From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Dec  1 13:33:56 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 13:33:56 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_dbdpg
Message-ID: <201012011233.oB1CXtbS015037@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is a quick version dump on request, no name adjustment for this one
now, I want to have more automatic tools in place first.

* pm_dbdpg: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.16.1,REV=2010.02.16
  -   to: 2.17.2,REV=2010.12.01
  + pm_dbdpg-2.17.2,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_dbdpg-2.17.2,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Dec  1 15:51:20 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 15:51:20 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs adobereader
Message-ID: <201012011451.oB1EpKI1023151@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Upstream version bump.

* adobereader: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 9.4.0,REV=2010.10.11
  -   to: 9.4.1,REV=2010.12.01
  + adobereader-9.4.1,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec  1 19:16:11 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 10:16:11 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_dbdpg
In-Reply-To: <201012011233.oB1CXtbS015037@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012011233.oB1CXtbS015037@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=_1XXrPWCnz6pEqkdh5p9LWP6sW9YeeqP3AJ54@mail.gmail.com>

by "on request", i PRESUME you mean "on request from original maintainer".

okay.

(and yeah, i'll probably want to write some more "automatic tools" on
my side for the renames. ugh)


On 12/1/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This is a quick version dump on request, no name adjustment for this one
> now, I want to have more automatic tools in place first.
>
> * pm_dbdpg: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 2.16.1,REV=2010.02.16
>   -   to: 2.17.2,REV=2010.12.01
>   + pm_dbdpg-2.17.2,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pm_dbdpg-2.17.2,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec  1 19:17:08 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 10:17:08 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs adobereader
In-Reply-To: <201012011451.oB1EpKI1023151@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012011451.oB1EpKI1023151@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimuyajUEufBsvcH2RcW4t-=_cZDWdsoc2_7RDA=@mail.gmail.com>

Grr. annoying adobe.
okay.


On 12/1/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Upstream version bump.
>
> * adobereader: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 9.4.0,REV=2010.10.11
>   -   to: 9.4.1,REV=2010.12.01
>   + adobereader-9.4.1,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Dec  1 22:16:37 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 22:16:37 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
Message-ID: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Remove CSWlibclamav and CSWlibclamav-devel from the catalog.

* libclam6: new package
  + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* clamav: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28
  -   to: 0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01
  + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Dec  2 10:45:25 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 10:45:25 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_mailspf
Message-ID: <201012020945.oB29jPTf025187@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This fixes #4623.

* pm_mailspf: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.01.18
  -   to: 2010.12.02
  + pm_mailspf-2.007,REV=2010.12.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Dec  2 14:24:42 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 14:24:42 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_module_version, pmtools
Message-ID: <201012021324.oB2DOg5h022539@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Just a small bump I need for the smart perl module packager.

* pmtools: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.01,REV=2006.09.02
  -   to: 1.10,REV=2010.12.02
  + pmtools-1.10,REV=2010.12.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

And this new module also.

* pm_module_version: new package
  + pm_module_version-0.12,REV=2010.12.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Dec  3 03:24:31 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 21:24:31 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <201011280343.oAS3hYPE028516@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011280343.oAS3hYPE028516@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <1291343045-sup-5093@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Sat Nov 27 22:43:34 -0500 2010:


Bump...

Thanks
-Ben

> Re-rolled with the /usr/local/bin removed.  Fixed a few other minor
> items in a similar vein.  There are still a few paths like that in
> various comments or examples, but they're fine.
> 
> Thanks
> -Ben
> 
> * git: revision upgrade
>   - from: 2010.09.25
>   -   to: 2010.11.28
>   + git-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + git-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + git_completion-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + git_cvs-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + git_devel-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + git_devel-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + git_doc-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + git_emacs-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + git_gui-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + git_svn-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + gitk-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> 
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From rupert at opencsw.org  Fri Dec  3 08:03:50 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 01:03:50 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
Message-ID: <201012030703.oB373oVb005868@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* mercurial: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.7.1,REV=2010.11.17
  -   to: 1.7.2,REV=2010.12.03
  + mercurial-1.7.2,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + mercurial-1.7.2,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec  3 22:41:30 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 13:41:30 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_mailspf
In-Reply-To: <201012020945.oB29jPTf025187@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012020945.oB29jPTf025187@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim71qkMB5q=ycXcuO+6K4vMBLivD2+GDvK6Ei3J@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 12/2/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This fixes #4623.
>
> * pm_mailspf: revision upgrade
>   - from: 2010.01.18
>   -   to: 2010.12.02
>   + pm_mailspf-2.007,REV=2010.12.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec  3 22:45:31 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 13:45:31 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_module_version, pmtools
In-Reply-To: <201012021324.oB2DOg5h022539@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012021324.oB2DOg5h022539@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikS7O4vJQ8rdBibyFioR5+D=qsJkBcgR0kH6a-v@mail.gmail.com>

Grrr. the "embedded docs in the code" feature is annoying, for
pmtools, given its prolific use of /usr/local

batched


On 12/2/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Just a small bump I need for the smart perl module packager.
>
> * pmtools: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 1.01,REV=2006.09.02
>   -   to: 1.10,REV=2010.12.02
>   + pmtools-1.10,REV=2010.12.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> And this new module also.
>
> * pm_module_version: new package
>   + pm_module_version-0.12,REV=2010.12.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec  3 22:46:24 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 13:46:24 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
In-Reply-To: <201012030703.oB373oVb005868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012030703.oB373oVb005868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimgwHJmUYahoEs3WW4N_rWsUCk2no-oaqao+jS-@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On 12/2/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * mercurial: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 1.7.1,REV=2010.11.17
>   -   to: 1.7.2,REV=2010.12.03
>   + mercurial-1.7.2,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + mercurial-1.7.2,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec  3 22:47:47 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 13:47:47 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <1291343045-sup-5093@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201011280343.oAS3hYPE028516@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1291343045-sup-5093@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=9KTY9-KkzW6RBLznaKLJup7W1k=jh5LUkk+-B@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On 12/2/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Sat Nov 27 22:43:34 -0500 2010:
>
>
> Bump...
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
>> Re-rolled with the /usr/local/bin removed.  Fixed a few other minor
>> items in a similar vein.  There are still a few paths like that in
>> various comments or examples, but they're fine.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Ben
>>
>> * git: revision upgrade
>>   - from: 2010.09.25
>>   -   to: 2010.11.28
>>   + git-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + git-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + git_completion-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + git_cvs-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + git_devel-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + git_devel-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + git_doc-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + git_emacs-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + git_gui-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + git_svn-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + gitk-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
> --
> Ben Walton
> Systems Programmer - CHASS
> University of Toronto
> C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Sat Dec  4 00:01:36 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 15:01:36 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>

This one is going to take a little longer, because I'm using it as a
motivator to write a nice rename wrapper for myself.

(renaming, rather than "remove, then add". Since removing in mantis is
currently a way longer and uglier process for me than is comfortable
right now)


On 12/1/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Remove CSWlibclamav and CSWlibclamav-devel from the catalog.
>
> * libclam6: new package
>   + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * clamav: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28
>   -   to: 0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01
>   + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From rupert at opencsw.org  Sat Dec  4 12:42:25 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 05:42:25 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs genshi
Message-ID: <201012041142.oB4BgPFQ025740@login.bo.opencsw.org>

version fits to new trac verison.

* genshi: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.5.1,REV=2009.06.05
  -   to: 0.6,REV=2010.12.02
  + genshi-0.6,REV=2010.12.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Sat Dec  4 16:09:45 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 16:09:45 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs bind, bind_chroot, bind_devel,
	bind_u(...)
Message-ID: <201012041509.oB4F9jl0009906@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* bind: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 9.7.2P2,REV=2010.10.19
  -   to: 9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03
  + bind-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + bind-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + bind_chroot-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + bind_devel-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + bind_utils-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + bind_utils-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libbind-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libbind-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Sat Dec  4 16:13:12 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 16:13:12 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs dhcp, dhcp_devel
Message-ID: <201012041513.oB4FDCSV011319@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* dhcp: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 4.2.0,REV=2010.07.20
  -   to: 4.2.0P1,REV=2010.12.03
  + dhcp-4.2.0P1,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + dhcp-4.2.0P1,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + dhcp_devel-4.2.0P1,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From yann at opencsw.org  Sat Dec  4 16:44:53 2010
From: yann at opencsw.org (Yann Rouillard)
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 16:44:53 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openssl, openssl_devel, openssl_rt,
	o(...)
Message-ID: <4CFA61F5.5020401@opencsw.org>

* openssl: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21
  -   to: 0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04
  + openssl_devel-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openssl_devel-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openssl_rt-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openssl_rt-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openssl_utils-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openssl_utils-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openssl-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

--
Generated by submitpkg

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Sat Dec  4 17:43:03 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 17:43:03 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs lzop
Message-ID: <201012041643.oB4Gh3xw019674@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* lzop: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.02,REV=2009.04.20_rev=rc1
  -   to: 1.03,REV=2010.12.04
  + lzop-1.03,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + lzop-1.03,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Sat Dec  4 18:00:59 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 18:00:59 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <1288802093-sup-4720@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201011010656.oA16uaLQ012938@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1288617957-sup-3784@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTikgvLLNAj3VCgWNrE_zA+PE8=TtNT2VwWyuMVq9@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288802093-sup-4720@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik4eYmFVNc7C51trEh-jBR3eTUzxck1JOCQGD2=@mail.gmail.com>

should we releaes 2.2.17 like it is?  i guess it does no harm to do another
release as soon there is something release-worthy.

rupert.


On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 17:35, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:

> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Nov 03 12:33:12 -0400 2010:
>
> > ETA on fixing these bugs?
>
> Well, I started work on the 'e build' stuff over the last two nights.
> I'm not able to do anything tonight but can hopefully wrap them up in
> the next few days after that.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
> --
> Ben Walton
> Systems Programmer - CHASS
> University of Toronto
> C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20101204/f6e5ae47/attachment.html>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Dec  4 18:12:30 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 12:12:30 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik4eYmFVNc7C51trEh-jBR3eTUzxck1JOCQGD2=@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011010656.oA16uaLQ012938@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1288617957-sup-3784@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTikgvLLNAj3VCgWNrE_zA+PE8=TtNT2VwWyuMVq9@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288802093-sup-4720@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTik4eYmFVNc7C51trEh-jBR3eTUzxck1JOCQGD2=@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1291482445-sup-2084@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from rupert THURNER's message of Sat Dec 04 12:00:59 -0500 2010:

> should we releaes 2.2.17 like it is?  i guess it does no harm to do
> another release as soon there is something release-worthy.

If you'd like to test the packages in my experimental/apache2 repo,
that would be helpful.  It addresses all but one of the bugs filed and
additionally moves etc/ to /etc/opt/csw/apache2 and var/ to
/var/opt/csw/apache2.  The config files are copied, the old log files
are not.

All of the cswap2mod CAS stuff is converted to use the 'e build' setup
that James suggested.  I also used that to handle the default .CSW
config files and the migration of those files from old etc/ to new.
Taken as a whole, there is a fair amount of change introduced.

My own tests indicate that it should be ok, but I'd like a bit more
feedback before throwing this one over the fence...especially in light
of the sparse zone issues I introduced before.

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From rupert at opencsw.org  Sat Dec  4 19:02:26 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 19:02:26 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <1291482445-sup-2084@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201011010656.oA16uaLQ012938@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1288617957-sup-3784@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTikgvLLNAj3VCgWNrE_zA+PE8=TtNT2VwWyuMVq9@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288802093-sup-4720@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTik4eYmFVNc7C51trEh-jBR3eTUzxck1JOCQGD2=@mail.gmail.com>
	<1291482445-sup-2084@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin0dmAb_mnFscsnDM39kQRFUoJYAx=crMuLOH-K@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 18:12, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:

> Excerpts from rupert THURNER's message of Sat Dec 04 12:00:59 -0500 2010:
>
> > should we releaes 2.2.17 like it is?  i guess it does no harm to do
> > another release as soon there is something release-worthy.
>
> If you'd like to test the packages in my experimental/apache2 repo,
> that would be helpful.  It addresses all but one of the bugs filed and
> additionally moves etc/ to /etc/opt/csw/apache2 and var/ to
> /var/opt/csw/apache2.  The config files are copied, the old log files
> are not.
>
> All of the cswap2mod CAS stuff is converted to use the 'e build' setup
> that James suggested.  I also used that to handle the default .CSW
> config files and the migration of those files from old etc/ to new.
> Taken as a whole, there is a fair amount of change introduced.
>
> My own tests indicate that it should be ok, but I'd like a bit more
> feedback before throwing this one over the fence...especially in light
> of the sparse zone issues I introduced before.
>

here it looks good as w?ll.

rupert.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20101204/78232f88/attachment.html>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Dec  4 19:17:38 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 13:17:38 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin0dmAb_mnFscsnDM39kQRFUoJYAx=crMuLOH-K@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011010656.oA16uaLQ012938@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1288617957-sup-3784@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTikgvLLNAj3VCgWNrE_zA+PE8=TtNT2VwWyuMVq9@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288802093-sup-4720@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTik4eYmFVNc7C51trEh-jBR3eTUzxck1JOCQGD2=@mail.gmail.com>
	<1291482445-sup-2084@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTin0dmAb_mnFscsnDM39kQRFUoJYAx=crMuLOH-K@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1291486009-sup-6022@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from rupert THURNER's message of Sat Dec 04 13:02:26 -0500 2010:

> here it looks good as w?ll.

So the transfer of relevant config files from /opt/csw/apache2/etc to
/etc/opt/csw/apache2 worked fine for you as well?

I just ran another test here and I see that moving the configuration
will break the use of the existing server.crt and server.key files.
This needs to be handled too...looking at this now.

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Dec  4 19:58:49 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 19:58:49 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby1, ruby, rubydev, rubydoc,
	rub(...)
Message-ID: <201012041858.oB4IwnAw016558@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This release addresses Mantis id 4399.

Thanks
-Ben

* ruby: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.8.7p299,REV=2010.09.19
  -   to: 1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04
  + ruby-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubydev-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubydev-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubydoc-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubymode-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubymode_el-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubytk-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubytk-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libruby1: new package
  + libruby1-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libruby1-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Sun Dec  5 18:52:06 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2010 11:52:06 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
Message-ID: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* various packages: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.6.13,REV=2010.10.27
  -   to: 1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05
  + ap2_subversion-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + javasvn-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_subversion-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pythonsvn-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rbsvn-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + subversion-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + subversion_contrib-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + subversion_devel-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + subversion_tools-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Dec  6 14:13:30 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 14:13:30 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnuplot
Message-ID: <201012061313.oB6DDUNH000511@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

this is a small courtesy update for you :-)


Best regards

  -- Dago

* gnuplot: minor version upgrade
  - from: 4.2.6,REV=2009.09.20
  -   to: 4.4.2,REV=2010.12.06
  + gnuplot-4.4.2,REV=2010.12.06-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gnuplot-4.4.2,REV=2010.12.06-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Dec  6 17:12:29 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:12:29 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb48, berkeleydb48_devel,
	ber(...)
Message-ID: <201012061612.oB6GCTPJ027598@login.bo.opencsw.org>

A version bump.

* berkeleydb48: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0
  -   to: 4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0
  + berkeleydb48-4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + berkeleydb48-4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + berkeleydb48_devel-4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + berkeleydb48_devel-4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + berkeleydb48_doc-4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 21:59:41 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 12:59:41 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs genshi
In-Reply-To: <201012041142.oB4BgPFQ025740@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012041142.oB4BgPFQ025740@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikWRvNdy-v_4WhiAZixk3EYHdLE=Ly==nBAKT=5@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 12/4/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> version fits to new trac verison.
>
> * genshi: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 0.5.1,REV=2009.06.05
>   -   to: 0.6,REV=2010.12.02
>   + genshi-0.6,REV=2010.12.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 22:01:21 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 13:01:21 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs dhcp, dhcp_devel
In-Reply-To: <201012041513.oB4FDCSV011319@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012041513.oB4FDCSV011319@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikQ5_HGrsBi45TbXNPEL=eTMgEObnB5nJ8ERf=_@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 12/4/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * dhcp: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 4.2.0,REV=2010.07.20
>   -   to: 4.2.0P1,REV=2010.12.03
>   + dhcp-4.2.0P1,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + dhcp-4.2.0P1,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + dhcp_devel-4.2.0P1,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 22:02:13 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 13:02:13 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs lzop
In-Reply-To: <201012041643.oB4Gh3xw019674@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012041643.oB4Gh3xw019674@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinC+wcDEew6Y_CbEHjBmMWBSM36Mu0FRa7tZAp-@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 12/4/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * lzop: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 1.02,REV=2009.04.20_rev=rc1
>   -   to: 1.03,REV=2010.12.04
>   + lzop-1.03,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + lzop-1.03,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 22:13:04 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 13:13:04 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnuplot
In-Reply-To: <201012061313.oB6DDUNH000511@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012061313.oB6DDUNH000511@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinNnQZ4zhwU4bsJY+FANmGHiAxH-t=UCO+=Ywpv@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks. erm.. seems like you went quite a bit further than "minor" though.

old version has these dependancies:
P       CSWftype2
P       CSWfconfig
P       CSWiconv
P       CSWgd
P       CSWxpm
P       CSWjpeg
P       CSWncurses
P       CSWpng
P       CSWreadline
P       CSWzlib


Your version adds these new dependancies:

P CSWwxwidgetscommon wxwidgets_common - A cross-platform toolkit, common files
P CSWlibatk libatk - An accessibility toolkit for GNOME
P CSWpango libpango - A framework for the layout and rendering of
international text
P CSWggettextrt ggettextrt - GNU locale utilities
P CSWemacscommon emacs_common - the Emacs editor architecture neutral
common components
P CSWlibcairo libcairo - The Cairo 2D Graphics Library
P CSWwxwidgetsgtk2 wxwidgets_gtk2 - A cross-platform toolkit, gtk2 support
P CSWgtk2 gtk2 - GTK toolkit for creating graphical user interfaces
P CSWgd gd - A library used for dynamic image creation
P CSWncurses ncurses - A free software emulation of curses
P CSWlua lua - light-weight language designed for extending applications
P CSWsunmath libsunmath - Sun maths library
P CSWglib2 glib2 - Low level core compatibility library for GTK+ and GNOME


The bulk of your additions, seem to be UI-based.
I think there are some programs that use gnuplot, that dont
neccessarily declare a dependancy, because they use the binary
executable.
These programs do not care about all the fancy GUI options.
As such, pulling in all those extra deps, is not helpful to our user.
Would you mind either removing them, or putting them in some kind of
gnuplot_ui package?

as always, the comparison:
debian splits out emacs support into its own separate package. they
also splut out ruby, python, and x11 into their own packages.
Oddly, there is no useful base"gnuplot" package any more. it's just an
empty stub. Programs are presumbly expected to depend on either
gnuplot_x11 or gnuplot_nox, as needed.

but anyways, I guess by prior use, "gnuplot_x11" would win over "gnuplot_ui".

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 22:16:07 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 13:16:07 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <1290869606-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201011262250.oAQMoxdl004534@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=wHVvqfvB4Q42xiNme_CJC+1TWnp4ur+gGN8ju@mail.gmail.com>
	<1290864046-sup-6628@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<1290869606-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimgFU4dsbpnhdODBaA__LQgdCbN3MP-f84UC0GT@mail.gmail.com>

batched, btw.


On 11/27/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Sat Nov 27 08:22:04 -0500 2010:
>> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Sat Nov 27 00:40:34 -0500 2010:
>> > THere is a problem in gitdevel.
>>
>> > it has a header file that hardcodes a default path of /usr/local/bin
>> > instead of /opt/csw/bin.
>>
>> I would argue that this is fine:
>>
>> #ifndef _PATH_DEFPATH
>> #define _PATH_DEFPATH "/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin"
>>
>> #endif
>
> Never mind.  We don't have _PATH_DEFPATH on solaris.  Patched.
>
> -Ben
> --
> Ben Walton
> Systems Programmer - CHASS
> University of Toronto
> C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 22:31:08 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 13:31:08 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb48, berkeleydb48_devel,
	ber(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012061612.oB6GCTPJ027598@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012061612.oB6GCTPJ027598@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimZspMu=0cnZLaEYf=s6Mqf+Z4h44YumAVcwY62@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 12/6/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> A version bump.
>
> * berkeleydb48: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0
>   -   to: 4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0
>   + berkeleydb48-4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + berkeleydb48-4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   +
> berkeleydb48_devel-4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + berkeleydb48_devel-4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + berkeleydb48_doc-4.8.30,REV=2010.12.06_rev=p0-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 22:37:47 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 13:37:47 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs bind, bind_chroot, bind_devel,
	bind_u(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012041509.oB4F9jl0009906@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012041509.oB4F9jl0009906@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimj4M=yXQPn3eWOSPJe345tyT4oqJK2hB6hZ2PM@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 12/4/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * bind: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 9.7.2P2,REV=2010.10.19
>   -   to: 9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03
>   + bind-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + bind-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + bind_chroot-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + bind_devel-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + bind_utils-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + bind_utils-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libbind-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libbind-9.7.2P3,REV=2010.12.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 22:40:42 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 13:40:42 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openssl, openssl_devel, openssl_rt,
	o(...)
In-Reply-To: <4CFA61F5.5020401@opencsw.org>
References: <4CFA61F5.5020401@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinf6saSsNBo7+YCjE43OYnnvbT_O5qpMHaXfPG7@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Yann. batched.


On 12/4/10, Yann Rouillard <yann at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * openssl: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21
>   -   to: 0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04
>   + openssl_devel-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openssl_devel-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openssl_rt-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openssl_rt-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openssl_utils-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openssl_utils-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openssl-0.9.8q,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Dec  6 22:48:07 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 22:48:07 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnuplot
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinNnQZ4zhwU4bsJY+FANmGHiAxH-t=UCO+=Ywpv@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012061313.oB6DDUNH000511@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinNnQZ4zhwU4bsJY+FANmGHiAxH-t=UCO+=Ywpv@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1FA29B72-2559-400F-BF3B-EEED8EAB1A07@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 06.12.2010 um 22:13 schrieb Philip Brown:
> but anyways, I guess by prior use, "gnuplot_x11" would win over "gnuplot_ui".

Does that mean you suggest using alternatives to have an x11 and non-x11 versions?


Best regards

  -- Dago



From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 22:53:27 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 13:53:27 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby1, ruby, rubydev, rubydoc,
	rub(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012041858.oB4IwnAw016558@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012041858.oB4IwnAw016558@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinVt=Cx+H+Qg7twXF4_RQHRTgGndOBFFvicH7Xi@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On 12/4/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This release addresses Mantis id 4399.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * ruby: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 1.8.7p299,REV=2010.09.19
>   -   to: 1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04
>   + ruby-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + ruby-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + rubydev-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + rubydev-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + rubydoc-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + rubymode-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + rubymode_el-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + rubytk-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + rubytk-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libruby1: new package
>   + libruby1-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libruby1-1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 22:57:11 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 13:57:11 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnuplot
In-Reply-To: <1FA29B72-2559-400F-BF3B-EEED8EAB1A07@opencsw.org>
References: <201012061313.oB6DDUNH000511@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinNnQZ4zhwU4bsJY+FANmGHiAxH-t=UCO+=Ywpv@mail.gmail.com>
	<1FA29B72-2559-400F-BF3B-EEED8EAB1A07@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinvNLTXOrqO_egpNnXmXQRDgg7pidOmKroge5yk@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/6/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 06.12.2010 um 22:13 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> but anyways, I guess by prior use, "gnuplot_x11" would win over
>> "gnuplot_ui".
>
> Does that mean you suggest using alternatives to have an x11 and non-x11
> versions?


not really.
Even when a system has both installed, I'm sure that server-type stuff
doesnt want to have to invoke the 3xbigger footprint program, just
because people also want the gui version sometimes.
I'd suggest keeping the binary for the gui version as gnuplot_x11, and
leaving it at that.

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec  6 23:01:03 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 14:01:03 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>

HI Rupert,
maybe you wanna go preruse these things more, before I look too much further?

i notice in subversion_tools

/opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/tools/dev/prebuild-cleanup.sh:rm
/usr/local/bin/apr-config


Okay on the one hand, this is under a "doc" dir.
But on the other hand, it's an .sh script.

problem?


On 12/5/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * various packages: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 1.6.13,REV=2010.10.27
>   -   to: 1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05
>   + ap2_subversion-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + javasvn-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pm_subversion-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pythonsvn-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + rbsvn-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + subversion-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + subversion_contrib-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + subversion_devel-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + subversion_tools-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From rupert at opencsw.org  Mon Dec  6 23:25:51 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 23:25:51 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>

did only a version number change and rebuild. this tools directory seems to
change anyway with svn-1.7.

but /usr/local/bin/apr-config? i'm wondering where this comes from ... it
should not be there, and i cannot see it in the package.

rupert.


On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 23:01, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:

> HI Rupert,
> maybe you wanna go preruse these things more, before I look too much
> further?
>
> i notice in subversion_tools
>
> /opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/tools/dev/prebuild-cleanup.sh:rm
> /usr/local/bin/apr-config
>
>
> Okay on the one hand, this is under a "doc" dir.
> But on the other hand, it's an .sh script.
>
> problem?
>
>
> On 12/5/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> > * various packages: patchlevel upgrade
> >   - from: 1.6.13,REV=2010.10.27
> >   -   to: 1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05
> >   + ap2_subversion-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> >   + javasvn-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> >   + pm_subversion-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> >   + pythonsvn-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> >   + rbsvn-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> >   + subversion-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> >   + subversion_contrib-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> >   + subversion_devel-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> >   + subversion_tools-1.6.15,REV=2010.12.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> >
> > --
> > Generated by submitpkg
> > _______________________________________________
> > pkgsubmissions mailing list
> > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
> >
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20101206/77f446fe/attachment-0001.html>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec  7 02:34:07 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:34:07 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/6/10, rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> did only a version number change and rebuild. this tools directory seems to
> change anyway with svn-1.7.
>
> but /usr/local/bin/apr-config? i'm wondering where this comes from ... it
> should not be there, and i cannot see it in the package.
>
> rupert.

which package did you look at?
I did tell you exactly where it is:


>>
>> /opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/tools/dev/prebuild-cleanup.sh


in subversion_tools


There are also instances of /usr/local/bin in subversion_contrib
mostly "trivial", but the ones that look to be in actual programs are:
/opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/contrib/hook-scripts/commit-block-joke.py
/opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/contrib/cgi/tweak-log.cgi


the cgi is definately NOT mere documentation:

###############################################################################
# Configuration Section

my $gSvnlookCmd = '/usr/local/bin/svnlook';
  ...

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 02:41:07 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 20:41:07 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1291685940-sup-4548@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Dec 06 20:34:07 -0500 2010:

> There are also instances of /usr/local/bin in subversion_contrib
> mostly "trivial", but the ones that look to be in actual programs are:
> /opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/contrib/hook-scripts/commit-block-joke.py
> /opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/contrib/cgi/tweak-log.cgi
> 
> 
> the cgi is definately NOT mere documentation:

Ok, but it is in contrib/.  This is always buyer beware type stuff.  I
don't think there is any expectation that these things will 'just
work.'

For what it's worth, I think this is something that should be
exempted, even though it definitely isn't 'mere documentation.'

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec  7 02:53:08 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:53:08 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <1291685940-sup-4548@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1291685940-sup-4548@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimy7eDPVKMxavwXfnG_3zqCDEmikJ46T3S6w3ph@mail.gmail.com>

[Arg. gmail decided to reply to Ben only. Copying list]

Its a program. Something expected to run. But it's broken, so it wont run.
Maintainer needs to either fix it, or exclude it from the package.

If more than one person out there is going to use it, it's most
reasonable that the maintainer fix it ONE time, then multiple people
out there have to fix it multiple times.
If no-one's ever going to use it... then lets not put it in the package.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 03:07:23 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 21:07:23 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimy7eDPVKMxavwXfnG_3zqCDEmikJ46T3S6w3ph@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1291685940-sup-4548@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTimy7eDPVKMxavwXfnG_3zqCDEmikJ46T3S6w3ph@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1291687448-sup-8236@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Dec 06 20:53:08 -0500 2010:

> Its a program. Something expected to run. But it's broken, so it
> wont run.  Maintainer needs to either fix it, or exclude it from the
> package.

I still disagree.  It's placed under doc/, and further in contrib/.
It's a widely held convention in my experience that things in contrib
are not expected to run without fiddling.

If it were outside of doc/, I'd agree with you.  Had Rupert copied a
few of the example scripts from contrib into a normal program
directory then yes, it should be fixed.  As it is though, I think the
location should allow for non-function.

That being said, it wouldn't be bad to put extra work into making them
viable with less fiddling.  I'm simply arguing that it shouldn't be a
must item in this case.

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From gadavis at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 03:16:58 2010
From: gadavis at opencsw.org (Geoff Davis)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 03:16:58 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnetcdf6, libnetcdf_c++5,
	libnetcdf(...)
Message-ID: <201012070216.oB72GwJd012132@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is my first package for OpenCSW. It's a library for accessing scientific 
data formats that my next package will depend on.

Due to Mantis Bug 4497, I had to include some dependencies on CSWgcc4core. 
(Unfortunately at this time there isn't a way to easily include the 
cswreleasemgr file with GAR, so I'm putting that info into this email.)

* netcdf: new package
  + libnetcdf6-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnetcdf6-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnetcdf_c++5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnetcdf_c++5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnetcdff5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnetcdff5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + netcdf-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + netcdf-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + netcdf_devel-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + netcdf_devel-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 06:34:51 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 06:34:51 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikXnt0+AeQzeE7hXpXbmUcerwS5wfJBOhQ0dPYT@mail.gmail.com>

oh, you mean the file _in_ doc, an example script, contains this path in the
text? or a file called "commit-block-joke" in contrib? i guess this is one
of the rare cases where we completely disagree :)

any change to upstream is code on our side, needs to be maintained, can be
the source of an error, and might block an upgrade to a new version, which
makes our offer look less good than it is or causes real trouble (i do not
mention the broken ldaps authentication again ..). commit-block-joke is not
worth this, at least imo.

and - to be honest - i am happy to reduce the time budget i use for
upgrading packages, not the other way round.

rupert.


On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 02:34, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:

> On 12/6/10, rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> > did only a version number change and rebuild. this tools directory seems
> to
> > change anyway with svn-1.7.
> >
> > but /usr/local/bin/apr-config? i'm wondering where this comes from ... it
> > should not be there, and i cannot see it in the package.
> >
> > rupert.
>
> which package did you look at?
> I did tell you exactly where it is:
>
>
> >>
> >> /opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/tools/dev/prebuild-cleanup.sh
>
>
> in subversion_tools
>
>
> There are also instances of /usr/local/bin in subversion_contrib
> mostly "trivial", but the ones that look to be in actual programs are:
> /opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/contrib/hook-scripts/commit-block-joke.py
> /opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/contrib/cgi/tweak-log.cgi
>
>
> the cgi is definately NOT mere documentation:
>
>
> ###############################################################################
> # Configuration Section
>
> my $gSvnlookCmd = '/usr/local/bin/svnlook';
>  ...
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20101207/d6efa537/attachment.html>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec  7 18:08:56 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 09:08:56 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikXnt0+AeQzeE7hXpXbmUcerwS5wfJBOhQ0dPYT@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikXnt0+AeQzeE7hXpXbmUcerwS5wfJBOhQ0dPYT@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin_BMiaFG_DNd9rPvXO4=pysWaVO=i_ZDNv3O4m@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/6/10, rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> oh, you mean the file _in_ doc, an example script, contains this path in the
> text? or a file called "commit-block-joke" in contrib? i guess this is one
> of the rare cases where we completely disagree :)

the "joke" one sounds trivial and ignorable. but the other one does not.

There are multiple complicating factors here. One of which is, the
"upstream" people (or was it your choice?) inappropriately decided to
bundle "contrib" scripts, under "doc", when it doesnt sound like they
are really "documentation" at all.
And you acknowlege they are not documentation, by *you yourself*
splitting out the files into their own subversion_contrib package,
rather than a "doc" package.

There's an old English saying, that you are "hoist by your own petard" :-)
You yourself have designated the contents as "not doc", otherwise, it
should be subversion_doc


> any change to upstream is code on our side, needs to be maintained, can be
> the source of an error, and might block an upgrade to a new version, which
> makes our offer look less good than it is or causes real trouble (i do not
> mention the broken ldaps authentication again ..). commit-block-joke is not
> worth this, at least imo.

Yes, this means you would need to generate a local "patch". It's
really not that difficult.

The GAR patching mechanisms are almost automatic, if you leave the git
stuff enabled.
You basically just edit the file, ONE time, then run (some gar magic
"make patch" command). It does the work of creating a patchfile for
you.
svn commit and package

and then future versions will automatically be patched by gar.


>> /opt/csw/share/doc/subversion/contrib/cgi/tweak-log.cgi

From skayser at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 21:11:18 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 21:11:18 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimy7eDPVKMxavwXfnG_3zqCDEmikJ46T3S6w3ph@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1291685940-sup-4548@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTimy7eDPVKMxavwXfnG_3zqCDEmikJ46T3S6w3ph@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20101207201118.GC30288@sebastiankayser.de>

* Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> [Arg. gmail decided to reply to Ben only. Copying list]
> 
> Its a program. Something expected to run. But it's broken, so it wont run.
> Maintainer needs to either fix it, or exclude it from the package.
> 
> If more than one person out there is going to use it, it's most
> reasonable that the maintainer fix it ONE time, then multiple people
> out there have to fix it multiple times.
> If no-one's ever going to use it... then lets not put it in the package.

Out of curiosity. I sense that path issues in packages seem to have
emerged (increased?) recently, say the last couple of weeks. Was this a
change to the release manager checkpkg?

Regarding the specific issue: why would you want to press someone to sit
down, investigate, and fix every possible path occurence within various
contrib/ scripts? We are not talking about bin/ and very likely this is
not a simple sed operation. While we sure can appreciate everyone who
goes to such lengths, I can understand that this level of detail is off
the chart for some - motivational and proportionality wise. What do we
achieve then by making it a package submission showstopper?

Sebastian

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec  7 21:41:27 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 12:41:27 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <20101207201118.GC30288@sebastiankayser.de>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1291685940-sup-4548@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTimy7eDPVKMxavwXfnG_3zqCDEmikJ46T3S6w3ph@mail.gmail.com>
	<20101207201118.GC30288@sebastiankayser.de>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=DBM91PREor8SMB=ujgUqmFEpQU_42njnKNtVS@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/7/10, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> Out of curiosity. I sense that path issues in packages seem to have
> emerged (increased?) recently, say the last couple of weeks. Was this a
> change to the release manager checkpkg?

nope, dont think so. its mostly a coincidence. What HAS changed, is
that I made it so my version is more verbose about what the file paths
with the problems are.



> Regarding the specific issue: why would you want to press someone to sit
> down, investigate, and fix every possible path occurence within various
> contrib/ scripts? We are not talking about bin/ and very likely this is
> not a simple sed operation.

yes it is a simple sed operation.
i've looked at the file.

and there are only the two files in there I'm fussing about. I'm
ignoring the path occurrences in true "doc" files.

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec  7 21:48:07 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 12:48:07 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnetcdf6, libnetcdf_c++5,
	libnetcdf(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012070216.oB72GwJd012132@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012070216.oB72GwJd012132@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin12me+yZT-Scb84V9+WpYk06E5s_aLL2m3_1wz@mail.gmail.com>

Great! Nice to see something, Geoff.
Given that this is a "new" package, I'm giving it extra scrutiny.

I notice that the libnetcXXX files are relatively tiny.
Does it really make sense to split them out?

You do have the option of having just a unified "libnetcdf" package if
you would prefer.

If you still choose to split them all up separately, it would probably
be useful to have a more descriptive description.
Currently, :

NAME=libnetcdff5 - Machine-independent data formats for array-oriented
scientific data, libnetcdff.so.5


that doesnt seem very helpful to me, in describing why you bothered
splitting it out. Or what libnetcdff
5 IS.

Alternative style of naming, for the other lib:

libnetcdf_c++5 - C++ shared library for netcdf

rather than the long but mostly unhelpful
libnetcdf_c++5 - Machine-independent data formats for array-oriented
scientific data, libnetcdf_c++.so.5

On 12/6/10, Geoff Davis <gadavis at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This is my first package for OpenCSW. It's a library for accessing
> scientific
> data formats that my next package will depend on.
>
> Due to Mantis Bug 4497, I had to include some dependencies on CSWgcc4core.
> (Unfortunately at this time there isn't a way to easily include the
> cswreleasemgr file with GAR, so I'm putting that info into this email.)
>
> * netcdf: new package
>   + libnetcdf6-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libnetcdf6-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libnetcdf_c++5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libnetcdf_c++5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libnetcdff5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libnetcdff5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + netcdf-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + netcdf-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + netcdf_devel-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + netcdf_devel-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From skayser at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 22:00:00 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 22:00:00 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=DBM91PREor8SMB=ujgUqmFEpQU_42njnKNtVS@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1291685940-sup-4548@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTimy7eDPVKMxavwXfnG_3zqCDEmikJ46T3S6w3ph@mail.gmail.com>
	<20101207201118.GC30288@sebastiankayser.de>
	<AANLkTi=DBM91PREor8SMB=ujgUqmFEpQU_42njnKNtVS@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20101207210000.GD30288@sebastiankayser.de>

* Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> On 12/7/10, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> > Regarding the specific issue: why would you want to press someone to sit
> > down, investigate, and fix every possible path occurence within various
> > contrib/ scripts? We are not talking about bin/ and very likely this is
> > not a simple sed operation.
> 
> yes it is a simple sed operation.
> i've looked at the file.

Sorry, definition unclear. Not a simple sed operation = identify the
relevant files, locate the path references and determine whether they
are indeed subject to simple sed replacements (or e.g. whether there are
any extra dependencies required).

> and there are only the two files in there I'm fussing about. I'm
> ignoring the path occurrences in true "doc" files.

Rupert, two changes okay for you?

Maciej, does checkpkg have a mechanism to check for such path occurences
in /opt/csw/share/doc (to avoid surprises at the release gate). And do
we have different levels of checkpkg guidance, different as in
"can/should" vs "must"? IMHO "can/should" would be sufficiently
appropriate for this case. More a heads up helper than a show stopper.

Sebastian

From gadavis at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 22:28:40 2010
From: gadavis at opencsw.org (Geoff Davis)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 13:28:40 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnetcdf6, libnetcdf_c++5,
	libnetcdf(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin12me+yZT-Scb84V9+WpYk06E5s_aLL2m3_1wz@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012070216.oB72GwJd012132@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin12me+yZT-Scb84V9+WpYk06E5s_aLL2m3_1wz@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6AC766C9-4CD9-4790-995E-07E0AC7C60EC@opencsw.org>

On Dec 7, 2010, at 12:48 PM, Philip Brown wrote:

> 
> I notice that the libnetcXXX files are relatively tiny.
> Does it really make sense to split them out?
> 
> You do have the option of having just a unified "libnetcdf" package if
> you would prefer.
> 
The libraries were split out at the suggestion of checkpkg based on what I assume is the new library policy. Additionally, I believe that my forthcoming GMT package only needs to link against the actual libraries rather than a full run-time package with all of the helper binaries. I know that our typical use case here at my day job doesn't make any use of those format conversion binaries, but GMT wants the libraries for who knows what and won't compile without them.

I'll tweak the package descriptions to make them a bit more readable as I agree that they're not particularly useful in their current state. Those descriptions were the automatically generated ones that checkpkg spit out, probably because it thinks that the end user isn't really going to see them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20101207/da659063/attachment.html>

From rupert at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 23:18:37 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 23:18:37 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <20101207210000.GD30288@sebastiankayser.de>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1291685940-sup-4548@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTimy7eDPVKMxavwXfnG_3zqCDEmikJ46T3S6w3ph@mail.gmail.com>
	<20101207201118.GC30288@sebastiankayser.de>
	<AANLkTi=DBM91PREor8SMB=ujgUqmFEpQU_42njnKNtVS@mail.gmail.com>
	<20101207210000.GD30288@sebastiankayser.de>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimZWwCkg5P0ZF5k1mEYn1_wmOqUFb0DP+r5CSka@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 22:00, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> * Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> > On 12/7/10, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> > > Regarding the specific issue: why would you want to press someone to sit
> > > down, investigate, and fix every possible path occurence within various
> > > contrib/ scripts? We are not talking about bin/ and very likely this is
> > > not a simple sed operation.
> >
> > yes it is a simple sed operation.
> > i've looked at the file.
>
> Sorry, definition unclear. Not a simple sed operation = identify the
> relevant files, locate the path references and determine whether they
> are indeed subject to simple sed replacements (or e.g. whether there are
> any extra dependencies required).
>
> > and there are only the two files in there I'm fussing about. I'm
> > ignoring the path occurrences in true "doc" files.
>
> Rupert, two changes okay for you?
>

sure ...

From gadavis at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 23:22:46 2010
From: gadavis at opencsw.org (Geoff Davis)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 23:22:46 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnetcdf6, libnetcdf_c++5,
	libnetcdf(...)
Message-ID: <201012072222.oB7MMknc014333@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Tweak package descriptions to be more descriptive.
* netcdf: new package
  + libnetcdf6-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnetcdf6-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnetcdf_c++5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnetcdf_c++5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnetcdff5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnetcdff5-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + netcdf-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + netcdf-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + netcdf_devel-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + netcdf_devel-4.1.1,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From skayser at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 23:29:42 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 23:29:42 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimZWwCkg5P0ZF5k1mEYn1_wmOqUFb0DP+r5CSka@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1291685940-sup-4548@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTimy7eDPVKMxavwXfnG_3zqCDEmikJ46T3S6w3ph@mail.gmail.com>
	<20101207201118.GC30288@sebastiankayser.de>
	<AANLkTi=DBM91PREor8SMB=ujgUqmFEpQU_42njnKNtVS@mail.gmail.com>
	<20101207210000.GD30288@sebastiankayser.de>
	<AANLkTimZWwCkg5P0ZF5k1mEYn1_wmOqUFb0DP+r5CSka@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20101207222942.GG30288@sebastiankayser.de>

* rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 22:00, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> > * Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> > > and there are only the two files in there I'm fussing about. I'm
> > > ignoring the path occurrences in true "doc" files.
> >
> > Rupert, two changes okay for you?
>
> sure ...

Thanks! As a simple sed will do, at least there won't be much to break
on upgrades for the two relevant files.

Sebastian

From skayser at opencsw.org  Tue Dec  7 23:58:26 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 23:58:26 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs parcellite
Message-ID: <201012072258.oB7MwQtB022486@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Parcellite is a lightweight GTK+ clipboard manager.
http://parcellite.sourceforge.net/

* parcellite: new package
  + parcellite-0.9.2,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + parcellite-0.9.2,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at opencsw.org  Wed Dec  8 18:26:59 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 09:26:59 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs parcellite
In-Reply-To: <201012072258.oB7MwQtB022486@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012072258.oB7MwQtB022486@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimMJhJuZ=fa6Y9GYm=qAmFYAZz4ER+kxp+8FhaD@mail.gmail.com>

cool. batched



On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Parcellite is a lightweight GTK+ clipboard manager.
> http://parcellite.sourceforge.net/
>
> * parcellite: new package
> ?+ parcellite-0.9.2,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ parcellite-0.9.2,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From skayser at opencsw.org  Thu Dec  9 14:11:40 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 14:11:40 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gpicview
Message-ID: <201012091311.oB9DBe6d013939@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Lightweight image viewer
http://lxde.sourceforge.net/gpicview/

* gpicview: new package
  + gpicview-0.2.1,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gpicview-0.2.1,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From skayser at opencsw.org  Thu Dec  9 14:17:33 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 14:17:33 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs stress
Message-ID: <201012091317.oB9DHX19008758@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Non-maintainer upload for stress. Built from GAR, closes #3665.
https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=3665

* stress: revision upgrade
  - from: 2009.02.27
  -   to: 2010.12.09
  + stress-1.0.4,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + stress-1.0.4,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Thu Dec  9 15:29:11 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 14:29:11 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnspr4, libnspr4_devel, nspr,
	nspr_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=sbwGYCKJ8sZDZNc+f6YP7Fi-E7jjkM_K=YwQg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010151317.o9FDHlxr014035@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=dH9F0qwry0tNiKc-qubt5iOd4UEHbMJ991O2=@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimUYY7jYvPSkMKZE-6SKUOkqfX_Zg0KU0okZoph@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim_bGaJN9J+i8uBjbXeFv2mS-GCRyAKAKSR6Rha@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX2u3jZEyzrDYtY1hX1egEf44M+FDdTrXTZ_CT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinTt=0tAm=Vi_NpcJKCE-PGgAG=pN0tUOWoBdZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinHA5Guurf6gU2B1p=TTH9v0bvKkZ2UH7cpPKVU@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=mUHD-ym1cwg8xfpYOn_-2GcTwPg7rqDeWagbZ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=sbwGYCKJ8sZDZNc+f6YP7Fi-E7jjkM_K=YwQg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=uwzX4SGJ=WfUja03F_3QUFAt-=X4C1LNUKzGi@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 17 de Outubro de 2010 18:20, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> sorry thought I had mentioned it.
> it's in Mozilla

I'll point out that there's one more package that contains
/opt/csw/share/aclocal/nspr.m4.  I don't know all the details about
the way you implemented checking for collisions, but I recall you
mentioning a unique index on the path column in the files table.  If
that's how you implemented it, you had to make the data in this column
unique.  If there were already two files with the same path, you
probably had to delete one of them.  If this is what you did, you lost
the information about other packages which contain conflicting files.
Right now, if we fix CSWmozilla, your database will think that there
is no collision any more, while there in fact will be one.

From gadavis at opencsw.org  Thu Dec  9 19:31:58 2010
From: gadavis at opencsw.org (Geoff Davis)
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 10:31:58 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnetcdf6, libnetcdf_c++5,
	libnetcdf(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin7kpVdNqj81wWqZjqWic_TVhn-r-WnkqLUq6Zj@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012072222.oB7MMknc014333@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin7kpVdNqj81wWqZjqWic_TVhn-r-WnkqLUq6Zj@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <99627965-44ED-4A90-8FAD-6C3E8CFEEBED@opencsw.org>

Phil,

I don't mean to be a pill about this, but after seeing this thread stalled for several days, I feel we've reached an impasse. I'm not quite sure what changes you would like me to make to the packaging in order to get it out the door. If you would like me to combine all of the shared object packages into a netcdf_rt package or something similar, I would be happy to do so. I just need an answer one way or the other.

I would really like to get this package out the door and get started on my next one. I've got a limited amount of time available right now where I can make a big push towards new packages or package overhauls, but that time window is rapidly coming to a close.

Thanks,
Geoff

On Dec 8, 2010, at 9:25 AM, Philip Brown wrote:

> Sebastian, Maciej;
> 
> As I understand it, you guys are okay with the debian concept of
> "library splitting can be good, but not mandatory; grouping multiple
> libraries into a (uniquely versioned) library package is okay".
> 
> But you seem to have implemented gar checkpkg to be more pushy on the
> user than that, as indicated by the forward, below.
> 
> How about toning the messages down, to make it clear that grouping is okay?
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Geoff Davis <gadavis at opencsw.org>
> Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnetcdf6, libnetcdf_c++5, libnetcdf(...)
> To: Release Manager <pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> 
> 
> 
>> You do have the option of having just a unified "libnetcdf" package if
>> you would prefer.
> 
> The libraries were split out at the suggestion of checkpkg based on
> what I assume is the new library policy.


From skayser at opencsw.org  Thu Dec  9 20:08:04 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 20:08:04 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnetcdf6, libnetcdf_c++5,
	libnetcdf(...)
In-Reply-To: <99627965-44ED-4A90-8FAD-6C3E8CFEEBED@opencsw.org>
References: <201012072222.oB7MMknc014333@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin7kpVdNqj81wWqZjqWic_TVhn-r-WnkqLUq6Zj@mail.gmail.com>
	<99627965-44ED-4A90-8FAD-6C3E8CFEEBED@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <20101209190804.GK30288@sebastiankayser.de>

* Geoff Davis <gadavis at opencsw.org> wrote:
> I don't mean to be a pill about this, but after seeing this thread
> stalled for several days, I feel we've reached an impasse. I'm not
> quite sure what changes you would like me to make to the packaging in
> order to get it out the door. If you would like me to combine all of
> the shared object packages into a netcdf_rt package or something
> similar, I would be happy to do so. I just need an answer one way or
> the other.

Sorry for the late reply on this topic. Phil, I am no Python juggler,
thus not actively hacking away at checkpkg. Haven't even yet seen the
specific output when it comes to the library split off suggestions. Will
will catch up on the exact output though - to see how it feels to me.
So much for the tools part of the discussion.

For the other part, the split off policy itself and its incentive, I
find Geoff's netcdf package to be a clear use case for separate library
packages. He is going to link another app to it right away. In case
netcdf bumps its SONAMEs there's no need to artifically inject the old
libs into a new netcdf package or rebuild dependent packages to link
against the new version. No hassle, less possible breakage and a soft
migration path. Can't be more obvious to me.

+1 For split off

Sebastian

[1] http://wiki.opencsw.org/checkpkg-error-tags#toc5

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec  9 20:32:21 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 11:32:21 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnetcdf6, libnetcdf_c++5,
	libnetcdf(...)
In-Reply-To: <99627965-44ED-4A90-8FAD-6C3E8CFEEBED@opencsw.org>
References: <201012072222.oB7MMknc014333@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin7kpVdNqj81wWqZjqWic_TVhn-r-WnkqLUq6Zj@mail.gmail.com>
	<99627965-44ED-4A90-8FAD-6C3E8CFEEBED@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikD_RBWS4SzjtbvkPoY503+GQxp4Va5362+kqfA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Geoff Davis <gadavis at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Phil,
>
> I don't mean to be a pill about this, but after seeing this thread stalled for several days, I feel we've reached an impasse. I'm not quite sure what changes you would like me to make to the packaging in order to get it out the door. If you would like me to combine all of the shared object packages into a netcdf_rt package or something similar, I would be happy to do so. I just need an answer one way or the other.
>


Sorry for the delay. I was actually mostly waiting on your feedback,
on whether you thought it would be best to have the shared libraries
collectively grouped, or separate. I got the impression that you only
put them together "because checkpkg told you to".

Given that you seem to be happy with them as is, and given the
additional feedback from Sebastian, I will release them today.

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec  9 21:10:21 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 12:10:21 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=3_5FSnaYQEiqmWRJxu9toUQnSYeZDtsUc=HpN@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011081957.oA8JvUVW025660@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikVgBzacEx2U22XRQAn==admXRUdF7GeW1MEN-h@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimTBCV0cVt1z5e70BjSc68s+x7ueposFHLd0hcc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinJt_a5Uainip1ekZjCTViCwZvg8B5bmVQwQPqW@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=3_5FSnaYQEiqmWRJxu9toUQnSYeZDtsUc=HpN@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikEmy-C9o6sjUqC4kOs5r8kP3LqhNMDcEdOHb6X@mail.gmail.com>

In the spirit of getting old "stalled" packages moving, I'm revisiting
cups as well :)

I'm putting my reply back on the pkgsubmissions list, because this
reply is not about general policy, but about an issue quite specific
to libcups.


To give a BRIEF recap, my primary concern was over the potential
conflicts in the future, between the existing packages

libcups-1.4.4-xxxxxx
libcups2-1.4.4-xxxxx


and what will happen in the future when "cups" finally reached version 2.
My concern was that we might potentially have need of an older
'libcups' package, and a newer
"libcups2" package, to allow the newer version to also exist.
except we already have a ''libcups2" package for the specific shared
library package.

Now that I looked at the package set with a fresh head, I realized
that the "libcups" is marked as a "transitional" package. it's not
supposed to be promoted indefinately. So even if cups reached version
2, we would not create a newer version of it.
Therefore, I dont see a potential for conflict any more.
Therefore, I shall release the package set. hopefully today.

From skayser at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 10 02:21:25 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 02:21:25 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ack
Message-ID: <201012100121.oBA1LPkJ008966@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* ack: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.88,REV=2009.07.15
  -   to: 1.94,REV=2010.12.10
  + ack-1.94,REV=2010.12.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From skayser at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 10 12:37:57 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:37:57 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs xterm
Message-ID: <201012101137.oBABbvvf010427@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* xterm: major version upgrade
  - from: 260,REV=2010.07.08
  -   to: 267,REV=2010.12.09
  + xterm-267,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + xterm-267,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec 10 19:10:42 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:10:42 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs xterm
In-Reply-To: <201012101137.oBABbvvf010427@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012101137.oBABbvvf010427@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=WGbK+VgE4TDJO=79VX8CdZKybWkfvM0nNgdWH@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 12/10/10, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * xterm: major version upgrade
>   - from: 260,REV=2010.07.08
>   -   to: 267,REV=2010.12.09
>   + xterm-267,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + xterm-267,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec 10 19:12:22 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:12:22 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs stress
In-Reply-To: <201012091317.oB9DHX19008758@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012091317.oB9DHX19008758@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=YQqBPB3AX-ufyq1g0AzeG=rmKW6oV5cnrEb93@mail.gmail.com>

Did you attempt to talk to Cyrus?


On 12/9/10, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Non-maintainer upload for stress. Built from GAR, closes #3665.
> https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=3665
>
> * stress: revision upgrade
>   - from: 2009.02.27
>   -   to: 2010.12.09
>   + stress-1.0.4,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + stress-1.0.4,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec 10 19:11:20 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:11:20 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ack
In-Reply-To: <201012100121.oBA1LPkJ008966@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012100121.oBA1LPkJ008966@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTiknWnB4uVOCpJSt5GO+UKRLJChi_X7Pr_S0xgO1@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 12/9/10, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * ack: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 1.88,REV=2009.07.15
>   -   to: 1.94,REV=2010.12.10
>   + ack-1.94,REV=2010.12.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec 10 19:21:56 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:21:56 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gpicview
In-Reply-To: <201012091311.oB9DBe6d013939@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012091311.oB9DBe6d013939@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimo3JbfQ13tA3FShLmAOVXE+qVb-eF+MosrYimc@mail.gmail.com>

Very cool! Nice to have a non-bloated choice again. This will probably
become my new viewer of choice :)


On 12/9/10, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Lightweight image viewer
> http://lxde.sourceforge.net/gpicview/
>
> * gpicview: new package
>   + gpicview-0.2.1,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + gpicview-0.2.1,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec 10 19:34:48 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:34:48 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnspr4, libnspr4_devel, nspr,
	nspr_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=uwzX4SGJ=WfUja03F_3QUFAt-=X4C1LNUKzGi@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010151317.o9FDHlxr014035@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=dH9F0qwry0tNiKc-qubt5iOd4UEHbMJ991O2=@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimUYY7jYvPSkMKZE-6SKUOkqfX_Zg0KU0okZoph@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim_bGaJN9J+i8uBjbXeFv2mS-GCRyAKAKSR6Rha@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX2u3jZEyzrDYtY1hX1egEf44M+FDdTrXTZ_CT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinTt=0tAm=Vi_NpcJKCE-PGgAG=pN0tUOWoBdZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinHA5Guurf6gU2B1p=TTH9v0bvKkZ2UH7cpPKVU@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=mUHD-ym1cwg8xfpYOn_-2GcTwPg7rqDeWagbZ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=sbwGYCKJ8sZDZNc+f6YP7Fi-E7jjkM_K=YwQg@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=uwzX4SGJ=WfUja03F_3QUFAt-=X4C1LNUKzGi@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinaJYp4BSjiKE5Tze=F7gYEf4C5EmZSy6cNnzr1@mail.gmail.com>

Hmm.. sorry i somehow missed replying to this one...


On 12/9/10, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> No dia 17 de Outubro de 2010 18:20, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>
> escreveu:
>> sorry thought I had mentioned it.
>> it's in Mozilla
>
> I'll point out that there's one more package that contains
> /opt/csw/share/aclocal/nspr.m4.  I don't know all the details about
> the way you implemented checking for collisions, but I recall you
> mentioning a unique index on the path column in the files table.  If
> that's how you implemented it, you had to make the data in this column
> unique.

yup

>  If there were already two files with the same path, you
> probably had to delete one of them.  If this is what you did, you lost
> the information about other packages which contain conflicting files.
> Right now, if we fix CSWmozilla, your database will think that there
> is no collision any more, while there in fact will be one.

For some old,bad packages, I had to compromise, and not register them
in the collision database. Given non-purity of existing data, we have
two tables; a no-limits one(which the web references for searches),
and a collisions one.

I'll accept the libnspr4 packages for filename purposes, if CSWmozilla
is cleaned up.

The only other collision is "sunbird", It is obsolete.
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/sunbird/
  "We recommend upgrading to Thunderbird 3 and Lightning 1.0 beta2."

If someone packaged up lightning, i would be very happy to drop our
sunbird package.
I'd like to just drop it anyway, but since we dont have any vaguely
comparable functionality in another package, I am reluctant to do so.

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec 10 19:36:03 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:36:03 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>

Havent forgotten about this... unfortunately, my 'coding' is lower
priority than doing releases.
So many releases recently!  (yay? :-)


On 12/3/10, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> This one is going to take a little longer, because I'm using it as a
> motivator to write a nice rename wrapper for myself.
>
> (renaming, rather than "remove, then add". Since removing in mantis is
> currently a way longer and uglier process for me than is comfortable
> right now)
>
>
> On 12/1/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Remove CSWlibclamav and CSWlibclamav-devel from the catalog.
>>
>> * libclam6: new package
>>   + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libclam6-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libclam6_devel-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> * clamav: patchlevel upgrade
>>   - from: 0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28
>>   -   to: 0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01
>>   + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + clamav-0.96.5,REV=2010.12.01-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> --
>> Generated by submitpkg
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>>
>

From skayser at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 10 23:38:31 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 23:38:31 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs stress
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=YQqBPB3AX-ufyq1g0AzeG=rmKW6oV5cnrEb93@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012091317.oB9DHX19008758@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=YQqBPB3AX-ufyq1g0AzeG=rmKW6oV5cnrEb93@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <58324.84.173.31.148.1292020711.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de>

Philip Brown schrieb:
> Did you attempt to talk to Cyrus?

Only via the bug notes on https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=3665
for which there was no response, thus the NMU. Put him on CC for the
pkgsubmission email, he's on the recipient list for this one also.

Cyrus, any objections to the stress NMU? It delivers a non-null man page
and bumps stress to 1.0.4. I don't mind if you want to submit your own
version, so go ahead if you prefer to. :)

Sebastian

P.S.: The build is straight-forward. GAR recipe at
http://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/stress/trunk/Makefile


From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec 10 23:54:14 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:54:14 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs stress
In-Reply-To: <58324.84.173.31.148.1292020711.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de>
References: <201012091317.oB9DHX19008758@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=YQqBPB3AX-ufyq1g0AzeG=rmKW6oV5cnrEb93@mail.gmail.com>
	<58324.84.173.31.148.1292020711.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimM+kLhGs=2Eg2U5Cmak5-=qWBUjbcFrCGb8htT@mail.gmail.com>

wierd.. he has not responded to that VERY old bug listing, .. over a year old.
But he did post to maintainers list, this year june.

http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/2010-June/012395.html



On 12/10/10, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Philip Brown schrieb:
>> Did you attempt to talk to Cyrus?
>
> Only via the bug notes on https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=3665
> for which there was no response, thus the NMU. Put him on CC for the
> pkgsubmission email, he's on the recipient list for this one also.
>
> Cyrus, any objections to the stress NMU? It delivers a non-null man page
> and bumps stress to 1.0.4. I don't mind if you want to submit your own
> version, so go ahead if you prefer to. :)
>
> Sebastian
>
> P.S.: The build is straight-forward. GAR recipe at
> http://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/stress/trunk/Makefile
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Dec 13 12:57:27 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 12:57:27 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca, pm_berkeleydb
Message-ID: <201012131157.oBDBvRxo007163@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is an important version bump due to the new Oracle patch release mechanism.

* pca: major version upgrade
  - from: 20100910.01,REV=2010.09.10
  -   to: 20101213.01,REV=2010.12.13
  + pca-20101213.01,REV=2010.12.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

This one fixes #4629 breaking amavis:
  https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4629

* pm_berkeleydb: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.09.10
  -   to: 2010.12.13
  + pm_berkeleydb-0.43,REV=2010.12.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_berkeleydb-0.43,REV=2010.12.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec 13 18:53:52 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 09:53:52 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca, pm_berkeleydb
In-Reply-To: <201012131157.oBDBvRxo007163@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012131157.oBDBvRxo007163@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimUyzg2THY4+jibfSfkPCC_=c-c=hZAoiDHmgTw@mail.gmail.com>

Sooo.. I'm waiting on confirmation from you guys on the other thread,
before releasing this



On 12/13/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This is an important version bump due to the new Oracle patch release
> mechanism.
>
> * pca: major version upgrade
>   - from: 20100910.01,REV=2010.09.10
>   -   to: 20101213.01,REV=2010.12.13
>   + pca-20101213.01,REV=2010.12.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> This one fixes #4629 breaking amavis:
>   https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4629
>
> * pm_berkeleydb: revision upgrade
>   - from: 2010.09.10
>   -   to: 2010.12.13
>   + pm_berkeleydb-0.43,REV=2010.12.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pm_berkeleydb-0.43,REV=2010.12.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec 13 22:21:51 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 13:21:51 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs stress
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimM+kLhGs=2Eg2U5Cmak5-=qWBUjbcFrCGb8htT@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012091317.oB9DHX19008758@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=YQqBPB3AX-ufyq1g0AzeG=rmKW6oV5cnrEb93@mail.gmail.com>
	<58324.84.173.31.148.1292020711.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de>
	<AANLkTimM+kLhGs=2Eg2U5Cmak5-=qWBUjbcFrCGb8htT@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimyKPRE07EvLu4SgM7=y8iW26GzrKZp0rLXJrM2@mail.gmail.com>

He appears completely unreachable, even when attempting to contact
directly. his "alt" email address bounced.

So I guess I'll mark him as missing, and accept this package.


On 12/10/10, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> wierd.. he has not responded to that VERY old bug listing, .. over a year
> old.
> But he did post to maintainers list, this year june.
>
> http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/2010-June/012395.html
>
>
>
> On 12/10/10, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Philip Brown schrieb:
>>> Did you attempt to talk to Cyrus?
>>
>> Only via the bug notes on https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=3665
>> for which there was no response, thus the NMU. Put him on CC for the
>> pkgsubmission email, he's on the recipient list for this one also.
>>
>> Cyrus, any objections to the stress NMU? It delivers a non-null man page
>> and bumps stress to 1.0.4. I don't mind if you want to submit your own
>> version, so go ahead if you prefer to. :)
>>
>> Sebastian
>>
>> P.S.: The build is straight-forward. GAR recipe at
>> http://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/stress/trunk/Makefile
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>>
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Dec 13 22:37:45 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 22:37:45 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca, pm_berkeleydb
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimUyzg2THY4+jibfSfkPCC_=c-c=hZAoiDHmgTw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012131157.oBDBvRxo007163@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimUyzg2THY4+jibfSfkPCC_=c-c=hZAoiDHmgTw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B64C731D-48CC-4254-9CC2-5B1AAE56142F@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 13.12.2010 um 18:53 schrieb Philip Brown:
> Sooo.. I'm waiting on confirmation from you guys on the other thread,
> before releasing this

Regardless of the bdb thing, please make sure to release pca today or
nobody gets patches tomorrow.

> On 12/13/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> This is an important version bump due to the new Oracle patch release
>> mechanism.
>> 
>> * pca: major version upgrade
>>  - from: 20100910.01,REV=2010.09.10
>>  -   to: 20101213.01,REV=2010.12.13
>>  + pca-20101213.01,REV=2010.12.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz


Best regards

  -- Dago


From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec 13 22:47:06 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 13:47:06 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca, pm_berkeleydb
In-Reply-To: <B64C731D-48CC-4254-9CC2-5B1AAE56142F@opencsw.org>
References: <201012131157.oBDBvRxo007163@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimUyzg2THY4+jibfSfkPCC_=c-c=hZAoiDHmgTw@mail.gmail.com>
	<B64C731D-48CC-4254-9CC2-5B1AAE56142F@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimmq3GaUs_i02BuZqbB4AdvzMMtTMRWAg4PY3bS@mail.gmail.com>

okay pca batched

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 14 01:43:49 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 16:43:49 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca, pm_berkeleydb
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimmq3GaUs_i02BuZqbB4AdvzMMtTMRWAg4PY3bS@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012131157.oBDBvRxo007163@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimUyzg2THY4+jibfSfkPCC_=c-c=hZAoiDHmgTw@mail.gmail.com>
	<B64C731D-48CC-4254-9CC2-5B1AAE56142F@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimmq3GaUs_i02BuZqbB4AdvzMMtTMRWAg4PY3bS@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikt+NEskLTYu6zt5v5tWagrK+0gCMwtW8E=N5Ti@mail.gmail.com>

As per thread on maintainers list:
pm_berkeleydb also batched

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Dec 14 10:37:53 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 10:37:53 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libtasn1, libtasn1_3, libtasn1_devel,
	(...)
Message-ID: <201012140937.oBE9brW0003817@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is a version bump.

* unrar: major version upgrade
  - from: 3.9.10,REV=2010.08.19
  -   to: 4.0.2,REV=2010.12.14
  + unrar-4.0.2,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + unrar-4.0.2,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

Version bump and split-off .so

* libtasn1: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.7,REV=2010.05.21
  -   to: 2.9,REV=2010.12.14
  + libtasn1-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libtasn1-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libtasn1_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libtasn1_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libtasn1_3: new package
  + libtasn1_3-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libtasn1_3-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Dec 14 12:20:30 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:20:30 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs wdiff, xchm
Message-ID: <201012141120.oBEBKU76021219@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Two version bumps. Even xchm is now compiling after we resolved the X11 stuff!!! :-)

* wdiff: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 0.6.2,REV=2010.05.29
  -   to: 0.6.5,REV=2010.12.14
  + wdiff-0.6.5,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + wdiff-0.6.5,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* xchm: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.13,REV=2007.09.17
  -   to: 1.18,REV=2010.12.14
  + xchm-1.18,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + xchm-1.18,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From ai at opencsw.org  Tue Dec 14 20:35:25 2010
From: ai at opencsw.org (Andy Igoshin)
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 22:35:25 +0300
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs nginx 0.8.54
Message-ID: <201012142235.25800.ai@opencsw.org>

nginx-0.8.54,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
nginx-0.8.54,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
nginx-0.8.54,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
nginx-0.8.54,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz


-- 
Andy Igoshin <ai at vsu.ru>                 Voronezh State University
Phone: +7 (4732) 522406                  Network Operation Center
Fax:   +7 (4732) 208820                  Voronezh, Russia

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec 15 00:05:45 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 15:05:45 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>

Good news:  I wrote the rename script! and it works!
(as can be seen in database now)

bad news:

i noticed
/var/opt/csw/clamav/db/daily.cvd
/var/opt/csw/clamav/db/main.cvd


Okay, I notice you have it in a special class, so this doesnt seem
strictly an "oops" inclusion.
But, is it really a good idea to ship anything in /var/opt?  Our
normal standards say "no".

Could you describe more about what is going on here please?

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 15 01:43:59 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 19:43:59 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Tue Dec 14 18:05:45 -0500 2010:

> But, is it really a good idea to ship anything in /var/opt?  Our
> normal standards say "no".
> 
> Could you describe more about what is going on here please?

This might be an ok exception?  Those are the database signatures as
of packaging time (or roughly so, anyway).  The RHEL5 packages I
recently built provide a clamav-data and clamav-data-empty.  The first
gives you the cvd files (more stale as time goes) while the second
gives just the required directory structure.

I don't use the OpenCSW clamav packages, but the first thing an admin
would be doing after installing them is running freshclam anyway.  On
the other hand, I haven't tried starting clamav without these files
present so it may make sense in the case of auto-enabled daemons to
provide something, even if stale.[1]

Peter, what are your thoughts on the matter?

Thanks
-Ben

[1] This could likely be worked around with a postinstall script.
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 15 09:07:00 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 09:07:00 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Tue Dec 14 18:05:45 -0500 2010:
>
>> But, is it really a good idea to ship anything in /var/opt? ?Our
>> normal standards say "no".
>>
>> Could you describe more about what is going on here please?
>
> This might be an ok exception? ?Those are the database signatures as
> of packaging time (or roughly so, anyway). ?The RHEL5 packages I
> recently built provide a clamav-data and clamav-data-empty. ?The first
> gives you the cvd files (more stale as time goes) while the second
> gives just the required directory structure.
>
> I don't use the OpenCSW clamav packages, but the first thing an admin
> would be doing after installing them is running freshclam anyway. ?On
> the other hand, I haven't tried starting clamav without these files
> present so it may make sense in the case of auto-enabled daemons to
> provide something, even if stale.[1]
>
> Peter, what are your thoughts on the matter?

Besides that this is the random rule of the week?

We had this discussion two years ago, whether to provide signature
databases or not with the package. Most thought it was of use,
especially for the new user who may not even know about freshclam or
have set up his infrastructure so freshclam can actually fetch any
updates from the mirrors. Now it's usable from install and they
actually update the database for every release so it's not that stale
and useless, not every malware is a previously unknown one.

This is a security and bug fix release and there's people waiting for
it. I have at least one user who was completely new to OpenCSW who is
waiting for this specific release to start using our packages. I
didn't say anything when Phil wanted to fiddle with some script
instead of releasing it and now this after two full weeks?

Jake Goerzen just posted an upgrade bug yesterday, well I submitted
the packages the day after the Clam team released 0.96.5, I can't do
much better than that.

/peter

From skayser at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 15 09:20:58 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 09:20:58 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs xterm
Message-ID: <201012150820.oBF8KwKM017671@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* xterm: major version upgrade
  - from: 260,REV=2010.07.08
  -   to: 267,REV=2010.12.09
  + xterm-267,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + xterm-267,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 15 14:31:27 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:31:27 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs boost_jam
Message-ID: <201012151331.oBFDVRbD023848@login.bo.opencsw.org>

The Boost build tool.

* boost_jam: new package
  + boost_jam-3.1.18,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + boost_jam-3.1.18,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From skayser at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 15 14:55:04 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:55:04 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs xterm
In-Reply-To: <201012150820.oBF8KwKM017671@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012150820.oBF8KwKM017671@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <20101215135504.GQ30288@sebastiankayser.de>

* Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * xterm: major version upgrade
>   - from: 260,REV=2010.07.08
>   -   to: 267,REV=2010.12.09
>   + xterm-267,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + xterm-267,REV=2010.12.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

Please ignore this, resent by accident.

Sebastian

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 15 16:17:11 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 16:17:11 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gsasl, libgsasl, libgsasl7,
	libgsasl_devel
Message-ID: <201012151517.oBFFHB03013537@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is a version bump and a library split-off according the updated rules.

* gsasl: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.4.4,REV=2010.04.20
  -   to: 1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15
  + gsasl-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gsasl-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgsasl-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgsasl_devel-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgsasl_devel-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libgsasl7: new package
  + libgsasl7-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgsasl7-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec 15 18:17:39 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 09:17:39 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:07 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Tue Dec 14 18:05:45 -0500 2010:
>>
>>> But, is it really a good idea to ship anything in /var/opt? ?Our
>>> normal standards say "no".
>>>
>>> Could you describe more about what is going on here please?
>>.....
> We had this discussion two years ago, whether to provide signature
> databases or not with the package. Most thought it was of use,
> especially for the new user who may not even know about freshclam or
> have set up his infrastructure so freshclam can actually fetch any
> updates from the mirrors.

and I think that this is a good idea. Thanks for the refresher on that info
(might be nice to put it in the "i cswreleasemgr" file)
But if you read the specific question I had, it was not "should we
ship a signature database", but "should we ship it in /var/opt?"

This is not a "random new rule": it was generally agreed upon, a while
back, that shipping files in /var was usually a bad idea, and that it
was preferable to generate them from templates in /opt/csw at install
time.

So how about moving
/var/opt/csw/clamav/db/daily.cvd
/var/opt/csw/clamav/db/main.cvd

to /opt/csw/share/clamav/ or something, and then implementing a
"if {var file} does not exist, copy in this file instead" postinstall ?

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 15 18:27:33 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 18:27:33 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinsV82ZhBR5H+i-OGJj8FYrKzxExMGB-sFxKL+c@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> So how about moving
> /var/opt/csw/clamav/db/daily.cvd
> /var/opt/csw/clamav/db/main.cvd
>
> to /opt/csw/share/clamav/ or something, and then implementing a
> "if {var file} does not exist, copy in this file instead" postinstall ?

That's an unnecessary complication for no possible benefit.

/peter

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec 15 22:07:47 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:07:47 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libtasn1, libtasn1_3,
 libtasn1_devel, (...)
In-Reply-To: <201012140937.oBE9brW0003817@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012140937.oBE9brW0003817@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim6GpDwBZKfrreZMMZ1OXzhYCcM304Pt5y1xLwY@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/14/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> Version bump and split-off .so
>
> * libtasn1: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 2.7,REV=2010.05.21
>   -   to: 2.9,REV=2010.12.14
>   + libtasn1-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libtasn1-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libtasn1_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libtasn1_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libtasn1_3: new package
>   + libtasn1_3-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libtasn1_3-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>

Coould I get some clarification here?

It's kinda wierd to see "libtasn1", and "libtasn1_3".

I'm guessing you are saying, libtasn1 holds an old, to be orphaned libxx.so.,
and libtasn1_3 is for forward use


Also, a side point about our library package naming policies in general:
I compared to debian, and they do things like

libtasn1-3
libtasn1-3-dev

Do we want to emulate that with
libXXXXn_n_devel

rather than
libXXXXn_devel
which is ambiguous and potentially confusing in situations like this?


libXXX_devel with no trailing numbering, can be more easily taken as
 "this is the appropriate modern devel for libXXX".

But your current naming, leaves ambiguity. People could misread it and
imply that for some reason, we only support devel for version 1(_0),
but not for version 1_3

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec 15 22:10:10 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:10:10 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs wdiff, xchm
In-Reply-To: <201012141120.oBEBKU76021219@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012141120.oBEBKU76021219@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikASCWbZ9VDDTyNd+UyDu4c9a-vE6ZxBpKVotVW@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/14/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Two version bumps. Even xchm is now compiling after we resolved the X11
> stuff!!! :-)

Hurray, that's good news!

and so is this:  packages batched



> * wdiff: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 0.6.2,REV=2010.05.29
>   -   to: 0.6.5,REV=2010.12.14
>   + wdiff-0.6.5,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + wdiff-0.6.5,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * xchm: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 1.13,REV=2007.09.17
>   -   to: 1.18,REV=2010.12.14
>   + xchm-1.18,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + xchm-1.18,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec 15 22:14:36 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:14:36 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs boost_jam
In-Reply-To: <201012151331.oBFDVRbD023848@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012151331.oBFDVRbD023848@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik0fqzH2CUf1BD_FMqwB2yw+GbqDUFbtJXgH7nb@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 12/15/10, Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> The Boost build tool.
>
> * boost_jam: new package
>   + boost_jam-3.1.18,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + boost_jam-3.1.18,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec 15 22:13:37 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:13:37 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs nginx 0.8.54
In-Reply-To: <201012142235.25800.ai@opencsw.org>
References: <201012142235.25800.ai@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimJrcTr7p7hRKKA817uvT4rB_hJENfOxqDF2qnU@mail.gmail.com>

thanks. batched.


On 12/14/10, Andy Igoshin <ai at opencsw.org> wrote:
> nginx-0.8.54,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> nginx-0.8.54,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> nginx-0.8.54,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> nginx-0.8.54,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>
>
> --
> Andy Igoshin <ai at vsu.ru>                 Voronezh State University
> Phone: +7 (4732) 522406                  Network Operation Center
> Fax:   +7 (4732) 208820                  Voronezh, Russia
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec 15 22:15:46 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:15:46 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gsasl, libgsasl, libgsasl7,
	libgsasl_devel
In-Reply-To: <201012151517.oBFFHB03013537@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012151517.oBFFHB03013537@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=S71JNaE7w+72oTwKhS7i7LjYmb9iRCVCofiyt@mail.gmail.com>

On hold, while waiting for some answers on my _devel naming question
on your other packages.

On 12/15/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This is a version bump and a library split-off according the updated rules.
>
> * gsasl: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 1.4.4,REV=2010.04.20
>   -   to: 1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15
>   + gsasl-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + gsasl-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libgsasl-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libgsasl_devel-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libgsasl_devel-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libgsasl7: new package
>   + libgsasl7-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libgsasl7-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 15 22:16:02 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 22:16:02 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libtasn1, libtasn1_3,
	libtasn1_devel, (...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim6GpDwBZKfrreZMMZ1OXzhYCcM304Pt5y1xLwY@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012140937.oBE9brW0003817@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim6GpDwBZKfrreZMMZ1OXzhYCcM304Pt5y1xLwY@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B559BC2E-32D8-452A-A7F3-B892D3AEC477@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 15.12.2010 um 22:07 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On 12/14/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Version bump and split-off .so
>> 
>> * libtasn1: minor version upgrade
>>  - from: 2.7,REV=2010.05.21
>>  -   to: 2.9,REV=2010.12.14
>>  + libtasn1-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + libtasn1-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + libtasn1_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + libtasn1_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>> 
>> * libtasn1_3: new package
>>  + libtasn1_3-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + libtasn1_3-2.9,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> 
> Coould I get some clarification here?
> 
> It's kinda wierd to see "libtasn1", and "libtasn1_3".
> 
> I'm guessing you are saying, libtasn1 holds an old, to be orphaned libxx.so.,
> and libtasn1_3 is for forward use

Partly, libtasn1 is old and an empty stub to libtasn1_3.
ATM there is just one SONAME in use.

> Also, a side point about our library package naming policies in general:
> I compared to debian, and they do things like
> 
> libtasn1-3
> libtasn1-3-dev
> 
> Do we want to emulate that with
> libXXXXn_n_devel
> 
> rather than
> libXXXXn_devel
> which is ambiguous and potentially confusing in situations like this?

We can't do this as *devel includes *.so pointing to the soname-specific
library. If we _would_ do it all *devel-packages would need to be incompatible
to each other or distribute to specific subdirectories with the respective
development files - which would need to be specified during compilation
one by one. Sounds pretty ugly to me.

When really old versions are need the libraries should be split in a
berkeleydb-similar fashion with completely confined subdirectories.

> libXXX_devel with no trailing numbering, can be more easily taken as
> "this is the appropriate modern devel for libXXX".

...Which is clearly deprecated by package description string.

> But your current naming, leaves ambiguity. People could misread it and
> imply that for some reason, we only support devel for version 1(_0),
> but not for version 1_3

Erm, the protocol is named ASN1 - the '1' is not part of a soname number.
And yes, devel is always for the latest version.


Best regards

  -- Dago



From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec 15 22:24:14 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:24:14 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libtasn1, libtasn1_3,
 libtasn1_devel, (...)
In-Reply-To: <B559BC2E-32D8-452A-A7F3-B892D3AEC477@opencsw.org>
References: <201012140937.oBE9brW0003817@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim6GpDwBZKfrreZMMZ1OXzhYCcM304Pt5y1xLwY@mail.gmail.com>
	<B559BC2E-32D8-452A-A7F3-B892D3AEC477@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikF=RJqaonBtzRst8ktTO_OF9YuuqXhHNOanuvp@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/15/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
>...
> Erm, the protocol is named ASN1 - the '1' is not part of a soname number.
>

oh yeah. i forgot about that oddity. really makes our package naming confusing.
I'd say this warrants a "put a reminder about that in the
cswreleasemgr file" note, in svn.

but I'll let the packages through, along with your other ones.

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Dec 15 22:30:41 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:30:41 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gsasl, libgsasl, libgsasl7,
	libgsasl_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=S71JNaE7w+72oTwKhS7i7LjYmb9iRCVCofiyt@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012151517.oBFFHB03013537@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=S71JNaE7w+72oTwKhS7i7LjYmb9iRCVCofiyt@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=PP3LwV-PH3zQw32xGypyNzp7KOBju8-vP2c+C@mail.gmail.com>

okay, batched.


On 12/15/10, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> On hold, while waiting for some answers on my _devel naming question
> on your other packages.
>
> On 12/15/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> This is a version bump and a library split-off according the updated
>> rules.
>>
>> * gsasl: minor version upgrade
>>   - from: 1.4.4,REV=2010.04.20
>>   -   to: 1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15
>>   + gsasl-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + gsasl-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libgsasl-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libgsasl_devel-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libgsasl_devel-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> * libgsasl7: new package
>>   + libgsasl7-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + libgsasl7-1.6.0,REV=2010.12.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> --
>> Generated by submitpkg
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>>
>

From maciej at opencsw.org  Thu Dec 16 09:01:41 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 09:01:41 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd
Message-ID: <201012160801.oBG81fVf017696@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Adding the missing cupsd-1.4.4 package.

Fixes https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4634

The cupsd package was missing from the original submission[1], the error
happened when manually specifying the list of packages to upgrade.  I'll see
if I can harden this part of the process, so there would be at least a warning
about a potentially missing package.

* cupsd: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.06.29
  -   to: 1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20
  + cupsd-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsd-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

[1] http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/2010-November/001528.html

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Dec 16 10:24:26 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:24:26 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libtasn1, libtasn1_3,
	libtasn1_devel, (...)
In-Reply-To: <201012140937.oBE9brW0003817@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012140937.oBE9brW0003817@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <CF766A77-11A7-4D0D-B91F-9B145CEDE077@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 14.12.2010 um 10:37 schrieb Dagobert Michelsen:
> This is a version bump.
> 
> * unrar: major version upgrade
>  - from: 3.9.10,REV=2010.08.19
>  -   to: 4.0.2,REV=2010.12.14
>  + unrar-4.0.2,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + unrar-4.0.2,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

This one on the batch with libtasn1 and is not released. Would you mind
having a look?


Best regards

  -- Dago


From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Dec 16 10:29:04 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:29:04 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnet, libnet1, libnet_devel
In-Reply-To: <ED2945A9-DEE0-46B2-8E6A-9E5969F6F434@opencsw.org>
References: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
	<008C0724-E797-4FBF-A85D-25EF610C9AE1@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimTuzD_W7FT53rkgcLcMG0hSRJHSjkEZt+Suw8x@mail.gmail.com>
	<ED2945A9-DEE0-46B2-8E6A-9E5969F6F434@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <C725DDAB-860C-4982-A122-443F5D3E0267@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

ping on libnet release still waiting?


Best regards

  -- Dago

Am 19.11.2010 um 10:54 schrieb Dagobert Michelsen:
> Am 18.11.2010 um 22:51 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> On 11/18/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>> Am 17.11.2010 um 18:57 schrieb Philip Brown:
>>>> Two comments:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. the SONAME is libnet.so.1
>>> 
>>> Partly correct. The SONAME of libnet.so.1.0.2 is libnet.so which is
>>> the one all existing packages link to:
>>> http://www.opencsw.org/packages/libnet
>> 
>> For other peoples' benefit, here is full information:
>> 
>> 1. OLD "libnet" package contained a libnet.so* file, which other
>> programs required
>> as only "libnet.so"
>> 
>> 2. The "real filename" of the old package was libnet.so.1.0.2.
>> However, that is kinda irrelevant since nothing referenced it directly
>> as such
>> 
>> 3. NEW "libnet", contains a symlink "libnet.so.1.0.2".
> 
> Umh, no. /opt/csw/lib/libnet.so.1.0.2 is a file as always and libnet.so
> is a symlink pointing to it as always.
> 
>> This is, as I
>> mentioned, completely irrelevent, since no "old" stuff uses it,and
>> "new" stuff has libnet.so.1.6.0
> 
> I think it is good to have libnet.so pointing to libnet.so.1.0.2 to
> make it explicit what version libnet.so is pointing to instead of
> having just a file libnet.so with the contents of libnet.so.1.0.2
> in it.
> 
>> 4. NEW "libnet" has an actual SONAME of "libnet.so.1"
> 
> Right.
> 
>>>> Why do you then provide a symlink
>>>> /opt/csw/lib/libnet.so=libnet.so.1.0.2
>>>> It would seem to be completely unneccessary.
>>> 
>>> Just for clarity. I could put the libnet.so.1.0.2 directly in
>>> libnet.so without loss of functionality, but personally I prefer to
>>> make the version explicit as there is no other place where you
>>> can see the library version.
>> 
>> clarity of what? I Dont Get It.
>> And speaking of "I Dont Get It"... I also dont get what provides the
>> backwards capability for older stuff needing libnet.so.
>> 
>> oh wait, I didnt notice that you provide the actual binary compat lib
>> in "libnet", in addition to the symlink.
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> Justaminute... Even though I'm suggesting not following the proposed
>> standards.. doesnt your implementation, break the proposed standards
>> too? :)
> 
> Probably, because it is a legacy library and does not have a SONAME anyway.
> 
>> Seems like CSWlibnet, should depend on a new "CSWlibnet0" for now:
>> Then that, and only that, should have the older compat
>> libnet.so.1.0.2, and libnet.so symlink to it.
> 
> ...which would break the standards too as .so should be in _devel.
> But again, libnet is not a standard library. It is a legacy piece
> of crap where the library broke even existing SONAME standards.
> 
>>>> 2. Given that this is a "lib" package... having "lib_devel" would seem
>>>> to be redundant.
>>>> What do you think of my addendum to the wiki proposal, where for
>>>> 'lib*' packages specifically, we just put the "devel" stuff in the
>>>> straight "lib" package?
>>> 
>>> I don't like it because the devel part of some libraries are excessively
>>> large where you would like to keep the devel package.
>> 
>> I may be missing something here.
>> 
>> What I'm seeing, is that if we stuck to the proposal,it would mean:
>> 
>> applications that need the lib, would depend on CSWlibfoo#-#-#.
>> They would not pull in  CSWlibfoo-devel, or anything else. To compile
>> stuff, people have to add in CSWlibfoo-devel
> 
> Correct.
> 
>> What I an suggesting is almost identical:
>> applications that need the lib, would depend on CSWlibfoo#-#-#.
>> They would not pull in  CSWlibfoo, or anything else. To compile stuff,
>> people have to add in CSWlibfoo
> 
> This would be good if all libraries would play well. A ton of packages
> depends on CSWlibnet, so that one must contain the old libnet.so. If you
> want to add the devel stuff to CSWlibnet that is doable, but it would be
> the devel-files **from the new** libnet library. Personally I would find
> this very confusing.
> 
>> To me, this makes contextual sense, because if a user explicitly wants
>> to use "libfoo" directly, they can say "I want libfoo installed", aka
>> "pkg-get install libfoo", and be ready to go. The "_devel" part is
>> redundant to a library package, if you've already split out the actual
>> shared library itself to a different package.
>> 
>> I dont see how a user ever ends up with 'devel' type stuff that they
>> dont need, in either case shown above.
> 
> As I said: existing packages depend on CSWlibnet which would then
> contain devel-stuff from another version. Additionally, having
> a clean _devel-policy like "if you want to compile x you must install
> x_devel" is very simple and could be even be made an automated
> check, but only if done consistently.
> 
>>> One more argument for having a separate devel: When we split out
>>> real libraries like CSWlibnet1 containing libnet.so.1.1.5 the
>>> merging of devel in there makes some of the advantages useless.
>>> When some libnet.so.2.x comes out CSWlibnet1 would need to be respun
>>> to rip out the devel stuff as this would now be shipped in CSWlibnet2.
>> 
>> well yes. IF (andonly if) we thought it advantageous to be able to
>> develop on both versions of the library, we would want to maintain
>> "libnet1", and "libnet2"
> 
> We don't want this. And I don't see how this related to my statement.
> Putting devel together with a library will lead to repackaging
> of the library package if another SONAME comes out as the devel
> part needs to be relocated to the new package, so both need to
> be rebuilt. *Not* to rebuild all packages is one of the goals
> of the library suffixing with the so-number.
> 
>> However, in most sane cases, we only care about development with "the
>> latest" version of something. So do most people.
>> Again, if they want to pull in "libfoo" to compile with, they probably
>> are just using some kind of general requirement, and dont really want
>> to think about "well, I need to get 'libfoo-vx-y. IF it's available.
>> oh wait, opencsw doesnt have that yet. Hmm.. I wonder what version
>> they have.. .checking... okay I'll specifically select libfoo-x-y to
>> install now'".
>> 
>> Kinda annoying. I'm thinking most users are just ripping through
>> compile requirements, and they just want to "get the latest".
>> So having "CSWlibfoo" track to "development for 'the latest' libfoo",
>> I see as a feature for the users, rather than a negative overall.
> 
> I don't see how this is more difficult than to say "If I want to
> develop with libfoo I need to install CSWlibfoo-devel".
> 
>> So to be more explicit, I'm suggesting that, *specifically for library
>> packages only",
>> "libfoo" contains
>> - a dependancy on the latest shared library version we support
>> - the dev files to compile against it.
>> 
>> Does that sound more appealing?
> 
> In general this sounds not too bad, but
> - it is really bad for legacy libraries like libnet
> - it is not consistent to have _devel for some packages but not for others.
> 
> Having a consistent _devel would allow something like "List all CSW
> packages and install <pkg>-devel" and everything will work.
> 
> 
> Best regards
> 
> -- Dago
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions


From maciej at opencsw.org  Thu Dec 16 14:56:52 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:56:52 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_mox
Message-ID: <201012161356.oBGDuq9h000048@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* py_mox: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 0.5.0,REV=2009.12.28
  -   to: 0.5.3,REV=2010.12.16
  + py_mox-0.5.3,REV=2010.12.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec 16 19:18:10 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:18:10 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd
In-Reply-To: <201012160801.oBG81fVf017696@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012160801.oBG81fVf017696@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikZun8Cpj2PO4YAJC7FkjLGe0o0qX_Tkz2DVhwY@mail.gmail.com>

Err... it uses cswinitsmf... AND it's manually linking in /etc?

1 f cswinitsmf /etc/opt/csw/init.d/cswcups 0555 root bin 4547 14118 1287564115
1 s none /etc/opt/csw/rc0.d/K00cups=../init.d/cswcups

Plus its class action dependancies havent been updated.


On 12/16/10, Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Adding the missing cupsd-1.4.4 package.
>
> Fixes https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4634
>
> The cupsd package was missing from the original submission[1], the error
> happened when manually specifying the list of packages to upgrade.  I'll see
> if I can harden this part of the process, so there would be at least a
> warning
> about a potentially missing package.
>
> * cupsd: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.06.29
>   -   to: 1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20
>   + cupsd-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + cupsd-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> [1]
> http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/2010-November/001528.html
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec 16 19:19:00 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:19:00 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libtasn1, libtasn1_3,
 libtasn1_devel, (...)
In-Reply-To: <CF766A77-11A7-4D0D-B91F-9B145CEDE077@opencsw.org>
References: <201012140937.oBE9brW0003817@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<CF766A77-11A7-4D0D-B91F-9B145CEDE077@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=w3t3wdoWEZ=H9aL3dDxLt28w78hQECKLW-_oV@mail.gmail.com>

okay, batched


On 12/16/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 14.12.2010 um 10:37 schrieb Dagobert Michelsen:
>> This is a version bump.
>>
>> * unrar: major version upgrade
>>  - from: 3.9.10,REV=2010.08.19
>>  -   to: 4.0.2,REV=2010.12.14
>>  + unrar-4.0.2,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + unrar-4.0.2,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> This one on the batch with libtasn1 and is not released. Would you mind
> having a look?
>
>
> Best regards
>
>   -- Dago
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec 16 19:21:01 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:21:01 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnet, libnet1, libnet_devel
In-Reply-To: <C725DDAB-860C-4982-A122-443F5D3E0267@opencsw.org>
References: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
	<008C0724-E797-4FBF-A85D-25EF610C9AE1@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimTuzD_W7FT53rkgcLcMG0hSRJHSjkEZt+Suw8x@mail.gmail.com>
	<ED2945A9-DEE0-46B2-8E6A-9E5969F6F434@opencsw.org>
	<C725DDAB-860C-4982-A122-443F5D3E0267@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikFXN1gqd0m=fatL7T8L5at=yAh38y3HQqnMsVz@mail.gmail.com>

okay, batched

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec 16 19:22:12 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:22:12 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_mox
In-Reply-To: <201012161356.oBGDuq9h000048@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012161356.oBGDuq9h000048@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinbTWfM3OeEVABPMHL9=ZLfav+UHv95fsY0P8WW@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On 12/16/10, Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * py_mox: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 0.5.0,REV=2009.12.28
>   -   to: 0.5.3,REV=2010.12.16
>   + py_mox-0.5.3,REV=2010.12.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From maciej at opencsw.org  Thu Dec 16 19:40:55 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 18:40:55 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikZun8Cpj2PO4YAJC7FkjLGe0o0qX_Tkz2DVhwY@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012160801.oBG81fVf017696@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikZun8Cpj2PO4YAJC7FkjLGe0o0qX_Tkz2DVhwY@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=n3St6+t-yrzgqdeVn_Gz_Cy0bpmDxPBiT-Q9q@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 16 de Dezembro de 2010 18:18, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> Err... it uses cswinitsmf... AND it's manually linking in /etc?
>
> 1 f cswinitsmf /etc/opt/csw/init.d/cswcups 0555 root bin 4547 14118 1287564115
> 1 s none /etc/opt/csw/rc0.d/K00cups=../init.d/cswcups
>
> Plus its class action dependancies havent been updated.

I excluded the rc files.  Should that become an automatic check?

I've already written the build description and patches for cups-1.4.5,
so I'll put 1.4.5 into experimental instead.

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec 16 19:47:15 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:47:15 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=n3St6+t-yrzgqdeVn_Gz_Cy0bpmDxPBiT-Q9q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012160801.oBG81fVf017696@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikZun8Cpj2PO4YAJC7FkjLGe0o0qX_Tkz2DVhwY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=n3St6+t-yrzgqdeVn_Gz_Cy0bpmDxPBiT-Q9q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=txOrYy=rLh3B9v_x65ouD0EFj30CvBk5dzgns@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/16/10, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> No dia 16 de Dezembro de 2010 18:18, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>
> escreveu:
>> Err... it uses cswinitsmf... AND it's manually linking in /etc?
>>
>> 1 f cswinitsmf /etc/opt/csw/init.d/cswcups 0555 root bin 4547 14118
>> 1287564115
>> 1 s none /etc/opt/csw/rc0.d/K00cups=../init.d/cswcups
>>
>> Plus its class action dependancies havent been updated.
>
> I excluded the rc files.  Should that become an automatic check?


I dunno if its worth it. It should only occur for "legacy" packages these days.

I guess I'll ignore this pkg, and wait for your 1.4.5 release then.

From maciej at opencsw.org  Thu Dec 16 19:52:42 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 18:52:42 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=txOrYy=rLh3B9v_x65ouD0EFj30CvBk5dzgns@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012160801.oBG81fVf017696@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikZun8Cpj2PO4YAJC7FkjLGe0o0qX_Tkz2DVhwY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=n3St6+t-yrzgqdeVn_Gz_Cy0bpmDxPBiT-Q9q@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=txOrYy=rLh3B9v_x65ouD0EFj30CvBk5dzgns@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinvQZHArx7T9exWM4K0QGOQ5Y2Gwz_RopsHWGpG@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 16 de Dezembro de 2010 18:47, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> I dunno if its worth it. It should only occur for "legacy" packages these days.

GARified packages will have this automated, but this doesn't mean that
all packages will be updated to CSWcas-*, so it might make sense to
have some checks in place.  I was thinking about 2 checks:

1. CSWcswclassutils dependency ==> error
2. CSWcas-initsmf dependency + rc files ==> error

> I guess I'll ignore this pkg, and wait for your 1.4.5 release then.

I'll put 1.4.5 in testing today.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 17 04:56:51 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 22:56:51 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1292556644-sup-176@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Dec 15 12:17:39 -0500 2010:

> This is not a "random new rule": it was generally agreed upon, a while
> back, that shipping files in /var was usually a bad idea, and that it
> was preferable to generate them from templates in /opt/csw at install
> time.

This is the shared /opt/csw issue popping up again.  It has been
generally agreed that files shouldn't be placed under /var.

In this case, given that it's a security update release and the
previous packages have shipped these files, I'd be inclined to wave it
through.

That being said, I think a slightly different solution in the future
might be warranted:

Peter is correct that shipping these files in place makes sense when
targeting the "it just works" principle.  Clamav refuses to start
without the signature files.  

James pointed out in the original discussion that _most_ sites running
clamav will be doing it on internet connected mail servers (or have
admins that know enough to handle their own freshclam).

What I see as the biggest reason to not ship these files 'in place'
though is that they have the potential to downgrade the signature
files at a site.  If the package is built and released today but a
site doesn't update the package until February, while continuing to
keep their signatures fresh for the old version, they'd be losing
quite a few signatures when they do update to the newer
package...Presumably they'd force a manual update, but we shouldn't
count on that.

Phil, how about releasing these as is for now.

Peter, how about tackling the freshclam on install issue working under
the premise that failure to pull the updates could result in a big
ugly note at install time.  This could be combined with storing the
stock (release day version) signature files elsewhere in the package
and copying them in on failure to freshclam.  (I'd be tempted to just
drop them from the package at this point instead of lugging them for
little benefit after the first clamav installation...?)

Thoughts?

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 17 09:14:22 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 09:14:22 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpacparser1, libpacparser_devel,
	pa(...)
Message-ID: <201012170814.oBH8EMEP026132@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* pacparser: new package
  + libpacparser1-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libpacparser1-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libpacparser_devel-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libpacparser_devel-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pacparser-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pacparser-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_libpacparser-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_libpacparser-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 17 17:52:07 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:52:07 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libdbi1, libdbi_devel
Message-ID: <201012171652.oBHGq7iG013304@login.bo.opencsw.org>

C library similar to Perls DBI. Drivers similar to DBD::* follow next after release.

* libdbi: new package
  + libdbi1-0.8.4,REV=2010.12.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libdbi1-0.8.4,REV=2010.12.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libdbi_devel-0.8.4,REV=2010.12.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libdbi_devel-0.8.4,REV=2010.12.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 17 21:55:22 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 15:55:22 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinvQZHArx7T9exWM4K0QGOQ5Y2Gwz_RopsHWGpG@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012160801.oBG81fVf017696@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikZun8Cpj2PO4YAJC7FkjLGe0o0qX_Tkz2DVhwY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=n3St6+t-yrzgqdeVn_Gz_Cy0bpmDxPBiT-Q9q@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=txOrYy=rLh3B9v_x65ouD0EFj30CvBk5dzgns@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinvQZHArx7T9exWM4K0QGOQ5Y2Gwz_RopsHWGpG@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1292619302-sup-3138@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski's message of Thu Dec 16 13:52:42 -0500 2010:

> 1. CSWcswclassutils dependency ==> error
> 2. CSWcas-initsmf dependency + rc files ==> error

Late to the party, but these seem logical to me.

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From maciej at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 17 22:17:29 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 22:17:29 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libprotobuf6, libprotobuf_lite6,
	libp(...)
Message-ID: <201012172117.oBHLHTle005635@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Remake of the protocol buffer packages.  The protobuf_rt package, which is now
empty and transitional, is included for completeness, but nothing depends on
it any more, and it can be removed.

* protobuf: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.03.02
  -   to: 2010.12.14
  + protobuf-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + protobuf-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + protobuf_devel-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + protobuf_devel-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + protobuf_rt-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_protobuf-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* libproto: new packages
  + libprotobuf6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libprotobuf6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libprotobuf_lite6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libprotobuf_lite6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libprotoc6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libprotoc6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Dec 18 16:42:12 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 16:42:12 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cswpkgloghooks
Message-ID: <201012181542.oBIFgC0Y013221@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

This addresses Mantis ID 4639.

Thanks
-Ben

* cswpkgloghooks: major version upgrade
  - from: 1.1.1,REV=2010.03.31
  -   to: 2.0,REV=2010.12.18
  + cswpkgloghooks-2.0,REV=2010.12.18-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Dec 18 18:54:37 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 18:54:37 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs coreutils
Message-ID: <201012181754.oBIHsbDe015802@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

This update addresses Mantis 4640.  The package now provides
LC_TIME directories as they were previously stripped from all
GAR builds.

Thanks
-Ben

* coreutils: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.06.28
  -   to: 2010.12.18
  + coreutils-8.4,REV=2010.12.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + coreutils-8.4,REV=2010.12.18-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Dec 20 14:01:17 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 14:01:17 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
Message-ID: <201012201301.oBKD1HPE015732@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This fixes #4638, please push ASAP as some installations will break
without this fix.

* openldap: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.11.17
  -   to: 2010.12.20
  + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From blizinski at google.com  Thu Dec  9 20:39:22 2010
From: blizinski at google.com (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 19:39:22 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <20101207210000.GD30288@sebastiankayser.de>
References: <201012051752.oB5Hq6fE020585@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimteRuTi_YyLf8+j-=rtyysqj594XY861fW7Tpc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwj59v5oK11HG8qn0bsm3ome3yAZuLMC07c4Yp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin9Wdr36Y_c+67X4A1_K0QP_jQ_L301qV8GweA1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1291685940-sup-4548@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTimy7eDPVKMxavwXfnG_3zqCDEmikJ46T3S6w3ph@mail.gmail.com>
	<20101207201118.GC30288@sebastiankayser.de>
	<AANLkTi=DBM91PREor8SMB=ujgUqmFEpQU_42njnKNtVS@mail.gmail.com>
	<20101207210000.GD30288@sebastiankayser.de>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=7gbzdyZgJdz2ZFeevHeQdVrxdDO86o=Y4hHdM@mail.gmail.com>

It is certainly possible. We now scan all the files for known bad strings.
We could add /usr/local and/or /usr/share to that list. We could also limit
the search to certain paths, but I think it makes sense to ransack every
file in every location.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20101209/f7a7ddd4/attachment-0001.html>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec 20 21:07:39 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 12:07:39 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs bash
In-Reply-To: <4CE96A40.3050608@pleiades.fr.eu.org>
References: <4CE96A40.3050608@pleiades.fr.eu.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=nsSDs1+yb=EmLoBtTagUH0wPhpJZCV1fYX0HL@mail.gmail.com>

Err.. I'm not seeing it?


On 11/21/10, Yann Rouillard <yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org> wrote:
> * bash: added missing rbash symlink (closes #4600)
>    - from: 2010.09.01
>    -   to: 2010.11.20
>    + bash-4.1.7,REV=2010.11.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>    + bash-4.1.7,REV=2010.11.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Dec 20 21:13:53 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 12:13:53 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs coreutils
In-Reply-To: <201012181754.oBIHsbDe015802@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012181754.oBIHsbDe015802@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimwd6a3waTGK0y1ckjqqVkweYzP+Mi-fV13zAyE@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On 12/18/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> This update addresses Mantis 4640.  The package now provides
> LC_TIME directories as they were previously stripped from all
> GAR builds.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * coreutils: revision upgrade
>   - from: 2010.06.28
>   -   to: 2010.12.18
>   + coreutils-8.4,REV=2010.12.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + coreutils-8.4,REV=2010.12.18-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From maciej at opencsw.org  Tue Dec 21 01:22:54 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 01:22:54 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libslp1, openslp_devel
Message-ID: <201012210022.oBL0Ms0A003447@login.bo.opencsw.org>

OpenSLP - provides libslp.so.1 to use with CUPS in order to stop depending on
a stock Solaris library.

There was a user on IRC tonight who was installing CUPS on OpenSolaris and was
bitten by missing libslp.so.1.  I think we better provide our own library to
avoid this kind of problems in the future.

* openslp: new package
  + libslp1-1.2.1,REV=2010.12.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libslp1-1.2.1,REV=2010.12.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openslp_devel-1.2.1,REV=2010.12.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openslp_devel-1.2.1,REV=2010.12.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Tue Dec 21 01:52:52 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 01:52:52 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs exim
Message-ID: <201012210052.oBL0qq43019644@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

This update addresses Mantis 4631 which is a remote root exploit.

Thanks
-Ben

* exim: minor version upgrade
  - from: 4.68,REV=2007.09.20
  -   to: 4.72,REV=2010.12.18
  + exim-4.72,REV=2010.12.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + exim-4.72,REV=2010.12.18-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 21 03:17:33 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:17:33 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpacparser1, libpacparser_devel,
	pa(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012170814.oBH8EMEP026132@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012170814.oBH8EMEP026132@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin2LfXkL=L-jk8kDBksZPyrAC5zYn_y7XD-QaiD@mail.gmail.com>

batched everything except py_lib***

doesnt depend on the specific class action script


On 12/17/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * pacparser: new package
>   + libpacparser1-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libpacparser1-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libpacparser_devel-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libpacparser_devel-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pacparser-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pacparser-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + py_libpacparser-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + py_libpacparser-1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 21 03:19:36 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:19:36 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libdbi1, libdbi_devel
In-Reply-To: <201012171652.oBHGq7iG013304@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012171652.oBHGq7iG013304@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimqtUgDCdW_nCkMv0z6ydk2+K634wU5ddE8sEbw@mail.gmail.com>

Ugh. its just stupid when software has a library SONAME that doesnt
match its own version.
but okay, batched.



On 12/17/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> C library similar to Perls DBI. Drivers similar to DBD::* follow next after
> release.
>
> * libdbi: new package
>   + libdbi1-0.8.4,REV=2010.12.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libdbi1-0.8.4,REV=2010.12.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libdbi_devel-0.8.4,REV=2010.12.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libdbi_devel-0.8.4,REV=2010.12.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 21 03:20:07 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:20:07 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cswpkgloghooks
In-Reply-To: <201012181542.oBIFgC0Y013221@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012181542.oBIFgC0Y013221@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimkJhk1AK+SpbfA9=iZz3HukXB-QYBmG5aj4Pc0@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On 12/18/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> This addresses Mantis ID 4639.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * cswpkgloghooks: major version upgrade
>   - from: 1.1.1,REV=2010.03.31
>   -   to: 2.0,REV=2010.12.18
>   + cswpkgloghooks-2.0,REV=2010.12.18-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 21 03:31:28 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:31:28 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libprotobuf6, libprotobuf_lite6,
	libp(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012172117.oBHLHTle005635@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012172117.oBHLHTle005635@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikwpJVmiyB8UtsJ9NrwcW+XvwUKZoqqF1hUNWsF@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/17/10, Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Remake of the protocol buffer packages.  The protobuf_rt package, which is
> now
> empty and transitional, is included for completeness, but nothing depends on
> it any more, and it can be removed.

Thank you for pointing that out. i shall remove it.


rest of them are batched.


> * protobuf: revision upgrade
>   - from: 2010.03.02
>   -   to: 2010.12.14
>   + protobuf-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + protobuf-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + protobuf_devel-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + protobuf_devel-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + protobuf_rt-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + py_protobuf-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libproto: new packages
>   + libprotobuf6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libprotobuf6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libprotobuf_lite6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libprotobuf_lite6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libprotoc6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libprotoc6-2.3.0,REV=2010.12.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 21 03:34:30 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:34:30 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012201301.oBKD1HPE015732@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012201301.oBKD1HPE015732@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=uBodg8iNPkq4xTvE-XJKO4C=1m+b2Ptaf17Yh@mail.gmail.com>

point of interest: if something is important to push quickly, put
something as first or second word in the subject line to get my
attention.
Okay, batched.


On 12/20/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This fixes #4638, please push ASAP as some installations will break
> without this fix.
>
> * openldap: revision upgrade
>   - from: 2010.11.17
>   -   to: 2010.12.20
>   + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 21 03:37:56 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:37:56 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libslp1, openslp_devel
In-Reply-To: <201012210022.oBL0Ms0A003447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012210022.oBL0Ms0A003447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikepN69eNsZz7MvfqKYaWxZB9G8sCBnVo1E6-=d@mail.gmail.com>

erm... I dont agree with that assessment.

On 12/20/10, Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> OpenSLP - provides libslp.so.1 to use with CUPS in order to stop depending
> on a stock Solaris library.
>
> There was a user on IRC tonight who was installing CUPS on OpenSolaris and
> was
> bitten by missing libslp.so.1.  I think we better provide our own library to
> avoid this kind of problems in the future.


I think we would be better off providing some kind of
"opensolaris_compat" package, or set of packages.
(and probably putting it in a side tree, not our usual mirror subdirs)

I dont think we should be needlessly duplicating stuff in PROPER
solaris, because of opensolaris.

Unless this version of libslp is somehow "better" than the version
shipped in solaris, I dont think it's good to ship it.


> * openslp: new package
>   + libslp1-1.2.1,REV=2010.12.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libslp1-1.2.1,REV=2010.12.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openslp_devel-1.2.1,REV=2010.12.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openslp_devel-1.2.1,REV=2010.12.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 21 03:39:54 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:39:54 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs exim
In-Reply-To: <201012210052.oBL0qq43019644@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012210052.oBL0qq43019644@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim2perK0FqOymiEBoguua6bu6Lu7ohwOF+WyFC6@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On 12/20/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> This update addresses Mantis 4631 which is a remote root exploit.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * exim: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 4.68,REV=2007.09.20
>   -   to: 4.72,REV=2010.12.18
>   + exim-4.72,REV=2010.12.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + exim-4.72,REV=2010.12.18-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Tue Dec 21 04:17:22 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 22:17:22 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libslp1, openslp_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikepN69eNsZz7MvfqKYaWxZB9G8sCBnVo1E6-=d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012210022.oBL0Ms0A003447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikepN69eNsZz7MvfqKYaWxZB9G8sCBnVo1E6-=d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1292901225-sup-6356@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Dec 20 21:37:56 -0500 2010:

> I think we would be better off providing some kind of
> "opensolaris_compat" package, or set of packages.  (and probably
> putting it in a side tree, not our usual mirror subdirs)

Are you envisioning something like the CSWXfoo stuff that was
discussed last year in the context of things like exim that would like
to be Incompatible with the SUNWsendmail, etc?  This is obviously a
different class than that, but do you see a separate prefix for the
pkgname, or just a segregation on the mirrors and a separate catalog?

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 21 18:08:31 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 09:08:31 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libslp1, openslp_devel
In-Reply-To: <1292901225-sup-6356@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201012210022.oBL0Ms0A003447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikepN69eNsZz7MvfqKYaWxZB9G8sCBnVo1E6-=d@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292901225-sup-6356@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=jv81qjxxiMG1ip-JHCPG=oDLO0m3zS79vzkbq@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/20/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Dec 20 21:37:56 -0500 2010:
>
>> I think we would be better off providing some kind of
>> "opensolaris_compat" package, or set of packages.  (and probably
>> putting it in a side tree, not our usual mirror subdirs)
>
> Are you envisioning something like the CSWXfoo stuff that was
> discussed last year in the context of things like exim that would like
> to be Incompatible with the SUNWsendmail, etc?  This is obviously a
> different class than that, but do you see a separate prefix for the
> pkgname, or just a segregation on the mirrors and a separate catalog?
>

Just a separate catalog.

If the "uname -r" output was definitive for "OpenSolaris" vs "Solaris
Next", i would suggest just basing it on that. But we dont know
whether  "SunOS 5.11" is going to stay opensolaris, or whether it's
going to be solaris-next, and what the pkg makeup of that is REALLY
going to be, until it is released.
So, we'll probably need "stable", "current", and "opensolaris" separately.

From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 22 18:32:17 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 18:32:17 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_devel, cupsclient, cupsd,
	(...)
Message-ID: <201012221732.oBMHWHBo012979@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Upate of cups packages.  Fixes bug 4634, "CSWcupsd 1.4.3,REV=2010.06.29 no
longer starts"[1].  This update is special in that it contains unoptimized
binaries with debugging symbols.  cupsd-1.4.5 built with optimization and ran
in my test environment segfaulted when reading configuration:

(dbx) run -f 
Running: cupsd -f 
(process id 11919)
Reading libc_psr.so.1
Reading en_US.UTF-8.so.3
Reading methods_unicode.so.3
t at 1 (l at 1) signal SEGV (no mapping at the fault address) in
cupsdReadConfiguration at 0x27894
0x00027894: cupsdReadConfiguration+0x24fc: ld [%o5], %i4

When built with debugging symbols, it would work without segfaulting.  Not
being able to debug the issue in a reasonably short time, I'm inclined to
release unoptimized - but working - binaries, to alleviate the current
problem.

[1] https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4634

* cups: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20
  -   to: 1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22
  + cups-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsclient-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsclient-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsdoc-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcups-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcups2-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcups2-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupscgi1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupscgi1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsdriver1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsdriver1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsimage2-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsimage2-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsmime1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsmime1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsppdc1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsppdc1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* cups_devel: new package
  + cups_devel-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cups_devel-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* cupsd: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.06.29
  -   to: 1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22
  + cupsd-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsd-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* Package to remove
  - cupsdev-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  - cupsdev-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 22 21:15:04 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 15:15:04 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1293048341-sup-2502@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Dec 15 12:17:39 -0500 2010:

> and I think that this is a good idea. Thanks for the refresher on that info
> (might be nice to put it in the "i cswreleasemgr" file)
> But if you read the specific question I had, it was not "should we
> ship a signature database", but "should we ship it in /var/opt?"

Ok, so I've done more reading on old threads and the current
documentation.  I wasn't able to find any historical mail thread or
document on our website that forbids shipping files in /var/opt/csw.

The closest we have is this from the share /opt/csw writeup:

    "Allowable for run-time-only data. Do not deliver files in package
    here."

While this we seem to run contrary to what I said above, it's
ambiguous at best.

The clamav database files are critical run-time files and definitely
need to live under /var/opt/csw.  Aside from the potential to backdate
the signature files at update time, I don't see any reason to stop
this package based on their presence.

Phil: If these were non-runtime files, I would agree with your
position.  Can you point me at an old discussion or web document where
we forbid this type of file under /var/opt/csw?

Peter: I do think that the possibility for back-dating the virus
signatures is something that should be handled, but not as a
show-stopper for this release.  What about treating these files like a
config file with some sort of cswpreserveconf type handler?

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec 23 19:15:42 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 10:15:42 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_devel, cupsclient, cupsd,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012221732.oBMHWHBo012979@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012221732.oBMHWHBo012979@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikUh_HdgFfcs=QSxYdmCUOVhfjv+frt6N68yMo5@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/22/10, Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Upate of cups packages.  Fixes bug 4634, "CSWcupsd 1.4.3,REV=2010.06.29 no
> longer starts"[1].  This update is special in that it contains unoptimized
> binaries with debugging symbols.  cupsd-1.4.5 built with optimization and
> ran
> in my test environment segfaulted when reading configuration:
>
> (dbx) run -f
> Running: cupsd -f
> (process id 11919)
> Reading libc_psr.so.1
> Reading en_US.UTF-8.so.3
> Reading methods_unicode.so.3
> t at 1 (l at 1) signal SEGV (no mapping at the fault address) in
> cupsdReadConfiguration at 0x27894
> 0x00027894: cupsdReadConfiguration+0x24fc: ld [%o5], %i4
>
> When built with debugging symbols, it would work without segfaulting.  Not
> being able to debug the issue in a reasonably short time, I'm inclined to
> release unoptimized - but working - binaries, to alleviate the current
> problem.


errr.. as a programmer, this screams to me, "STILL BROKEN YOU'LL PAY LATER!!"
It's just that the brokenness is *initially* hidden in the trash area
of debugging symbol memory or something.

How about just doing no optimization, but also no debugging symbols?

if it still breaks, then there is a serious code bug (upstream!) and
in my opinion, we should not release.

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec 23 19:18:27 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 10:18:27 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <1293048341-sup-2502@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
	<1293048341-sup-2502@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim7nd-piDY44wf2FhFncZoTF-PJ-xu5VcvJfbzL@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/22/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> The closest we have is this from the share /opt/csw writeup:
>
>     "Allowable for run-time-only data. Do not deliver files in package
>     here."
>
> While this we seem to run contrary to what I said above, it's
> ambiguous at best.
>

seems pretty non-ambiguous to me.
"run time only". == "only data generated at run time".
"run time" == "when program is running".

The program is not running at pkgadd/install time.

From pfelecan at opencsw.org  Thu Dec 23 19:55:43 2010
From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 19:55:43 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim7nd-piDY44wf2FhFncZoTF-PJ-xu5VcvJfbzL@mail.gmail.com>
	(Philip Brown's message of "Thu, 23 Dec 2010 10:18:27 -0800")
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
	<1293048341-sup-2502@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTim7nd-piDY44wf2FhFncZoTF-PJ-xu5VcvJfbzL@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <x6k4j0mi8g.fsf@opencsw.org>

Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:

> On 12/22/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>
>> The closest we have is this from the share /opt/csw writeup:
>>
>>     "Allowable for run-time-only data. Do not deliver files in package
>>     here."
>>
>> While this we seem to run contrary to what I said above, it's
>> ambiguous at best.
>>
>
> seems pretty non-ambiguous to me.
> "run time only". == "only data generated at run time".

This mean that if the data is not generated at run-time it cannot be put
there?

What about the files distributed by SUNWapch2r? They are in /var/apache2
and there are files and directories not generated at run-time. Isn't it?
Is that in contradiction with your interpretation?

The maintainer explained very clearly why it must be in the place that
the files are but maybe this is a case of "whatever the maintainer feels
like"? Maybe disrupting a clamav installation is of the "best" quality
for the corporate world?
-- 
Peter

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Dec 23 20:55:07 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 20:55:07 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpacparser1, libpacparser_devel,
	pa(...)
Message-ID: <201012231955.oBNJt700022917@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Version bump and fix for Python module.

* pacparser: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07
  -   to: 1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23
  + libpacparser1-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libpacparser1-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libpacparser_devel-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libpacparser_devel-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pacparser-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pacparser-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* py_libpacparser: new package
  + py_libpacparser-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_libpacparser-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec 23 23:54:02 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:54:02 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <x6k4j0mi8g.fsf@opencsw.org>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
	<1293048341-sup-2502@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTim7nd-piDY44wf2FhFncZoTF-PJ-xu5VcvJfbzL@mail.gmail.com>
	<x6k4j0mi8g.fsf@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin8zco4Sq2rkB-MJ9tjpzurggSxCvWBu+-KGTRK@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/23/10, Peter FELECAN <pfelecan at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:
>
>> seems pretty non-ambiguous to me.
>> "run time only". == "only data generated at run time".
>
> This mean that if the data is not generated at run-time it cannot be put
> there?
>
> What about the files distributed by SUNWapch2r? They are in /var/apache2
> and there are files and directories not generated at run-time. Isn't it?
> Is that in contradiction with your interpretation?

Let me point out that you are referencing a Sun package, and comparing
it to CSW packages.
Sun does not always do things sanely.
For example, shipping the *config* files for smf, under /var.
idiotic.

SUNWapch2r seems to be similarly stupid.

btw: directories under /var/opt are no problem.


> The maintainer explained very clearly why it must be in the place that
> the files are but maybe this is a case of "whatever the maintainer feels
> like"? Maybe disrupting a clamav installation is of the "best" quality
> for the corporate world?

Its not a matter of "no you cant configure the program to *use* /var/opt".
It's merely a matter of not "shipping them *in* /var/opt".
ie, "dont put files in /var/opt as part of your 'prototype' file".
There isnt a problem with a postinstall script copying files into
/var/opt/csw, from elsewhere, as I already explicitly said on this
thread.

It's fairly trivial for "the maintainer" to toss together a
postinstall script to copy them from somewhere else. Should take all
of 10 minutes.

Like a template? I'd be happy to write one, if it's going to actually get used.

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec 23 23:57:11 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:57:11 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin8zco4Sq2rkB-MJ9tjpzurggSxCvWBu+-KGTRK@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
	<1293048341-sup-2502@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTim7nd-piDY44wf2FhFncZoTF-PJ-xu5VcvJfbzL@mail.gmail.com>
	<x6k4j0mi8g.fsf@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin8zco4Sq2rkB-MJ9tjpzurggSxCvWBu+-KGTRK@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=TXfm+633ZA=Nu-Nwh_2yKmnMRdrmS-HoYjRF7@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/23/10, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>
> It's fairly trivial for "the maintainer" to toss together a
> postinstall script to copy them from somewhere else. Should take all
> of 10 minutes.
>
> Like a template? I'd be happy to write one, if it's going to actually get
> used.


PS: there are also other ways to go.
For example, if there's some kind of boot-time startup script, it
would be fairly trivial to insert,

if [ ! -f /var/path/file.db ] ; then
  echo NOTICE: no seed file present. Copying in failsafe file $FILEDB
  cp $FILEDB /var/path/file.db
fi



Contrariwise, other people have commented that most people will want
to run "freshclam" as the first thing they do. That would create the
appropriate file(s).

So instead, the boot-time script, could take the file not being there,
as a sign that the user wants to have the software "installed", but
not activate it yet.

From maciej at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 24 01:01:28 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 01:01:28 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_devel, cupsclient, cupsd,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012221732.oBMHWHBo012979@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012221732.oBMHWHBo012979@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <201012240001.oBO01S6O001070@login.bo.opencsw.org>

As suggested, cups packages with no optimization, and with no debugging
symbols.

I know it's broken, and I know we'll pay later, but it's Christmas and I'm
short on money.

Just to make sure: Do you know what the current problem (with cupsd in the
catalog) is?

* cupsd: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.06.29
  -   to: 1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24
  + cupsd-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsd-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* cups: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20
  -   to: 1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24
  + cups-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsclient-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsclient-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsdev-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsdev-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsdoc-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcups-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcups2-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcups2-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupscgi1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupscgi1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsdriver1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsdriver1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsimage2-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsimage2-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsmime1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsmime1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsppdc1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsppdc1-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* cups_devel: new package
  + cups_devel-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cups_devel-1.4.5,REV=2010.12.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec 24 01:13:33 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 16:13:33 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpacparser1, libpacparser_devel,
	pa(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012231955.oBNJt700022917@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012231955.oBNJt700022917@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=Y=kimDHJoWDiwMKxEDOmA=6hjP0Avb3d9mRzR@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 12/23/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Version bump and fix for Python module.
>
> * pacparser: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 1.2.6,REV=2010.12.07
>   -   to: 1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23
>   + libpacparser1-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libpacparser1-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libpacparser_devel-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libpacparser_devel-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pacparser-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pacparser-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * py_libpacparser: new package
>   + py_libpacparser-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + py_libpacparser-1.2.7,REV=2010.12.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec 24 01:31:29 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 16:31:29 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_devel, cupsclient, cupsd,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012240001.oBO01S6O001070@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012221732.oBMHWHBo012979@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<201012240001.oBO01S6O001070@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimsZibG-DnHZrEwKa4qsgaRtmDRR-7ZRQQ5rzP+@mail.gmail.com>

>Just to make sure: Do you know what the current problem (with cupsd in the
>catalog) is?


Not sure what you mean by that.
At any rate, this set is batched.

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Dec 24 01:35:44 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 16:35:44 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_devel, cupsclient, cupsd,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimsZibG-DnHZrEwKa4qsgaRtmDRR-7ZRQQ5rzP+@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012221732.oBMHWHBo012979@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<201012240001.oBO01S6O001070@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimsZibG-DnHZrEwKa4qsgaRtmDRR-7ZRQQ5rzP+@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=L_xu0o=BV_5b_p6szi32gxSsxLS5P7e0_fubv@mail.gmail.com>

PS:

Grrr. you did a package rename without telling me.
cupsdev -> cups_devel.

Please bring these to my attention when you submit stuff.

Since this is a no-depends rename, and fits our schema, I'll process it.


On 12/23/10, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>>Just to make sure: Do you know what the current problem (with cupsd in the
>>catalog) is?
>
>
> Not sure what you mean by that.
> At any rate, this set is batched.
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 24 01:52:30 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 19:52:30 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim7nd-piDY44wf2FhFncZoTF-PJ-xu5VcvJfbzL@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
	<1293048341-sup-2502@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTim7nd-piDY44wf2FhFncZoTF-PJ-xu5VcvJfbzL@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1293151729-sup-2453@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Thu Dec 23 13:18:27 -0500 2010:

> >     "Allowable for run-time-only data. Do not deliver files in package
> >     here."
> >
> > While this we seem to run contrary to what I said above, it's
> > ambiguous at best.
> >
> 
> seems pretty non-ambiguous to me.

In the context of this discussion, yes, but without this context, that
statement alone is ambiguous.

> "run time only". == "only data generated at run time".

You're extrapolating.  The word 'generated' is not in the wording, so
it doesn't count.  It could also be expanded to "only data used at run
time."

> "run time" == "when program is running".

Nobody is arguing this.

Do you have reference to the discussion where we decided not to
deliver files directly in /var/opt/csw?  I vaguely recall it but can't
find it and I don't see a good reason for it at the present time.

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From maciej at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 24 07:31:51 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 06:31:51 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_devel, cupsclient, cupsd,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimsZibG-DnHZrEwKa4qsgaRtmDRR-7ZRQQ5rzP+@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201012221732.oBMHWHBo012979@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<201012240001.oBO01S6O001070@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimsZibG-DnHZrEwKa4qsgaRtmDRR-7ZRQQ5rzP+@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=kT4ZQ0isRQLcnn0K_a=_yK3R80Ci8Rpw2=Fvk@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 24 de Dezembro de 2010 00:31, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
>>Just to make sure: Do you know what the current problem (with cupsd in the
>>catalog) is?
>
>
> Not sure what you mean by that.

I meant mantis bug 4634:  https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4634

> At any rate, this set is batched.

Cool, thanks.

> Grrr. you did a package rename without telling me.
> cupsdev -> cups_devel.

Sorry about that.  I thought I've mentioned it, but it seems like I've
been so preoccupied with problems with cupsd, I didn't write about the
rename.  Apologies.

From ai at vsu.ru  Fri Dec 24 06:58:52 2010
From: ai at vsu.ru (Andy Igoshin)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 08:58:52 +0300
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs proftpd 1.3.3d
Message-ID: <201012240858.52838.ai@vsu.ru>

proftpd-1.3.3d,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
proftpd-1.3.3d,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz


-- 
Andy Igoshin <ai at vsu.ru>                 Voronezh State University
Phone: +7 (4732) 522406                  Network Operation Center
Fax:   +7 (4732) 208820                  Voronezh, Russia

From pfelecan at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 24 12:50:41 2010
From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 12:50:41 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin8zco4Sq2rkB-MJ9tjpzurggSxCvWBu+-KGTRK@mail.gmail.com>
	(Philip Brown's message of "Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:54:02 -0800")
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
	<1293048341-sup-2502@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTim7nd-piDY44wf2FhFncZoTF-PJ-xu5VcvJfbzL@mail.gmail.com>
	<x6k4j0mi8g.fsf@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin8zco4Sq2rkB-MJ9tjpzurggSxCvWBu+-KGTRK@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <x6bp4bmlta.fsf@opencsw.org>

Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:

> On 12/23/10, Peter FELECAN <pfelecan at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:
>>
>>> seems pretty non-ambiguous to me.
>>> "run time only". == "only data generated at run time".
>>
>> This mean that if the data is not generated at run-time it cannot be put
>> there?
>>
>> What about the files distributed by SUNWapch2r? They are in /var/apache2
>> and there are files and directories not generated at run-time. Isn't it?
>> Is that in contradiction with your interpretation?
>
> Let me point out that you are referencing a Sun package, and comparing
> it to CSW packages.
> Sun does not always do things sanely.
> For example, shipping the *config* files for smf, under /var.
> idiotic.

Ah, the eternal ending argument: Sun does "idiotic" things...

> SUNWapch2r seems to be similarly stupid.
>
> btw: directories under /var/opt are no problem.

If you take 30s you can see that is not only directories but also files.

>> The maintainer explained very clearly why it must be in the place that
>> the files are but maybe this is a case of "whatever the maintainer feels
>> like"? Maybe disrupting a clamav installation is of the "best" quality
>> for the corporate world?
>
> Its not a matter of "no you cant configure the program to *use* /var/opt".
> It's merely a matter of not "shipping them *in* /var/opt".
> ie, "dont put files in /var/opt as part of your 'prototype' file".
> There isnt a problem with a postinstall script copying files into
> /var/opt/csw, from elsewhere, as I already explicitly said on this
> thread.
>
> It's fairly trivial for "the maintainer" to toss together a
> postinstall script to copy them from somewhere else. Should take all
> of 10 minutes.

This is what I dislike the most: "fairly trivial", "should take 10
minutes", this way you decide what the given maintainer should do with
his time.

-- 
Peter

From jgoerzen at opencsw.org  Fri Dec 24 20:48:29 2010
From: jgoerzen at opencsw.org (Jake Goerzen)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 11:48:29 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <x6bp4bmlta.fsf@opencsw.org>
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>	<1293048341-sup-2502@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>	<AANLkTim7nd-piDY44wf2FhFncZoTF-PJ-xu5VcvJfbzL@mail.gmail.com>	<x6k4j0mi8g.fsf@opencsw.org>	<AANLkTin8zco4Sq2rkB-MJ9tjpzurggSxCvWBu+-KGTRK@mail.gmail.com>
	<x6bp4bmlta.fsf@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <4D14F90D.2010800@opencsw.org>

On 12/24/10 03:50, Peter FELECAN wrote:
> Philip Brown<phil at bolthole.com>  writes:
>
>    
>> On 12/23/10, Peter FELECAN<pfelecan at opencsw.org>  wrote:
>>      
>>> Philip Brown<phil at bolthole.com>  writes:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> seems pretty non-ambiguous to me.
>>>> "run time only". == "only data generated at run time".
>>>>          
>>> This mean that if the data is not generated at run-time it cannot be put
>>> there?
>>>
>>> What about the files distributed by SUNWapch2r? They are in /var/apache2
>>> and there are files and directories not generated at run-time. Isn't it?
>>> Is that in contradiction with your interpretation?
>>>        
>> Let me point out that you are referencing a Sun package, and comparing
>> it to CSW packages.
>> Sun does not always do things sanely.
>> For example, shipping the *config* files for smf, under /var.
>> idiotic.
>>      
> Ah, the eternal ending argument: Sun does "idiotic" things...
>
>    
>> SUNWapch2r seems to be similarly stupid.
>>
>> btw: directories under /var/opt are no problem.
>>      
> If you take 30s you can see that is not only directories but also files.
>
>    
>>> The maintainer explained very clearly why it must be in the place that
>>> the files are but maybe this is a case of "whatever the maintainer feels
>>> like"? Maybe disrupting a clamav installation is of the "best" quality
>>> for the corporate world?
>>>        
>> Its not a matter of "no you cant configure the program to *use* /var/opt".
>> It's merely a matter of not "shipping them *in* /var/opt".
>> ie, "dont put files in /var/opt as part of your 'prototype' file".
>> There isnt a problem with a postinstall script copying files into
>> /var/opt/csw, from elsewhere, as I already explicitly said on this
>> thread.
>>
>> It's fairly trivial for "the maintainer" to toss together a
>> postinstall script to copy them from somewhere else. Should take all
>> of 10 minutes.
>>      
> This is what I dislike the most: "fairly trivial", "should take 10
> minutes", this way you decide what the given maintainer should do with
> his time.
>
>    

I didn't realize this discussion was going on in pkgsubmissions since I 
wasn't subscribed (but I am now).  Here is a idea using the gar recipe 
to work this out:

create a new postinstall script

vi files/CSWclamav.postinstall

#!/bin/sh

MAIN = /opt/csw/share/doc/clamav/main.cvd
DAILY = /opt/csw/share/doc/clamav/daily.cvd

if [ ! -f /var/opt/csw/clamav/db/main.cvd ] ; then
   cp $MAIN /var/opt/csw/clamav/db
fi

if [ ! -f /var/opt/csw/clamav/db/daily.cvd ] ; then
   cp $DAILY /var/opt/csw/clamav/db
fi

Add to gar recipe:

DISTFILES += CSWclamav.postinstall

Add to gar recipe in the "post-install-modulated:"

@mv $(DESTDIR)/var/opt/csw/clamav/db/*.cvd 
$(DESTDIR)/opt/csw/share/doc/clamav/

This way when gmake package is ran the files will be prototype'ed in 
/opt/csw/share/doc/clamav.  Then, during pkgadd if the files don't exist 
the postinstall script will copy them there and clamd can start up.

Jake

From pfelecan at opencsw.org  Sat Dec 25 20:03:51 2010
From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN)
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2010 20:03:51 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclam6, libclam6_devel
In-Reply-To: <4D14F90D.2010800@opencsw.org> (Jake Goerzen's message of "Fri,
	24 Dec 2010 11:48:29 -0800")
References: <201012012116.oB1LGbgY010236@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimbwJbJuAgNch=7ehkD6wRh-iSSdZByeyo-DDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4ZOccwhOxDLPXqBfxEAkjACUeJWAG=WGSzR+6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinS+JtMk3uLfyROq9NxPvK5Kq4v315ziv8r8dv8@mail.gmail.com>
	<1292373495-sup-2481@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinqf25mKQGrnutktmm+eUCVDxk5Ha7mNfW29Bv_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=0J=b4v1b+jc8m5L31gxELE7iWq9j-gLqrzDwL@mail.gmail.com>
	<1293048341-sup-2502@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTim7nd-piDY44wf2FhFncZoTF-PJ-xu5VcvJfbzL@mail.gmail.com>
	<x6k4j0mi8g.fsf@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin8zco4Sq2rkB-MJ9tjpzurggSxCvWBu+-KGTRK@mail.gmail.com>
	<x6bp4bmlta.fsf@opencsw.org> <4D14F90D.2010800@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <x6y67dllns.fsf@opencsw.org>

Jake Goerzen <jgoerzen at opencsw.org> writes:

> On 12/24/10 03:50, Peter FELECAN wrote:
>> Philip Brown<phil at bolthole.com>  writes:
>>
>>    
>>> On 12/23/10, Peter FELECAN<pfelecan at opencsw.org>  wrote:
>>>      
>>>> Philip Brown<phil at bolthole.com>  writes:
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>> seems pretty non-ambiguous to me.
>>>>> "run time only". == "only data generated at run time".
>>>>>          
>>>> This mean that if the data is not generated at run-time it cannot be put
>>>> there?
>>>>
>>>> What about the files distributed by SUNWapch2r? They are in /var/apache2
>>>> and there are files and directories not generated at run-time. Isn't it?
>>>> Is that in contradiction with your interpretation?
>>>>        
>>> Let me point out that you are referencing a Sun package, and comparing
>>> it to CSW packages.
>>> Sun does not always do things sanely.
>>> For example, shipping the *config* files for smf, under /var.
>>> idiotic.
>>>      
>> Ah, the eternal ending argument: Sun does "idiotic" things...
>>
>>    
>>> SUNWapch2r seems to be similarly stupid.
>>>
>>> btw: directories under /var/opt are no problem.
>>>      
>> If you take 30s you can see that is not only directories but also files.
>>
>>    
>>>> The maintainer explained very clearly why it must be in the place that
>>>> the files are but maybe this is a case of "whatever the maintainer feels
>>>> like"? Maybe disrupting a clamav installation is of the "best" quality
>>>> for the corporate world?
>>>>        
>>> Its not a matter of "no you cant configure the program to *use* /var/opt".
>>> It's merely a matter of not "shipping them *in* /var/opt".
>>> ie, "dont put files in /var/opt as part of your 'prototype' file".
>>> There isnt a problem with a postinstall script copying files into
>>> /var/opt/csw, from elsewhere, as I already explicitly said on this
>>> thread.
>>>
>>> It's fairly trivial for "the maintainer" to toss together a
>>> postinstall script to copy them from somewhere else. Should take all
>>> of 10 minutes.
>>>      
>> This is what I dislike the most: "fairly trivial", "should take 10
>> minutes", this way you decide what the given maintainer should do with
>> his time.
>>
>>    
>
> I didn't realize this discussion was going on in pkgsubmissions since
> I wasn't subscribed (but I am now).  Here is a idea using the gar
> recipe to work this out:
> [...]
> This way when gmake package is ran the files will be prototype'ed in
> /opt/csw/share/doc/clamav.  Then, during pkgadd if the files don't
> exist the postinstall script will copy them there and clamd can start
> up.
>

Thank you Jake. However, the discussion was about arbitrariness of
rules/policies more than feasibility.

-- 
Peter

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Dec 27 11:15:35 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2010 11:15:35 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libserf, libserf0_0, libserf_devel
Message-ID: <201012271015.oBRAFZcn025964@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This fixes #4642 and split off library and devel.

* libserf: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.09.17
  -   to: 2010.12.27
  + libserf-0.7.0,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* libserf: new package
  + libserf0_0-0.7.0,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libserf0_0-0.7.0,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libserf_devel-0.7.0,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libserf_devel-0.7.0,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Dec 27 23:30:44 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2010 23:30:44 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca
Message-ID: <201012272230.oBRMUiCd010099@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Important bump or certain patches won't download.

* pca: major version upgrade
  - from: 20101213.01,REV=2010.12.13
  -   to: 20101221.01,REV=2010.12.27
  + pca-20101221.01,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Dec 27 23:38:33 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2010 23:38:33 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libgnomeui, libgnomeui2_0,
	libgnomeui(...)
Message-ID: <201012272238.oBRMcXX7021434@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This fixes #4641 and splits the package according to the new library
packaging rules.

* libgnomeui: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.06.26
  -   to: 2010.12.20
  + libgnomeui-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* libgnomeui: new package
  + libgnomeui2_0-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgnomeui2_0-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgnomeui_devel-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgnomeui_devel-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgnomeui_doc-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Dec 28 16:05:07 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 16:05:07 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsigsegv, libsigsegv0, libsigsegv2,
	(...)
Message-ID: <201012281505.oBSF57Gx002674@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Update to 2.9 and split according to new package rules

* libsigsegv: new package
  + libsigsegv0-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv0-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv2-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv2-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv_devel-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv_devel-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libsigsegv: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.8,REV=2010.07.26
  -   to: 2.9,REV=2010.11.19
  + libsigsegv-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at opencsw.org  Tue Dec 28 18:06:39 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 09:06:39 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs proftpd 1.3.3d
In-Reply-To: <201012240858.52838.ai@vsu.ru>
References: <201012240858.52838.ai@vsu.ru>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=CidKMeguoo13fv3crhDMHcVbPxoW6v+KmucGC@mail.gmail.com>

There seems to be a boatload of /usr/local references in there.. but
far as I can tell, it's all in documentation files. So I guess it's
okay.
batching


On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Andy Igoshin <ai at vsu.ru> wrote:
> proftpd-1.3.3d,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> proftpd-1.3.3d,REV=2010.12.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>
>
>

From phil at opencsw.org  Tue Dec 28 18:11:06 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 09:11:06 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libserf, libserf0_0, libserf_devel
In-Reply-To: <201012271015.oBRAFZcn025964@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012271015.oBRAFZcn025964@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik7ibeHAjyN7DQ01kXFHUsMHCcCo=Xfp6-HWKnH@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 2:15 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This fixes #4642 and split off library and devel.
>
> * libserf: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2010.09.17
> ?- ? to: 2010.12.27
> ?+ libserf-0.7.0,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libserf: new package
> ?+ libserf0_0-0.7.0,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libserf0_0-0.7.0,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libserf_devel-0.7.0,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libserf_devel-0.7.0,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 28 18:12:02 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 09:12:02 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca
In-Reply-To: <201012272230.oBRMUiCd010099@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012272230.oBRMUiCd010099@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikThNy1VTcOJDqRpqv36gufbCWYQ_TUwATSaPJy@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Important bump or certain patches won't download.
>
> * pca: major version upgrade
> ?- from: 20101213.01,REV=2010.12.13
> ?- ? to: 20101221.01,REV=2010.12.27
> ?+ pca-20101221.01,REV=2010.12.27-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 28 18:13:40 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 09:13:40 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libgnomeui, libgnomeui2_0,
	libgnomeui(...)
In-Reply-To: <201012272238.oBRMcXX7021434@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012272238.oBRMcXX7021434@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=xLuNXnh4Or7xFqfv66f4SSMdKC4OWCtWLvtU7@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This fixes #4641 and splits the package according to the new library
> packaging rules.
>
> * libgnomeui: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2010.06.26
> ?- ? to: 2010.12.20
> ?+ libgnomeui-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libgnomeui: new package
> ?+ libgnomeui2_0-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libgnomeui2_0-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libgnomeui_devel-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libgnomeui_devel-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libgnomeui_doc-2.24.3,REV=2010.12.20-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Dec 28 18:15:06 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 09:15:06 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsigsegv, libsigsegv0,
 libsigsegv2, (...)
In-Reply-To: <201012281505.oBSF57Gx002674@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012281505.oBSF57Gx002674@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimmQEAYQpTzqHaTB0YVXAVneaRk+dtK8y3aE_fX@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 7:05 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Update to 2.9 and split according to new package rules
>
> * libsigsegv: new package
> ?+ libsigsegv0-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv0-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv2-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv2-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv_devel-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv_devel-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libsigsegv: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 2.8,REV=2010.07.26
> ?- ? to: 2.9,REV=2010.11.19
> ?+ libsigsegv-2.9,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Dec 28 22:05:25 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 22:05:25 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] PRIORITY newpkgs libsigsegv, libsigsegv0,
	libsigsegv2, (...)
Message-ID: <201012282105.oBSL5PJf018485@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Fix regression reported in #4501, just a respin with a link missing
in the prior package. Please push ASAP as it breaks gawk.

* libsigsegv: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.11.19
  -   to: 2010.12.28
  + libsigsegv-2.9,REV=2010.12.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv0-2.9,REV=2010.12.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv0-2.9,REV=2010.12.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv2-2.9,REV=2010.12.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv2-2.9,REV=2010.12.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 29 09:46:05 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 09:46:05 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] UPDATE newpkgs libsigsegv, libsigsegv0,
	libsigsegv2, (...)
Message-ID: <201012290846.oBT8k5xN022053@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Bump again as time has invalidated my dependency :-(

* libsigsegv: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.11.19
  -   to: 2010.12.29
  + libsigsegv-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv0-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv0-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv2-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv2-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsigsegv_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 29 10:05:10 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 10:05:10 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs parallel
Message-ID: <201012290905.oBT95Aak008836@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* parallel: major version upgrade
  - from: 20100424,REV=2010.05.11
  -   to: 20101222,REV=2010.12.29
  + parallel-20101222,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 29 13:33:54 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 13:33:54 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs help2man
Message-ID: <201012291233.oBTCXs9O022326@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* help2man: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.38.2,REV=2010.05.26
  -   to: 1.38.4,REV=2010.12.29
  + help2man-1.38.4,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Dec 29 20:34:50 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 20:34:50 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] taglib etc. not pushed
Message-ID: <F973ADFD-AA6F-43E6-B50D-CA4A71CFBE58@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

I just noted that taglib, taglib_gcc and taglib_devel have not been pushed:
  http://mirror.opencsw.org/opencsw/current/sparc/5.9/
although the pages already list the updated version 1.6.3,REV=2010.10.11:
  http://www.opencsw.org/packages/taglib/

Would you mind having a look?


Best regards

  -- Dago


From phil at opencsw.org  Thu Dec 30 18:41:46 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 09:41:46 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] UPDATE newpkgs libsigsegv, libsigsegv0,
 libsigsegv2, (...)
In-Reply-To: <201012290846.oBT8k5xN022053@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201012290846.oBT8k5xN022053@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinT9iRRMzeC_h-PBe0KG88TfSRy35DtwMULYmv7@mail.gmail.com>

batching.

On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Bump again as time has invalidated my dependency :-(
>
> * libsigsegv: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2010.11.19
> ?- ? to: 2010.12.29
> ?+ libsigsegv-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv0-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv0-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv2-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv2-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsigsegv_devel-2.9,REV=2010.12.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Dec 30 18:43:08 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 09:43:08 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] taglib etc. not pushed
In-Reply-To: <F973ADFD-AA6F-43E6-B50D-CA4A71CFBE58@opencsw.org>
References: <F973ADFD-AA6F-43E6-B50D-CA4A71CFBE58@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinUs46jFsJh8+xqAv3nWfbHk70vmHFmnz2YqLnq@mail.gmail.com>

odd. well i dont see the packages any more.
sorry you'll have to resubmit.



On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> I just noted that taglib, taglib_gcc and taglib_devel have not been pushed:
> ?http://mirror.opencsw.org/opencsw/current/sparc/5.9/
> although the pages already list the updated version 1.6.3,REV=2010.10.11:
> ?http://www.opencsw.org/packages/taglib/
>
> Would you mind having a look?
>
>
> Best regards
>
> ?-- Dago
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Dec 30 22:05:52 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 22:05:52 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs taglib, taglib_devel, taglib_gcc
Message-ID: <201012302105.oBUL5q9R014285@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Resubmitted as original packages somehow got lost during the mirror push

* taglib_gcc: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.4
  -   to: 1.6.3,REV=2010.11.01
  + taglib_gcc-1.6.3,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + taglib_gcc-1.6.3,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* taglib: new package
  + taglib-1.6.3,REV=2010.10.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + taglib-1.6.3,REV=2010.10.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + taglib_devel-1.6.3,REV=2010.10.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + taglib_devel-1.6.3,REV=2010.10.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg