On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:17:53PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2018/05/22 09:48, Ken M wrote:
> > So the port in question is lmms, since I got it to compile manually to the
> > current version I figured might as well go with updating the port.
> >
> > They do have release tgz files hosted
It seems that the libtool flag to not create a versioned object is
"-avoid-version". It also looks like openldap already does that when
compiling under Windows (from build/top.mk):
# platform-specific libtool flags
NT_LTFLAGS_LIB = -no-undefined -avoid-version -rpath $(libdir)
NT_LTFLAGS_MOD = -no
On 2018/05/22 17:29, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> > From: Stuart Henderson
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 2:51 PM
> >
> > Then there are the main DB backends. These are ones where all
> > OpenLDAP package users will need to adapt, which makes me less sure
> > about splitting them off.
>
> It's unlike
> From: Stuart Henderson
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 2:51 PM
>
> Then there are the main DB backends. These are ones where all
> OpenLDAP package users will need to adapt, which makes me less sure
> about splitting them off.
It's unlikely somebody would be using both bdb and mdb though; so hard
> From: Jeremie Courreges-Anglas
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 11:36 AM
>
> I see the point of using SUBPACKAGEs and shared modules instead of
> FLAVORS for aci and gssapi support. I'm not sure I see the point of
> using shared modules just because we can, especially if this implies
> mandatory c
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:50:56PM +0200, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 07:22:13PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> > > @@ -3434,17 +3434,17 @@ show:
> > > # du fails if it can't access everything
> > > show-size:
> > > @if du -ks ${WRKDIR} 2>/dev/null >${WRKDIR}/wrkdir-size; then \
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 07:22:13PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> > @@ -3434,17 +3434,17 @@ show:
> > # du fails if it can't access everything
> > show-size:
> > @if du -ks ${WRKDIR} 2>/dev/null >${WRKDIR}/wrkdir-size; then \
> > - cat ${WRKDIR}/wrkdir-size && rm -f ${WRKDIR}/wrkdir-siz
On 2018/05/22 20:35, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> On Mon, May 21 2018, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> .if ${FLAVOR:Maci}
> >> -CONFIGURE_ARGS += --enable-aci
> >> +CONFIGURE_ARGS += --enable-aci=mod
> >> .endif
> >
> > hmm, with aci turned into a module, we should be a
On Tue, May 22 2018, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 08:23:20PM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>> On Fri, May 18 2018, Klemens Nanni wrote:
>> > If neither `Pass' nor `PassCmd' is specified in the configuration,
>> > mbsync(1) prompts for the IMAP password.
>> >
>> > This d
> From: Stuart Henderson
> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 1:46 PM
>
> It's the upstream build system that is building them with odd
> names here, ports doesn't have much to do with this.
Oh, okay; I thought you were objecting to the way I was creating the symlinks
in the makefile, not the existence
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 08:23:20PM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> On Fri, May 18 2018, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> > If neither `Pass' nor `PassCmd' is specified in the configuration,
> > mbsync(1) prompts for the IMAP password.
> >
> > This diff adds the missing "tty" promise in such cases.
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 08:35:38PM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> On Mon, May 21 2018, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> .if ${FLAVOR:Maci}
> >> -CONFIGURE_ARGS += --enable-aci
> >> +CONFIGURE_ARGS += --enable-aci=mod
> >> .endif
> >
> > hmm, with aci turned into a m
On Mon, May 21 2018, Stuart Henderson wrote:
[...]
>> .if ${FLAVOR:Maci}
>> -CONFIGURE_ARGS += --enable-aci
>> +CONFIGURE_ARGS += --enable-aci=mod
>> .endif
>
> hmm, with aci turned into a module, we should be able to get rid
> of the FLAVOR. (and even if we can't, it'll need an extr
On Fri, May 18 2018, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> If neither `Pass' nor `PassCmd' is specified in the configuration,
> mbsync(1) prompts for the IMAP password.
>
> This diff adds the missing "tty" promise in such cases.
>
> OK?
>
> PS: Noone complaint so far.
I understand that getting rid of "proc exec
On 05/09/18 15:05, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2018/05/09 14:55, Martijn van Duren wrote:
>> On 05/08/18 18:49, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>>> Better to just fix phar on sparc64...does anyone have more information
>>> on the problem?
>>>
>> I agree, but right now sparc64 has nothing. We can always re
[cross-posted to the WireGuard mailing list]
Hello OpenBSD Ports List,
I sent a very similar email [0] to the FreeBSD ports list yesterday.
I'm the author of WireGuard [1], a secure network tunnel protocol [2]
and a set of implementations of it. It was originally designed for the
Linux kernel, b
At the risk of appearing ungrateful for all the wonderful work the ports
contributors perform (which I most definitely am not), I was wondering
whether it might be possible to know what the plans are for adding PHP
versions 7.1 and 7.2 to the tree?
If they're not in prospect, that's cool. I un
On 2018/05/22 09:48, Ken M wrote:
> So the port in question is lmms, since I got it to compile manually to the
> current version I figured might as well go with updating the port.
>
> They do have release tgz files hosted on github but those release tarballs
> don't
> actually include the submodu
So the port in question is lmms, since I got it to compile manually to the
current version I figured might as well go with updating the port.
They do have release tgz files hosted on github but those release tarballs don't
actually include the submodule that is the problem. I will contact them,
co
bulk build on arm64.ports.openbsd.org
started on Sat May 19 03:44:49 MDT 2018
finished at Tue May 22 01:32:57 MDT 2018
lasted 03D14h48m
done with kern.version=OpenBSD 6.3-current (GENERIC.MP) #112: Thu May 17
02:13:15 MDT 2018
built packages:8151
May 19:3012
May 20:1305
May 21:3833
build fail
20 matches
Mail list logo
