From ihsan at opencsw.org Thu Nov 1 23:29:32 2012 From: ihsan at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?B?xLBoc2FuwqBEb8SfYW4=?=) Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 23:29:32 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] spam spam spam In-Reply-To: References: <38a36adbab16e39e8c09faaaca7d4531.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <5092F7CC.9000105@opencsw.org> Am 31.10.2012 18:31, schrieb Ben Walton: > I don't see this spam but my mail goes to gmail so I get those filters > working for me. Even when it was going to a non-gmail final destination > though, I saw very little spam on those lists with my trained > spamassassin filter. What filters are you using? The amount Spam and rejected messages increased heavily in the last 2 weeks. > Ihsan: Could we hook spamassassin into the mail flow on mail.opencsw.org > if it's not there already? I could supply a > fairly well trained bayes db if so...Even with this in the pipeline > though, I still prefer tagged delivery to discarding. The Bayes DB is actually trained. The buildfarm list is an open list and this causes it to receive more spam than this list for example. I would suggest, that I'm going to moderate posting by non list-members. Is that okay for you guys? Ihsan -- ihsan at dogan.ch http://blog.dogan.ch/ From pfelecan at opencsw.org Fri Nov 2 09:11:36 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:11:36 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] spam spam spam In-Reply-To: <5092F7CC.9000105@opencsw.org> (=?utf-8?B?IsSwaHNhbsKgRG8=?= =?utf-8?B?xJ9hbiIncw==?= message of "Thu, 01 Nov 2012 23:29:32 +0100") References: <38a36adbab16e39e8c09faaaca7d4531.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> <5092F7CC.9000105@opencsw.org> Message-ID: ?hsan?Do?an writes: > The Bayes DB is actually trained. The buildfarm list is an open list and > this causes it to receive more spam than this list for example. I would > suggest, that I'm going to moderate posting by non list-members. > > Is that okay for you guys? Yes. BTW, the board list is also a spam target. -- Peter From bwalton at opencsw.org Sat Nov 3 18:16:09 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 17:16:09 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] spam spam spam In-Reply-To: <5092F7CC.9000105@opencsw.org> References: <38a36adbab16e39e8c09faaaca7d4531.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> <5092F7CC.9000105@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi Ihsan, The Bayes DB is actually trained. The buildfarm list is an open list and > this causes it to receive more spam than this list for example. I would > suggest, that I'm going to moderate posting by non list-members. > > Is that okay for you guys? > That's fine with me too as long as it's not too burdensome for you? Thanks -Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wilbury at opencsw.org Sat Nov 3 19:33:33 2012 From: wilbury at opencsw.org (Juraj Lutter) Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2012 19:33:33 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] spam spam spam In-Reply-To: References: <38a36adbab16e39e8c09faaaca7d4531.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> <5092F7CC.9000105@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <5095637D.1050501@opencsw.org> On 11/03/2012 06:16 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > Hi Ihsan, > > The Bayes DB is actually trained. The buildfarm list is an open list and > this causes it to receive more spam than this list for example. I would > suggest, that I'm going to moderate posting by non list-members. > > Is that okay for you guys? > > > That's fine with me too as long as it's not too burdensome for you? There should be more moderators from each time zone. -- Juraj Lutter From romeotheriault at opencsw.org Sun Nov 4 07:52:52 2012 From: romeotheriault at opencsw.org (Romeo Theriault) Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 20:52:52 -1000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > > The project page for the python 2.x library directory fix is here: > http://wiki.opencsw.org/project-python2libdir > > I have the base python packages rolled already. I'm planning to > install it on one of testing boxes and then build some of the base > module packages against it. Notably this base set would include > anything required by checkpkg. > > Is anyone doing "python stuff" on the testing* boxes that this might > affect? > > Details to follow as things get rolling... Hi Ben, I'm in no rush on this but just want to make sure I'm not missing the bus in terms of rebuiding my python modules. Is it ready for us to make the changes and if so what changes need to be made to conform to the new standard? Thanks, Romeo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwalton at opencsw.org Sun Nov 4 10:12:07 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 09:12:07 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Romeo, On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Romeo Theriault wrote: > Hi Ben, I'm in no rush on this but just want to make sure I'm not missing > the bus in terms of rebuiding my python modules. Is it ready for us to make > the changes and if so what changes need to be made to conform to the new > standard? I haven't done much in the last few days as I've been in the middle of moving but I'm hoping to get rolling again shortly. On the experimental10* boxes, I've been working through the package set and placing updated packages in /home/experimental/python26-lib/. As needed, these updated versions are installed on the experimental hosts. If you want to build your modules now, that would be perfect. I just made python26-lib mode 1777 so that anyone can deposit packages. Most packages are just a quick respin but not all. Some break at a post-install or post-merge step when they try to do something in the legacy site packages directory. I added $(SITE_PACKAGES) to the python category file in GAR for use in these recipes. Others break for different reasons although nothing has taken too much time to resolve so far. I'm not doing any version bumps unless required for some reason. My approach has been to work though the list doing dependencies first and then checking them off on the wiki page: http://wiki.opencsw.org/project-python2libdir I've been doing any package required so far but if people want to maintain ownership, they'll need to re-roll too...I don't mind going through to do any fixup work required first though. Thanks -Ben From romeotheriault at opencsw.org Mon Nov 5 08:22:21 2012 From: romeotheriault at opencsw.org (Romeo Theriault) Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 21:22:21 -1000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Ben, Thanks for the update. I'll get started on doing some tomorrow. But I have a few questions, see below: On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > I haven't done much in the last few days as I've been in the middle of > moving but I'm hoping to get rolling again shortly. On the > experimental10* boxes, I've been working through the package set and > placing updated packages in /home/experimental/python26-lib/. As > needed, these updated versions are installed on the experimental > hosts. I guess after you build them you're installing them on the experimental10* hosts. I'm guessing I should do the same? Are you doing any testing on them besides verifying they install fine? > If you want to build your modules now, that would be perfect. I just > made python26-lib mode 1777 so that anyone can deposit packages. > > Most packages are just a quick respin but not all. Some break at a > post-install or post-merge step when they try to do something in the > legacy site packages directory. I added $(SITE_PACKAGES) to the > python category file in GAR for use in these recipes. Others break > for different reasons although nothing has taken too much time to > resolve so far. > > I'm not doing any version bumps unless required for some reason. > > My approach has been to work though the list doing dependencies first > and then checking them off on the wiki page: > http://wiki.opencsw.org/project-python2libdir Ok. > > I've been doing any package required so far but if people want to > maintain ownership, they'll need to re-roll too...I don't mind going > through to do any fixup work required first though. Thanks, Romeo From rupert at opencsw.org Tue Nov 6 03:31:40 2012 From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 03:31:40 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] apr-util build: "memcache/apr_memcache.c", line 425: undefined symbol: APR_RESLIST_CLEANUP_FIRST In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hi, while upgrading to the new verison of apr-util, it does not seem to find apr any more? anybody has an idea where this might come from? /bin/bash /opt/csw/libexec/apr/build-1/libtool --silent --mode=compile /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc -mt -xO3 -m32 -xarch=386 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DSOLARIS2=9 -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS -D_REENTRANT -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -I/opt/csw/include -I/home/rupert/mgar-sav/pkg/apr-util/trunk/work/solaris10-i386/build-isa-i386/apr-util-1.5.1/include -I/home/rupert/mgar-sav/pkg/apr-util/trunk/work/solaris10-i386/build-isa-i386/apr-util-1.5.1/include/private -I/opt/csw/include -I/opt/csw/include -I/opt/csw/bdb48/include -o memcache/apr_memcache.lo -c memcache/apr_memcache.c && touch memcache/apr_memcache.lo "memcache/apr_memcache.c", line 425: warning: implicit function declaration: apr_reslist_cleanup_order_set "memcache/apr_memcache.c", line 425: undefined symbol: APR_RESLIST_CLEANUP_FIRST cc: acomp failed for memcache/apr_memcache.c gmake[1]: *** [memcache/apr_memcache.lo] Error 1 gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/rupert/mgar-sav/pkg/apr-util/trunk/work/solaris10-i386/build-isa-i386/apr-util-1.5.1' gmake: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 gmake: Leaving directory `/home/rupert/mgar-sav/pkg/apr-util/trunk/work/solaris10-i386/build-isa-i386/apr-util-1.5.1' gmake[1]: *** [build-work/solaris10-i386/build-isa-i386/apr-util-1.5.1/Makefile] Error 2 gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/rupert/mgar-sav/pkg/apr-util/trunk' gmake: *** [merge-isa-i386] Error 2 rupert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwalton at opencsw.org Tue Nov 6 09:34:44 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 08:34:44 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] apr-util build: "memcache/apr_memcache.c", line 425: undefined symbol: APR_RESLIST_CLEANUP_FIRST In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Rupert, Is the Apr Dev package installed? Also the build is defining things for solaris 9 when building on 10... Not sure if that will bite you. It's likely being picked up from a -config tool somewhere. Thanks -Ben On Nov 6, 2012 2:32 AM, "rupert THURNER" wrote: > hi, > > while upgrading to the new verison of apr-util, it does not seem to find > apr any more? anybody has an idea where this might come from? > > /bin/bash /opt/csw/libexec/apr/build-1/libtool --silent --mode=compile > /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc -mt -xO3 -m32 -xarch=386 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DSOLARIS2=9 > -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS -D_REENTRANT -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE > -I/opt/csw/include > -I/home/rupert/mgar-sav/pkg/apr-util/trunk/work/solaris10-i386/build-isa-i386/apr-util-1.5.1/include > -I/home/rupert/mgar-sav/pkg/apr-util/trunk/work/solaris10-i386/build-isa-i386/apr-util-1.5.1/include/private > -I/opt/csw/include -I/opt/csw/include -I/opt/csw/bdb48/include -o > memcache/apr_memcache.lo -c memcache/apr_memcache.c && touch > memcache/apr_memcache.lo > "memcache/apr_memcache.c", line 425: warning: implicit function > declaration: apr_reslist_cleanup_order_set > "memcache/apr_memcache.c", line 425: undefined symbol: > APR_RESLIST_CLEANUP_FIRST > cc: acomp failed for memcache/apr_memcache.c > gmake[1]: *** [memcache/apr_memcache.lo] Error 1 > gmake[1]: Leaving directory > `/home/rupert/mgar-sav/pkg/apr-util/trunk/work/solaris10-i386/build-isa-i386/apr-util-1.5.1' > gmake: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 > gmake: Leaving directory > `/home/rupert/mgar-sav/pkg/apr-util/trunk/work/solaris10-i386/build-isa-i386/apr-util-1.5.1' > gmake[1]: *** > [build-work/solaris10-i386/build-isa-i386/apr-util-1.5.1/Makefile] Error 2 > gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/rupert/mgar-sav/pkg/apr-util/trunk' > gmake: *** [merge-isa-i386] Error 2 > > rupert > > > > _______________________________________________ > maintainers mailing list > maintainers at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers > .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwalton at opencsw.org Tue Nov 6 09:42:17 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 08:42:17 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Romeo, On Nov 5, 2012 7:22 AM, "Romeo Theriault" wrote: > > Hi Ben, Thanks for the update. I'll get started on doing some > tomorrow. But I have a few questions, see below: > > On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > > I haven't done much in the last few days as I've been in the middle of > > moving but I'm hoping to get rolling again shortly. On the > > experimental10* boxes, I've been working through the package set and > > placing updated packages in /home/experimental/python26-lib/. As > > needed, these updated versions are installed on the experimental > > hosts. > > I guess after you build them you're installing them on the > experimental10* hosts. I'm guessing I should do the same? Are you > doing any testing on them besides verifying they install fine? I am only installing when needed as a dependency. I rely on the provided test suite (if any) for verification and am not doing any other checks at this point. Once the collection is rebuilt we can do more thorough things if desired. For now I'm focusing on getting the recipes updated if required and the rebuild completed. > > > If you want to build your modules now, that would be perfect. I just > > made python26-lib mode 1777 so that anyone can deposit packages. > > > > Most packages are just a quick respin but not all. Some break at a > > post-install or post-merge step when they try to do something in the > > legacy site packages directory. I added $(SITE_PACKAGES) to the > > python category file in GAR for use in these recipes. Others break > > for different reasons although nothing has taken too much time to > > resolve so far. > > > > I'm not doing any version bumps unless required for some reason. > > > > My approach has been to work though the list doing dependencies first > > and then checking them off on the wiki page: > > http://wiki.opencsw.org/project-python2libdir > > Ok. > > > > > I've been doing any package required so far but if people want to > > maintain ownership, they'll need to re-roll too...I don't mind going > > through to do any fixup work required first though. > > Thanks, > Romeo > _______________________________________________ > maintainers mailing list > maintainers at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers > .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From skayser at opencsw.org Tue Nov 6 22:43:57 2012 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 22:43:57 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-maintainers] [Fwd: OpenCSW question about package CSWsynergy] Message-ID: <64414.92.193.73.244.1352238237.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de> Hey guys, just received this request to update synergy. As I am busy with other things, is someone willing to take on the update? I've pointed steve to #opencsw in case he's willing to maintain the package himself. Best, Sebastian ------------------------ Urspr?ngliche Nachricht ------------------------- Betreff: OpenCSW question about package CSWsynergy Von: steve.dobbs at gmail.com Datum: Di, 6.11.2012, 17:34 An: skayser at opencsw.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Will you be updating synergy to the 1.4 tree anytime soon? From romeotheriault at opencsw.org Wed Nov 7 09:03:05 2012 From: romeotheriault at opencsw.org (Romeo Theriault) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 22:03:05 -1000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Ben, thanks for the follow up. I started by trying to rebuild the pyzmq (zeromq) module and am running into this error: running build_ext error: invalid Python installation: unable to open /opt/csw/lib/python/config/Makefile (No such file or directory) gmake[1]: *** [build-work/solaris9-sparc/build-isa-sparcv8/pyzmq-2.2.0/setup.py] Error 1 This is after running a 'mgar platforms' upon which time mgar ssh's into experimental9s and 9x to build the module. As you know the Makefile is now in the python2.6 directory instead of python dir. But I checked on experimental9s and there is no config dir in either "python" or the "python26" directory. Do you have any advice on how to proceed here? Thanks, Romeo On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > Hi Romeo, > > On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Romeo Theriault > wrote: > >> Hi Ben, I'm in no rush on this but just want to make sure I'm not missing >> the bus in terms of rebuiding my python modules. Is it ready for us to make >> the changes and if so what changes need to be made to conform to the new >> standard? > > I haven't done much in the last few days as I've been in the middle of > moving but I'm hoping to get rolling again shortly. On the > experimental10* boxes, I've been working through the package set and > placing updated packages in /home/experimental/python26-lib/. As > needed, these updated versions are installed on the experimental > hosts. > > If you want to build your modules now, that would be perfect. I just > made python26-lib mode 1777 so that anyone can deposit packages. > > Most packages are just a quick respin but not all. Some break at a > post-install or post-merge step when they try to do something in the > legacy site packages directory. I added $(SITE_PACKAGES) to the > python category file in GAR for use in these recipes. Others break > for different reasons although nothing has taken too much time to > resolve so far. > > I'm not doing any version bumps unless required for some reason. > > My approach has been to work though the list doing dependencies first > and then checking them off on the wiki page: > http://wiki.opencsw.org/project-python2libdir > > I've been doing any package required so far but if people want to > maintain ownership, they'll need to re-roll too...I don't mind going > through to do any fixup work required first though. > > Thanks > -Ben > _______________________________________________ > maintainers mailing list > maintainers at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers > .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::. From bwalton at opencsw.org Wed Nov 7 09:30:13 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 08:30:13 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Romeo, On Nov 7, 2012 8:03 AM, "Romeo Theriault" wrote: > > Hi Ben, thanks for the follow up. I started by trying to rebuild the > pyzmq (zeromq) module and am running into this error: > > running build_ext > error: invalid Python installation: unable to open > /opt/csw/lib/python/config/Makefile (No such file or directory) > gmake[1]: *** [build-work/solaris9-sparc/build-isa-sparcv8/pyzmq-2.2.0/setup.py] > Error 1 > > > This is after running a 'mgar platforms' upon which time mgar ssh's > into experimental9s and 9x to build the module. As you know the > Makefile is now in the python2.6 directory instead of python dir. But > I checked on experimental9s and there is no config dir in either > "python" or the "python26" directory. Sorry, I didn't note that I was doing this on solaris 10 only. You van add the specific platform list to a recipe or to your.garrc which is the route I've taken. Thanks -Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jh at opencsw.org Wed Nov 7 11:37:29 2012 From: jh at opencsw.org (Jan Holzhueter) Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 11:37:29 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] [Fwd: OpenCSW question about package CSWsynergy] In-Reply-To: <64414.92.193.73.244.1352238237.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de> References: <64414.92.193.73.244.1352238237.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de> Message-ID: <509A39E9.8080307@opencsw.org> Hi, did take a look at it. crazy build stuff :) (cmake ) Builds for x86 on sparc I get this: /home/jh/opencsw/synergy/trunk/work/solaris10-sparc/build-isa-sparcv8plus/synergy-1.4.10-Source/src/lib/ipc/CIpcServerProxy.cpp:93:60: warning: ISO C++ says that these are ambiguous, even though the worst conversion for the first is better than the worst conversion for the second: [enabled by default] In file included from /home/jh/opencsw/synergy/trunk/work/solaris10-sparc/build-isa-sparcv8plus/synergy-1.4.10-Source/src/lib/ipc/CIpcServerProxy.cpp:24:0: /home/jh/opencsw/synergy/trunk/work/solaris10-sparc/build-isa-sparcv8plus/synergy-1.4.10-Source/src/lib/ipc/../synergy/CProtocolUtil.h:81:16: note: candidate 1: static void CProtocolUtil::writef(void*, const char*, __gnuc_va_list) /home/jh/opencsw/synergy/trunk/work/solaris10-sparc/build-isa-sparcv8plus/synergy-1.4.10-Source/src/lib/ipc/../synergy/CProtocolUtil.h:52:16: note: candidate 2: static void CProtocolUtil::writef(synergy::IStream*, const char*, ...) /home/jh/opencsw/synergy/trunk/work/solaris10-sparc/build-isa-sparcv8plus/synergy-1.4.10-Source/src/lib/ipc/../synergy/CProtocolUtil.h:81:16: error: 'static void CProtocolUtil::writef(void*, const char*, __gnuc_va_list)' is private yes the function is private. But what makes it different on sparc ? Committed everything I have. For anyone who wants to look at it. Greetings Jan Am 06.11.12 22:43, schrieb Sebastian Kayser: > Hey guys, > > just received this request to update synergy. > > As I am busy with other things, is someone willing to take > on the update? I've pointed steve to #opencsw in case he's > willing to maintain the package himself. > > Best, > > Sebastian > > > ------------------------ Urspr?ngliche Nachricht ------------------------- > Betreff: OpenCSW question about package CSWsynergy > Von: steve.dobbs at gmail.com > Datum: Di, 6.11.2012, 17:34 > An: skayser at opencsw.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Will you be updating synergy to the 1.4 tree anytime soon? > > > _______________________________________________ > maintainers mailing list > maintainers at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers > .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::. > From romeotheriault at opencsw.org Wed Nov 7 18:43:49 2012 From: romeotheriault at opencsw.org (Romeo Theriault) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 07:43:49 -1000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > Sorry, I didn't note that I was doing this on solaris 10 only. You van add > the specific platform list to a recipe or to your.garrc which is the route > I've taken. Does that mean that future builds of python modules will be solaris 10+ only? Romeo From bwalton at opencsw.org Wed Nov 7 19:56:47 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 18:56:47 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Romeo, On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Romeo Theriault wrote: > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Ben Walton wrote: >> Sorry, I didn't note that I was doing this on solaris 10 only. You van add >> the specific platform list to a recipe or to your.garrc which is the route >> I've taken. > > Does that mean that future builds of python modules will be solaris 10+ only? As far as I'm concerned, yes. We could likely build for 9 still but I've decided to not bother. We're getting to the point where library versions have diverged enough that I just don't think 9 is worth the effort...of course people still use 8. (Deploying new stacks on legacy systems...?) Thanks -Ben From romeotheriault at opencsw.org Wed Nov 7 23:31:33 2012 From: romeotheriault at opencsw.org (Romeo Theriault) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 12:31:33 -1000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Ben Walton wrote: > As far as I'm concerned, yes. We could likely build for 9 still but > I've decided to not bother. We're getting to the point where library > versions have diverged enough that I just don't think 9 is worth the > effort...of course people still use 8. (Deploying new stacks on > legacy systems...?) I won't put up a stink for sol9 support but, yes, I still have some solaris 9 boxes that I need to maintain and I like to try to keep them the same as possible as the 10 boxes. But I understand the reasons. Thanks, Romeo From romeotheriault at opencsw.org Thu Nov 8 09:41:09 2012 From: romeotheriault at opencsw.org (Romeo Theriault) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 22:41:09 -1000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Ben, So I added: PACKAGING_PLATFORMS = solaris10-sparc solaris10-i386 to my .garrc and building now works. Thanks. I am now seeing this when building pyzmq: CSWpy-pyzmq: * Python compiled files are supposed to be compiled usingthe cswpycompile class action script. For more information, see http://wiki.opencsw.org /cswclassutils-package If any of the reported errors were false positives, you can override them pasting the lines below to the GAR recipe. CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWpy-pyzmq += discouraged-path-in-pkgmap|/opt/csw/lib/python2.6/site-packages/zmq/ssh/tunnel.pyc CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWpy-pyzmq += discouraged-path-in-pkgmap|/opt/csw/lib/python2.6/site-packages/zmq/tests/__init__.pyc CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWpy-pyzmq += discouraged-path-in-pkgmap|/opt/csw/lib/python2.6/site-packages/zmq/tests/test_context.pyc Can I assume the "discouraged path" warning is from the old mgar settings wanting stuff under /opt/csw/lib/python and not python2.6? If so, should I just ignore this for now and manually logon to experimental10x to continue with the build of the package on x86? (This package is platform dependent.) Also, not sure what the "Python compiled files are supposed to be compiled usingthe cswpycompile class action script" warning is about since it looks to me like the python files got compiled.... Any pointers are appreciated. Thanks! Romeo On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Romeo Theriault wrote: > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Ben Walton wrote: >> As far as I'm concerned, yes. We could likely build for 9 still but >> I've decided to not bother. We're getting to the point where library >> versions have diverged enough that I just don't think 9 is worth the >> effort...of course people still use 8. (Deploying new stacks on >> legacy systems...?) > > I won't put up a stink for sol9 support but, yes, I still have some > solaris 9 boxes that I need to maintain and I like to try to keep them > the same as possible as the 10 boxes. But I understand the reasons. > > Thanks, > Romeo From bwalton at opencsw.org Thu Nov 8 22:28:16 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 21:28:16 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Romeo, On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Romeo Theriault wrote: > Hi Ben, So I added: > > PACKAGING_PLATFORMS = solaris10-sparc solaris10-i386 > > to my .garrc and building now works. Thanks. Perfect. > I am now seeing this when building pyzmq: > > CSWpy-pyzmq: > * Python compiled files are supposed to be compiled usingthe cswpycompile > class action script. For more information, see http://wiki.opencsw.org > /cswclassutils-package > If any of the reported errors were false positives, you can override them > pasting the lines below to the GAR recipe. > CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWpy-pyzmq += > discouraged-path-in-pkgmap|/opt/csw/lib/python2.6/site-packages/zmq/ssh/tunnel.pyc > CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWpy-pyzmq += > discouraged-path-in-pkgmap|/opt/csw/lib/python2.6/site-packages/zmq/tests/__init__.pyc > CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWpy-pyzmq += > discouraged-path-in-pkgmap|/opt/csw/lib/python2.6/site-packages/zmq/tests/test_context.pyc I suspect that your recipe has an EXTRA_MERGE_EXCLUDES line that references the old python directory. If you change your recipe to subsitute /opt/csw/lib/python/ with $(SITE_PACKAGES)/ and run a remerge package it should work out, I think. > Also, not sure what the "Python compiled files are supposed to be > compiled usingthe cswpycompile class action script" warning is about > since it looks to me like the python files got compiled.... They tend to get built but we exclude them, preferring instead to generate locally at install time. Let me know if you have any more snags. Thanks -Ben From romeotheriault at opencsw.org Thu Nov 8 22:45:36 2012 From: romeotheriault at opencsw.org (Romeo Theriault) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 11:45:36 -1000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] python library directory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Ben, On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Ben Walton wrote: > I suspect that your recipe has an EXTRA_MERGE_EXCLUDES line that > references the old python directory. If you change your recipe to > subsitute /opt/csw/lib/python/ with $(SITE_PACKAGES)/ and run a > remerge package it should work out, I think. I don't have any EXTRA_MERGE_EXCLUDES line. Here is the Makefile: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/browser/csw/mgar/pkg/lang-python/pyzmq/trunk/Makefile Do you notice anything in there that may be causing the issue? Maybe it's something in the setup.py.... > >> Also, not sure what the "Python compiled files are supposed to be >> compiled usingthe cswpycompile class action script" warning is about >> since it looks to me like the python files got compiled.... > > They tend to get built but we exclude them, preferring instead to > generate locally at install time. > > Let me know if you have any more snags. > Thanks. Romeo From maciej at opencsw.org Fri Nov 9 10:58:07 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 09:58:07 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Camp hangout Message-ID: Hello campers, Do you plan to set up a hangout during the camp? Maciej -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dam at opencsw.org Fri Nov 9 11:27:45 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 11:27:45 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Camp hangout In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20AF0E12-A90D-4CB3-A10A-F5372FF4CC94@opencsw.org> Hi Maciej, Am 09.11.2012 um 10:58 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : > Do you plan to set up a hangout during the camp? Definitely :-) I am setting up the video equipment right now. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From maciej at opencsw.org Fri Nov 9 11:29:07 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 10:29:07 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Camp hangout In-Reply-To: <20AF0E12-A90D-4CB3-A10A-F5372FF4CC94@opencsw.org> References: <20AF0E12-A90D-4CB3-A10A-F5372FF4CC94@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Cool. Could make some calendar entries and share them? It will help me plan the day. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dam at opencsw.org Fri Nov 9 11:51:40 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 11:51:40 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Camp hangout In-Reply-To: References: <20AF0E12-A90D-4CB3-A10A-F5372FF4CC94@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <21AF3495-2190-4DE7-AFBD-ABDCAF53600F@opencsw.org> Hi Maciej, Am 09.11.2012 um 11:29 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : > Cool. Could make some calendar entries and share them? It will help me plan the day. > Sure, done. We will have some slow start, Carsten will arrive in a minute, Igor at 3pm and Yann at 8pm. I guess most of the stuff will start tomorrow. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dam at opencsw.org Fri Nov 9 12:08:11 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 12:08:11 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Camp hangout In-Reply-To: <21AF3495-2190-4DE7-AFBD-ABDCAF53600F@opencsw.org> References: <20AF0E12-A90D-4CB3-A10A-F5372FF4CC94@opencsw.org> <21AF3495-2190-4DE7-AFBD-ABDCAF53600F@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi folks, Am 09.11.2012 um 11:51 schrieb Dagobert Michelsen : > Am 09.11.2012 um 11:29 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : >> Cool. Could make some calendar entries and share them? It will help me plan the day. >> > Sure, done. We will have some slow start, Carsten will arrive in a minute, > Igor at 3pm and Yann at 8pm. I guess most of the stuff will start tomorrow. There is a problem with the camera: it does not seem to be detected by the G+ video plugin, just the laptop builtin. The camera does work with iMove and FaceTime. It is a HD Camcorder connected via FireWire. Any advice on how I could fix this? Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rupert at opencsw.org Sat Nov 10 07:49:42 2012 From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 07:49:42 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] csw-upload-package for cmake complains for 5.11, what is different? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: anybody of you happens to know what the cause of theses errors would be? Checks failed for catalogs: - sparc SunOS5.11 cmake-2.8.9,REV=2012.11.06-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz To see errors, run: /opt/csw/bin/checkpkg --catalog-release unstable --os-release SunOS5.11 --architecture sparc f6f2473cad7ddacc9a4bd9f07ac7bf09 - i386 SunOS5.11 cmake-2.8.9,REV=2012.11.06-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz To see errors, run: /opt/csw/bin/checkpkg --catalog-release unstable --os-release SunOS5.11 --architecture i386 abde9236c8fb0815b5633dd11d077416 Packages have not been submitted to the unstable catalog. # Checkpkg suggests adding the following lines to the GAR recipe: # This is a summary; see above for details. RUNTIME_DEP_PKGS_CSWcmake += CSWemacscommon If any of the reported errors were false positives, you can override them pasting the lines below to the GAR recipe. CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += soname-not-found|libCstd.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/cmake CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += soname-not-found|libcurses.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/ccmake CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += soname-not-found|libm.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/cmake CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += soname-not-found|libc.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/ctest From yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org Sat Nov 10 08:01:51 2012 From: yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org (Yann Rouillard) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 08:01:51 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] csw-upload-package for cmake complains for 5.11, what is different? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Rupert, Dago tried to update the Solaris 11 checkpkg database yesterday but it failed because of a bug, and the database is probably currently incomplete. This will be fixed shortly, we'll keep you updated. Yann Le 10 nov. 2012 07:50, "rupert THURNER" a ?crit : > anybody of you happens to know what the cause of theses errors would be? > > Checks failed for catalogs: > - sparc SunOS5.11 > cmake-2.8.9,REV=2012.11.06-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > To see errors, run: > /opt/csw/bin/checkpkg --catalog-release unstable --os-release > SunOS5.11 --architecture sparc f6f2473cad7ddacc9a4bd9f07ac7bf09 > - i386 SunOS5.11 > cmake-2.8.9,REV=2012.11.06-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > To see errors, run: > /opt/csw/bin/checkpkg --catalog-release unstable --os-release > SunOS5.11 --architecture i386 abde9236c8fb0815b5633dd11d077416 > Packages have not been submitted to the unstable catalog. > > > # Checkpkg suggests adding the following lines to the GAR recipe: > # This is a summary; see above for details. > RUNTIME_DEP_PKGS_CSWcmake += CSWemacscommon > If any of the reported errors were false positives, you can override them > pasting the lines below to the GAR recipe. > CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += > soname-not-found|libCstd.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/cmake > CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += > soname-not-found|libcurses.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/ccmake > CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += > soname-not-found|libm.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/cmake > CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += > soname-not-found|libc.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/ctest > _______________________________________________ > maintainers mailing list > maintainers at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers > .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org Sat Nov 10 11:47:47 2012 From: yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org (Yann Rouillard) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 11:47:47 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] csw-upload-package for cmake complains for 5.11, what is different? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Rupert, It is fixed now. You can try to upload the package again. Yann 2012/11/10 Yann Rouillard > Hi Rupert, > > Dago tried to update the Solaris 11 checkpkg database yesterday but it > failed because of a bug, and the database is probably currently incomplete. > > This will be fixed shortly, we'll keep you updated. > > Yann > Le 10 nov. 2012 07:50, "rupert THURNER" a ?crit : > > anybody of you happens to know what the cause of theses errors would be? >> >> Checks failed for catalogs: >> - sparc SunOS5.11 >> cmake-2.8.9,REV=2012.11.06-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> To see errors, run: >> /opt/csw/bin/checkpkg --catalog-release unstable --os-release >> SunOS5.11 --architecture sparc f6f2473cad7ddacc9a4bd9f07ac7bf09 >> - i386 SunOS5.11 >> cmake-2.8.9,REV=2012.11.06-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> To see errors, run: >> /opt/csw/bin/checkpkg --catalog-release unstable --os-release >> SunOS5.11 --architecture i386 abde9236c8fb0815b5633dd11d077416 >> Packages have not been submitted to the unstable catalog. >> >> >> # Checkpkg suggests adding the following lines to the GAR recipe: >> # This is a summary; see above for details. >> RUNTIME_DEP_PKGS_CSWcmake += CSWemacscommon >> If any of the reported errors were false positives, you can override them >> pasting the lines below to the GAR recipe. >> CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += >> soname-not-found|libCstd.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/cmake >> CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += >> soname-not-found|libcurses.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/ccmake >> CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += >> soname-not-found|libm.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/cmake >> CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWcmake += >> soname-not-found|libc.so.1|is|needed|by|opt/csw/bin/ctest >> _______________________________________________ >> maintainers mailing list >> maintainers at lists.opencsw.org >> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers >> .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::. >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maciej at opencsw.org Sat Nov 10 11:52:09 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 10:52:09 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] csw-upload-package for cmake complains for 5.11, what is different? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2012/11/10 Yann Rouillard > It is fixed now. You can try to upload the package again. > Are you able to write a unit test that would have caught this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org Sat Nov 10 12:10:38 2012 From: yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org (Yann Rouillard) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 12:10:38 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] csw-upload-package for cmake complains for 5.11, what is different? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Maciej, It's definitely possible. I will add this to my todo list for now. Yann 2012/11/10 Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski > 2012/11/10 Yann Rouillard > >> It is fixed now. You can try to upload the package again. >> > > Are you able to write a unit test that would have caught this? > > _______________________________________________ > maintainers mailing list > maintainers at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers > .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dam at opencsw.org Sun Nov 11 01:44:21 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 01:44:21 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Large batch update of catalogs Message-ID: <880770BE-2B78-4380-BB78-0B5DADBDD267@opencsw.org> Hi folks, we are currently busy at the Summercamp in Lenggries cleaning up the catalog and updating packages. While at it we dropped a whole bunch of packages probably no longer useful or unmaintained. If any of your active packages is involved we apologize in advance and would kindly request a rebuild. A simple csw-upload-pkg is sufficient to get the package in the catalog again. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From rupert at opencsw.org Sun Nov 11 03:30:48 2012 From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 03:30:48 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Large batch update of catalogs In-Reply-To: <880770BE-2B78-4380-BB78-0B5DADBDD267@opencsw.org> References: <880770BE-2B78-4380-BB78-0B5DADBDD267@opencsw.org> Message-ID: if somebody could have a look on how to upgrade libserf it would be great? i tried to give it the correct version 1.1, produced an error. so i just increased the patch verison - which then worked. On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi folks, > > we are currently busy at the Summercamp in Lenggries cleaning up the catalog and > updating packages. While at it we dropped a whole bunch of packages probably no > longer useful or unmaintained. If any of your active packages is involved we > apologize in advance and would kindly request a rebuild. A simple csw-upload-pkg > is sufficient to get the package in the catalog again. > > > Best regards > > -- Dago > > -- > "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, > and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 > > _______________________________________________ > maintainers mailing list > maintainers at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers > .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::. From pfelecan at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 09:22:42 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (pfelecan at opencsw.org) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:22:42 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal Message-ID: What's the rationale behind the removal of albumshaper from the catalog ? From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 12:14:34 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 11:14:34 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2012/11/12 > What's the rationale behind the removal of albumshaper from the catalog ? >From another posting[1]: """While at it we dropped a whole bunch of packages probably no longer useful or unmaintained. If any of your active packages is involved we apologize in advance and would kindly request a rebuild.""" So you have been apologized to for it in advance, and it's been requested that you rebuild albumshaper and upload it. Maciej [1] http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/2012-November/017327.html From bonivart at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 13:38:33 2012 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 13:38:33 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski wrote: > > 2012/11/12 > > What's the rationale behind the removal of albumshaper from the catalog ? > > From another posting[1]: > > """While at it we dropped a whole bunch of packages probably no longer > useful or unmaintained. If any of your active packages is involved we > apologize in advance and would kindly request a rebuild.""" > > So you have been apologized to for it in advance, and it's been > requested that you rebuild albumshaper and upload it. But in this case albumshaper was updated just a few months ago by Peter F himself so it should be considered actively maintained. Why did someone consider the package to be "not useful" without asking the maintainer first? Or is there a technical reason for it having to be rebuilt just now? That's not clear by the apology. I think it would have been better to publish a list of packages supposed to be deleted from the catalog and let others have an opinion about them instead of just removing them and apologizing in general for it. I from time to time get emails about not maintaining a package any longer so someone either updated my package or it got removed without me getting any info about it. It annoys me. /peter From dam at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 14:08:20 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:08:20 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Hi Peter+Peter, Am 12.11.2012 um 13:38 schrieb Peter Bonivart : > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski > wrote: >> >> 2012/11/12 >>> What's the rationale behind the removal of albumshaper from the catalog ? >> >> From another posting[1]: >> >> """While at it we dropped a whole bunch of packages probably no longer >> useful or unmaintained. If any of your active packages is involved we >> apologize in advance and would kindly request a rebuild.""" >> >> So you have been apologized to for it in advance, and it's been >> requested that you rebuild albumshaper and upload it. > > But in this case albumshaper was updated just a few months ago by > Peter F himself so it should be considered actively maintained. Why > did someone consider the package to be "not useful" without asking the > maintainer first? Or is there a technical reason for it having to be > rebuilt just now? That's not clear by the apology. We tried to identify problematic packages to be dropped by several factors, like retired maintainer, long time no update or unmaintained dependency. Obviously some packages swept in the drop list which should have kept. As we really wanted to getting things done on the camp we decided to go along with what we got and if any erroneous drops are encountered reupload them. So (the other) Peter, apologies again, please repush the package again. > I think it would have been better to publish a list of packages > supposed to be deleted from the catalog and let others have an opinion > about them instead of just removing them and apologizing in general > for it. In general I totally concur, but the camps are a unique chance twice a year to push things and finish them during the weekend which takes weeks during normal operation. > I from time to time get emails about not maintaining a package > any longer so someone either updated my package or it got removed > without me getting any info about it. It annoys me. This is a different issue and most of the time the pushing maintainer does not intend this. Maciej: How about a slight change in csw-upload-pkg which rejects foreign uploads to active maintainers unless the maintainer is either retired/sabbatical or --takeover is specified? Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 20:25:06 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:25:06 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] New catalogs: kiel and bratislava Message-ID: We have two new catalogs on the mirror: kiel and bratislava. kiel - a snapshot of unstable as it is now. It will be the new testing. bratislava - is empty. bratislava will be populated from scratch by newly built packages. The idea is to build a clean/cleaned stack of stuff that we care about. During the camp we talked that we probably won't implement tiers, so for bratislava we intend to rebuild the world, consisting of what we referred as tier 1 + tier 2 packages. We can't yet upload to bratislava, because csw-upload-pkg currently does not allow to select which catalog to upload to. I'll implement catalog selection and release a new version of cswutils. Maciej From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 20:44:31 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:44:31 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: 2012/11/12 Dagobert Michelsen : > Maciej: How about a slight change in csw-upload-pkg which rejects > foreign uploads to active maintainers unless the maintainer is > either retired/sabbatical or --takeover is specified? Do we really want that? What's the rationale behind it? On the camp we talked that it's a good thing if we're not locking down packages to specific people. Part of that is the change of wording to "Last uploaded by". I looked at albumshaper. It is built with GCC 3, so I looked why - it turns out it depends on KDE. We don't have KDE in the repository any more, but the old packages are installed on the buildfarm, so the build runs for now. But when we clean the buildfarm from the packages that we dropped from the catalog, the build will no longer run as is, e.g. qmake from KDE will be gone. The good news is that we have CSWqt4-gxx-dev[1] which brings us qmake from QT4. So I'm guessing that unless albumshaper requires more KDE components, it could be built with QT4 from /opt/csw/gxx. Thoughts? Maciej [1] http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/pkgdb/srv4/6c20cdf8a93879c3e2d4b27ecfeadf74/ From bonivart at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 21:14:23 2012 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:14:23 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Notes from camp? Message-ID: Are there any notes from the camp? /peter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bonivart at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 21:31:33 2012 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:31:33 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski wrote: > > Do we really want that? What's the rationale behind it? On the camp we > talked that it's a good thing if we're not locking down packages to > specific people. Part of that is the change of wording to "Last uploaded by". I think that kind of change should have a vote or at least a proper discussion on the maintainers list. From bwalton at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 21:38:07 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:38:07 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski > wrote: >> >> Do we really want that? What's the rationale behind it? On the camp we >> talked that it's a good thing if we're not locking down packages to >> specific people. Part of that is the change of wording to "Last uploaded by". > > I think that kind of change should have a vote or at least a proper > discussion on the maintainers list. I don't think that it will be a problem in reality. Active maintainers update their packages which means that someone else doesn't need to. A quick "mind if I update your package" is (and has been) sufficient for a takeover...As long as we follow this simple protocol there isn't a problem. Unresponsive maintainers have always been worked around in the way we're talking about now: by simply building and releasing their packages to take them over. This change isn't about making package takeover a free-for-all. Thanks -Ben From dam at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 22:34:01 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:34:01 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Notes from camp? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <444CFFE7-158E-4EF8-979A-3A98D088A33D@opencsw.org> Hi Peter, Am 12.11.2012 um 21:14 schrieb Peter Bonivart : > Are there any notes from the camp? Sure, everything is linked from the camp page: http://wiki.opencsw.org/summercamp-2012 We don't have many protocols though, as we hacked a lot. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From bonivart at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 23:25:13 2012 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 23:25:13 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Notes from camp? In-Reply-To: <444CFFE7-158E-4EF8-979A-3A98D088A33D@opencsw.org> References: <444CFFE7-158E-4EF8-979A-3A98D088A33D@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Sure, everything is linked from the camp page: > http://wiki.opencsw.org/summercamp-2012 > > We don't have many protocols though, as we hacked a lot. I saw the commits, I meant what you talked about and what decisions were made. From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 23:39:08 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej =?utf-8?Q?Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:39:08 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Notes from camp? In-Reply-To: References: <444CFFE7-158E-4EF8-979A-3A98D088A33D@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <20121112223908.GA9277@quince.home.blizinski.pl> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:25:13PM +0100, Peter Bonivart wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > > Sure, everything is linked from the camp page: > > http://wiki.opencsw.org/summercamp-2012 > > > > We don't have many protocols though, as we hacked a lot. > > I saw the commits, I meant what you talked about and what decisions were made. There are notes here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uSkl7SmInnBkYRY5JivrV7TPehzRetIItBshrCwfa-4/edit I think this time around it was more of a hacking meeting than decision making. The main decision was to finally kill stable with fire. Maciej From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 23:42:51 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:42:51 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: 2012/11/12 Peter Bonivart > > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski > wrote: > > > > Do we really want that? What's the rationale behind it? On the camp we > > talked that it's a good thing if we're not locking down packages to > > specific people. Part of that is the change of wording to "Last uploaded by". > > I think that kind of change should have a vote or at least a proper > discussion on the maintainers list. By what kind of change you mean - a change of wording on the website? Or do you think there was some other kind of change? (There wasn't.) From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Nov 12 23:45:31 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:45:31 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: 2012/11/12 Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : > The good news is that we have CSWqt4-gxx-dev[1] which brings us qmake > from QT4. So I'm guessing that unless albumshaper requires more KDE > components, it could be built with QT4 from /opt/csw/gxx. I poked albumshaper more, tried to build it with QT 4, and couldn't. Albumshaper requires QT 3, doesn't work with QT 4, and the last Albumshaper code release took place 7 years ago. The package looks unmaintainable to me. :-( From bonivart at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 00:36:05 2012 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 00:36:05 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Notes from camp? In-Reply-To: <20121112223908.GA9277@quince.home.blizinski.pl> References: <444CFFE7-158E-4EF8-979A-3A98D088A33D@opencsw.org> <20121112223908.GA9277@quince.home.blizinski.pl> Message-ID: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Maciej Blizi?ski wrote: > There are notes here: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uSkl7SmInnBkYRY5JivrV7TPehzRetIItBshrCwfa-4/edit Thanks, I'll take a look. From bonivart at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 01:03:22 2012 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 01:03:22 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:42 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski wrote: > 2012/11/12 Peter Bonivart >> >> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski >> wrote: >> > >> > Do we really want that? What's the rationale behind it? On the camp we >> > talked that it's a good thing if we're not locking down packages to >> > specific people. Part of that is the change of wording to "Last uploaded by". >> >> I think that kind of change should have a vote or at least a proper >> discussion on the maintainers list. > > By what kind of change you mean - a change of wording on the website? > Or do you think there was some other kind of change? (There wasn't.) I think your response to Dago's request implied a significant change in what it means to be a maintainer. Then Ben said nothing has changed. Now you also say nothing has changed but the text above to me looks like you and some others at camp think that packages are now locked to maintainers and that is something negative, I'm still curious about what you mean by that? I don't mind a minor change in wording, but you do say above that it's part of a change, as in more is to come. What would that be? From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 01:27:42 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 00:27:42 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: 2012/11/13 Peter Bonivart : > I think your response to Dago's request implied a significant change > in what it means to be a maintainer. Then Ben said nothing has > changed. Now you also say nothing has changed but the text above to me > looks like you and some others at camp think that packages are now > locked to maintainers and that is something negative, I'm still > curious about what you mean by that? I don't mind a minor change in > wording, but you do say above that it's part of a change, as in more > is to come. What would that be? It's got mostly to do with new maintainers, or people who could become maintainers. We already have the culture of courtesy non-maintainer package uploads, but it's not visible on the outside, for example on the website. There is certain attachment of a package to its maintainer, but it's not as strong as it used to appear on the package pages. The new wording ("Last uploaded by") sends a better message. From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 01:32:23 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 00:32:23 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Bratislava Message-ID: Let's start a thread about the bratislava catalog. For starters, I'd need a GARified CSWcommon, build for Solaris 9. Being a lazy bastard, I'd like to ask if anyone's up for writing a build recipe for it? I'd use it as the first upload to bratislava. Maciej From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 19:39:27 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:39:27 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Bratislava In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2012/11/13 Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : > Let's start a thread about the bratislava catalog. For starters, I'd > need a GARified CSWcommon, build for Solaris 9. Being a lazy bastard, > I'd like to ask if anyone's up for writing a build recipe for it? I'd > use it as the first upload to bratislava. I submitted a first step to build CSWcommon. http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/19686 It looks like GAR makes many assumptions that are not true for CSWcommon, such as depending on CSWcommon and stripping common directories by default. Some amount of special-casing in GAR will be necessary to produce the right pkgmap. Dago, could you look at this? From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 20:43:02 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 20:43:02 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: ("Maciej (Matchek) =?utf-8?Q?Blizi=C5=84ski=22's?= message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2012 11:14:34 +0000") References: Message-ID: "Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski" writes: > So you have been apologized to for it in advance, and it's been > requested that you rebuild albumshaper and upload it. Oh, thank you. BTW I didn't intend to receive apologies. I asked just for information and rebuilding the package can be done. -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 20:44:26 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 20:44:26 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: (Peter Bonivart's message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2012 13:38:33 +0100") References: Message-ID: Peter Bonivart writes: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski > wrote: >> >> 2012/11/12 >> > What's the rationale behind the removal of albumshaper from the catalog ? >> >> From another posting[1]: >> >> """While at it we dropped a whole bunch of packages probably no longer >> useful or unmaintained. If any of your active packages is involved we >> apologize in advance and would kindly request a rebuild.""" >> >> So you have been apologized to for it in advance, and it's been >> requested that you rebuild albumshaper and upload it. > > But in this case albumshaper was updated just a few months ago by > Peter F himself so it should be considered actively maintained. Why > did someone consider the package to be "not useful" without asking the > maintainer first? Or is there a technical reason for it having to be > rebuilt just now? That's not clear by the apology. > > I think it would have been better to publish a list of packages > supposed to be deleted from the catalog and let others have an opinion > about them instead of just removing them and apologizing in general > for it. I from time to time get emails about not maintaining a package > any longer so someone either updated my package or it got removed > without me getting any info about it. It annoys me. As I said, I wished only to have the rationale. But discussion is good anyway and I agree with you. -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 20:47:42 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 20:47:42 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: ("Maciej (Matchek) =?utf-8?Q?Blizi=C5=84ski=22's?= message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:44:31 +0000") References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: "Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski" writes: > 2012/11/12 Dagobert Michelsen : >> Maciej: How about a slight change in csw-upload-pkg which rejects >> foreign uploads to active maintainers unless the maintainer is >> either retired/sabbatical or --takeover is specified? > > Do we really want that? What's the rationale behind it? On the camp we > talked that it's a good thing if we're not locking down packages to > specific people. Part of that is the change of wording to "Last uploaded by". If we implement this it should be set on a package basis, i.e. in the recipe such as csw-upload-pkg can comply. > I looked at albumshaper. It is built with GCC 3, so I looked why - it > turns out it depends on KDE. We don't have KDE in the repository any > more, but the old packages are installed on the buildfarm, so the > build runs for now. But when we clean the buildfarm from the packages > that we dropped from the catalog, the build will no longer run as is, > e.g. qmake from KDE will be gone. That means that you remove KDE and possibly gcc3 ? Well, again, what's the rationale? > The good news is that we have CSWqt4-gxx-dev[1] which brings us qmake > from QT4. So I'm guessing that unless albumshaper requires more KDE > components, it could be built with QT4 from /opt/csw/gxx. I'll try. -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 20:49:39 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 20:49:39 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: (Peter Bonivart's message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:31:33 +0100") References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Peter Bonivart writes: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski > wrote: >> >> Do we really want that? What's the rationale behind it? On the camp we >> talked that it's a good thing if we're not locking down packages to >> specific people. Part of that is the change of wording to "Last uploaded by". > > I think that kind of change should have a vote or at least a proper > discussion on the maintainers list. Possibly. Anyhow, the "Last uploaded by" is a nice addition; of course the etiquette requires that for a actively maintained package, the approval be politely/lightly requested by the uploader. -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 20:51:07 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 20:51:07 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: (Ben Walton's message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:38:07 +0000") References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Ben Walton writes: > A quick "mind if I update your package" This is the kind of request that I had in mind when writing about "politely/lightly" requesting approval to upload. -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 20:52:21 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 20:52:21 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: ("Maciej (Matchek) =?utf-8?Q?Blizi=C5=84ski=22's?= message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:42:51 +0000") References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: "Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski" writes: > By what kind of change you mean - a change of wording on the website? In our policies. BTW, we should resuscitate the discussion about the policies definition. What do you think? -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Nov 13 20:54:02 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 20:54:02 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: ("Maciej (Matchek) =?utf-8?Q?Blizi=C5=84ski=22's?= message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:45:31 +0000") References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: "Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski" writes: > 2012/11/12 Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : >> The good news is that we have CSWqt4-gxx-dev[1] which brings us qmake >> from QT4. So I'm guessing that unless albumshaper requires more KDE >> components, it could be built with QT4 from /opt/csw/gxx. > > I poked albumshaper more, tried to build it with QT 4, and couldn't. > Albumshaper requires QT 3, doesn't work with QT 4, and the last > Albumshaper code release took place 7 years ago. The package looks > unmaintainable to me. :-( Well, thank you for your research. I'll have a look in the near future. For the moment I will upload it again until we still have the required packages on the build farm. -- Peter From yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org Tue Nov 13 22:31:33 2012 From: yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org (Yann Rouillard) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:31:33 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] QA pages now working again ! Message-ID: Hi everyone, Following the work done during the camp and with the help of William, the QA pages are now working again ! - the QA packages page are properly updated with version from GAR, upstream and catalogs: http://www.opencsw.org/qa/package/vsftpd/, - the QA maintainer pages allow you again to quickly see the packages that need update: https://www.opencsw.org/qa/maintainer/yann/, - the statistics are now properly updated: https://www.opencsw.org/get-it/package-statistics/ There are still some things left to do: - document how it works, - re-enable uwatch emails, - setup some monitoring probe to check that the QA updates are done. But at least the package information are up to date on the website. If you notice something wrong, don't hesitate to mention it. Yann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maciej at opencsw.org Wed Nov 14 01:12:59 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 00:12:59 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: 2012/11/13 Peter FELECAN : > Well, thank you for your research. I'll have a look in the near > future. For the moment I will upload it again until we still have the > required packages on the build farm. I'm going through the packages and identifying ones that depend on the gcc3 runtime. Most are now removed, these three direct deps remain: CSWlibdvdread - I updated the build so now it builds with GCC 4. Could you respin it and upload? I can also do it if you wish. CSWlibstdc++5 - this is the file containing the C++ standard library, and has its own set of (indirect) reverse dependencies: easytag, irrtoolset, openjade, tetex CSWtetex - this one might be hard, it has yet another set of reverse dependencies, 15 of them or so. The more we can rebuild and free from the dependency on the gcc3 runtime, the better. Maciej From maciej at opencsw.org Wed Nov 14 14:14:35 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 13:14:35 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: 2012/11/14 Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski > CSWlibstdc++5 - this is the file containing the C++ standard library, > and has its own set of (indirect) reverse dependencies: easytag, > irrtoolset, openjade, tetex > I took a shot at rebuilding openjade with GCC 4, it went without major issues (one static cast was needed), and is now released to unstable (no version change). I also tried irrtoolset, but it did not build, patching is needed. easytag - why it uses GCC 3 - I don't know, it's not even declared in the build file. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pfelecan at opencsw.org Wed Nov 14 20:12:20 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 20:12:20 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] albumshaper removal In-Reply-To: ("Maciej (Matchek) =?utf-8?Q?Blizi=C5=84ski=22's?= message of "Wed, 14 Nov 2012 00:12:59 +0000") References: <7125D04F-F831-4F2E-9D4C-8EEC657597DF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: "Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski" writes: > CSWlibdvdread - I updated the build so now it builds with GCC 4. Could > you respin it and upload? I can also do it if you wish. As you have seen I respin-it and uploaded the new package. Thank you for the recipe. -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Wed Nov 14 20:18:58 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 20:18:58 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] QA pages now working again ! In-Reply-To: (Yann Rouillard's message of "Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:31:33 +0100") References: Message-ID: Yann Rouillard writes: > If you notice something wrong, don't hesitate to mention it. Very nice. Thank you. As a note, when the page is large, as in https://www.opencsw.org/qa/maintainer/pfelecan/, we cannot see the its right hand side. -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Thu Nov 15 16:23:34 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (pfelecan at opencsw.org) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:23:34 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-maintainers] checkpkg for builds spawning on 2 or more days Message-ID: TeXLive packaging is very looooong: almos 3 day; consequently the package time stamp is different than that of the expected, by checkpkg, build directory. The package libkpathsea6 is generated on September 27 but the checking take place on September 30... Here is what I got: INFO:root:Juicing the svr4 package stream files... 0% | | Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/pfelecan/opencsw/.buildsys/v2/gar//bin/checkpkg", line 197, in main() File "/home/pfelecan/opencsw/.buildsys/v2/gar//bin/checkpkg", line 120, in main stats_list = collector.CollectStatsFromFiles(file_list, None) File "/home/pfelecan/opencsw/.buildsys/v2/lib/python/package_stats.py", line 499, in CollectStatsFromFiles stats.CollectStats(force=force_unpack) File "/home/pfelecan/opencsw/.buildsys/v2/lib/python/package_stats.py", line 174, in CollectStats if force or not self.StatsExist(): File "/home/pfelecan/opencsw/.buildsys/v2/lib/python/package_stats.py", line 102, in StatsExist pkg_stats = self.GetDbObject() File "/home/pfelecan/opencsw/.buildsys/v2/lib/python/package_stats.py", line 85, in GetDbObject md5_sum = self.GetMd5sum() File "/home/pfelecan/opencsw/.buildsys/v2/lib/python/package_stats.py", line 80, in GetMd5sum self.md5sum = self.srv4_pkg.GetMd5sum() File "/home/pfelecan/opencsw/.buildsys/v2/lib/python/package.py", line 193, in GetMd5sum fp = open(self.pkg_path) IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/home/pfelecan/staging/build-30.Sep.2012/libkpathsea6-20120701,REV=2012.09.27-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz' gmake[1]: *** [pkgcheck] Error 2 gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/pfelecan/opencsw/texlive/trunk' gmake: *** [platforms] Error 2 From maciej at opencsw.org Thu Nov 15 16:30:33 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:30:33 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] checkpkg for builds spawning on 2 or more days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2012/11/15 > > The package libkpathsea6 is generated on September 27 but the checking > take place on September 30... > > Here is what I got: > > IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: > '/home/pfelecan/staging/build-30.Sep.2012/libkpathsea6-20120701,REV=2012.09.27-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz' > gmake[1]: *** [pkgcheck] Error 2 ...and the file doesn't exist, right? I blame GAR. checkpkg has to get the right file name, it's not sane to do in any other way. If it takes days for these operations, you can try running checkpkg by hand. Look what the options are there, against which catalog release, architecture and OS release you want to check it, and see what happens. Meanwhile, GAR needs to learn how to not re-evaluate file names. From dam at opencsw.org Thu Nov 15 18:04:01 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:04:01 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] checkpkg for builds spawning on 2 or more days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5BA1254C-F10F-4B02-AA59-D91548B05A04@opencsw.org> Hi, Am 15.11.2012 um 16:30 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : > 2012/11/15 >> >> The package libkpathsea6 is generated on September 27 but the checking >> take place on September 30... >> >> Here is what I got: >> >> IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: >> '/home/pfelecan/staging/build-30.Sep.2012/libkpathsea6-20120701,REV=2012.09.27-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz' >> gmake[1]: *** [pkgcheck] Error 2 > > ...and the file doesn't exist, right? I blame GAR. checkpkg has to > get the right file name, it's not sane to do in any other way. > > If it takes days for these operations, you can try running checkpkg by > hand. Look what the options are there, against which catalog release, > architecture and OS release you want to check it, and see what > happens. > > Meanwhile, GAR needs to learn how to not re-evaluate file names. For now you can do mgar platforms-repackage to just redo the packaging phase. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From ihsan at opencsw.org Thu Nov 15 21:23:02 2012 From: ihsan at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?B?xLBoc2FuwqBEb8SfYW4=?=) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 21:23:02 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Train Spamassassin's Bayes Database Message-ID: <50A54F26.1010308@opencsw.org> Hi, As you probably have noticed, the amount of Spam towards the opencsw.org domain has and train the Bayes database. increased in the last few weeks. I've went through the Spamassassin configuration and fixed a few things. Spam detection should work better now. If you still have Spam in your inbox, which hasn't been detected by Spamassassin, you can move to a specific folder. A cron job will grep every hour this mail (or mails) If you would like to report Spam, please create this subfolders in your Mailbox: INBOX/z_salearn/junk IMPORTANT: Please do not put any legitimate mails in there, as this would break the bayes accurancy. As always, feedback and suggestions are always welcome. Ihsan -- ihsan at dogan.ch http://blog.dogan.ch/ From ihsan at opencsw.org Fri Nov 16 12:15:43 2012 From: ihsan at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?B?xLBoc2FuIERvxJ9hbg==?=) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 12:15:43 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] spam spam spam In-Reply-To: References: <38a36adbab16e39e8c09faaaca7d4531.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> <5092F7CC.9000105@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <50A6205F.3020903@opencsw.org> Hi Ben, On 11/03/2012 06:16 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > The Bayes DB is actually trained. The buildfarm list is an open list and > this causes it to receive more spam than this list for example. I would > suggest, that I'm going to moderate posting by non list-members. > > Is that okay for you guys? > > > That's fine with me too as long as it's not too burdensome for you? Done. Non list-members are moderated now. Ihsan -- ihsan at dogan.ch http://blog.dogan.ch/ From ihsan at opencsw.org Fri Nov 16 12:16:41 2012 From: ihsan at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?B?xLBoc2FuIERvxJ9hbg==?=) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 12:16:41 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] spam spam spam In-Reply-To: <5095637D.1050501@opencsw.org> References: <38a36adbab16e39e8c09faaaca7d4531.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> <5092F7CC.9000105@opencsw.org> <5095637D.1050501@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <50A62099.7010406@opencsw.org> On 11/03/2012 07:33 PM, Juraj Lutter wrote: > There should be more moderators from each time zone. That would be definitely good. Any volunteers? Ihsan -- ihsan at dogan.ch http://blog.dogan.ch/ From jh at opencsw.org Fri Nov 16 12:19:20 2012 From: jh at opencsw.org (Jan Holzhueter) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 12:19:20 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] spam spam spam In-Reply-To: <50A62099.7010406@opencsw.org> References: <38a36adbab16e39e8c09faaaca7d4531.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> <5092F7CC.9000105@opencsw.org> <5095637D.1050501@opencsw.org> <50A62099.7010406@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <50A62138.4060708@opencsw.org> Am 16.11.12 12:16, schrieb ?hsan Do?an: > On 11/03/2012 07:33 PM, Juraj Lutter wrote: > >> There should be more moderators from each time zone. > > That would be definitely good. Any volunteers? > we are more or less consolidated now in terms of time zone :) Greetings Jan From grzemba at contac-dt.de Fri Nov 16 13:37:51 2012 From: grzemba at contac-dt.de (Carsten Grzemba) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 13:37:51 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] mgar CPAN MASTERSITES problem Message-ID: <73d0bc182908.50a641af@contac-dt.de> Can somebody of the mgar maintainers have a look at this error, I have no MASTER_SITES value set: cgrzemba at unstable10x:~/opencsw/cpan/Crypt-SmbHash/trunk$ mgar fetch /home/cgrzemba/opencsw/.buildsys/v2/gar//gar.lib.mk:34: *** MASTER_SITES must contain only URLs ending in a / wheres this did not: http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/B/BJ/BJKUIT.? Stop. Thanks -- Carsten Grzemba -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From grzemba at contac-dt.de Fri Nov 16 13:55:46 2012 From: grzemba at contac-dt.de (Carsten Grzemba) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 13:55:46 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] checkpkg problem Message-ID: <73f09d2b634.50a645e2@contac-dt.de> Hi, I got the following error but the lib libX11.so.4 is in /usr/lib (sym link): cgrzemba at login:~/pkgs$ /opt/csw/bin/checkpkg --catalog-release unstable --os-release SunOS5.10 --architecture i386 de6a0db7dabc5dd525e2fc5ecd9cf1e4 INFO:root:Unwrapping candies... 100% |#########################################################################|INFO:root:Tasting candies one by one... 100% |#########################################################################|INFO:root:Tasting them all at once... INFO:root:Stuffing the candies under the pillow... 100% |#########################################################################|CSWzenity: ?* libX11.so.4 could not be resolved for opt/csw/bin/zenity, with rpath ?? ('/opt/csw/lib/$ISALIST', '/opt/csw/lib', '/usr/lib/$ISALIST', '/usr/lib', ?? '/lib/$ISALIST', '/lib'), expanded to ['/opt/csw/lib', ?? '/opt/csw/lib/amd64', '/opt/csw/lib/pentium+mmx', '/opt/csw/lib/pentium', ?? '/opt/csw/lib/i486', '/opt/csw/lib/i386', '/opt/csw/lib/pentium_pro', ?? '/opt/csw/lib/i86', '/opt/csw/lib/pentium_pro+mmx', '/opt/csw/lib', ?? '/usr/lib', '/usr/lib/amd64', '/usr/lib/pentium+mmx', '/usr/lib/pentium', ?? '/usr/lib/i486', '/usr/lib/i386', '/usr/lib/pentium_pro', '/usr/lib/i86', ?? '/usr/lib/pentium_pro+mmx', '/usr/lib', '/lib', '/lib/amd64', ?? '/lib/pentium+mmx', '/lib/pentium', '/lib/i486', '/lib/i386', ?? '/lib/pentium_pro', '/lib/i86', '/lib/pentium_pro+mmx', '/lib'], while the ?? file was not present on the filesystem, nor in the packages under ?? examination. What is the problem? -- Carsten Grzemba Tel.:?? +49 3677 64740 Mobil: +49 171 9749479 Fax:?? +49 3677 6474111 Email: carsten.grzemba at contac-dt.de contac Datentechnik GmbH -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dam at opencsw.org Fri Nov 16 14:05:16 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 14:05:16 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] mgar CPAN MASTERSITES problem In-Reply-To: <73d0bc182908.50a641af@contac-dt.de> References: <73d0bc182908.50a641af@contac-dt.de> Message-ID: <476743BB-A58C-41B2-8BC8-E181E5082C51@opencsw.org> Hi Carsten, Am 16.11.2012 um 13:37 schrieb Carsten Grzemba : > Can somebody of the mgar maintainers have a look at this error, I have no MASTER_SITES value set: > > cgrzemba at unstable10x:~/opencsw/cpan/Crypt-SmbHash/trunk$ mgar fetch /home/cgrzemba/opencsw/.buildsys/v2/gar//gar.lib.mk:34: *** MASTER_SITES must contain only URLs ending in a / wheres this did not: http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/B/BJ/BJKUIT. Stop. Please commit what you have so I can have a look. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From dam at opencsw.org Fri Nov 16 15:43:00 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 15:43:00 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Unstable* synced Message-ID: <804FD0EE-896F-445B-A364-DD8D345D957D@opencsw.org> Hi, I have just synced unstable* that it includes the most recent packages from unstable*, but no packages no longer in the catalog and no obsoleted packages. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From dam at opencsw.org Sun Nov 18 13:36:54 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 13:36:54 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Multiple license files now possible Message-ID: Hi folks, as discussed on the summercamp it is now possible since r19709 to specify multiple licenses for a package with LICENSE += COPYING LICENSE += COPYING.LGPL and such. Please see the docs for details: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/wiki/CopyRight Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From pfelecan at opencsw.org Sun Nov 18 15:12:48 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:12:48 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] checkpkg for builds spawning on 2 or more days In-Reply-To: ("Maciej (Matchek) =?utf-8?Q?Blizi=C5=84ski=22's?= message of "Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:30:33 +0000") References: Message-ID: "Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski" writes: > 2012/11/15 >> >> The package libkpathsea6 is generated on September 27 but the checking >> take place on September 30... >> >> Here is what I got: >> >> IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: >> '/home/pfelecan/staging/build-30.Sep.2012/libkpathsea6-20120701,REV=2012.09.27-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz' >> gmake[1]: *** [pkgcheck] Error 2 > > ...and the file doesn't exist, right? I blame GAR. checkpkg has to > get the right file name, it's not sane to do in any other way. Well, for a build done on 27 it's not right to use the directory of builds on 30, isn't it? > If it takes days for these operations, you can try running checkpkg by > hand. Look what the options are there, against which catalog release, > architecture and OS release you want to check it, and see what > happens. Of course but it defeats the "automatic" part of it. -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Sun Nov 18 15:14:55 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:14:55 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] checkpkg for builds spawning on 2 or more days In-Reply-To: <5BA1254C-F10F-4B02-AA59-D91548B05A04@opencsw.org> (Dagobert Michelsen's message of "Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:04:01 +0100") References: <5BA1254C-F10F-4B02-AA59-D91548B05A04@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Dagobert Michelsen writes: > Am 15.11.2012 um 16:30 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : >> 2012/11/15 >>> >>> The package libkpathsea6 is generated on September 27 but the checking >>> take place on September 30... >>> >>> Here is what I got: >>> >>> IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: >>> '/home/pfelecan/staging/build-30.Sep.2012/libkpathsea6-20120701,REV=2012.09.27-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz' >>> gmake[1]: *** [pkgcheck] Error 2 >> >> ...and the file doesn't exist, right? I blame GAR. checkpkg has to >> get the right file name, it's not sane to do in any other way. >> >> If it takes days for these operations, you can try running checkpkg by >> hand. Look what the options are there, against which catalog release, >> architecture and OS release you want to check it, and see what >> happens. >> >> Meanwhile, GAR needs to learn how to not re-evaluate file names. > > For now you can do > mgar platforms-repackage > to just redo the packaging phase. Right. However the repackage takes more than 2 days! IMHO we'll have the same issue. -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Sun Nov 18 15:16:26 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:16:26 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Multiple license files now possible In-Reply-To: (Dagobert Michelsen's message of "Sun, 18 Nov 2012 13:36:54 +0100") References: Message-ID: Dagobert Michelsen writes: > as discussed on the summercamp it is now possible since r19709 to specify multiple licenses for > a package with > LICENSE += COPYING > LICENSE += COPYING.LGPL > and such. Please see the docs for details: > http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/wiki/CopyRight Nice. I'll need this for the 92 TeXLive packages. -- Peter From dam at opencsw.org Sun Nov 18 15:20:08 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:20:08 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] checkpkg for builds spawning on 2 or more days In-Reply-To: References: <5BA1254C-F10F-4B02-AA59-D91548B05A04@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi Peter, Am 18.11.2012 um 15:14 schrieb Peter FELECAN : > Dagobert Michelsen writes: >> Am 15.11.2012 um 16:30 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : >>> 2012/11/15 >>>> >>>> The package libkpathsea6 is generated on September 27 but the checking >>>> take place on September 30... >>>> >>>> Here is what I got: >>>> >>>> IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: >>>> '/home/pfelecan/staging/build-30.Sep.2012/libkpathsea6-20120701,REV=2012.09.27-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz' >>>> gmake[1]: *** [pkgcheck] Error 2 >>> >>> ...and the file doesn't exist, right? I blame GAR. checkpkg has to >>> get the right file name, it's not sane to do in any other way. >>> >>> If it takes days for these operations, you can try running checkpkg by >>> hand. Look what the options are there, against which catalog release, >>> architecture and OS release you want to check it, and see what >>> happens. >>> >>> Meanwhile, GAR needs to learn how to not re-evaluate file names. >> >> For now you can do >> mgar platforms-repackage >> to just redo the packaging phase. > > Right. However the repackage takes more than 2 days! IMHO we'll have the > same issue. Are you sure? The repackage phase is usually pretty fast. Nonetheless you are of course right that this is a bug in GAR, unfortunately it is not an easy fix so if we can work around this quickly you probably get a releasable package much faster than waiting for me to get a full fix for that. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From pfelecan at opencsw.org Sun Nov 18 16:45:27 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:45:27 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] checkpkg for builds spawning on 2 or more days In-Reply-To: (Dagobert Michelsen's message of "Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:20:08 +0100") References: <5BA1254C-F10F-4B02-AA59-D91548B05A04@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Dagobert Michelsen writes: > Hi Peter, > > Am 18.11.2012 um 15:14 schrieb Peter FELECAN : >> Dagobert Michelsen writes: >>> Am 15.11.2012 um 16:30 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : >>>> 2012/11/15 >>>>> >>>>> The package libkpathsea6 is generated on September 27 but the checking >>>>> take place on September 30... >>>>> >>>>> Here is what I got: >>>>> >>>>> IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: >>>>> '/home/pfelecan/staging/build-30.Sep.2012/libkpathsea6-20120701,REV=2012.09.27-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz' >>>>> gmake[1]: *** [pkgcheck] Error 2 >>>> >>>> ...and the file doesn't exist, right? I blame GAR. checkpkg has to >>>> get the right file name, it's not sane to do in any other way. >>>> >>>> If it takes days for these operations, you can try running checkpkg by >>>> hand. Look what the options are there, against which catalog release, >>>> architecture and OS release you want to check it, and see what >>>> happens. >>>> >>>> Meanwhile, GAR needs to learn how to not re-evaluate file names. >>> >>> For now you can do >>> mgar platforms-repackage >>> to just redo the packaging phase. >> >> Right. However the repackage takes more than 2 days! IMHO we'll have the >> same issue. > > > Are you sure? The repackage phase is usually pretty fast. The prototypes creation for each package takes between 30 and 240 minutes... I'll provide a list and other statistics the next week. > Nonetheless you are of course right that this is a bug in GAR, unfortunately it is not > an easy fix so if we can work around this quickly you probably get a releasable package > much faster than waiting for me to get a full fix for that. Possibly. -- Peter From dam at opencsw.org Sun Nov 18 16:47:22 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:47:22 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] checkpkg for builds spawning on 2 or more days In-Reply-To: References: <5BA1254C-F10F-4B02-AA59-D91548B05A04@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <0700669B-5A10-47BC-B1D7-599267674CE8@opencsw.org> Hi Peter, Am 18.11.2012 um 16:45 schrieb Peter FELECAN : > Dagobert Michelsen writes: >> Am 18.11.2012 um 15:14 schrieb Peter FELECAN : >>> Dagobert Michelsen writes: >>>> Am 15.11.2012 um 16:30 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : >>>>> 2012/11/15 >>>>>> >>>>>> The package libkpathsea6 is generated on September 27 but the checking >>>>>> take place on September 30... >>>>>> >>>>>> Here is what I got: >>>>>> >>>>>> IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: >>>>>> '/home/pfelecan/staging/build-30.Sep.2012/libkpathsea6-20120701,REV=2012.09.27-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz' >>>>>> gmake[1]: *** [pkgcheck] Error 2 >>>>> >>>>> ...and the file doesn't exist, right? I blame GAR. checkpkg has to >>>>> get the right file name, it's not sane to do in any other way. >>>>> >>>>> If it takes days for these operations, you can try running checkpkg by >>>>> hand. Look what the options are there, against which catalog release, >>>>> architecture and OS release you want to check it, and see what >>>>> happens. >>>>> >>>>> Meanwhile, GAR needs to learn how to not re-evaluate file names. >>>> >>>> For now you can do >>>> mgar platforms-repackage >>>> to just redo the packaging phase. >>> >>> Right. However the repackage takes more than 2 days! IMHO we'll have the >>> same issue. >> >> >> Are you sure? The repackage phase is usually pretty fast. > > The prototypes creation for each package takes between 30 and 240 > minutes... I'll provide a list and other statistics the next week. That is? long. Probably GAR needs some additional performance optimizations. Performance statistics greatly appreciated. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Nov 19 10:03:48 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej =?utf-8?Q?Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:03:48 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] checkpkg problem In-Reply-To: <73f09d2b634.50a645e2@contac-dt.de> References: <73f09d2b634.50a645e2@contac-dt.de> Message-ID: <20121119090348.GA22812@quince> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 01:55:46PM +0100, Carsten Grzemba wrote: > I got the following error but the lib libX11.so.4 is in /usr/lib (sym link): > (...) > What is the problem? It's fixed now. There was a problem with re-importing the stock system files information into the package database. pkgdb wouldn't remove all the table rows it needed to remove, which made it not possible to insert new rows. http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/19712 I re-imported system files for Solaris 10 and 11. This made it possible to upload packages to the bratislava catalog. From pfelecan at opencsw.org Mon Nov 19 15:44:35 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (pfelecan at opencsw.org) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 15:44:35 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-maintainers] TeXLive packaging take almost 3 days Message-ID: <45c2f3ff0a268dff9e15d23967f71026.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> I'm struggling to replace teTeX with TeXLive since July... Quite a big endeavor. Here are some statistics: 112180 files in the installation directory 87 packages I'm using the split as defined by Debian with some adaptations. The time taken for each package is summarized in the following table: |-------+-------------------------------| | hh:mm | what | |-------+-------------------------------| | 67:09 | total_time | |-------+-------------------------------| | 04:17 | build_time | | 00:20 | global_prototype | | 00:36 | libkpathsea6 | | 00:36 | libptexenc1 | | 00:30 | tetex | | 00:41 | texlive-base | | 00:44 | texlive-bibtex-extra | | 00:43 | texlive-binaries | | 07:02 | texlive-common | | 02:48 | texlive-dev | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-base | | 00:32 | texlive-doc-bg | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-cs+sk | | 00:32 | texlive-doc-de | | 00:36 | texlive-doc-en | | 00:33 | texlive-doc-es | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-fi | | 00:32 | texlive-doc-fr | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-it | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-ja | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-ko | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-mn | | 00:32 | texlive-doc-nl | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-pl | | 00:32 | texlive-doc-pt | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-ru | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-si | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-th | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-tr | | 00:31 | texlive-doc-uk | | 00:33 | texlive-doc-vi | | 00:32 | texlive-doc-zh | | 00:36 | texlive-extra-utils | | 00:35 | texlive-font-utils | | 01:33 | texlive-fonts-extra | | 00:46 | texlive-fonts-extra-doc | | 00:52 | texlive-fonts-recommended | | 01:33 | texlive-fonts-recommended-doc | | 00:33 | texlive-formats-extra | | 00:37 | texlive-games | | 00:36 | texlive-generic-extra | | 00:32 | texlive-generic-recommended | | 00:35 | texlive-humanities | | 00:34 | texlive-humanities-doc | | 00:33 | texlive-lang-african | | 00:33 | texlive-lang-arabic | | 00:30 | texlive-lang-croatian | | 00:36 | texlive-lang-cyrillic | | 00:33 | texlive-lang-czechslovak | | 00:41 | texlive-lang-finnish | | 00:33 | texlive-lang-french | | 00:32 | texlive-lang-german | | 00:41 | texlive-lang-greek | | 00:33 | texlive-lang-hebrew | | 00:31 | texlive-lang-hungarian | | 00:34 | texlive-lang-indic | | 00:32 | texlive-lang-italian | | 00:31 | texlive-lang-lithuanian | | 00:32 | texlive-lang-mongolian | | 00:36 | texlive-lang-polish | | 00:31 | texlive-lang-portuguese | | 00:31 | texlive-lang-spanish | | 00:31 | texlive-lang-swedish | | 00:32 | texlive-lang-tibetan | | 00:35 | texlive-lang-vietnamese | | 00:36 | texlive-latex-base | | 00:34 | texlive-latex-base-doc | | 02:54 | texlive-latex-extra | | 01:47 | texlive-latex-extra-doc | | 00:51 | texlive-latex-recommended | | 00:40 | texlive-latex-recommended-doc | | 00:33 | texlive-latex3 | | 00:33 | texlive-luatex | | 00:42 | texlive-math-extra | | 00:33 | texlive-metapost | | 00:32 | texlive-metapost-doc | | 00:35 | texlive-music | | 00:35 | texlive-omega | | 00:38 | texlive-pictures | | 00:36 | texlive-pictures-doc | | 00:35 | texlive-plain-extra | | 00:57 | texlive-pstricks | | 00:40 | texlive-pstricks-doc | | 00:43 | texlive-publishers | | 00:40 | texlive-publishers-doc | | 00:38 | texlive-science | | 00:36 | texlive-science-doc | | 00:32 | texlive-xetex | | 00:32 | texlive-xindy | |-------+-------------------------------| Most of the time is spent in cswproto and patfilter utilities. For example: for libkpathsea6 the usage is the following: cswproto: real 1223.12 user 1092.55 sys 139.96 of which 1077 by repeated calls to pkgproto pathfilter: real 2183.69 user 2182.79 sys 0.72 IMHO, there is place for some optimization. If there is a kind soul to help on this he'll have my gratitude. From dam at opencsw.org Mon Nov 19 15:49:58 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 15:49:58 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] TeXLive packaging take almost 3 days In-Reply-To: <45c2f3ff0a268dff9e15d23967f71026.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> References: <45c2f3ff0a268dff9e15d23967f71026.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi Peter, Am 19.11.2012 um 15:44 schrieb pfelecan at opencsw.org: > I'm struggling to replace teTeX with TeXLive since July... Quite a big > endeavor. Here are some statistics: > > 112180 files in the installation directory > > 87 packages > > I'm using the split as defined by Debian with some adaptations. > > The time taken for each package is summarized in the following table: > > |-------+-------------------------------| > | hh:mm | what | > |-------+-------------------------------| > | 67:09 | total_time | > |-------+-------------------------------| > | 04:17 | build_time | > | 00:20 | global_prototype | > | 00:36 | libkpathsea6 | > | 00:36 | libptexenc1 | > | 00:30 | tetex | > | 00:41 | texlive-base | > | 00:44 | texlive-bibtex-extra | > | 00:43 | texlive-binaries | > | 07:02 | texlive-common | > | 02:48 | texlive-dev | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-base | > | 00:32 | texlive-doc-bg | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-cs+sk | > | 00:32 | texlive-doc-de | > | 00:36 | texlive-doc-en | > | 00:33 | texlive-doc-es | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-fi | > | 00:32 | texlive-doc-fr | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-it | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-ja | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-ko | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-mn | > | 00:32 | texlive-doc-nl | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-pl | > | 00:32 | texlive-doc-pt | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-ru | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-si | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-th | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-tr | > | 00:31 | texlive-doc-uk | > | 00:33 | texlive-doc-vi | > | 00:32 | texlive-doc-zh | > | 00:36 | texlive-extra-utils | > | 00:35 | texlive-font-utils | > | 01:33 | texlive-fonts-extra | > | 00:46 | texlive-fonts-extra-doc | > | 00:52 | texlive-fonts-recommended | > | 01:33 | texlive-fonts-recommended-doc | > | 00:33 | texlive-formats-extra | > | 00:37 | texlive-games | > | 00:36 | texlive-generic-extra | > | 00:32 | texlive-generic-recommended | > | 00:35 | texlive-humanities | > | 00:34 | texlive-humanities-doc | > | 00:33 | texlive-lang-african | > | 00:33 | texlive-lang-arabic | > | 00:30 | texlive-lang-croatian | > | 00:36 | texlive-lang-cyrillic | > | 00:33 | texlive-lang-czechslovak | > | 00:41 | texlive-lang-finnish | > | 00:33 | texlive-lang-french | > | 00:32 | texlive-lang-german | > | 00:41 | texlive-lang-greek | > | 00:33 | texlive-lang-hebrew | > | 00:31 | texlive-lang-hungarian | > | 00:34 | texlive-lang-indic | > | 00:32 | texlive-lang-italian | > | 00:31 | texlive-lang-lithuanian | > | 00:32 | texlive-lang-mongolian | > | 00:36 | texlive-lang-polish | > | 00:31 | texlive-lang-portuguese | > | 00:31 | texlive-lang-spanish | > | 00:31 | texlive-lang-swedish | > | 00:32 | texlive-lang-tibetan | > | 00:35 | texlive-lang-vietnamese | > | 00:36 | texlive-latex-base | > | 00:34 | texlive-latex-base-doc | > | 02:54 | texlive-latex-extra | > | 01:47 | texlive-latex-extra-doc | > | 00:51 | texlive-latex-recommended | > | 00:40 | texlive-latex-recommended-doc | > | 00:33 | texlive-latex3 | > | 00:33 | texlive-luatex | > | 00:42 | texlive-math-extra | > | 00:33 | texlive-metapost | > | 00:32 | texlive-metapost-doc | > | 00:35 | texlive-music | > | 00:35 | texlive-omega | > | 00:38 | texlive-pictures | > | 00:36 | texlive-pictures-doc | > | 00:35 | texlive-plain-extra | > | 00:57 | texlive-pstricks | > | 00:40 | texlive-pstricks-doc | > | 00:43 | texlive-publishers | > | 00:40 | texlive-publishers-doc | > | 00:38 | texlive-science | > | 00:36 | texlive-science-doc | > | 00:32 | texlive-xetex | > | 00:32 | texlive-xindy | > |-------+-------------------------------| > > Most of the time is spent in cswproto and patfilter utilities. > > For example: for libkpathsea6 the usage is the following: > > cswproto: > > real 1223.12 > user 1092.55 > sys 139.96 > > of which 1077 by repeated calls to pkgproto > > pathfilter: > > real 2183.69 > user 2182.79 > sys 0.72 > > IMHO, there is place for some optimization. > > If there is a kind soul to help on this he'll have my gratitude. The numbers are? impressive. I have never optimized pathfilter as it usually runs a second for average packages, so it probably leaves much room. Please use DEBUG_PACKAGING=1 mgar repackage to get the actual pathfilter invocation and grab the file it is applied to so I can rerun and profile it. I can then happily try to speed it up. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Nov 19 16:21:51 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 15:21:51 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] The bratislava catalog Message-ID: There's an idea to start building the bratislava catalog from scratch. The idea started at the last camp during the conversation about cleaning up the existing catalogs. The exact idea is to, as cleanly as possible, build a catalog which will be following our current practices: all packages built with GAR, no obsoleted packages, libraries split out and so forth. Also, to alleviate the issues with C++ libraries, all C++ software (or even all software) would be built with GCC. There will be no CSWcommon. The rationale for a new rebuild that cleaning up the current catalog is rather hard. It's mainly got to do with existing dependencies, where e.g. maintained packages depend on unmaintained. It's an alternative to the idea of tiers. Rebuilding from scratch will not introduce as much complexity, and will still help us improve the catalog quality. http://wiki.opencsw.org/release-bratislava I made it possible to use csw-upload-pkg to upload to the bratislava catalog. The catalog is already generated and published on the mirror. I've made a test release of CSWtree. My first goal will be to build GCC for bratislava. It has some dependencies, so I will start working my way up, starting with iconv. http://www.opencsw.org/qa/packages/gcc4core/ The goal is to have a limited but well maintained set of core packages, such as Apache, GCC and MySQL. Of course, it will require building all the dependencies first. How to build for bratislava? These instructions are valid for November/December 2012: - build on the unstable hosts - make a 'bratislava' branch in subversion, e.g.: svn cp https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/tree/{trunk,branches/bratislava} - add the following lines to the recipe: GARCOMPILER = GNU COMMON_PKG_DEPENDS = INCLUDE_COMMONDIRS = 1 - checkpkg doesn't know about CSWcommon-less packages, so you will need to add overrides: CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWlibcharset1 += bad-location-of-file CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWlibcharset1 += disallowed-path - otherwise proceed as usual - when the packages are built, use csw-upload-pkg to upload them to bratislava: csw-upload-pkg --catalog-release bratislava [ [ ... ] ] Sometimes you'll need to think about the order in which to insert the packages. For example libiconv2 doesn't have dependencies, but libiconv-utils does depend on libintl8, so you need to skip libiconv-utils until you upload libintl8. That's it. In the meantime, Dago will experiment with a new approach to Makefiles, allowing for multiple Makefiles in one package directory, which will make it easier to maintain separate build files for each catalog release, and will reduce the number of files and directories in the subversion tree. Maciej -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Nov 19 18:05:44 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 17:05:44 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] The bratislava catalog In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: An update to the bratislava build process: before we can start building with GCC, two things need to be done: - building a completely empty CSWcommon and uploading it to bratislava - uploading libgcc_s1 from the unstable catalog to bratislava (both i386 and sparc) >From this point on you'll be able to upload packages built with GCC. You also need to update your gar sources (e.g. mgar up --all). Maciej -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pfelecan at opencsw.org Mon Nov 19 18:48:20 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 18:48:20 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] TeXLive packaging take almost 3 days In-Reply-To: (Dagobert Michelsen's message of "Mon, 19 Nov 2012 15:49:58 +0100") References: <45c2f3ff0a268dff9e15d23967f71026.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Dagobert Michelsen writes: > The numbers are? impressive. I have never optimized pathfilter as it usually > runs a second for average packages, so it probably leaves much room. Please use > DEBUG_PACKAGING=1 mgar repackage > to get the actual pathfilter invocation and grab the file it is applied to so I can > rerun and profile it. I can then happily try to speed it up. The script containing the invocation of the 2 utilities, as extracted from the packaging log, can be found on the build farm at ~pfelecan/opencsw/texlive/trunk/4o; beware that the utilities are a little bit hacked in my instance of .buildsys/v2... Happy optimization! -- Peter From bwalton at opencsw.org Sun Nov 25 12:24:42 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 11:24:42 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Bratislava In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski wrote: > 2012/11/13 Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : >> Let's start a thread about the bratislava catalog. For starters, I'd >> need a GARified CSWcommon, build for Solaris 9. Being a lazy bastard, >> I'd like to ask if anyone's up for writing a build recipe for it? I'd >> use it as the first upload to bratislava. > > I submitted a first step to build CSWcommon. > > http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/19686 > > It looks like GAR makes many assumptions that are not true for > CSWcommon, such as depending on CSWcommon and stripping common > directories by default. Some amount of special-casing in GAR will be > necessary to produce the right pkgmap. I wonder if it wouldn't be easier to omit GAR from the process of building CSWcommon? The makefile could override any required targets to drive the packing commands directly. It's a simple package without much in the way of complexity and is already a bit of a special case. We could even just have a script instead of a makefile? Thoughts? Thanks -Ben From maciej at opencsw.org Sun Nov 25 12:32:22 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 11:32:22 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Bratislava In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2012/11/25 Ben Walton > I wonder if it wouldn't be easier to omit GAR from the process of > building CSWcommon? The makefile could override any required targets > to drive the packing commands directly. It's a simple package without > much in the way of complexity and is already a bit of a special case. > We could even just have a script instead of a makefile? I talked about this with Dago, and the conclusion was that we're getting rid of CSWcommon, it's not that useful anyway. I put empty CSWcommon into bratislava, but it's only so that I could reuse libgcc from unstable. After I rebuild GCC for bratislava, we're removing the remnants of CSWcommon. From maciej at opencsw.org Sun Nov 25 12:45:51 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 11:45:51 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] spam spam spam In-Reply-To: <50A62138.4060708@opencsw.org> References: <38a36adbab16e39e8c09faaaca7d4531.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> <5092F7CC.9000105@opencsw.org> <5095637D.1050501@opencsw.org> <50A62099.7010406@opencsw.org> <50A62138.4060708@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Maybe we should stop publishing the email address in plaintext? For example here: http://www.opencsw.org/manual/for-administrators/getting-started.html From bwalton at opencsw.org Sun Nov 25 13:12:16 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 12:12:16 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Bratislava In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski wrote: > 2012/11/25 Ben Walton >> I wonder if it wouldn't be easier to omit GAR from the process of >> building CSWcommon? The makefile could override any required targets >> to drive the packing commands directly. It's a simple package without >> much in the way of complexity and is already a bit of a special case. >> We could even just have a script instead of a makefile? > > I talked about this with Dago, and the conclusion was that we're > getting rid of CSWcommon, it's not that useful anyway. I put empty > CSWcommon into bratislava, but it's only so that I could reuse libgcc > from unstable. After I rebuild GCC for bratislava, we're removing the > remnants of CSWcommon. Ok, that works for me. The only downside that I see here is that catalog analysis would require handling a forest instead of a single tree. For any practical purposes this doesn't matter. So long CSWcommon and thanks for all the fish! Thanks -Ben From bwalton at opencsw.org Sun Nov 25 19:56:44 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 18:56:44 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] dropping the stable catalog from checkpkg Message-ID: Hi All, Maciej and I have been discussing the stable catalog with respect to how to handle it going forward in the checkpkg database. We've moved the filesystem view of it out of the way to prevent any future access to it but the meta data is still in our database and info about it can be queried. I'd like to propose that we now drop all of that info from the database since, as far as we're concerned, it is a fossilized (non-)entity. Objections? Thanks -Ben From maciej at opencsw.org Sun Nov 25 20:16:01 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 19:16:01 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] dropping the stable catalog from checkpkg In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2012/11/25 Ben Walton : > I'd like to propose that we now drop all of that info from the > database since, as far as we're concerned, it is a fossilized > (non-)entity. The same thing applies to the catalog named 'current'. I used to sync it from disk, but it's now been defunct for over a year. We could drop from the database as well. From bwalton at opencsw.org Sun Nov 25 20:31:57 2012 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 19:31:57 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] dropping the stable catalog from checkpkg In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski wrote: > 2012/11/25 Ben Walton : >> I'd like to propose that we now drop all of that info from the >> database since, as far as we're concerned, it is a fossilized >> (non-)entity. > > The same thing applies to the catalog named 'current'. I used to sync > it from disk, but it's now been defunct for over a year. We could drop > from the database as well. +1. Thanks -Ben From dam at opencsw.org Tue Nov 27 18:45:42 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 18:45:42 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] TeXLive packaging take almost 3 days In-Reply-To: References: <45c2f3ff0a268dff9e15d23967f71026.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi Peter, Am 19.11.2012 um 18:48 schrieb Peter FELECAN : > Dagobert Michelsen writes: >> The numbers are? impressive. I have never optimized pathfilter as it usually >> runs a second for average packages, so it probably leaves much room. Please use >> DEBUG_PACKAGING=1 mgar repackage >> to get the actual pathfilter invocation and grab the file it is applied to so I can >> rerun and profile it. I can then happily try to speed it up. > > The script containing the invocation of the 2 utilities, as extracted > from the packaging log, can be found on the build farm at > ~pfelecan/opencsw/texlive/trunk/4o; beware that the utilities are a > little bit hacked in my instance of .buildsys/v2? This is now roughly 40 times faster by precompiling the regexps: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/19753 There is probably more to gain, but this may help on the first stage. cswproto depends on pkgproto which already takes some time and uses precompiled regexps, but it is only called once during packaging where pathfilter is called for every package. Please drop me a note how it goes, I will also take more looks on the code. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From dam at opencsw.org Wed Nov 28 18:44:48 2012 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 18:44:48 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] [csw-users] libc.so.1 SUNW_1.22.2 In-Reply-To: References: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B2044A33ED@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us> Message-ID: <7CA88689-A693-46BB-928B-3F037B238C08@opencsw.org> Hi Maciej, (F'ing up a post from users@) Am 28.11.2012 um 18:25 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizi?ski : > 2012/11/28 Dagobert Michelsen >> I would say our baseline is s10u8. You can freely download s10u10 and luupgrade to that >> without a support contract IIRC. > > We were thinking about matching the building OS version in sync with > the catalog releases. For instance, we'd be building dublin on an > older version, and kiel on a newer one. This would make it easier to > say: "You need at least U4 to run dublin, and at least U8 to run > dublin" (numbers are completely bogus in that sentence). The problem is that the farm is now on u10 and I can't easily downgrade it without reinstalling the world. So for practical reasons I am afraid we have for kiel Solaris 10u10 and stick to it even when u11 is out. For Solaris 11 we still need to think about something now that 11.1 is out. Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 From guillomovitch at opencsw.org Thu Nov 29 12:59:55 2012 From: guillomovitch at opencsw.org (Guillaume Rousse) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 12:59:55 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Cherry-picking unstable packages Message-ID: <50B74E3B.9010503@opencsw.org> Hello list. We have a dizain solaris server here (at works), and I'm trying to push the same software we use on other platforms on them. That's why I packaged fusioninventory-agent and rsyslog recently. My dilemn is that those packages are currently in the "unstable" catalog, whereas my solaris hosts are currently configured to use tje "testing" catalog, so I can't install them easily through pkgutil. I see the following strategies: 1) wait for those packages to be available in "testing" 2) manually pull and install those packages from the mirror 3) switch all those hosts to use "unstable" I don't have any ETA for 1, and 3 seems quite hazardous, so I think 2 is the best compromise. However, if pkg-add is the functional equivalence of rpm in linux world, I fear I'll have to resolve dependencies manually... Is there any better tools to achieve it ? -- BOFH excuse #231: We had to turn off that service to comply with the CDA Bill. From maciej at opencsw.org Thu Nov 29 15:02:36 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 14:02:36 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Cherry-picking unstable packages In-Reply-To: <50B74E3B.9010503@opencsw.org> References: <50B74E3B.9010503@opencsw.org> Message-ID: 2012/11/29 Guillaume Rousse : > My dilemn is that those packages are currently in the "unstable" catalog, > whereas my solaris hosts are currently configured to use tje "testing" > catalog, so I can't install them easily through pkgutil. I see the following > strategies: > > 1) wait for those packages to be available in "testing" If you want to keep using the http://mirror.opencsw.org/opencsw/testing/ (or similar, on another mirror), this will take at least half a year, see [1]. > 2) manually pull and install those packages from the mirror Requires resolving dependencies by hand, could cause problems because of incompatible package versions. Can be tricky and painful. > 3) switch all those hosts to use "unstable" Probably not a good thing for production hosts to pull directly from unstable. You could add your own staging solution, where you mirror the unstable catalog, and sync it when you choose to. > I don't have any ETA for 1, and 3 seems quite hazardous, so I think 2 is the > best compromise. However, if pkg-add By "pkg-get", did you mean pkgutil? > is the functional equivalence of rpm in > linux world, I fear I'll have to resolve dependencies manually... Is there > any better tools to achieve it ? 4) switch to the kiel catalog The kiel catalog is now what dublin used to be - it gets periodic updates from the unstable catalog, so you're likely to avoid temporary problems when a package is uploaded, then detected as problematic, and fixed or rolled back. The kiel catalog will eventually become the testing catalog, but it's not at the moment, and will not until dublin becomes the stable catalog. [1] http://www.opencsw.org/2012/11/roadmap-for-2013/ From pfelecan at opencsw.org Thu Nov 29 22:30:49 2012 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 22:30:49 +0100 Subject: [csw-maintainers] TeXLive packaging take almost 3 days In-Reply-To: (Dagobert Michelsen's message of "Tue, 27 Nov 2012 18:45:42 +0100") References: <45c2f3ff0a268dff9e15d23967f71026.squirrel@mail.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Dagobert Michelsen writes: > Hi Peter, > > Am 19.11.2012 um 18:48 schrieb Peter FELECAN : >> Dagobert Michelsen writes: >>> The numbers are? impressive. I have never optimized pathfilter as it usually >>> runs a second for average packages, so it probably leaves much room. Please use >>> DEBUG_PACKAGING=1 mgar repackage >>> to get the actual pathfilter invocation and grab the file it is applied to so I can >>> rerun and profile it. I can then happily try to speed it up. >> >> The script containing the invocation of the 2 utilities, as extracted >> from the packaging log, can be found on the build farm at >> ~pfelecan/opencsw/texlive/trunk/4o; beware that the utilities are a >> little bit hacked in my instance of .buildsys/v2? > > This is now roughly 40 times faster by precompiling the regexps: > http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/19753 > > There is probably more to gain, but this may help on the first stage. > cswproto depends on pkgproto which already takes some time and uses > precompiled regexps, but it is only called once during packaging > where pathfilter is called for every package. > > Please drop me a note how it goes, I will also take more looks on the code. Thank you. I confirm a 50 times optimization for pathfilter. As for cswproto, still a hog, here is some additional profiling data: Total Elapsed Time = 1184.726 Seconds User+System Time = 1060.576 Seconds Exclusive Times %Time ExclSec CumulS #Calls sec/call Csec/c Name 98.1 1040. 1040.6 112180 0.0093 0.0093 main::is_common 0.09 0.980 0.980 112164 0.0000 0.0000 main::exclude 0.01 0.069 0.236 7 0.0099 0.0337 main::BEGIN As you can see the time is spent is determining if the components are part of the common package. I understood that in the future we get rid of that but in the mean time we need to find a quicker way to determine that relation. With the current optimization we probably can package TeXLive in 1.5 days which is still too much... -- Peter From maciej at opencsw.org Fri Nov 30 10:13:50 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 09:13:50 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] MySQL max_allowed_packet on the buildfarm Message-ID: Was anyone tweaking max_allowed_packet in /opt/csw/mysql5/my.cnf? I found an old vim process holding the file, and the setting too little for our buildfarm setup; I wasn't able to make a database backup with the currently running setting. See: http://wiki.opencsw.org/checkpkg#toc21 So I killed the vim session, adjusted max_allowed_packet and restarted MySQL. Maciej From maciej at opencsw.org Fri Nov 30 17:31:32 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 16:31:32 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] dropping the stable catalog from checkpkg In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is now done. I wrote down how to delete a catalog from the database: http://wiki.opencsw.org/checkpkg#toc6 From maciej at opencsw.org Fri Nov 30 17:34:35 2012 From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 16:34:35 +0000 Subject: [csw-maintainers] Garbage collecting the package database Message-ID: The package database stores metadata about every package ever analyzed with checkpkg. Only a small fraction of built and checked packages make it into catalogs, which means that there is a boatload of packages which are in the database, but aren't used. I wrote a script to find and delete unused packages: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/19788 There were about 80k packages (defined as SVR4 .pkg files), of which only 16.5k are actually used in catalogs (since the stable and current catalogs are now dropped from the database). Before garbage collection, the compressed database dump had 815MB, and now it has 150MB. I'm guessing that the size reduction will also have performance benefits. Maciej