Dear port maintainers,
The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more
unmaintained ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity
to check each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate,
submit/commit an update. Please consider also adopting this po
Hello.
I have yet to read the instructions by pizzamig@freebsd presented by
arrowd@freebsd... :)
( https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports/2024-February/005321.html )
John Marino (FreeBSD) wrote on 2024/02/21 00:18:
> The port builds fine.
Yes, however, it seems that all subpackage opti
Hello.
Luca Pizzamiglio wrote on 2024/02/21 05:26:
> The aforementioned `make describe` issues affect the `pkg version` issue
> you highlighted.
Yes, perhaps there is a mistake in INDEX-*, and pkg version -P will not cause
the problem (Unconfirmed as I am still in a INDEX-12 environment :) ).
R
The aforementioned `make describe` issues affect the `pkg version` issue
you highlighted.
On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 12:09 AM Tatsuki Makino
wrote:
> Hello.
> I am delayed in many things on my end, so I don't have time for this kind
> of thing :)
> But...
>
> I think the following conversions need
Hi Dan.
The list of subpackages is available via `make -V SUBPACKAGES`
Probably, the dependencies should also be split by subpackages, when this
is the case. `make -V *_DEPENDS.subpkgname` provides the dependencies
I can write directly in the github issue some of those things, for reference
Best
I get it now.
e.g LIB_DEPENDS.speex= ${LIB_DEPENDS} libspeexdsp.so:audio/speexdsp
This is saying the speex subpackage needs speexdsp.
Let me look at this more in depth.
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 1:57 PM Jan Beich wrote:
>
> j...@chen.org.nz writes:
>
> >>> It appears to be missing the SUBPACKAGE
> Port dependencies are not package dependencies
It's literally defined as LIB_DEPENDS in the makefile.
By definition LIB_DEPENDS are run time dependencies.
> If you want to install only "alsa-plugins" (aka "main" subpackage) without
> extra plugins/dependencies just do it like before with all p
j...@chen.org.nz writes:
>>> It appears to be missing the SUBPACKAGE dependencies. Is this
>>> intentional, or a bug?
>>
>> Intentional. See pkg-message:
>>
>> Plugins with extra dependencies moved into subpackages:
>> - alsa-plugins-ffmpeg
>> - alsa-plugins-jack
>> - alsa-plugins-pulseaudio
>>
February 17, 2024 1:56 AM, "Jan Beich" wrote:
>> But the installed package reports:
>> 8:09pm# pkg info --dependencies alsa-plugins
>> alsa-plugins-1.2.7.1_3:
>> alsa-lib-1.2.10_1
>
> Check dependencies of subpackages instead e.g.,
>
> $ pkg info -xd 'alsa-plugins-[^0-9]'
> alsa-plugins-ffmpeg-
On Feb 20, 2024, at 05:13, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote:
> Mark Millard wrote:
>
>> It probably should be separate from this topic, but I'd interested
>> to understand some example types of changes folks make for which
>> poudriere prevents the changes from working but for which portmaster
>> use o
The port builds fine.
The problem is that the dependencies are not listed in the package manifest.
This is a bug in the code that creates the package manifest.
That's why both Synth and Poudriere are considering the packages using
subpackages to be invalid. They are examining the package manifest
"Edward Sanford Sutton, III" wrote:
> > What's the reasoning behind people claiming a shift from "make install"
> > to poudriere is necessary?
>
>I don't consider it necessary, but building in a clean environment is
> desirable to minimize issues and maximize uptime. Some ports will fail
>
On 2/20/24 06:13, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote:
Mark Millard wrote:
It probably should be separate from this topic, but I'd interested
to understand some example types of changes folks make for which
poudriere prevents the changes from working but for which portmaster
use or make use allows the ch
Mark Millard wrote:
> It probably should be separate from this topic, but I'd interested
> to understand some example types of changes folks make for which
> poudriere prevents the changes from working but for which portmaster
> use or make use allows the change to work.
I've many changes, nothi
Dewayne Geraghty wrote:
> flourished my use of "the system". Over time I realised that the ports
> maintainer's option choices didn't reflect my needs. Now I have 490
> changes to the ports options and modified 233 ports' Makefiles and files/.
> This customisation is based, in priority order: s
15 matches
Mail list logo
