola Vitale
_
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 13:54, Wesley Shields wrote:
> While I agree that editors/vim could use the changes you're discussing,
> do you really think such a comment is needed? Attacks like that are not
> necessary. Let your code speak for itself.
>
> -- WXS
This port has major issues and numerous
On 2010-09-17 22:00, John D McDonnell wrote:
> Around 3 weeks ago, I had asked on the list about how to compile
> FreeRADIUS 2 with support for e-directory. I had been hoping to get an
> answer back by now from someone with a success story of using FreeRADIUS
> 2
> on FreeBSD with Novell E-Direc
jhell wrote:
> ... Mercurial being the distributed version control that it is
> allows you to clone, make the changes you need to the clone test it
> thoroughly and then either push or pull them to the main tree ...
At the risk of starting the VCS variant of the vi vs emacs wars :)
why Mercurial
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/17/2010 17:19, Wesley Shields wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 01:49:37PM -0400, jhell wrote:
>>
>> After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
>> registering the files it installed already I found out that it is
>> installing
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 07:18:09PM -0400, jhell wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 09/17/2010 17:19, Wesley Shields wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 01:49:37PM -0400, jhell wrote:
> >>
> >> After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
> >> registeri
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 03:51:42PM -0700, Rob Farmer wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 13:54, Wesley Shields wrote:
> > While I agree that editors/vim could use the changes you're discussing,
> > do you really think such a comment is needed? Attacks like that are not
> > necessary. Let your code sp
On 09/17/2010 19:22, Wesley Shields wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 07:18:09PM -0400, jhell wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 09/17/2010 17:19, Wesley Shields wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 01:49:37PM -0400, jhell wrote:
After a force upgrade of vim
On 09/17/2010 19:52, Anonymous wrote:
> jhell writes:
>
>> After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
>> registering the files it installed already I found out that it is
>> installing to / ~! ugh.
>
> Does the following diff fixes it?
>
> %%
> Index: editors/vim/Makefil
jhell writes:
> After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
> registering the files it installed already I found out that it is
> installing to / ~! ugh.
Does the following diff fixes it?
%%
Index: editors/vim/Makefile
=
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 16:24, Wesley Shields wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 03:51:42PM -0700, Rob Farmer wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 13:54, Wesley Shields wrote:
>> > While I agree that editors/vim could use the changes you're discussing,
>> > do you really think such a comment is needed
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 03:52:17AM +0400, Anonymous wrote:
> jhell writes:
>
> > After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
> > registering the files it installed already I found out that it is
> > installing to / ~! ugh.
>
> Does the following diff fixes it?
It does all
Anonymous writes:
> jhell writes:
>
>> After a force upgrade of vim that had failed unfortunately not
>> registering the files it installed already I found out that it is
>> installing to / ~! ugh.
>
> Does the following diff fixes it?
>
> %%
> Index: editors/vim/Makefile
> =
On 18/09/2010 01:13, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
> jhell wrote:
>
>> ... Mercurial being the distributed version control that it is
>> allows you to clone, make the changes you need to the clone test it
>> thoroughly and then either push or pull them to the main tree ...
>
> At the risk of star
45 matches
Mail list logo
