On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 11:28:29 +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
At the moment when I do
pkg_version -vIL=
I get
exiv2-0.21,1 > succeeds index (index has
0.21.1)
From what I can see the difference is a comma or a dot, so maybe it's
just a typo but I think it needs to be c
On Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:12:35 +, Eitan Adler wrote:
The .pkgconf suffix tells pkgng that this file is a sample. But it
could
also be done via an attribute.
I would much prefer an attribute instead of a suffix for the reasons
previously stated.
I hope this is not bikeshedding the issue.
Th
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:02:25 -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
The reason I choose pkgconf (we can change that name) is that it
concerns
only configuration files that the maintainers DO want.
I want to make sure that maintainers are looking at the samples the
proprose
to provide a usable sample, not t
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:15:41 +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
On 14 July 2011 20:02, Eitan Adler wrote:
The reason I choose pkgconf (we can change that name) is that it
concerns
only configuration files that the maintainers DO want.
I want to make sure that maintainers are looking at the samples the
Hi,
Is there anyone interested here to be part of an office team? the goal
of that team will be to take care of the office components of the ports.
Those are quite important for the desktop experience and having relying
on one person being able through a team to potentially have multiple
per
On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 16:22:52 +0200, Olivier Duchateau wrote:
And about editors/abiword ? even if this port is outdated, it can be
added I think.
I use development release (v2.9.1), everything works fine except
collaboration (telepathy and xmpp) plugin.
2011/7/15 Baptiste Daroussin :
Hi,
Is
On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 10:21:38 +0900 (JST), Maho NAKATA wrote:
From: Philipp Ost
Subject: Re: What about creating an office team
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 17:35:56 +0200
Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
[...]
maybe many more? (you can propose your candidate here :))
What about math/gnumeric? It
On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:41:31 +, Dieter BSD wrote:
1. Spell out very clearly its purpose - is it to populate a jail,
for
example?
Populating a chroot/jail is one purpose.
Corrupting the pkgdb there is a chroot option for that
Another is to test a new version of a package without messi
19, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Chris Rees
wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 15 July 2011 14:33, Baptiste Daroussin
wrote:
> >>> > Hi,
> >>> http://wiki.freebsd.org/Office
>
...
> >>Excellent!
Chris
Apache links are the following :
http://incubator.apache.
Hi all,
For the third time, I'm running a deprecation campaign to remove old,
unmaintain and/or problematic stuff from the ports tree (ports@)
As usual I may be wrong there maybe some false positive, I sharpened a
bit my analysis scripts so there should be less false positive in the
deprecat
On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:34:00 -0700 (PDT), JoelFRodriguez wrote:
Are you serious? Upgrading the OS on a production machine is a really
steep
price to pay. I've over a thousand working ports and numerous
customers that
I would have to port afterwards.
You really can't fix what appears to be a rea
On Wed, 03 Aug 2011 02:02:39 -0700, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
For the third time, I'm running a deprecation campaign to
remove old, unmaintain and/or problematic stuff from the
ports tree (ports@)
As usual I may be wrong there maybe some false positi
On Wed, 03 Aug 2011 07:04:11 -0700, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Wed, 03 Aug 2011 02:02:39 -0700, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
> What, exactly, is the significance of the list at
>
>
http://people.freebsd.org/~ehaupt/distilator/po...@freebsd.org-bad.html
On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 15:08:53 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
As root, I did
mkdir -p /usr/opt
ln -s /usr/opt /opt
cd /usr/ports/editors/libreoffice
make PREFIX=/opt/
The above builds and installs dependencies along the
way under the /opt/ heirarchy. The first few are
cppunit-1.12.1
mdbtools-0.5_14
b
On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 05:37:29 -0400, b. f. wrote:
There is nothing to fix, this is the way ports are expected to work.
Are you sure? IMHO if PREFIX is defined before installing any port
and never gets changed than all ports should respect PREFIX.
> Playing with PREFIX != LOCALBASE has to be done
[...]
internal build errors:
ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making
/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-bootstrap-3.4.2.3/mythes
it seems that the error is inside 'mythes', please re-run build
inside this module to isolate the error and/or test your fix:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:57:00 +0200, Albert Shih wrote:
Le 23/08/2011 à 06:56:59+, Baptiste Daroussin a écrit
[...]
>> internal build errors:
>>
>> ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making
>>
>>
/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-bootstrap-3.4.2
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 15:45:12 +0200, Alex Dupre wrote:
Baptiste Daroussin ha scritto:
LOCALIZED_LANG=fr work fine for me :)
Not in tinderbox, probably you have installed something that's not in
the dependencies list.
No, tested in tinderbox, and build is always succesful on my tind
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 18:58:12 +0200, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote:
## Andriy Gapon (a...@freebsd.org):
[javac] * @author Ortwin Gl�ck
[javac] ^
[javac] 1 error
BUILD FAILED
$ locale
LANG=en_GB.UTF-8
Same here... us germans with our umlauts...
I fixed that h
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:51:59 +0200, Alex Dupre wrote:
Baptiste Daroussin ha scritto:
Can you just send me your configure.log which should be located in
/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-bootstrap-3.4.2.3/config.log
the build systems fails to detect the local mythes version and
Hi all,
First of all I'd like to apologise about the mess with the update of
libreoffice 3.4, that lead us to the new policy about how to manage the
libreoffice ports.
From now we will be more respectful of what upstream do, which mean we
will maintain two version of libreoffice, the legacy
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 06:55:03PM -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 2012-04-30 18:25:03 -0400, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > My time deserved to work to porting LibreOffice to FreeBSD is now
> > b
On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 02:30:40PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> Since LibreOffice 3.5.X can not be build on either FreeBSD
> 9-STABLE/amd64 or FreeBSD 10-CURRENT/amd64 (I tried legacy gcc 4.2.1, I
> tried clang 3.0 and clang 3.1, I tried gcc 4.6 on three different boxes,
> all failing compiling the
On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 03:52:57PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 02:30:40PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> > Since LibreOffice 3.5.X can not be build on either FreeBSD
> > 9-STABLE/amd64 or FreeBSD 10-CURRENT/amd64 (I tried legacy gcc 4.2.1, I
> >
On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 05:01:19PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> On 05/06/12 16:15, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 03:52:57PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >> On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 02:30:40PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> >>> Since LibreOf
On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 09:20:06AM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 07/05/2012 01:58 Baptiste Daroussin said the following:
> > Well for libreoffice on freebsd clang is the official compiler, because
> > 4.2.1 is just too old for libreoffice, and I never managed to make it built
>
On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 12:22:21PM +0200, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> On 05/07/12 11:35, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 09:20:06AM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >> on 07/05/2012 01:58 Baptiste Daroussin said the following:
> >>> Well for libreoffice on
On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 08:22:16PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2012-05-07 12:22, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> ...
> > The error I faced was introduced by the port net/libcmis, which in my
> > case was built via gcc 4.6 (and doesn't build with CLANG). After
> > building libcmis with legacy gcc 4.2.1,
On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 08:22:16PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2012-05-07 12:22, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> ...
> > The error I faced was introduced by the port net/libcmis, which in my
> > case was built via gcc 4.6 (and doesn't build with CLANG). After
> > building libcmis with legacy gcc 4.2.1,
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 08:10:25AM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 07/05/2012 12:35 Baptiste Daroussin said the following:
> > On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 09:20:06AM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >> on 07/05/2012 01:58 Baptiste Daroussin said the following:
> >>> Well fo
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 07:59:15AM -0400, Robert Huff wrote:
>
> Daniel Nebdal writes:
> > >
> > > In the case of gcc46, when I execute the previous six lines,
> > > return to
> > >
> > /data/port-work/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.2.2,
> > > and run "make",
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 03:09:48PM +0200, Daniel Nebdal wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 07:59:15AM -0400, Robert Huff wrote:
> >>
> >> Daniel Nebdal writes:
> >> > >
> >> > >
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 11:00:12AM -0400, Robert Huff wrote:
>
> Daniel Nebdal writes:
>
> > >> Making: libuno_sal.so.3
> > >> : ERROR: /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version GLIBCXX_3.4.15 required by
> > ../unxfbsd.pro/lib/check_libuno_sal.so.3 not found
> > >> dmake: Error code 1, while maki
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 01:34:28PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> Has anyone answered the original question? Are there going to be
> packages for libreoffice? If not, why not?
>
> Doug
Yes as soon as pointyhat builds are uploaded.
For example there are libreoffice packages on http://pkgbeta.freebsd
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 08:34:37AM +0200, Alex Dupre wrote:
> Erwin Lansing ha scritto:
> > portmgr has been working for long on a new option framework for the ports
> > to improve some of the deficiencies in the current framework.
>
> Great work! Looking quickly at the documentation I have a dou
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 11:41:32PM -0400, Erwin Lansing wrote:
> Hi,
>
> portmgr has been working for long on a new option framework for the ports to
> improve some of the deficiencies in the current framework. The new framework
> not only streamlines the current inconsistencies, but also adds
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 12:07:43PM -0500, Jeremy Messenger wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Jacques Chanel wrote:
> > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 01:53:41PM +0200, Koop Mast wrote:
> >> Can people try this and see if it fixes the problems?
> >> http://people.freebsd.org/~kwm/patch-cairo
> >>
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 08:53:40PM +0200, Jacques Chanel wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 07:03:40PM +0200, Jacques Chanel wrote:
> > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 01:53:41PM +0200, Koop Mast wrote:
> > > Can people try this and see if it fixes the problems?
> > > http://people.freebsd.org/~kwm/patch-ca
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 03:35:34PM +0200, Mel Flynn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> over the past few weeks I've been using the ports system without any
> ports-mgmt tool and have become utterly convinced that the PACKAGE_SEQ
> needs to be PACKAGE_SUSEQ for all but package-message.
> The primary reason is that t
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 04:34:20PM +0100, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 04:28:45PM +0200, Alberto Villa wrote:
> > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Anton Shterenlikht
> > wrote:
> > > Track shlibs: yes
> >
> > bapt@ or whoever will track this bug: this is the problem I had
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 08:09:23AM +0400, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
> Jason Helfman wrote on 30.05.2012 03:57:
> > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:29:01PM +0400, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov thus spake:
> >> Hi Baptiste,
> >>
> >> Am I right that `make rmconfig' isn't working with optionsng?
> >> I got this lin
Hi all,
On of the reasons of bsd.options.desc.mk is to be able to share common options
and descriptions, to have better consistency between ports and to have general
meaning descriptions that make more sense, has anyone can improve the
description of an option.
about consistency, I can already se
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 01:33:56PM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
> Folks, when moving forward with optionsng, do we want to convert
> NOPORTDOCS and NOPORTEXAMPLES to options everywhere? I fear that if we
> do, way too many ports which otherwise have no options will start asking
> if I want the docs
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 05:00:57PM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >> Maybe it would be best if ports which otherwise don't have options, and
> >> for which building docs don't require new dependencies would not put
> >> DOCS and
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 10:46:44PM +0200, Alberto Villa wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On of the reasons of bsd.options.desc.mk is to be able to share common
> > options
> > and descriptions, to have better consistency betw
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 02:23:12PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 5/30/2012 3:33 AM, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
> > Folks, when moving forward with optionsng, do we want to convert
> > NOPORTDOCS and NOPORTEXAMPLES to options everywhere?
>
> Absolutely not. By far the majority of users benefit from in
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 05:38:26PM -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote:
>
>
> On 5/30/12 5:33 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> >> would only cause confusion.
> > I'll go one further and suggest that the vast majority who don't want
> > these features are building specialized systems and they know very
> > w
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 09:38:55PM -0500, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 5/30/2012 9:29 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> > I'm confused by your answer. First, NLS is out of scope for the point
> > I'm making. Second, are you saying that you made DOCS and EXAMPLES into
> > OPTIONS? If so, are you saying
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 05:40:08PM -0600, Warren Block wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2012, Alberto Villa wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Baptiste Daroussin
> > wrote:
> >> On of the reasons of bsd.options.desc.mk is to be able to share common
> >> op
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 08:22:41AM +0200, Rainer Hurling wrote:
> With newest revision 1.14 devel/qt4-makeqpf does not buid anymore. It
> seems in Makefile there is needed an
>
> .include
>
> somewhere before line 48?
>
> ___
> freebsd-ports@freebsd.
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 01:57:58PM +1000, John Marshall wrote:
> I just had a whole bunch of ports install unexpectedly.
>
> portmaster -D -r png-1.4.11
>
> One of the ports that pulled in for rebuilding was graphics/php5-gd.
> That's fair enough, and it is depended on by lang/php5-extensions,
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 01:31:51PM +0200, Oliver Pinter wrote:
> Hi All!
>
> In x11-toolkits/qt33 broked one expression with options-ng merge. The
> attached patch fixed this.
> --- Makefile.orig 2012-06-02 13:26:43.0 +0200
> +++ Makefile 2012-06-02 13:27:23.0 +0200
> @@ -110
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 06:59:56PM +0200, Oliver Pinter wrote:
> On Saturday 02 June 2012 18:49:17 Oliver Pinter wrote:
> > On Saturday 02 June 2012 13:44:20 Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 01:31:51PM +0200, Oliver Pinter wrote:
> > > >
Hi,
The new options framework is now in the port for a week, most of the problems
directly concerning the framework seems to have been addressed.
Some issue seems still to be there regarding backward compatibility but I
haven't been able to reproduced any of the one that are supposed to be left.
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 09:20:23PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
> [Please cc me, since I'm not subscribed to this list. I originally asked this
> on questions@.]
>
> Hi,
>
> With the release of the new options framework for ports, I've run into a
> problem trying to convert one of my ports.
>
> Th
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 09:20:23PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
> [Please cc me, since I'm not subscribed to this list. I originally asked this
> on questions@.]
>
> Hi,
>
> With the release of the new options framework for ports, I've run into a
> problem trying to convert one of my ports.
>
> Th
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 10:01:01PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 09:20:23PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
> > [Please cc me, since I'm not subscribed to this list. I originally asked
> > this
> > on questions@.]
> >
> > Hi,
> &
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 04:28:16PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> My understanding is that one of the benefits of the new OPTIONS
> framework is that it's supposed to take make.conf knobs into account
> when displaying the options dialog.
yes it is if you use the new way of setting KNOBS aka a genera
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 11:12:17PM -0400, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> from Doug Barton :
>
> > My understanding is that one of the benefits of the new OPTIONS
> > framework is that it's supposed to take make.conf knobs into account
> > when displaying the options dialog.
>
> > I have WITHOUT_NLS defi
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:03:50AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 04:28:16PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> > My understanding is that one of the benefits of the new OPTIONS
> > framework is that it's supposed to take make.conf knobs into account
>
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 05:22:30PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
>
> I have just installed libreoffice-3.5.2_4 and are now getting the
> following error
>
> javaPathHelper: not found
>
> I understand that this error is known according to this tread
>
> http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 01:47:03PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> The new options framework sorts all of the options by default before
> presenting them to the user. I have mixed feelings about this, however
> there is supposed to be a workaround for those of us who have grouped
> the options for our
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 03:28:24PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 06/04/2012 15:22, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 01:47:03PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> >> The new options framework sorts al
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 03:28:24PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 06/04/2012 15:22, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 01:47:03PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> >> The new options framework sorts al
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 03:58:24PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 06/04/2012 15:40, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > Can you try with this patch ?
> > http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/bsd.options.mk.diff
> >
> &
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 07:42:33AM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
>
>
> 2012-06-04 18:58, Baptiste Daroussin skrev:
> > On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 05:22:30PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
> >>
> >> I have just installed libreoffice-3.5.2_4 and are now
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 09:26:10PM +0200, Florent wrote:
> On 31.05.2012 11:36, Leslie Jensen wrote:
> >
> > Help Please!
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry !
> > Fo
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 07:13:56AM +0200, coder.tuxfamily wrote:
> Le 05.06.2012 05:48, Heino Tiedemann a écrit :
> > Leslie Jensen wrote:
> >
> >> ---
> >> Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry !
> >>Fo
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:10:02AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 08:18:56AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > > I have the same problem but i can pass it except for "tail_build". My
> > > options :
> > > GTK3 (I don't remember
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 11:10:19AM +0200, Arnaud Houdelette wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I'm currently testing pkgng and poudriere as a replacement for old pkg
> and pkg_jail.
>
> When upgrading/reinstalling a port, pkg install / pkg upgrade resets the
> permissions of the directories created by the por
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 03:06:44AM -0700, Jakub Lach wrote:
> Stranger than fiction!
>
> I successfully installed (and it's working) LibreOffice with gcc47!
>
> Indeed maybe it's parallelization issue, because each time
> some module failed I rm it ( e.g. rm -r
> libreoffice/work/libreoffice-cor
Hi all,
The work will now begin to have a very long due feature in the ports tree.
Every sane package system are working with a stage directory support, this is
almost mandatory to have something clean.
That allows you to :
- be able to process anything but installation as a user (long
term goa
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 11:04:10AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:46:44AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:10:02AM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm having this same problem, if you need a ful
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:49:06AM -0400, Robert Huff wrote:
>
> Is it possible to disable parallel make jobs?
> If so, what is the correct way to do so?
>
>
> Robert Huff
>
Well it is disabled by default the parallel build you see is enable natively by
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 08:03:20AM -0700, Jakub Lach wrote:
> Theoretically LibreOffice already has
>
> MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE= yes
>
> in port's Makefile, but it's internally
> still parallelizing, correct?
Correct
regards,
Bapt
pgpc67zRP2Ecn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:49:06AM -0400, Robert Huff wrote:
>
> Is it possible to disable parallel make jobs?
> If so, what is the correct way to do so?
>
>
> Robert Huff
>
> ___
> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org m
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 06:48:38PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 05:49:05PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:49:06AM -0400, Robert Huff wrote:
> > >
> > > Is it possible to disable parallel make jobs?
> > >
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 12:51:16AM -0300, Sergio de Almeida Lenzi wrote:
> Hello all...
> finally I track down the problem with libreoffice,
> the problem is with the boost headers and files
>
> You MUST use the boost that comes with libreoffice,
> but somehow the makefiles searches /usr/local/inc
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 04:54:18PM +0200, Rainer Hurling wrote:
> On 06.06.2012 16:32 (UTC+2), Warren Block wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Jun 2012, Sergio de Almeida Lenzi wrote:
> >
> >> Hello all...
> >> finally I track down the problem with libreoffice,
> >> the problem is with the boost headers and file
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 08:38:10AM +0400, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've noticed (while portupgrading www/nginx-devel) that despite of
> the new options set it doesn't provide me with the configuration
> diaglog. This is because _OPTIONS_OK is set when OPTIONS isn't,
> and the latter is alw
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 08:38:10AM +0400, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've noticed (while portupgrading www/nginx-devel) that despite of
> the new options set it doesn't provide me with the configuration
> diaglog. This is because _OPTIONS_OK is set when OPTIONS isn't,
> and the latter is alw
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 04:34:31PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> while porting dnsmasq to optionsNG, I came across a couple of questions
> that do not seem to be addressed in the documentation.
>
> 1 - dependencies between options
>
> specifics: dns/dnsmasq offers IDN and NLS. D
On Sat, Jun 09, 2012 at 09:35:12AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 06/06/2012 22:27, Dave Hayes wrote:
> > Personally, a 'pkg-options-descr' text file would suit me just fine.
>
> For those on -ports, the context is, "How do we provide more information
> about what the various options mean?" This i
On Sat, Jun 09, 2012 at 08:27:11PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 06/06/2012 12:18, Heino Tiedemann wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > Why this ports needs his compiler to RUN?!
> >
> >
> > firefox 13.0,1
>
> It's very common for binaries built with gcc to link to libgcc, and/or
> libstdc++:
>
>
Hi all,
In the ports tree we lack a unique identifier, while we could live without it
until now, it is more than needed for 2 upcoming features: pkgng and stage
directory support.
unique means something that will always be the same what ever the options are
and what ever the runtime they use are.
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 06:05:49PM -0600, Warren Block wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012, Jason Helfman wrote:
>
> >> So references to NOPORTDOCS should be replaced with references to
> >> PORT_OPTIONS:MDOCS now? Why that but not NOPORTEXAMPLES?
> >
> > You can use PORT_OPTIONS:MEXAMPLES for this case
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 01:00:05PM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > There was a PR[1] to use some dialog(1) feature to expose it to
> > the user, would be nice if that extended description could
> > implemented that way (using help button fro
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 06:49:35AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> In the new OPTIONS framework, we have some great new constructs for
> doing really useful stuff constraining what different combinations of
> options may be selected.
>
> One of these is OPTIONS_SINGLE which implem
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 11:23:46PM -0700, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 10 June 2012 21:30, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > In the ports tree we lack a unique identifier, while we could live without
> > it
> > until now, it is more than needed for 2 u
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 07:36:15AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 05:30, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > In the ports tree we lack a unique identifier, while we could live without
> > it
> > until now, it is more than needed for 2 upcoming features: pkgng an
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:34:16PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 11:32, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >> UNIQUENAME importance being because the default location for a port's
> >> > OPTIONSFILE is derived from it, and non-uniqueness can lead to ports
&g
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 03:31:30PM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >> Perhaps we could introduce UNIQUE_ORIGIN which is
> >> ${ORIGIN}_${SUBPACKAGE} or something of the sort?
> >
> > I thought about this one, but while here we should t
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 02:17:21PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 12:55, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > why because they recommand their user to set PKGNAMEPREFIX to
> > ${BLA_PKGNAMEPREFIX} so that their prefix can be set from bsd.port.mk
> > Which mean th
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 08:00:53AM -0600, Warren Block wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 06:05:49PM -0600, Warren Block wrote:
> >> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012, Jason Helfman wrote:
> >>
> >>>> So ref
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 08:17:08AM -0600, Warren Block wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>
> >> The logic has probably gotten twisted around, and it's been long enough
> >> since I did this that I don't recall the situation. I think it wa
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 02:17:21PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 12:55, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > why because they recommand their user to set PKGNAMEPREFIX to
> > ${BLA_PKGNAMEPREFIX} so that their prefix can be set from bsd.port.mk
> > Which mean th
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 05:36:14PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 02:17:21PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> > On 11/06/2012 12:55, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > > why because they recommand their user to set PKGNAMEPREFIX to
> > > ${BLA_P
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 04:48:58PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 16:37, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >> This patch does the trick, I'm now running a script with that patch on to
> >> > discovers all the uniquename names which are not really uniq
> &
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:57:44PM +0400, Subbsd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ive try to use pkgng ( WITH_PKGNG=yes ) for build new environment and
> got failed:
> ...
> ===> Registering installation for bacula-server-5.2.6
> Installing bacula-server-5.2.6...pkg: bacula-server-5.2.6 conflicts
> with bacula-
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:17:45PM +0300, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I building the packages of ports in the chroot system FreeBSD 9.0 i386
> the parent system FreeBSD 9.0 amd64.
> pkg is segmentation fault in port devel/libtool.
>
> full trace obtained a pkg.core file is here
> http://pr
201 - 300 of 1241 matches
Mail list logo
