Hi,
At the end of the install, it says that dhcpd will run with it's root at:
/var/db/dhcpd
I'm curious. Is there some security reason that I'm missing? Why wouldn't
this be in: /usr/local/var/db/dhcpd ?
I'm very happy with the ongoing push to keep everything that isn't OS in the
/usr/local
Adding to my own post:
Something that was reported way back in 2012 and has also never been corrected,
is the informational message at the end of the port.
The last line has: WARNING: never edit the chrooted or jailed dhcpd.conf file
but the /usr/local/etc/dhcpd.conf instead which is always co
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 11:51 PM Matthew D. Fuller
wrote:
>
> Torfinn,
>
> > It doesn't apply cleanly to portupgrade in an up to date ports tree
>
> Hm. Seems to work fine here.
>
> % svn up
> Updating '.':
> At revision 498434.
Ah. I use portsnap to upgrade my ports tree. Is there a delay or dif
Often, a port fails to upgrade because of an existing link. Example:
> Compressing man pages (compress-man)
===> Installing ldconfig configuration file
---> Backing up the old version
---> Uninstalling the old version
[Reading data from pkg(8) ... - 990 packages found - done]
---> Deinstal
> On Apr 10, 2019, at 07:38, Paul Pathiakis via freebsd-ports
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> At the end of the install, it says that dhcpd will run with it's root at:
> /var/db/dhcpd
> I'm curious. Is there some security reason that I'm missing? Why wouldn't
> this be in: /usr/local/var/db/dhcpd ?
>
Ahhh... makes sense. (aka security... :D )
Thank you, Adam.
P.
On Wednesday, April 10, 2019, 10:53:26 AM EDT, Adam Weinberger
wrote:
> On Apr 10, 2019, at 07:38, Paul Pathiakis via freebsd-ports
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> At the end of the install, it says that dhcpd will run with it's r
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 04:06:00PM +0200 I heard the voice of
Torfinn Ingolfsen, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> Ah. I use portsnap to upgrade my ports tree. Is there a delay or
> difference?
A delay, sure, but the last commit in devel/portupgrade was over a
year ago. You'd probably notice if it were
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 04:13:33PM +0200 I heard the voice of
Torfinn Ingolfsen, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> Often, a port fails to upgrade because of an existing link. Example:
>
> ---> Preserving /usr/local/lib/qt5/libQt5DBus.so.5 as
> /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg/libQt5DBus.so.5
> cp: symlink: libQ
Yesterday I went through a round of updating and compiling ports. By
all outward appearances it was successful. But this morning's daily
status report revealed that clang had crashed on a signal 11 once
while compiling each qt5 package. (For once, it was useful to have
the "such-and-such install
On 10 Apr 2019, at 19:37, George Mitchell wrote:
>
> Yesterday I went through a round of updating and compiling ports. By
> all outward appearances it was successful. But this morning's daily
> status report revealed that clang had crashed on a signal 11 once
> while compiling each qt5 package.
On 2019-04-10 15:11, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 10 Apr 2019, at 19:37, George Mitchell wrote:
>>
>> Yesterday I went through a round of updating and compiling ports. By
>> all outward appearances it was successful. But this morning's daily
>> status report revealed that clang had crashed on a si
On 10 Apr 2019, at 21:29, George Mitchell wrote:
>
> On 2019-04-10 15:11, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>> On 10 Apr 2019, at 19:37, George Mitchell wrote:
>>>
>>> Yesterday I went through a round of updating and compiling ports. By
>>> all outward appearances it was successful. But this morning's da
Right
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:54 PM Matthew D. Fuller
wrote:
>
> My best guess is still something along the way tweaked up the patch
> you're trying; check the md5 vs the one in my earlier mail.
saved from (shudder) Gmail
tingo@kg-core1$ md5 patch-flavors_gmail
MD5 (patch-flavors_gmail) = 9ae3
On 2019-04-10 15:42, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 10 Apr 2019, at 21:29, George Mitchell wrote:
>>
>> On 2019-04-10 15:11, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>>>[...]
>>> I don't see any crash report(s) in the typescript? Did clang drop two
>>> files (a .sh and preprocessed .c or .cpp file) in /tmp, by any chan
Hi!
With portmaster I try to update todays ports and python default is
version 3.7 which is okay for me but not for hplip:
===>>> All >>
hplip-3.17.11_3 (5/43)
===>>> Returning to dependency check for print/hplip
===>>> Dependency check complete for print/hplip
===>>> All >> hplip-3.17.11_3 (5/
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 18:03:22 -0400
ajtiM via freebsd-ports wrote:
> Hi!
>
> With portmaster I try to update todays ports and python default is
> version 3.7 which is okay for me but not for hplip:
> ===>>> All >>
> hplip-3.17.11_3 (5/43)
>
> ===>>> Returning to dependency check for print/hplip
16 matches
Mail list logo
