headers
Dr. Rene Hexel | 1 Oct 2002 01:21
Picon
Picon

Re: FYI: darwinports

On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 10:36  PM, Alistair Crooks wrote:

> I disagree, but, all in all, it's disappointing that they didn't
> mention pkgsrc as being one of the systems it was like, since there
> are a considerable number of packages which run on Darwin, and they
> could have leveraged off that.

   My impression is that they probably weren't even aware that pkgsrc
exists (at least not on Darwin).  Well, apparently every *BSD needs
its own package system ... ;-)

   Cheers
       ,
    Rene
Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
Adam Kranzel | 1 Oct 2002 01:30

PHP4 with Apache 2?

Hi all...

Apologies if this is the wrong list, and I'm probably making some stupid
mistake, if so feel free to point it out.

I found the patch posted by Makoto Fujiwara <makoto <at> ki.nu> on September
1st, to update the package to 4.2.2, which I then upgraded to 4.2.3.
Now I'm trying to get it to build as an Apache 2 module, and having no
luck at all.
I have Apache 2.0.42 and GNU pth 1.4.1 installed, and I have set
"--with_apxs2=${PREFIX}/sbin/apxs" and "--with-tsrm-pth" in
www/php4/Makefile.php (these two options were pulled from the FreeBSD
port).
When I try to build, it always dies during configure with:
"checking for Apache 2.0 module support via DSO through
APXS...configure: error: ZTS currently requires working POSIX threads.
We were unable to verify that your system supports Pthreads.
*** Error code 1

Stop."

I have tried changing "--with-tsrm-pth" to
"--with-tsrm-pth=${PREFIX}/bin/pth-config" and it had no effect.

Any ideas/suggestions/pointers?
I will happily RTFM, if I'm pointed at the proper FM.

thanks
 -Adam
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Murray Armfield | 1 Oct 2002 05:11
Picon

Multiple linux emulations

Hi Folks,
    I noticed that the linux emulation is located by a symbolic soft link.
This suggests to me that we could do something similar to what is done
with the lang/sun-j* pkgs and support installs of multiple
distributions/versions and use appropriate links to select the linux
binaries.
   Currently I am switching between the two suse pkgs now and again and
thought, "this would be nice..."
   Am I dreaming, am I missing some fundamental aspect? Has this be
suggested before? Is there any interest?

Take care,
      Murray
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Simon 'corecode' Schubert | 1 Oct 2002 06:27

Re: PHP4 with Apache 2?

On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 16:30:29 -0700
Adam Kranzel <adam <at> blacktabby.org> wrote:

> 1st, to update the package to 4.2.2, which I then upgraded to 4.2.3.
> Now I'm trying to get it to build as an Apache 2 module, and having no
> luck at all.

i've updated and created the appropriate pkgs locally here and i hope to soon get them clean enough to submit
and get it committed (within this week)

if you're still in need, mail me in private and i'll send you my unpolished diffs

cheers
  simon
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
SUNAGAWA Keiki | 1 Oct 2002 06:32
Picon

moving graphics/xmbdfed to fonts category

Hi all,

Since not only font data, several support programs are also
located in fonts category in these days, I'll move
graphics/xmbdfed which is a Motif-based BDF editor to there
unless strong objection.  (When I first committed it, font
category containd font data only.)

--
SUNAGAWA Keiki <kei_sun <at> ba2.so-net.ne.jp>
http://www05.u-page.so-net.ne.jp/ba2/kei_sun/
http://frill.yi.org/~kei/
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Thomas Klausner | 1 Oct 2002 09:12
Picon

Re: moving graphics/xmbdfed to fonts category

On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 01:32:21PM +0900, SUNAGAWA Keiki wrote:
> Since not only font data, several support programs are also
> located in fonts category in these days, I'll move
> graphics/xmbdfed which is a Motif-based BDF editor to there
> unless strong objection.  (When I first committed it, font
> category containd font data only.)

That's fine, thanks.
 Thomas

--

-- 
Thomas Klausner - wiz <at> danbala.ifoer.tuwien.ac.at
Main Rule of Usenet:  Never argue with idiots.  They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Alistair Crooks | 1 Oct 2002 10:18

Re: FYI: darwinports

On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 09:21:35AM +1000, Dr. Rene Hexel wrote:
> On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 10:36  PM, Alistair Crooks wrote:
> 
> >I disagree, but, all in all, it's disappointing that they didn't
> >mention pkgsrc as being one of the systems it was like, since there
> >are a considerable number of packages which run on Darwin, and they
> >could have leveraged off that.
> 
>   My impression is that they probably weren't even aware that pkgsrc
> exists (at least not on Darwin).  Well, apparently every *BSD needs
> its own package system ... ;-)

It's unlikely, since Chris Pinnock told Jordan Hubbard at the last
EuroBSDCon that pkgsrc was running on Darwin.

I view it as Apple's loss, though - of opportunity, goodwill, and
(last, but not necessarily least) time and effort.

Regards,
Alistair
Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
Reed Shadgett | 1 Oct 2002 11:00
Picon

Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/pkgtools/pkglint

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 01:52:45PM -0400, Andrew Brown wrote:
> >Version mismatch: 'standalone-tcsh' 6.12.00 vs 6.12.00nb1
>
> when they should probably do this:
>
>       PKGNAME:=       standalone-${PKGNAME}
>
> which, incidentally, is what the static-bash2 pkg does.  are you sure
> that one doesn't register itself properly?

shells/static-bash2/Makefile r1.2 changed PKGNAME to DISTNAME, as PKGNAME
would result in errors like:

Scanning pkgsrc Makefiles: ...............................Cannot extract
standalone-UNDEFINEDnb1 version (/usr/pkgsrc/shells/standalone-tcsh/Makefile)
3253 packages
Unknown package: 'standalone-tcsh' version 6.12.00nb1

Also, another misreport I noticed on one of my workstations today:
Version mismatch: 'koffice3' 1.1.1 vs 1.1.1

Take care

--
Reed <dent <at> netbsd.org>
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Benedikt Meurer | 1 Oct 2002 11:50
Picon

Re: Multiple linux emulations

On Tue, 01 Oct 2002, Murray Armfield wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>     I noticed that the linux emulation is located by a symbolic soft link.
> This suggests to me that we could do something similar to what is done
> with the lang/sun-j* pkgs and support installs of multiple
> distributions/versions and use appropriate links to select the linux
> binaries.
>    Currently I am switching between the two suse pkgs now and again and
> thought, "this would be nice..."
>    Am I dreaming, am I missing some fundamental aspect? Has this be
> suggested before? Is there any interest?

The question is: Why should we do? Is there any benefit of carrying
several Linux distributions in the pkgsrc tree? The old suse pkgs
are just for compatibility reasons and will be removed sooner or
later.

Benedikt

--

-- 
Real Programmers think better when playing Adventure or Rogue
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Julio Merino | 1 Oct 2002 13:11

Mplayer and codecs.conf

Hello

I had mplayer 0.90pre6 installed and it worked fine. IIRC, I did not have
a ~/.mplayer/codecs.conf; although, mplayer runned perfectly. I reinstalled
my system and compiled mplayer again (now 0.90pre8). This time, it does not
work (it complains about the missing codecs.conf). It needs it either in
the home directory or in pkg/etc/mplayer/codecs.conf. It's beeing installed
in pkg/share/mplayer/codecs.conf...

Is this the expected behavior? Should we install a copy of codecs.conf in
the etc tree, so mplayer works fine with a fresh installation (i.e., without
the need to be tuned)?

Thanks

--

-- 
HispaBSD admin - http://www.HispaBSD.org
For the developer - http://buildtool.sourceforge.net
Julio Merino <jmmv <at> hispabsd.org>
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |

Gmane