From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 00:35:31 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 00:35:31 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_links, cupsclient, cupsd, (...) Message-ID: <201002282335.o1SNZVnd002034@login.bo.opencsw.org> * py_suds: patchlevel upgrade Upgrade. http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4310 - from: 0.3.8,REV=2010.02.02 - to: 0.3.9,REV=2010.02.28 + py_suds-0.3.9,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * cups: revision upgrade Fixes a problem with backends not starting. http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4168 Makes the main cups package archall. - from: 2010.01.25 - to: 2010.02.20 + cupsd-1.4.2,REV=2010.02.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + cupsd-1.4.2,REV=2010.02.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + cupsclient-1.4.2,REV=2010.02.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + cupsclient-1.4.2,REV=2010.02.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + cups-1.4.2,REV=2010.02.20-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + cupsdev-1.4.2,REV=2010.02.20-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + cupsdoc-1.4.2,REV=2010.02.20-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + libcups-1.4.2,REV=2010.02.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libcups-1.4.2,REV=2010.02.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * mysql5devel: revision upgrade Changed dependencies: only depending on CSWmysql5rt now. http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4180 - from: 2009.12.22 - to: 2010.02.28 + mysql5devel-5.0.87,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + mysql5devel-5.0.87,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * nspr: revision upgrade Adds a 64-bit enabled .pc file to the devel package. - from: 2009.11.26 - to: 2010.02.27 + nspr_devel-4.8,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + nspr_devel-4.8,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * libnss3: new package Your puppet removed the isaexec. + libnss3-3.12.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libnss3-3.12.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libnss3_devel-3.12.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libnss3_devel-3.12.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libnss3_tools-3.12.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libnss3_tools-3.12.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * python: revision upgrade Adds a fix for the problem with Mercurial builds. - from: 2009.12.21 - to: 2010.02.15 + idle-2.6.4,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + python-2.6.4,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + python-2.6.4,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + python_devel-2.6.4,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + python_devel-2.6.4,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + python_test-2.6.4,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + python_tk-2.6.4,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + python_tk-2.6.4,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + python_rt-2.6.4,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * syslog_ng: patchlevel upgrade Fixes a problem with the startup script. http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4308 - from: 3.0.4,REV=2009.12.30 - to: 3.0.5,REV=2010.02.27 + syslog_ng-3.0.5,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + syslog_ng-3.0.5,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 10:13:39 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 10:13:39 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mtools Message-ID: <201003010913.o219DdEc002899@login.bo.opencsw.org> Version bump. * mtools: patchlevel upgrade - from: 4.0.12,REV=2009.11.26 - to: 4.0.13,REV=2010.03.01 + mtools-4.0.13,REV=2010.03.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + mtools-4.0.13,REV=2010.03.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 17:13:35 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 17:13:35 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs augeas, freetype2, gdmap, z Message-ID: <201003011613.o21GDZYK018015@login.bo.opencsw.org> Version bump: * freetype2: patchlevel upgrade - from: 2.3.9,REV=2009.09.11 - to: 2.3.12,REV=2010.02.26 + freetype2-2.3.12,REV=2010.02.26-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + freetype2-2.3.12,REV=2010.02.26-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Cool mini-script to ease handling of compressed archives: * z: new package + z-2.6.1,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz Found on SFW, useful visualization of diskspace, similar ncdu on GTK: * gdmap: new package + gdmap-0.8.1,REV=2010.03.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + gdmap-0.8.1,REV=2010.03.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz New package for config file editing: * augeas: new package + augeas-0.7.0,REV=2010.03.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + augeas-0.7.0,REV=2010.03.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 18:33:38 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:33:38 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, gitk, git_gui, git_emacs, git_sv(...) In-Reply-To: <201002270211.o1R2Bn2v013865@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201002270211.o1R2Bn2v013865@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Okay, weekend is over.. back to work :) looks good, adding to batch On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > * git: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 1.6.6,REV=2010.01.07 > ?- ? to: 1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15 > ?+ git-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ git-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ gitk-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ git_gui-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ git_emacs-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ git_svn-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ git_doc-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ git_completion-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ git_cvs-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ git_devel-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ git_devel-1.7.0,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- > Generated by submitpkg > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 1 18:35:01 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:35:01 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs In-Reply-To: <4B898CEE.4060601@opencsw.org> References: <4B898CEE.4060601@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Okay, batching On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > ilmbase: 64-bit build and split package > > ilmbase-1.0.1,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ilmbase-1.0.1,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ilmbase_devel-1.0.1,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ilmbase_devel-1.0.1,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From bwalton at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 18:37:01 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 12:37:01 -0500 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, gitk, git_gui, git_emacs, git_sv(...) In-Reply-To: References: <201002270211.o1R2Bn2v013865@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <1267464872-sup-3704@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Mar 01 12:33:38 -0500 2010: > Okay, weekend is over.. back to work :) Jeez, we give you time off now too? What next? A social life? :) Thanks for batching. -Ben -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 18:42:17 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:42:17 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsoup In-Reply-To: <4B8990E9.9010403@opencsw.org> References: <4B8990E9.9010403@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hmm.. there's a bit of ickyness about the old compat libs... they depend on a lib that we dont have any more: libgnutls.so.11 But since that's an existing bug, and the bug is in the gnutls package, not yours, I'll let your libsoup packages in. On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > libsoup: > Update to 2.26, split package. > libsoup2 is just for keeping dependency chain intact, when dependents are > rebuild libsoup2 will be scrapped. > libsoup includes old libraries for backward compatibility. > > libsoup-2.26.3,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libsoup-2.26.3,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libsoup2-2.26.3,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > libsoup_devel-2.26.3,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libsoup_devel-2.26.3,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libsoup_doc-2.26.3,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > _ From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 1 18:44:15 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:44:15 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs wmf In-Reply-To: <4B899E39.9090209@opencsw.org> References: <4B899E39.9090209@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Excellent. batching, thanks. On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > wmf: Split package, 64-bit build > > libwmf-0.2.8.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libwmf-0.2.8.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libwmf_devel-0.2.8.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libwmf_devel-0.2.8.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libwmf_doc-0.2.8.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > libwmf_gtk-0.2.8.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libwmf_gtk-0.2.8.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > wmf-0.2.8.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > wmf-0.2.8.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > wmf_fonts-0.2.8.4,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 1 18:45:22 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:45:22 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pixman In-Reply-To: <201002280129.o1S1ToDP026776@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201002280129.o1S1ToDP026776@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 5:29 PM, William Bonnet wrote: > * pixman: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 0.15.8,REV=2009.06.02 > ?- ? to: 0.17.8,REV=2010.02.25 > ?+ pixman-0.17.8,REV=2010.02.25-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pixman-0.17.8,REV=2010.02.25-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 1 18:46:22 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:46:22 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mtools In-Reply-To: <201003010913.o219DdEc002899@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003010913.o219DdEc002899@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: would seem to be missing some dependencies? > CSWlibice > CSWlibsm > CSWlibxau ? On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Version bump. > > * mtools: patchlevel upgrade > ?- from: 4.0.12,REV=2009.11.26 > ?- ? to: 4.0.13,REV=2010.03.01 > ?+ mtools-4.0.13,REV=2010.03.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ mtools-4.0.13,REV=2010.03.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- > Generated by submitpkg > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 1 18:47:11 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:47:11 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mtools In-Reply-To: References: <201003010913.o219DdEc002899@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Philip Brown wrote: > would seem to be missing some dependencies? > >> CSWlibice >> CSWlibsm >> CSWlibxau > oh, hmmm.. Is this a "pure sun X11" compile? From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 18:48:29 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:48:29 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxtst, libxtst_devel, libxvmc, libx(...) In-Reply-To: <201002280219.o1S2Jm5B020828@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201002280219.o1S2Jm5B020828@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 6:19 PM, William Bonnet wrote: > * libxtst: new package > ?+ libxtst-1.1.0,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxtst-1.1.0,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxtst_devel-1.1.0,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxtst_devel-1.1.0,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * libxvmc: new package > ?+ libxvmc-1.0.5,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxvmc-1.0.5,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxvmc_devel-1.0.5,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxvmc_devel-1.0.5,REV=2010.02.28-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > Hi, > > this is the last part of X11 update. > excellent! then we're all set after this batch? (roll on Xfce? :-) From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 18:59:40 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 17:59:40 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mtools In-Reply-To: References: <201003010913.o219DdEc002899@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > would seem to be missing some dependencies? > >> CSWlibice >> CSWlibsm >> CSWlibxau Analysis of sonames needed by the package set: libXau.so.6 is provided by SUNWxwplt and required by: floppyd libiconv.so.2 is provided by CSWiconv and required by: floppyd floppyd_installtest mkmanifest mtools libSM.so.6 is provided by SUNWxwplt and required by: floppyd libnsl.so.1 is provided by SUNWcslx and required by: floppyd floppyd_installtest mkmanifest mtools libICE.so.6 is provided by SUNWxwice and required by: floppyd libsocket.so.1 is provided by SUNWcslx and required by: floppyd floppyd_installtest mkmanifest mtools libc.so.1 is provided by SUNWcslx and required by: floppyd? floppyd_installtest mkmanifest mtools libX11.so.4 is provided by SUNWxwplt and required by: floppyd Also: maciej at build8s [build8s]:~ > ldd CSWmtools/root/opt/csw/bin/floppyd /usr/lib/secure/s8_preload.so.1 libiconv.so.2 => /opt/csw/lib/sparcv8/libiconv.so.2 libsocket.so.1 => /usr/lib/libsocket.so.1 libnsl.so.1 => /usr/lib/libnsl.so.1 libSM.so.6 => /usr/openwin/lib/libSM.so.6 libICE.so.6 => /usr/openwin/lib/libICE.so.6 libXau.so.6 => /usr/openwin/lib/libXau.so.6 libX11.so.4 => /usr/openwin/lib/libX11.so.4 libc.so.1 => /usr/lib/libc.so.1 libdl.so.1 => /usr/lib/libdl.so.1 libmp.so.2 => /usr/lib/libmp.so.2 libXext.so.0 => /usr/openwin/lib/libXext.so.0 /usr/platform/SUNW,SPARC-Enterprise-T5220/lib/libc_psr.so.1 Looks like binaries are linked against the Sun libraries, so the dependencies are correct (given the linking). From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 19:31:45 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 10:31:45 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mtools In-Reply-To: References: <201003010913.o219DdEc002899@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > > > Looks like binaries are linked against the Sun libraries, so the > dependencies are correct (given the linking). > Excellent! ok, will toss into next batch From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 1 20:42:01 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 11:42:01 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] nss In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> 1. You decided to build 64-bit libraries as well as 32bit libraries. >> very nice, I certainly approve of that ;-) > > Cool, I guess we can constrain the 64/32 bit discussion to the > CSWlibnss3-tools package. ?Are CSWlibnss3 and CSWlibnss3-devel OK? > I believe so. As Dagobert says, the isaexec thing for libnss_tools is more on the priority of "tweak". but it's rather in human nature that if something doesnt get fixed when it is noticed, then it never gets fixed. A related comment: looking at the release dates for the software, it does not seem like an updated version of the software is likely in the near future. Seems like it has progressed to a fairly stable form. From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 21:08:04 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 12:08:04 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs augeas, freetype2, gdmap, z In-Reply-To: <201003011613.o21GDZYK018015@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003011613.o21GDZYK018015@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * z: new package > + z-2.6.1,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz you might package xtitle as well. from same site > Version bump: > > * freetype2: patchlevel upgrade > > * gdmap: new package > > * augeas: new package > okay From skayser at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 21:10:38 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 21:10:38 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B884276.1050600@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> Philip Brown wrote on 26.02.2010 23:09: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: >> Philip Brown wrote on 26.02.2010 22:36: >>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 8:59 AM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: >>>> * py_lxml: new package >>>> + py_lxml-2.2.4,REV=2010.02.26-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>>> + py_lxml-2.2.4,REV=2010.02.26-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >>>> >>>> lxml is a Pythonic binding for the libxml2 and libxslt libraries. >>>> >>> thanks.. erm.. i'm confused though. we already have >>> py_libxml2-2.7.6,REV=2009.12.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> The ones that we already have are the native bindings which ship with >> libxml2. lxml aims to be easier to deal with. > > aha, gotcha :) > > how about tweaking the NAME field to be a bit more descriptive of that then. > > eg: > > NAME=py_lxml - alternative libxml2 binding that is easier to use than > py_libxml2 The "easier to use" was my interpretation, probably some people might find it easier to do this stuff with the native libxml2 python bindings. The "pythonic" in the current description is what lxml is in fact about, provide bindings for python that feel like python. http://blog.ianbicking.org/2008/12/10/lxml-an-underappreciated-web-scraping-library/ "To be Pythonic is to use the Python constructs and datastructures with clean, readable idioms. It is Pythonic to exploit dynamic typing for instance, and it's definitely not Pythonic to introduce static-type style verbosity into the picture where not needed. To be Pythonic is to avoid surprising experienced Python programmers with unfamiliar ways to accomplish a task." Sebastian From skayser at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 21:13:21 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 21:13:21 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B884276.1050600@opencsw.org> <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> Sebastian Kayser wrote on 01.03.2010 21:10: > Philip Brown wrote on 26.02.2010 23:09: >> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: >>> Philip Brown wrote on 26.02.2010 22:36: >>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 8:59 AM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: >>>>> * py_lxml: new package >>>>> + py_lxml-2.2.4,REV=2010.02.26-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>>>> + py_lxml-2.2.4,REV=2010.02.26-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >>>>> >>>>> lxml is a Pythonic binding for the libxml2 and libxslt libraries. >>>>> >>>> thanks.. erm.. i'm confused though. we already have >>>> py_libxml2-2.7.6,REV=2009.12.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >>> The ones that we already have are the native bindings which ship with >>> libxml2. lxml aims to be easier to deal with. >> aha, gotcha :) >> >> how about tweaking the NAME field to be a bit more descriptive of that then. >> >> eg: >> >> NAME=py_lxml - alternative libxml2 binding that is easier to use than >> py_libxml2 > > The "easier to use" was my interpretation, probably some people might > find it easier to do this stuff with the native libxml2 python bindings. > The "pythonic" in the current description is what lxml is in fact about, > provide bindings for python that feel like python. > > http://blog.ianbicking.org/2008/12/10/lxml-an-underappreciated-web-scraping-library/ Wrong link, sorry. Correct one is this one here: What is Pythonic? http://faassen.n--tree.net/blog/view/weblog/2005/08/06/0 > "To be Pythonic is to use the Python constructs and datastructures with > clean, readable idioms. It is Pythonic to exploit dynamic typing for > instance, and it's definitely not Pythonic to introduce static-type > style verbosity into the picture where not needed. To be Pythonic is to > avoid surprising experienced Python programmers with unfamiliar ways to > accomplish a task." Sebastian From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 1 21:26:47 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 12:26:47 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_links, cupsclient, cupsd, (...) In-Reply-To: <201002282335.o1SNZVnd002034@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201002282335.o1SNZVnd002034@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > * py_suds: patchlevel upgrade > ok. > * cups: revision upgrade > ?Fixes a problem with backends not starting. > ?http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4168 > ?Makes the main cups package archall. side comment: seems like you only "touched" 3 out of the 9 package files; you dont really have to upload all of them if you dont wish to. but okay, accepting all. > * mysql5devel: revision upgrade > ?Changed dependencies: only depending on CSWmysql5rt now. okay > * nspr: revision upgrade > ?Adds a 64-bit enabled .pc file to the devel package. Cool. > * libnss3: new package > ?Your puppet removed the isaexec. "Dance, puppet; Dance" ? Apparently, the puppet needs its strings adjusted though, because I still see that it is pointlessly building and delivering the 64bit binaries, even though they are not normally called, since the isaexec is not linked in. Is there a point to this double delivery? Kindly note that I'm not saying "no", I'm actually asking a question here. > * python: revision upgrade > ?Adds a fix for the problem with Mercurial builds. okay > * syslog_ng: patchlevel upgrade > ?Fixes a problem with the startup script. > ?http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4308 > ?- from: 3.0.4,REV=2009.12.30 > ?- ? to: 3.0.5,REV=2010.02.27 cool. From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 21:33:47 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 12:33:47 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B884276.1050600@opencsw.org> <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: > Sebastian Kayser wrote on 01.03.2010 21:10: >> >> The "easier to use" was my interpretation, probably some people might >> find it easier to do this stuff with the native libxml2 python bindings. Makes sense to me. fine with me. but >> The "pythonic" in the current description is what lxml is in fact about, >> provide bindings for python that feel like python. >>.... > > ?What is Pythonic? > ?http://faassen.n--tree.net/blog/view/weblog/200..... If something needs a web reference to explain it, it is probably not the best choice to use in a single-line description meant for general users to read :-} How about this: NAME=py_lxml - libxml2 binding with cleaner python syntax than py_libxml2 ? From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 21:39:42 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 21:39:42 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs xtitle Message-ID: <201003012039.o21KdgA4025910@login.bo.opencsw.org> * xtitle: new package + xtitle-1.0.2,REV=2010.03.01-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 21:40:12 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 21:40:12 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs augeas, freetype2, gdmap, z In-Reply-To: References: <201003011613.o21GDZYK018015@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi, Am 01.03.2010 um 21:08 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > >> * z: new package >> + z-2.6.1,REV=2010.02.27-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > > you might package xtitle as well. from same site Ok, done in newpkgs/, announce with separate mail. Best regards -- Dago From william at wbonnet.net Mon Mar 1 21:56:03 2010 From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet) Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 21:56:03 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxtst, libxtst_devel, libxvmc, libx(...) In-Reply-To: References: <201002280219.o1S2Jm5B020828@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B8C29E3.8070607@wbonnet.net> Hi Phil > > excellent! then we're all set after this batch? > 10: Yes sir :) > (roll on Xfce? :-) > humm... no valid excuse around :( okay... goto 10 cheers W. -- William http://www.wbonnet.net http://www.sunwizard.net Le site fran?ais des amateurs de stations Unix http://www.opencsw.org Community SoftWare for Solaris http://www.guses.org French speaking Solaris User Group From skayser at opencsw.org Mon Mar 1 22:16:18 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:16:18 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B884276.1050600@opencsw.org> <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> Philip Brown wrote on 01.03.2010 21:33: > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: >> Sebastian Kayser wrote on 01.03.2010 21:10: >>> The "easier to use" was my interpretation, probably some people might >>> find it easier to do this stuff with the native libxml2 python bindings. > > Makes sense to me. > > fine with me. but >>> The "pythonic" in the current description is what lxml is in fact about, >>> provide bindings for python that feel like python. >>> .... >> What is Pythonic? >> http://faassen.n--tree.net/blog/view/weblog/200..... > > > If something needs a web reference to explain it, it is probably not > the best choice to use in a single-line description meant for general > users to read :-} > > > How about this: > > > NAME=py_lxml - libxml2 binding with cleaner python syntax than py_libxml2 I see your point in helping the user to sort out what exactly py_lxml might be for when there is already py_libxml2. The problem I am having with this wording is that it puts a comparative, negative verdict upon py_libxml2. I would rather have the user make his own judgments. Can you think of something concise that creates a relationship to py_libxml2 without depreciating it at the same time? Sebastian From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 1 23:26:47 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 14:26:47 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B884276.1050600@opencsw.org> <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: > Philip Brown wrote on 01.03.2010 21:33: ... >> How about this: >> >> >> NAME=py_lxml - libxml2 binding with cleaner python syntax than py_libxml2 > > I see your point in helping the user to sort out what exactly py_lxml > might be for when there is already py_libxml2. > > The problem I am having with this wording is that it puts a comparative, > negative verdict upon py_libxml2. I would rather have the user make his > own judgments. > > Can you think of something concise that creates a relationship to > py_libxml2 without depreciating it at the same time? > are you objecting to the adjective "cleaner"? there are word games we can play, but at the end of the day, lets look at the result we are aiming for: This package exists because it is "closer to standard python syntax" than py_libxml2. That is why YOU use it. And you use it because in your view, it is "better than" py_libxml2. So anything we put in, is going to have some sort of "negative" reflection of py_libxml2. Because after all, anything we put in that accurately describes it, is going to imply py_libxml2 is inferior. Which it is. Otherwise, you wouldnt have bothered packaging py_lxml :-) If the user does not share your value judgements about "being close to python syntax is better", then they wont see it as a negative, so you neednt worry about it. change "cleaner" to "standard" if you like, perhaps? From skayser at opencsw.org Tue Mar 2 00:20:27 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 00:20:27 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B884276.1050600@opencsw.org> <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B8C4BBB.4070609@opencsw.org> Philip Brown wrote on 01.03.2010 23:26: > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: >> Philip Brown wrote on 01.03.2010 21:33: > ... >>> How about this: >>> >>> >>> NAME=py_lxml - libxml2 binding with cleaner python syntax than py_libxml2 >> I see your point in helping the user to sort out what exactly py_lxml >> might be for when there is already py_libxml2. >> >> The problem I am having with this wording is that it puts a comparative, >> negative verdict upon py_libxml2. I would rather have the user make his >> own judgments. >> >> Can you think of something concise that creates a relationship to >> py_libxml2 without depreciating it at the same time? >> > > are you objecting to the adjective "cleaner"? Yes. Although I appreciate the thought you put into the description, it's the valued comparison that I don't want to put in. > there are word games we can play, but at the end of the day, lets look > at the result we are aiming for: > > This package exists because it is "closer to standard python syntax" > than py_libxml2. > > That is why YOU use it. And you use it because in your view, it is > "better than" py_libxml2. > So anything we put in, is going to have some sort of "negative" > reflection of py_libxml2. Because after all, anything we put in that > accurately describes it, is going to imply py_libxml2 is inferior. > Which it is. How would you know? At least I couldn't say that a 100% sure. lxml's documentation was simply more accessible, there were more tutorials out there for it and my gut feeling told me to not bother with libxml2. It was easy to use and our IRC bot as well as the upcoming CLI interface to Mantis runs on it. Felt like the more accessible product to me. Nevertheless, that's not something I want to base a package description on. I would put in there what the package is about, not how it compares to competitor b. Neither would I package an Icinga package which says "Nagios fork which has the better GUI" just because I think so. Would you headline OpenCSW with "More comprehensive package repository than sunfreeware.com"? I wouldn't. > If the user does not share your value judgements about "being close to > python syntax is better", then they wont see it as a negative, so you > neednt worry about it. That's not my point. I simply don't want to put my name next to something which I don't mean to say. Sebastian From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 2 00:47:28 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 15:47:28 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: <4B8C4BBB.4070609@opencsw.org> References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B884276.1050600@opencsw.org> <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> <4B8C4BBB.4070609@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: > .... > How would you know? At least I couldn't say that a 100% sure. lxml's > documentation was simply more accessible, there were more tutorials out > there for it and my gut feeling told me to not bother with libxml2. It > was easy to use and our IRC bot as well as the upcoming CLI interface to > Mantis runs on it. Felt like the more accessible product to me. > > Nevertheless, that's not something I want to base a package description > on. I would put in there what the package is about, not how it compares > to competitor b. Neither would I package an Icinga package which says > "Nagios fork which has the better GUI" just because I think so. right, exactly. "better" is subjective. On the other hand, "closer to XYZ standards" is Objective. It's plain and simple fact. > Would you headline OpenCSW with "More comprehensive package repository > than sunfreeware.com"? I wouldn't. If it were true, I would have no problems doing that :) > That's not my point. I simply don't want to put my name next to > something which I don't mean to say. okay, thats perfectly understandable. but meanwhile, we still have to justify why exactly we are packaging up py_lxml, when py_libxml2 exists, and we need to do it in a way that is reflected in its description. your original naming choice, was: "lxml is a Pythonic binding for the libxml2 and libxslt libraries." The thing is, most reasonable coders would reasonably presume, that ALL py_XYZ packages are going to be "Pythonic", unless informed otherwise. Most people will view "Python Bindings" and "Pythonic binding" as identical in meaning. So if a user is looking at only the two lines, py_libxml2 - XML Parser Library Python Bindings and py_lxml - Pythonic binding for the libxml2 and libxslt libraries they are probably going to have the reaction of, "well, that's just dumb: what the #@$@ is the difference between the two?? The descriptions are basically the same thing! Both are [python language bindings for libxml2]. How useless." So, please pick a description that differentiates better between the two. From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 2 09:04:27 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 09:04:27 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B884276.1050600@opencsw.org> <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> <4B8C4BBB.4070609@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi Phil, Am 02.03.2010 um 00:47 schrieb Philip Brown: > okay, thats perfectly understandable. but meanwhile, we still have to > justify why exactly we are packaging up py_lxml, when py_libxml2 > exists, and we need to do it in a way that is reflected in its > description. IMHO your approach to descriptions is wrong. The description for the basic package should describe what is in there in terms of upstream. For this specific example it means "lxml" so you know what is in there. We package stuff up what is created upstream. It is not ours to argue or rectify why there are multiple versions. The important thing in descriptions is describing how packages are split ("This package contains the docs", "you need this if you want to compile", etc.). The typical usecases are: 1. Automatic install because it is a dependency for something and the user doesn't care anyway 2. The user already decided what he wants to work against and wants to install that software from OpenCSW. Again, description is not important. 3. The user installed the package, but it doesn't work because there are related components. Here the descriptions are important and they must reflect what OpenCSW has done to the upstream software. IMHO nobody will decide which libxml binding he is using by the description of the package. And, yes, if there are 50 editors and we have 50 maintainers who use these then, yes, we package up 50 editors. Opensource is about choice, and it is not ours to decide. Best regards -- Dago From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 2 09:29:13 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 09:29:13 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb48, berkeleydb48_devel, ber(...) Message-ID: <201003020829.o228TDn0024224@login.bo.opencsw.org> * berkeleydb48: patchlevel upgrade Version bump, nothing spectacular. - from: 4.8.24,REV=2009.10.18_rev=p0 - to: 4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0 + berkeleydb48-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + berkeleydb48-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + berkeleydb48_devel-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + berkeleydb48_devel-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + berkeleydb48_doc-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 2 11:48:38 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 11:48:38 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnome_icon_theme, libnss3, libnss3_de(...) Message-ID: <201003021048.o22Amcsg014470@login.bo.opencsw.org> * gnome_icon_theme: minor version upgrade - from: 2.18.0 - to: 2.22.0,REV=2010.03.01 + gnome_icon_theme-2.22.0,REV=2010.03.01-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * libnss3: new package + libnss3-3.12.4,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libnss3-3.12.4,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libnss3_devel-3.12.4,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libnss3_devel-3.12.4,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libnss3_tools-3.12.4,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libnss3_tools-3.12.4,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * sudo: patchlevel upgrade - from: 1.7.2,REV=2009.10.05_rev=p1 - to: 1.7.2p5,REV=2010.03.02 + sudo-1.7.2p5,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + sudo-1.7.2p5,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + sudo_common-1.7.2p5,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + sudo_common-1.7.2p5,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + sudo_ldap-1.7.2p5,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + sudo_ldap-1.7.2p5,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 2 11:48:53 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 10:48:53 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_links, cupsclient, cupsd, (...) In-Reply-To: References: <201002282335.o1SNZVnd002034@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > Puppet removed the 64-bit libraries. ?Updated packages are in newpkgs. s/libraries/binaries/ From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 2 11:48:16 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 10:48:16 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_links, cupsclient, cupsd, (...) In-Reply-To: References: <201002282335.o1SNZVnd002034@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> * libnss3: new package >> ?Your puppet removed the isaexec. > > "Dance, puppet; Dance" ? > Apparently, the puppet needs its strings adjusted though, because I > still see that it is pointlessly building and delivering the 64bit > binaries, even though they are not normally called, since the isaexec > is not linked in. Is there a point to this double delivery? > Kindly note that I'm not saying "no", I'm actually asking a question here. Its strings are working perfectly fine! The original message was "why are we using libexec, for certificate utilities?"[1]. It was about the presence of isaexec, not about the absence of the 64-bit binaries. Puppet was told to remove isaexec and it did exactly that, no less and no more. Puppet removed the 64-bit libraries. Updated packages are in newpkgs. [1] Puppet should rightfully say that we aren't using libexec at all. From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 2 18:58:43 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 09:58:43 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> <4B8C4BBB.4070609@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > > IMHO nobody will decide which libxml binding he is using by the > description of the package. When someone is writing a program, it makes sense to know what tools are available to use. If you are on freebsd, you would probably see what tools are "available" with minimum effort on freebsd. If you are on linux, you would probably see what tools are "available" with your particular distro. If you are using solaris, and you are using OpenCSW as your pre-compiled package system, it seems to me to make sense to see what tools and libraries are available through our "distro". The quickest, most efficient way to do that, is to pull up the one line list of packages (whether you do that via pkg-get -D, pkgutil, or http://www.opencsw.org/packages) and do a search for the topic that interests you. That is why the -D (search descriptions) flag exists for pkg-get in the first place. The description of a package is very important. For the coders among us, this is equivalent to writing appropriate comments. /* This is the square function */ int square(xxx){ ... } is a horrible, horrible comment. it's worse than useless, because it conveys no extra information, yet still takes up space! Similarly, /* This is the square2 function */ int square2(xxx){ ...} is worse yet. One needs to know why on earth there is a square2 function when there is already a square() function. Our descriptions need to have meaningful information to them. That means, the name of the software, and what it does, AND some level of ambiguity reduction when there are multiple similar packages. From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 2 19:07:44 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 10:07:44 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups, cups_links, cupsclient, cupsd, (...) In-Reply-To: References: <201002282335.o1SNZVnd002034@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Thank you for the simplified package contents. Batching now From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 2 19:09:41 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 10:09:41 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb48, berkeleydb48_devel, ber(...) In-Reply-To: <201003020829.o228TDn0024224@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003020829.o228TDn0024224@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Thanks. batching On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * berkeleydb48: patchlevel upgrade > ?Version bump, nothing spectacular. > ?- from: 4.8.24,REV=2009.10.18_rev=p0 > ?- ? to: 4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0 > ?+ berkeleydb48-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ berkeleydb48-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ berkeleydb48_devel-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ berkeleydb48_devel-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ berkeleydb48_doc-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 2 19:09:41 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 10:09:41 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb48, berkeleydb48_devel, ber(...) In-Reply-To: <201003020829.o228TDn0024224@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003020829.o228TDn0024224@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Thanks. batching On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * berkeleydb48: patchlevel upgrade > ?Version bump, nothing spectacular. > ?- from: 4.8.24,REV=2009.10.18_rev=p0 > ?- ? to: 4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0 > ?+ berkeleydb48-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ berkeleydb48-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ berkeleydb48_devel-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ berkeleydb48_devel-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ berkeleydb48_doc-4.8.26,REV=2010.03.02_rev=p0-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > From skayser at opencsw.org Tue Mar 2 19:49:46 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 19:49:46 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: References: <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> <4B8C4BBB.4070609@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <20100302184946.GD7613@sebastiankayser.de> * Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > > > > IMHO nobody will decide which libxml binding he is using by the > > description of the package. > > is worse yet. One needs to know why on earth there is a square2 > function when there is already a square() function. > > Our descriptions need to have meaningful information to them. > That means, the name of the software, and what it does, AND some level > of ambiguity reduction when there are multiple similar packages. nginx vs. apache vs. lighttpd. postfix vs. sendmail vs. exim vs. qmail. vi vs. nano vs. emacs. perl vs. ruby vs. python vs. lua vs. php. iozone vs bonnie. ttcp vs. iperf vs whatever. That discussion is seriously ill headed and a questionable time investment for all of us (to say it mildly). The following is a list of the short package descriptions for lxml from the Python Package Index, the major Linux distros, and OpenSolaris. Please pick one and let me know which one it should be. PPI: Powerful and Pythonic XML processing library combining libxml2/libxslt with the ElementTree API. http://pypi.python.org/pypi/lxml/2.2.6 Fedora: ElementTree-like Python bindings for libxml2 and libxslt https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/python-lxml Debian: pythonic binding for the libxml2 and libxslt libraries http://packages.debian.org/sid/python/python-lxml Ubuntu: pythonic binding for the libxml2 and libxslt libraries http://packages.ubuntu.com/hardy/python-lxml Gentoo: A Pythonic binding for the libxml2 and libxslt libraries http://packages.gentoo.org/package/dev-python/lxml OpenSUSE: A Pythonic Binding for the libxml2 and libxslt Libraries http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpackages/opensuse/python-lxml.html OpenSolaris: lxml http://pkg.opensolaris.org/release/info/0/SUNWpython-lxml%402.1.2%2C5.11-0.111%3A20090508T163109Z Sebastian From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 2 23:33:41 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 14:33:41 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnome_icon_theme, libnss3, libnss3_de(...) In-Reply-To: <201003021048.o22Amcsg014470@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003021048.o22Amcsg014470@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > * gnome_icon_theme: minor version upgrade > ?- > * libnss3: new package > > * sudo: patchlevel upgrade > okay, batching From maciej at opencsw.org Wed Mar 3 19:06:24 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 19:06:24 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gflags, protobuf, protobuf_devel, pro(...) Message-ID: <201003031806.o23I6Ot4023836@login.bo.opencsw.org> I've split protobuf into smaller packages. * protobuf: revision upgrade - from: 2010.02.23 - to: 2010.03.02 + protobuf-2.3.0,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + protobuf-2.3.0,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * protobuf: new package + protobuf_devel-2.3.0,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + protobuf_devel-2.3.0,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + protobuf_rt-2.3.0,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + protobuf_rt-2.3.0,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Here's a new package, Google command line option parsing for C++ and Python. * gflags: new package + gflags-1.3,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + gflags-1.3,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + py_gflags-1.3,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Wed Mar 3 19:10:07 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 18:10:07 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gflags, protobuf, protobuf_devel, pro(...) In-Reply-To: <201003031806.o23I6Ot4023836@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003031806.o23I6Ot4023836@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: And one more, Python support for protobuf: * py_protobuf: new package + py_protobuf-2.3.0,REV=2010.03.02-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 3 19:41:58 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 10:41:58 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gflags, protobuf, protobuf_devel, pro(...) In-Reply-To: <201003031806.o23I6Ot4023836@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003031806.o23I6Ot4023836@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > I've split protobuf into smaller packages. > > * protobuf: revision upgrade > ?- Thanks > Here's a new package, Google command line option parsing for C++ and Python. > > * gflags: new package > ?+ gflags-1.3,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ gflags-1.3,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Ah... this seems to be another isaexec GAR malfunction :( 1 l none /opt/csw/bin/gflags_completions.sh=/opt/csw/bin/isaexec 1 f none /opt/csw/bin/sparcv8/gflags_completions.sh 0755 root bin 5268 44497 126 6668632 1 f none /opt/csw/bin/sparcv9/gflags_completions.sh 0755 root bin 5268 44497 126 6668663 we need isaexec, on a shellscript? seriously? Well I suppose there is some theoretical possibility... However, the two files are identical. From phil at bolthole.com Thu Mar 4 00:03:36 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 15:03:36 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: <20100302184946.GD7613@sebastiankayser.de> References: <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> <4B8C4BBB.4070609@opencsw.org> <20100302184946.GD7613@sebastiankayser.de> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: > * Philip Brown wrote: >> >> >> Our descriptions need to have meaningful information to them. >> That means, the name of the software, and what it does, AND some level >> of ambiguity reduction when there are multiple similar packages. > > nginx vs. apache vs. lighttpd. postfix vs. sendmail vs. exim vs. qmail. > vi vs. nano vs. emacs. perl vs. ruby vs. python vs. lua vs. php. iozone > vs bonnie. ttcp vs. iperf vs whatever. That discussion is seriously ill > headed and a questionable time investment for all of us (to say it > mildly). you are grossly exagerating. It should not take a huge amount of time, to simply expand a one-line description, to be a little more descriptive. The cases above, have vast complex differences, that are not easily described in one line. This is not the case for the specific package we are discussing here. > The following is a list of the short package descriptions for lxml from > the Python Package Index, the major Linux distros, and OpenSolaris. > Please pick one and let me know which one it should be. > The OpenSolaris one obviously sucks, it contains no information. The others all mostly say, "A Pythonic binding for the libxml2 and libxslt libraries" All I'm asking you to do at this point, is translate "pythonic" into something a little more comprehensible, without having someone pull up google to figure out what "pythonic" means (if they even realize that there is a difference between "pythonic binding", and "python bindings", and so bother to look it up.) This is not a "huge time investment". This is not even a medium time investment. This is a matter of choosing to use jargon ("Pythonic") instead of something more easily comprehensible to our users. I'll remind you of the core principle: "To provide a straightforward, easy-to-use experience for the user" An important part of that, is to use straightforward, easy to understand language, rather than masking it in jargon. So I'll ask you to abide by that, and expand the description a little please. If you wish to put (Pythonic) in there too, I have no objection to that :) but please also explain, in the description itself, what that means. From maciej at opencsw.org Thu Mar 4 10:02:43 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:02:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd, gflags, roxfiler Message-ID: <201003040902.o2492h10003745@login.bo.opencsw.org> * roxfiler: minor version upgrade Also fixes http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4187 - from: 2.9,REV=2009.11.21 - to: 2.10,REV=2010.03.03 + roxfiler-2.10,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + roxfiler-2.10,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * cupsd: revision upgrade Fixes http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4319 There's also a new check in checkpkg to prevent this from happening in the future. - from: 2010.02.20 - to: 2010.03.04 + cupsd-1.4.2,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + cupsd-1.4.2,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * gflags: new package Removed isaexec. + gflags-1.3,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + gflags-1.3,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Thu Mar 4 15:18:39 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 15:18:39 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs vncserver, vncviewer, wxwidgets_commo(...) Message-ID: <201003041418.o24EIdrw019224@login.bo.opencsw.org> Here's a small refurbishement of some packages: they have now better dependencies. There are also license files added. * wxwidgets: revision upgrade - from: 2009.12.08 - to: 2010.03.04 + wxwidgets_common-2.8.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + wxwidgets_common-2.8.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + wxwidgets_devel-2.8.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + wxwidgets_devel-2.8.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + wxwidgets_gtk2-2.8.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + wxwidgets_gtk2-2.8.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * vncviewer: revision upgrade - from: 2009.11.16 - to: 2010.03.04 + vncviewer-1.3.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + vncviewer-1.3.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * vncserver: revision upgrade - from: 2009.11.21 - to: 2010.03.04 + vncserver-1.3.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + vncserver-1.3.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at bolthole.com Thu Mar 4 19:42:42 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:42:42 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd, gflags, roxfiler In-Reply-To: <201003040902.o2492h10003745@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003040902.o2492h10003745@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > * roxfiler: minor version upgrade > ?Also fixes http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4187 > ?- from: 2.9,REV=2009.11.21 > ?- ? to: 2.10,REV=2010.03.03 > ?+ roxfiler-2.10,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ roxfiler-2.10,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > Should this not also depend on CSWlibice? and CSWlibsm? From phil at bolthole.com Thu Mar 4 19:44:14 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:44:14 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd, gflags, roxfiler In-Reply-To: <201003040902.o2492h10003745@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003040902.o2492h10003745@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > * cupsd: revision upgrade > ?Fixes http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4319 > ?There's also a new check in checkpkg to prevent this > ?from happening in the future. > ?- from: 2010.02.20 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.04 > ?+ cupsd-1.4.2,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ cupsd-1.4.2,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * gflags: new package > ?Removed isaexec. > ?+ gflags-1.3,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ gflags-1.3,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > okay From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 4 19:46:51 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:46:51 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs vncserver, vncviewer, wxwidgets_commo(...) In-Reply-To: <201003041418.o24EIdrw019224@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003041418.o24EIdrw019224@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 6:18 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > Here's a small refurbishement of some packages: they have now better > dependencies. ?There are also license files added. > > * wxwidgets: revision upgrade > > > * vncviewer: revision upgrade > > * vncserver: revision upgrade > okay From maciej at opencsw.org Thu Mar 4 20:30:40 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 19:30:40 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd, gflags, roxfiler In-Reply-To: References: <201003040902.o2492h10003745@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> * roxfiler: minor version upgrade >> ?Also fixes http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4187 >> ?- from: 2.9,REV=2009.11.21 >> ?- ? to: 2.10,REV=2010.03.03 >> ?+ roxfiler-2.10,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> ?+ roxfiler-2.10,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > Should this not also depend on CSWlibice? > and CSWlibsm? Exactly, it shouldn't. If you look at the RPATHs of the binaries, it uses libraries from Sun. I'm rerolling older packages with the new checkpkg, it helps catch those kinds of issues. From dam at opencsw.org Thu Mar 4 21:44:52 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 21:44:52 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_xmlnssupp, pm_xmlsax Message-ID: <201003042044.o24KiqbK021932@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pm_xmlsax: minor version upgrade - from: 0.16,REV=2008.02.27 - to: 0.96,REV=2010.03.04 + pm_xmlsax-0.96,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_xmlnssupp: minor version upgrade - from: 1.09 - to: 1.10,REV=2010.03.04 + pm_xmlnssupp-1.10,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Thu Mar 4 22:06:36 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 22:06:36 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tkdiff Message-ID: <201003042106.o24L6aru015272@login.bo.opencsw.org> * tkdiff: revision number added upgrade Repackaged with GAR. - from: - to: 2010.03.04 + tkdiff-4.1.4,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at bolthole.com Thu Mar 4 22:08:26 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 13:08:26 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd, gflags, roxfiler In-Reply-To: References: <201003040902.o2492h10003745@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >>> * roxfiler: minor version upgrade >>>.. >> >> Should this not also depend on CSWlibice? >> and CSWlibsm? > > Exactly, it shouldn't. ?If you look at the RPATHs of the binaries, it > uses libraries from Sun. Which, for the record, and other people's benefits, is not exactly a bad thing in and of itself.. it's just bad if it also attempts to use our new gtk, which needs our newer, non-sun X libs. From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 4 22:45:57 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 13:45:57 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tkdiff In-Reply-To: <201003042106.o24L6aru015272@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003042106.o24L6aru015272@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: ok On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * tkdiff: revision number added upgrade > ?Repackaged with GAR. > ?- from: > ?- ? to: 2010.03.04 > ?+ tkdiff-4.1.4,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 4 22:47:12 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 13:47:12 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_xmlnssupp, pm_xmlsax In-Reply-To: <201003042044.o24KiqbK021932@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003042044.o24KiqbK021932@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay From hson at opencsw.org Thu Mar 4 23:18:04 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 23:18:04 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Newpkgs: openexr Message-ID: <4B90319C.3010505@opencsw.org> openexr: 64-bit build, split package openexr-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz openexr-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz openexr_devel-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz openexr_devel-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz openexr_doc-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz openexr_rt-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz openexr_rt-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 4 23:39:20 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 14:39:20 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Newpkgs: openexr In-Reply-To: <4B90319C.3010505@opencsw.org> References: <4B90319C.3010505@opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > openexr: 64-bit build, split package > > openexr-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > openexr-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > openexr_devel-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > openexr_devel-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > openexr_doc-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > openexr_rt-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > openexr_rt-1.6.1,REV=2010.03.04-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From skayser at opencsw.org Fri Mar 5 00:58:09 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:58:09 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B884276.1050600@opencsw.org> <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> <4B8C4BBB.4070609@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B904911.8070707@opencsw.org> Philip Brown wrote on 02.03.2010 00:47: > meanwhile, we still have to justify why exactly we are packaging > up py_lxml, when py_libxml2 exists, and we need to do it > in a way that is reflected in its description. > > your original naming choice, was: > > "lxml is a Pythonic binding for the libxml2 and libxslt libraries." > > The thing is, most reasonable coders would reasonably presume, that > ALL py_XYZ packages are going to be "Pythonic", unless informed > otherwise. > Most people will view "Python Bindings" and "Pythonic binding" as > identical in meaning. > > So if a user is looking at only the two lines, > > py_libxml2 - XML Parser Library Python Bindings > and > py_lxml - Pythonic binding for the libxml2 and libxslt libraries > > they are probably going to have the reaction of, "well, that's just > dumb: what the #@$@ is the difference between the two?? The > descriptions are basically the same thing! Both are > [python language bindings for libxml2]. How useless." Anyone who bases his judgment of software usefulness on the package description and who isn't doing python programming in the XML field might think that. All the others, those who actually need these modules, will be happy to find their python module of choice in the list. Let's not forget, it's the software which primarily provides value to the user, not a comprehensive, disambiguating one-line description. > So, please pick a description that differentiates better between the two. Here is a nice example regarding the relevance of descriptions: a list of descriptions for the text browser packages that we ship. It's _the very first time_ that I even looked at them [1,2,3,4]. w3m - Text-based web browser links - Textbased browser with frames, ssl, and menus elinks - An advanced text mode web browser lynx - text browser for the World Wide Web To follow your argument here, we would have to say: "why do we e.g. ship lynx?" It's not obvious from its description. How useless. And btw., you just recently released an updated version of lynx with exactly this description (not that I would care at all and I do apologize upfront to the affected maintainers in case you should decide to pursue explanatory descriptions for text browsers). Now even worse, if I were to base my software judgment purely on the description, I might get the impression that links is the only one with SSL support (explicitly mentions it, while the others don't) which would be a totally false assumption. Fortunately I am a sane person (except for engaging in this discussion of course) and know better. In other words: IMHO people couldn't care less about the package description as long as the description isn't misleading and their distro actually ships the software they are after. Sebastian P.S.: I came up with a re-written description now, which looks good to me. Looking at it now, one might think that was easy, but for me as a non-native speaker, during a week more than full of work it somehow wasn't at all ... and being blocked on a package release by one single friggin description line certainly feels __very__ disproportionate within our manageable team of active maintainers. [1] http://www.opencsw.org/packages/w3m [2] http://www.opencsw.org/packages/links [3] http://www.opencsw.org/packages/elinks [4] http://www.opencsw.org/packages/lynx From skayser at opencsw.org Fri Mar 5 00:59:21 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 00:59:21 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml Message-ID: <201003042359.o24NxL7S014210@login.bo.opencsw.org> Codename "for a better world" * py_lxml: new package + py_lxml-2.2.4,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + py_lxml-2.2.4,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at opencsw.org Fri Mar 5 02:30:28 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 17:30:28 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_lxml In-Reply-To: <4B904911.8070707@opencsw.org> References: <201002261659.o1QGxu4Y006448@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B8C1F3E.4020509@opencsw.org> <4B8C1FE1.7000604@opencsw.org> <4B8C2EA2.7090109@opencsw.org> <4B8C4BBB.4070609@opencsw.org> <4B904911.8070707@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: > > Here is a nice example regarding the relevance of descriptions: a list > of descriptions for the text browser packages that we ship. It's _the > very first time_ that I even looked at them [1,2,3,4]. > > ?w3m ? ?- Text-based web browser > ?links ?- Textbased browser with frames, ssl, and menus > ?elinks - An advanced text mode web browser > ?lynx ? - text browser for the World Wide Web > > To follow your argument here, we would have to say: "why do we e.g. ship > lynx?" It's not obvious from its description. How useless. And btw., you > just recently released an updated version of lynx with exactly this > description (not that I would care at all and I do apologize upfront to > the affected maintainers in case you should decide to pursue explanatory > descriptions for text browsers). Similar to the other examples previously given on this thread; the above mentioned browsers are semi-large, complicated packages, and it would not be easy to describe all the differences between them briefly, let alone in a single short line. That being said; I can give you a direct answer on the particular question you raised here: I personally have used ALL of the above browsers, and all of them have different features unique to them, that justify including them all. Here's a summary, from my own observations and recollections: "lynx" sucks, but its the standard, so we include it :) The others all have different ways of rendering, and navigation across a page. When you're forced, for various reasons, to browse websites in text mode, some browse better in w3m, others browse better in links. And elinks has the best foreign language support, if I recall correctly. > P.S.: I came up with a re-written description now, which looks good to > me. Thank you very much. :) For future reference - you mentioned your reluctance about rewording this, due to your being a non-native speaker of English. if you ever feel stuck for the "best possible" way to word anything, I would suggest asking on the maintainers list for suggestions? Even "native speakers" still ask for suggestions on that sort of thing :) From william at wbonnet.net Sat Mar 6 21:56:53 2010 From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet) Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 21:56:53 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pixman Message-ID: <201003062056.o26KurOf019435@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pixman: patchlevel upgrade - from: 0.17.8,REV=2010.02.25 - to: 0.17.10,REV=2010.03.06 + pixman-0.17.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pixman-0.17.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From rupert at opencsw.org Sun Mar 7 12:18:37 2010 From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 12:18:37 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Subject: newpkgs mercurial Message-ID: <6af4271003070318r4289f673y95dfedb2994c872b@mail.gmail.com> mercurial: minor version upgrade - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.02.02 - to: 1.5,REV=2010.03.07 + mercurial-1.5,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + mercurial-1.5,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From phil at bolthole.com Sun Mar 7 18:54:58 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 09:54:58 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pixman In-Reply-To: <201003062056.o26KurOf019435@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003062056.o26KurOf019435@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: batching On Saturday, March 6, 2010, William Bonnet wrote: > * pixman: patchlevel upgrade > ?- from: 0.17.8,REV=2010.02.25 > ?- ? to: 0.17.10,REV=2010.03.06 > ?+ pixman-0.17.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pixman-0.17.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- > Generated by submitpkg > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at bolthole.com Sun Mar 7 18:56:36 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 09:56:36 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Subject: newpkgs mercurial In-Reply-To: <6af4271003070318r4289f673y95dfedb2994c872b@mail.gmail.com> References: <6af4271003070318r4289f673y95dfedb2994c872b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: okay. and as a proactive comment, your subversion sparc pkg is "UNCOMMITTED" On Sunday, March 7, 2010, rupert THURNER wrote: > mercurial: minor version upgrade > ? - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.02.02 > ? -?? to: 1.5,REV=2010.03.07 > ? + mercurial-1.5,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ? + mercurial-1.5,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- > Generated by submitpkg > > From rupert at opencsw.org Sun Mar 7 22:22:04 2010 From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 22:22:04 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Subject: newpkgs mercurial In-Reply-To: References: <6af4271003070318r4289f673y95dfedb2994c872b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6af4271003071322j4c49ecb4l2b556e5f865a5ab2@mail.gmail.com> i let it run now with "screen" instead of nohup. and, i get testing failures - but as these tests take forever i am not sure if anybody did run them before: Running all tests in getopt_tests.py [30/71]...success Running all tests in basic_tests.py [31/71]...FAILURE Running all tests in checkout_tests.py [32/71]...success Running all tests in commit_tests.py [33/71]...FAILURE Running all tests in update_tests.py [34/71]... On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 18:56, Philip Brown wrote: > okay. > > and as a proactive comment, your subversion sparc pkg is "UNCOMMITTED" > > > On Sunday, March 7, 2010, rupert THURNER wrote: > > mercurial: minor version upgrade > > - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.02.02 > > - to: 1.5,REV=2010.03.07 > > + mercurial-1.5,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > > + mercurial-1.5,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > > > -- > > Generated by submitpkg > > > > > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rupert at opencsw.org Sun Mar 7 22:22:47 2010 From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 22:22:47 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] subversion test failures Message-ID: <6af4271003071322m37251f7cke9028f07f54e9109@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 22:22, rupert THURNER wrote: > i let it run now with "screen" instead of nohup. > > and, i get testing failures - but as these tests take forever i am not sure > if anybody did run them before: > > Running all tests in getopt_tests.py [30/71]...success > Running all tests in basic_tests.py [31/71]...FAILURE > Running all tests in checkout_tests.py [32/71]...success > Running all tests in commit_tests.py [33/71]...FAILURE > Running all tests in update_tests.py [34/71]... > > these are subversion tests of course. > > > > > On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 18:56, Philip Brown wrote: > >> okay. >> >> and as a proactive comment, your subversion sparc pkg is "UNCOMMITTED" >> >> >> On Sunday, March 7, 2010, rupert THURNER wrote: >> > mercurial: minor version upgrade >> > - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.02.02 >> > - to: 1.5,REV=2010.03.07 >> > + mercurial-1.5,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> > + mercurial-1.5,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > >> > -- >> > Generated by submitpkg >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> pkgsubmissions mailing list >> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org >> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 09:21:50 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:21:50 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs evince, gnomekeyring, libev, mpg321, (...) Message-ID: <201003080821.o288LoLZ023387@login.bo.opencsw.org> Here's a bunch of packages, mostly related to X11 They are either new packages or takeovers. * evince: minor version upgrade The latest version I could build at the moment. - from: 2.22.2,REV=2008.06.13 - to: 2.24.2,REV=2010.03.05 + evince-2.24.2,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + evince-2.24.2,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * gnomekeyring: major version upgrade With this one in place, I might be able to compile a newer evince. - from: 0.4.9 - to: 2.28.2,REV=2010.03.05 + gnomekeyring-2.28.2,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + gnomekeyring-2.28.2,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz The following 4 packages are dependencies of a tiling window manager I'm working on. * startup_notif: minor version upgrade - from: 0.8 - to: 0.10,REV=2010.03.06 + startup_notif-0.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + startup_notif-0.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * xcbproto: minor version upgrade - from: 1.5,REV=2009.06.04 - to: 1.6,REV=2010.03.06 + xcbproto-1.6,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + xcbproto-1.6,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * py_xcbproto: new package To remove the dependency on Python from xcbproto. + py_xcbproto-1.6,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * libev: new package This is faster that libevent. + libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz A random low-hanging fruit. * mpg321: new package + mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz This is more of a question than a submission. I've garified it and tested it on a few hosts. It's a very straightforward build: No patches, no custom copiler or linker options, enabled 64-bit build. If you want to see the build description, it's here: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/rsync/trunk/Makefile Do you have any specific tests that you usually wanted this to pass before releasing? * rsync: patchlevel upgrade - from: 3.0.6,REV=2009.09.21 - to: 3.0.7,REV=2010.02.17 + rsync-3.0.7,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + rsync-3.0.7,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From skayser at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 09:35:57 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:35:57 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Subject: newpkgs mercurial In-Reply-To: <6af4271003071322j4c49ecb4l2b556e5f865a5ab2@mail.gmail.com> References: <6af4271003070318r4289f673y95dfedb2994c872b@mail.gmail.com> <6af4271003071322j4c49ecb4l2b556e5f865a5ab2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20100308083557.GA26602@sebastiankayser.de> * rupert THURNER wrote: > i let it run now with "screen" instead of nohup. > > and, i get testing failures - but as these tests take forever i am not > sure if anybody did run them before: > > Running all tests in getopt_tests.py [30/71]...success > Running all tests in basic_tests.py [31/71]...FAILURE > Running all tests in checkout_tests.py [32/71]...success > Running all tests in commit_tests.py [33/71]...FAILURE > Running all tests in update_tests.py [34/71]... Regarding the tests: I had them running for the 1.6.6 build and back then they all passed successfully (except for those ones which are XFAILs, i.e. expected to fail). Even if they take long, I wouldn't ship a subversion build w/o running them all. That's a lot of testing coverage which we - as a distro - get for free. The build/test runtimes are also documented in the GAR Makefile. Sebastian From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 10:37:05 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:37:05 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs evince, gnomekeyring, libev, mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: <201003080821.o288LoLZ023387@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003080821.o288LoLZ023387@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 8:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > Here's a bunch of packages, mostly related to X11 They are either new packages > or takeovers. > > * evince: minor version upgrade > ?The latest version I could build at the moment. > ?- from: 2.22.2,REV=2008.06.13 > ?- ? to: 2.24.2,REV=2010.03.05 > ?+ evince-2.24.2,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ evince-2.24.2,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Gerard found a problem in this one, I'll be rerolling it. From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 8 17:51:12 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 08:51:12 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs... libev Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > > * libev: new package > ?This is faster that libevent. > ?+ libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > Thanks. in the interests of consistency, however; please remake with a more useful description than "Event loop modelled after libevent" I read the developer's actual home page description of it. if you want to be more polite, perhaps, "a high performance event handling library" ? :-) From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 8 17:54:34 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 08:54:34 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs evince, gnomekeyring, libev, mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: <201003080821.o288LoLZ023387@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003080821.o288LoLZ023387@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Sigh. please note, there were MULTIPLE issues in this batch. Splitting up replies is both a pain, and makes it difficult for people to follow. Please make smaller batches in future? you've already noted the issue with evince. another one from me to follow. On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > Here's a bunch of packages, mostly related to X11 They are either new packages > or takeovers. > > * evince: minor version upgrade > ?The latest version I could build at the moment. > ?- from: 2.22.2,REV=2008.06.13 > ?- ? to: 2.24.2,REV=2010.03.05 > ?+ evince-2.24.2,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ evince-2.24.2,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * gnomekeyring: major version upgrade > ?With this one in place, I might be able to compile a newer evince. > ?- from: 0.4.9 > ?- ? to: 2.28.2,REV=2010.03.05 > ?+ gnomekeyring-2.28.2,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ gnomekeyring-2.28.2,REV=2010.03.05-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > > The following 4 packages are dependencies of a tiling window manager I'm > working on. > > * startup_notif: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 0.8 > ?- ? to: 0.10,REV=2010.03.06 > ?+ startup_notif-0.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ startup_notif-0.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * xcbproto: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 1.5,REV=2009.06.04 > ?- ? to: 1.6,REV=2010.03.06 > ?+ xcbproto-1.6,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ xcbproto-1.6,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * py_xcbproto: new package > ?To remove the dependency on Python from xcbproto. > ?+ py_xcbproto-1.6,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > > * libev: new package > ?This is faster that libevent. > ?+ libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > > A random low-hanging fruit. > * mpg321: new package > ?+ mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > > This is more of a question than a submission. ?I've garified it and tested it > on a few hosts. ?It's a very straightforward build: No patches, no custom > copiler or linker options, enabled 64-bit build. ?If you want to see the build > description, it's here: > https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/rsync/trunk/Makefile > Do you have any specific tests that you usually wanted this to pass before > releasing? > > * rsync: patchlevel upgrade > ?- from: 3.0.6,REV=2009.09.21 > ?- ? to: 3.0.7,REV=2010.02.17 > ?+ rsync-3.0.7,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ rsync-3.0.7,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- > Generated by submitpkg > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 8 17:56:03 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 08:56:03 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_xcbproto Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > > * py_xcbproto: new package > ?To remove the dependency on Python from xcbproto. > ?+ py_xcbproto-1.6,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > however, there is already a pyxcbproto (CSWpyxcbproto) package. pleas decide how you'd like to deal with this (perhaps arm-wrestle Dago for it :-) From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 8 18:00:01 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:00:01 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs startup_notif Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > > > * startup_notif: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 0.8 > ?- ? to: 0.10,REV=2010.03.06 > ?+ startup_notif-0.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ startup_notif-0.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > The prior version of startup_notif, was created before our new X11 packages. This version depends on the new packages. Perhaps it belongs under /opt/csw/X11 ? From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 18:01:50 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 17:01:50 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_xcbproto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> >> * py_xcbproto: new package >> ?To remove the dependency on Python from xcbproto. >> ?+ py_xcbproto-1.6,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > > however, there is already a pyxcbproto (CSWpyxcbproto) package. > > pleas decide how you'd like to deal with this (perhaps arm-wrestle > Dago for it :-) Dago, how about renaming this package? That is, deleting CSWpyxcbproto? Nothing is depending it so far, and our standard is to have py_foo, not pyfoo for libraries. Maciej From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 8 18:03:26 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:03:26 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > > A random low-hanging fruit. > * mpg321: new package > ?+ mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > your description says: "NAME=mpg321 - A Free replacement for mpg123" Errr... but mpg123 is a sourceforge project. its already free. http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpg123/files/ "mpg123 is the fast and Free (LGPL since version 0.60) console based real time MPEG Audio Player for Layer 1, 2 and 3. " From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 8 18:06:14 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:06:14 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs evince, gnomekeyring, libev, mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: <201003080821.o288LoLZ023387@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003080821.o288LoLZ023387@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Believe it or not, some packages out of this set, DID actually make it into the release batch: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > > > * gnomekeyring: major version upgrade > * xcbproto: minor version upgrade > > This is more of a question than a submission. ?I've garified [rsync] and tested it > on a few hosts. ?It's a very straightforward build: No patches, no custom > copiler or linker options, enabled 64-bit build. ?If you want to see the build > description, it's here: > https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/rsync/trunk/Makefile > Do you have any specific tests that you usually wanted this to pass before > releasing? > > * rsync: patchlevel upgrade Eh. It's way overdue for an update. I took it as-is. It's a pretty straightforward "buildandrelease" type program :) From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 18:07:14 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 17:07:14 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs startup_notif In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> >> >> * startup_notif: minor version upgrade >> ?- from: 0.8 >> ?- ? to: 0.10,REV=2010.03.06 >> ?+ startup_notif-0.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> ?+ startup_notif-0.10,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > The prior version of startup_notif, was created before our new X11 packages. > > This version depends on the new packages. > Perhaps it belongs under /opt/csw/X11 ? It makes sense. There's a problem however. Dependent binaries, and there's lots of them[1], might not have /opt/csw/X11/lib in the RPATH. I could work around it by adding a symlink and filing bugs against other packages to add /opt/csw/X11/lib to the RPATH. I'd also have to add a module to checkpkg to make sure that the new software isn't allowed to link against this library in /opt/csw/lib. Do you think it's worth the trouble? [1] http://www.opencsw.org/packages/startup_notif From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 18:07:30 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 18:07:30 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_xcbproto In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E79F046-44DA-4A7D-B191-E31F0A724EB6@opencsw.org> Hi Maciej, Am 08.03.2010 um 18:01 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Philip Brown > wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski >> wrote: >>> >>> * py_xcbproto: new package >>> To remove the dependency on Python from xcbproto. >>> + py_xcbproto-1.6,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz >> >> however, there is already a pyxcbproto (CSWpyxcbproto) package. >> >> pleas decide how you'd like to deal with this (perhaps arm-wrestle >> Dago for it :-) > > Dago, how about renaming this package? That is, deleting > CSWpyxcbproto? Nothing is depending it so far, and our standard is to > have py_foo, not pyfoo for libraries. Sure, the name was chosen before the standard. Please proceed. Best regrads -- Dago From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 18:13:19 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 17:13:19 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> >> A random low-hanging fruit. >> * mpg321: new package >> ?+ mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> ?+ mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > your description says: > > "NAME=mpg321 - A Free replacement for mpg123" > > Errr... but mpg123 is a sourceforge project. its already free. > > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpg123/files/ > "mpg123 is the fast and Free (LGPL since version 0.60) console based > real time MPEG Audio Player for Layer 1, 2 and 3. " http://mpg321.sourceforge.net/ says: mpg321 is a Free replacement for mpg123, a very popular command-line mp3 player. I try to be faithful to the upstream descriptions if possible. If you think the original description is not good, the one that doesn't invoke mpg123 would sound something like "A command-line mp3 player". From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 8 18:13:53 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:13:53 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_xcbproto In-Reply-To: <3E79F046-44DA-4A7D-B191-E31F0A724EB6@opencsw.org> References: <3E79F046-44DA-4A7D-B191-E31F0A724EB6@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > >> >> Dago, how about renaming this package? That is, deleting >> CSWpyxcbproto? ?Nothing is depending it so far, and our standard is to >> have py_foo, not pyfoo for libraries. > > Sure, the name was chosen before the standard. Please proceed. > awwright, i'll handle it. *muttermutter*haterenames*muttermutter*..... From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 18:20:13 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:20:13 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs startup_notif In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > >> The prior version of startup_notif, was created before our new X11 packages. >> >> This version depends on the new packages. >> Perhaps it belongs under /opt/csw/X11 ? > > It makes sense. ?There's a problem however. ?Dependent binaries, and > there's lots of them[1], might not have /opt/csw/X11/lib in the RPATH. But startup_notif requires libs in /opt/csw/X11/lib. So things that use it, had BETTER have it in the RPATH. and first. Otherwise, "Things Will Break", down the road. Alternatively.... rebuild to not require "our" x11 libs, if thats even possible. From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 18:21:14 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:21:14 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs startup_notif In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Philip Brown wrote: > > > Alternatively.... rebuild to not require "our" x11 libs, if thats even possible. > but then again... if something that already uses "our" x11 libs, wants to use it... kaboomie. How many things actually USE this thing? Is it worth making both a "native" and a "csw-libs" version of the package? From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 18:25:20 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:25:20 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> your description says: >> >> "NAME=mpg321 - A Free replacement for mpg123" >> >> Errr... but mpg123 is a sourceforge project. its already free. >>.... > I try to be faithful to the upstream descriptions if possible. I can certainly understand that. There are, unfortunately, quite a few cases where the "upstream" is terrible at documenting its software :-} Why did you bother packaging this, exactly? Its not even as though mpg123 is an orphaned or abandoned project. it was just updated in feb of this year. In contrast, mpg321 is at a "zero" major rev, and has not been updated in 9 months. From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 18:42:36 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 18:42:36 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <76D1875D-7850-4FF8-811E-3CA6DA8000CD@opencsw.org> Hi, Am 08.03.2010 um 18:25 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski > wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Philip Brown >> wrote: > >>> your description says: >>> >>> "NAME=mpg321 - A Free replacement for mpg123" >>> >>> Errr... but mpg123 is a sourceforge project. its already free. >>> .... >> I try to be faithful to the upstream descriptions if possible. > > > I can certainly understand that. > There are, unfortunately, quite a few cases where the "upstream" is > terrible at documenting its software :-} > > Why did you bother packaging this, exactly? > Its not even as though mpg123 is an orphaned or abandoned project. it > was just updated in feb of this year. > > In contrast, mpg321 is at a "zero" major rev, and has not been updated > in 9 months. I packaged that maybe 10 years ago myself because it used lower resources than mpg123: "Unlike mpg123 it does all MP3 decoding with only fixed- point math by using the mad MPEG audio decoder library." On an UltraSparc I with 143 MHz that made quite some difference! Best regards -- Dago From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 8 18:55:37 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:55:37 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: <76D1875D-7850-4FF8-811E-3CA6DA8000CD@opencsw.org> References: <76D1875D-7850-4FF8-811E-3CA6DA8000CD@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > > > I packaged that maybe 10 years ago myself because it used lower resources > than mpg123: "Unlike mpg123 it does all MP3 decoding with only fixed-point > math by using the mad MPEG audio decoder library." On an UltraSparc I > with 143 MHz that made quite some difference! > Thanks for the input, Dago, So maybe retitle with "low resolution, fixed-point replacement of mpg123" ? I think that explicitly mentioning "mpg123" is a benefit in this case; it seems to be an explicit design goal to be a drop-in alternative implementation. yes? but then we'd have to think about how to package it, without conflicts. and do note that checking dependancies gets confusing if you use "alternatives" cross-package, with shared libs. You MIGHT consider updating the main mpg123 package, to include the mpg321 lib as an alternative implementation, since the library is very small. the entire package is 30k gzipped. Then "alternatives" will work cleanly. From hson at opencsw.org Mon Mar 8 19:38:38 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:38:38 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B95442E.3010003@opencsw.org> On 2010-03-08 18:03, Philip Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> >> A random low-hanging fruit. >> * mpg321: new package >> + mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > your description says: > > "NAME=mpg321 - A Free replacement for mpg123" > > Errr... but mpg123 is a sourceforge project. its already free. Back when mpg321 was created, mpg123 didn't have a free license even though the source code was available for download From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 8 20:13:14 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 11:13:14 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: <4B95442E.3010003@opencsw.org> References: <4B95442E.3010003@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > On 2010-03-08 18:03, Philip Brown wrote: >> >> >> Errr... but mpg123 is a sourceforge project. its already free. > > Back when mpg321 was created, mpg123 didn't have a free license even though > the source code was available for download > I figured something like that. btw, I wonder if there is an option in mpg123 itself, for the "fast fixed point implementation" option? If so, offering an "alternatives" alt shared lib in that package, from the proper mpg123 source (rather than mpg321) would be better yet. From william at wbonnet.net Mon Mar 8 23:40:49 2010 From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 23:40:49 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxau, libxau_devel Message-ID: <201003082240.o28Menvf000032@login.bo.opencsw.org> * libxau: revision upgrade - from: 2010.02.19 - to: 2010.03.08 + libxau-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxau-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libxau_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxau_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Fix bug 4136 -- Generated by submitpkg From william at wbonnet.net Tue Mar 9 00:15:09 2010 From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 00:15:09 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxext, libxext_devel Message-ID: <201003082315.o28NF9Yj026925@login.bo.opencsw.org> * libxext: revision upgrade - from: 2010.02.19 - to: 2010.03.08 + libxext-1.1.1,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxext-1.1.1,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libxext_devel-1.1.1,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxext_devel-1.1.1,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Fix bug : 4314 -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 9 00:18:41 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 15:18:41 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxext, libxext_devel In-Reply-To: <201003082315.o28NF9Yj026925@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003082315.o28NF9Yj026925@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 3:15 PM, William Bonnet wrote: > * libxext: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2010.02.19 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.08 > ?+ libxext-1.1.1,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxext-1.1.1,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxext_devel-1.1.1,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxext_devel-1.1.1,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > Fix bug : 4314 > batching From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 9 00:19:00 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 15:19:00 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxau, libxau_devel In-Reply-To: <201003082240.o28Menvf000032@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003082240.o28Menvf000032@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: batching On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:40 PM, William Bonnet wrote: > * libxau: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2010.02.19 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.08 > ?+ libxau-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxau-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxau_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxau_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > Fix bug 4136 > From william at wbonnet.net Tue Mar 9 08:07:04 2010 From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 08:07:04 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libx11, libx11_devel Message-ID: <201003090707.o29774dl007957@login.bo.opencsw.org> * libx11: revision upgrade - from: 2010.02.19 - to: 2010.03.08 + libx11-1.3.2,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libx11_devel-1.3.2,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * libx11: revision upgrade - from: 2010.02.19 - to: 2010.03.09 + libx11-1.3.2,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libx11_devel-1.3.2,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz Fix bug : 4155 -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 9 12:36:41 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 11:36:41 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs... libev In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> >> * libev: new package >> ?This is faster that libevent. >> ?+ libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> ?+ libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.07-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > Thanks. in the interests of consistency, however; please remake with a > more useful description than "Event loop modelled after libevent" > > I read the developer's actual home page description of it. > if you want to be more polite, perhaps, > "a high performance event handling library" ?? ?:-) Done. * libev: new package + libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 9 12:37:50 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 11:37:50 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs startup_notif In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Philip Brown wrote: >> >> >> Alternatively.... rebuild to not require "our" x11 libs, if thats even possible. >> > > > but then again... if something that already uses "our" x11 libs, wants > to use it... kaboomie. > > How many things actually USE this thing? > Is it worth making both a "native" and a "csw-libs" version of the package? I moved the libraries to /opt/csw/X11 and placed a symlink in such a way that old programs would still work, but new ones couldn't be linked against the old location. * startup_notif: minor version upgrade - from: 0.8 - to: 0.10,REV=2010.03.09 + startup_notif-0.10,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + startup_notif-0.10,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 9 12:39:52 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 11:39:52 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs startup_notif In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Philip Brown wrote: >> >> >> Alternatively.... rebuild to not require "our" x11 libs, if thats even possible. >> > > > but then again... if something that already uses "our" x11 libs, wants > to use it... kaboomie. > > How many things actually USE this thing? About two dozen packages, if you look at the package page[1]. > Is it worth making both a "native" and a "csw-libs" version of the package? It would be IMO an unnecessary complication. [1] http://www.opencsw.org/packages/startup_notif From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 9 14:10:24 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 13:10:24 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: References: <4B95442E.3010003@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: >> On 2010-03-08 18:03, Philip Brown wrote: >>> >>> >>> Errr... but mpg123 is a sourceforge project. its already free. >> >> Back when mpg321 was created, mpg123 didn't have a free license even though >> the source code was available for download >> > > I figured something like that. > > btw, I wonder if there is an option in mpg123 itself, for the "fast > fixed point implementation" option? > If so, offering an "alternatives" ?alt shared lib in that package, > from the proper mpg123 source (rather than mpg321) would be better > yet. Having two versions of mpg123 wouldn't hurt, it's an orthogonal issue. Why I built mpg321? It was written because mpg123 wasn't Free. mpg321 is still useful to keep up the competition and make sure that mpg123 doesn't become closed again; you can think of it as a redundancy that removes a single point of failure. I've added alternatives support for the $(bindir)/mpg123 path. The alternatives system won't overwrite the existing mpg123 binary, but when mpg123 starts using alternatives too, mpg321 will be able to place the $(bindir)/mpg123 symlink. * mpg321: new package + mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 9 15:55:43 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 15:55:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca Message-ID: <201003091455.o29EthxR019994@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pca: major version upgrade - from: 20091216.02,REV=2010.01.15 - to: 20100309.02,REV=2010.03.09 + pca-20100309.02,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 9 19:22:09 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:22:09 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libx11, libx11_devel In-Reply-To: <201003090707.o29774dl007957@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003090707.o29774dl007957@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Batchie On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 11:07 PM, William Bonnet wrote: > * libx11: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2010.02.19 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.08 > ?+ libx11-1.3.2,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libx11_devel-1.3.2,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * libx11: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2010.02.19 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.09 > ?+ libx11-1.3.2,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libx11_devel-1.3.2,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > > Fix bug : 4155 > From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 9 19:23:00 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:23:00 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca In-Reply-To: <201003091455.o29EthxR019994@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003091455.o29EthxR019994@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * pca: major version upgrade > ?- from: 20091216.02,REV=2010.01.15 > ?- ? to: 20100309.02,REV=2010.03.09 > ?+ pca-20100309.02,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > well dunno if it really counts as "major version upgrade", but ok ;-) From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 9 19:26:05 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:26:05 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs startup_notif In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:39 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > >> >> but then again... if something that already uses "our" x11 libs, wants >> to use it... kaboomie. >> >> How many things actually USE this thing? > > About two dozen packages, if you look at the package page[1]. > oh wow. thats a lot. and a lot of them are "legacy" binaries. Please confirm whether or not you have tested against at least one "legacy" (pre-our-X11-libraries) app that uses the startup_notify libs? From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 9 19:28:09 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:28:09 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: References: <4B95442E.3010003@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > >> btw, I wonder if there is an option in mpg123 itself, for the "fast >> fixed point implementation" option? >> If so, offering an "alternatives" ?alt shared lib in that package, >> from the proper mpg123 source (rather than mpg321) would be better >> yet. > > Having two versions of mpg123 wouldn't hurt, it's an orthogonal issue. > > Why I built mpg321? ?It was written because mpg123 wasn't Free. > mpg321 is still useful to keep up the competition and make sure that > mpg123 doesn't become closed again; you can think of it as a > redundancy that removes a single point of failure. > > I've added alternatives support for the $(bindir)/mpg123 path. ?The > alternatives system won't overwrite the existing mpg123 binary, but > when mpg123 starts using alternatives too, mpg321 will be able to > place the $(bindir)/mpg123 symlink. > Thanks for that. Please also update the description to denote the performance/implementation difference, though? From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 9 19:28:55 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:28:55 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs... libev In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:36 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> I read the developer's actual home page description of it. >> if you want to be more polite, perhaps, >> "a high performance event handling library" ?? ?:-) > > Done. > > * libev: new package > ?+ libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libev-3.9,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > Thanks. batching From william at wbonnet.net Tue Mar 9 20:28:02 2010 From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 20:28:02 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxrandr, libxrandr_devel Message-ID: <201003091928.o29JS2ln021154@login.bo.opencsw.org> * libxrandr: revision upgrade - from: 2010.02.24 - to: 2010.03.09 + libxrandr-1.3.0,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxrandr-1.3.0,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libxrandr_devel-1.3.0,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxrandr_devel-1.3.0,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Fix bug : 4326 -- Generated by submitpkg From william at wbonnet.net Tue Mar 9 20:32:52 2010 From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 20:32:52 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tbird_l10n_af, tbird_l10n_be, tbird_l(...) Message-ID: <201003091932.o29JWqwB025741@login.bo.opencsw.org> * tbird_l10n: new package + tbird_l10n_af-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_be-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_bg-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_ca-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_cs-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_da-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_de-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_el-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_en_gb-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_es_ar-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_es_es-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_eu-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_fi-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_fr-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_ga_ie-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_he-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_hu-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_it-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_ja-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_ko-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_lt-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_mk-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_nb_no-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_nl-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_nn_no-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_pa_in-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_pl-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_pt_br-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_pt_pt-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_ru-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_sk-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_sl-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_sv_se-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_tr-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_uk-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_zh_cn-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + tbird_l10n_zh_tw-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz Hi These packages are locales for thunderbird 2.0.0.23 The submission is complete, all the officially supported languages (available from mozilla ftp) are here cheers W. -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 9 23:04:18 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 22:04:18 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca In-Reply-To: References: <201003091455.o29EthxR019994@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >> * pca: major version upgrade >> ?- from: 20091216.02,REV=2010.01.15 >> ?- ? to: 20100309.02,REV=2010.03.09 >> ?+ pca-20100309.02,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > well dunno if it really counts as "major version upgrade", but ok ;-) The first segment of the version string was incremented. I would personally change it to something like: 0.20100309.02, so it would be a minor version upgrade. From maciej at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 00:22:19 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 23:22:19 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs startup_notif In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:39 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski > wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> >>> >>> but then again... if something that already uses "our" x11 libs, wants >>> to use it... kaboomie. >>> >>> How many things actually USE this thing? >> >> About two dozen packages, if you look at the package page[1]. >> > > oh wow. thats a lot. and a lot of them are "legacy" binaries. > > Please confirm whether or not you have tested against at least one > "legacy" (pre-our-X11-libraries) app that uses the startup_notify > libs? I've tested eog (eye of gnome). It doesn't have /opt/csw/X11 in the RPATH, and it works by opening the library from /opt/csw/lib. From maciej at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 08:18:15 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:18:15 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: References: <4B95442E.3010003@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > Please also update the description to denote the > performance/implementation difference, though? Done. * mpg321: new package + mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From maciej at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 08:21:39 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:21:39 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxcb, libxcb_devel, libxcb_doc Message-ID: <201003100721.o2A7LdxD005855@login.bo.opencsw.org> Tested by running emacs_gtk, which depends on it. * libxcb: minor version upgrade - from: 1.3,REV=2009.06.07 - to: 1.5,REV=2010.03.09 + libxcb-1.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxcb-1.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libxcb_devel-1.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxcb_devel-1.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libxcb_doc-1.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From bonivart at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 09:31:39 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:31:39 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) bind, namebench Message-ID: <625385e31003100031n5c9f5d96kbd89211325c62e29@mail.gmail.com> bind-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz bind-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz bind_chroot-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz bind_devel-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz bind_utils-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz bind_utils-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libbind-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libbind-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz namebench-1.2,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- /peter From bonivart at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 16:16:13 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:16:13 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) pkgutil Message-ID: <625385e31003100716r54a05739rde420e188440ff5b@mail.gmail.com> pkgutil-1.10,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pkgutil-1.10,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pkgutilplus-1.10,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- /peter From maciej at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 16:46:19 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:46:19 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs urxvt Message-ID: <201003101546.o2AFkJ6u008289@login.bo.opencsw.org> Now a brand new build for the brand new Solaris 8. Linked against OpenCSW X11 libs. * urxvt: new package + urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 18:10:59 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:10:59 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs startup_notif In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> >> Please confirm whether or not you have tested against at least one >> "legacy" (pre-our-X11-libraries) app that uses the startup_notify >> libs? > > I've tested eog (eye of gnome). ?It doesn't have /opt/csw/X11 in the > RPATH, and it works by opening the library from /opt/csw/lib. > _ okay, thanks. adding in startup_notify then. From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 18:12:23 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:12:23 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mpg321, (...) In-Reply-To: References: <4B95442E.3010003@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> Please also update the description to denote the >> performance/implementation difference, though? > > Done. > > * mpg321: new package > ?+ mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ mpg321-0.2.11,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > thanks. batching From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 18:18:07 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:18:07 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxcb, libxcb_devel, libxcb_doc In-Reply-To: <201003100721.o2A7LdxD005855@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003100721.o2A7LdxD005855@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > Tested by running emacs_gtk, which depends on it. > > * libxcb: minor version upgrade > batched From maciej at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 20:03:15 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:03:15 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gxmessage Message-ID: <201003101903.o2AJ3Fxj013809@login.bo.opencsw.org> A tool to display notifications on a GTK desktop. * gxmessage: new package + gxmessage-2.12.4,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + gxmessage-2.12.4,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 21:22:30 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:22:30 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxdg_basedir Message-ID: <201003102022.o2AKMUue016260@login.bo.opencsw.org> Turns out, libxdg_basedir had hardcoded things such as /usr/local and wasn't pointing at OpenCSW directories at all. I patched it so that it points at /opt/csw/share and /etc/opt/csw/xdg. This release also adds 64-bit libraries. * libxdg_basedir: revision upgrade - from: 2009.09.26 - to: 2010.03.10 + libxdg_basedir-1.0.2,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxdg_basedir-1.0.2,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 10 22:47:48 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:47:48 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tbird_l10n_af, tbird_l10n_be, tbird_l(...) In-Reply-To: <201003091932.o29JWqwB025741@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003091932.o29JWqwB025741@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 11:32 AM, William Bonnet wrote: > * tbird_l10n: new package > ?+ tbird_l10n_af-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ tbird_l10n_be-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz .. err.. i hate to point this out when you have already "produced" umpteen gazillion packages, but... the core package is named "thunderbird", not "tbird". it doesnt make sense to me to have these named "tbird_" From phil at bolthole.com Wed Mar 10 22:48:28 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:48:28 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) bind, namebench In-Reply-To: <625385e31003100031n5c9f5d96kbd89211325c62e29@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31003100031n5c9f5d96kbd89211325c62e29@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: batching On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > bind-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > bind-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > bind_chroot-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > bind_devel-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > bind_utils-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > bind_utils-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libbind-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libbind-9.7.0,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > namebench-1.2,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > From hson at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 01:55:37 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 01:55:37 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tbird_l10n_af, tbird_l10n_be, tbird_l(...) In-Reply-To: References: <201003091932.o29JWqwB025741@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B983F89.5080101@opencsw.org> On 2010-03-10 22:47, Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 11:32 AM, William Bonnet wrote: >> * tbird_l10n: new package >> + tbird_l10n_af-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz >> + tbird_l10n_be-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > .. > > err.. i hate to point this out when you have already "produced" > umpteen gazillion packages, but... > > the core package is named "thunderbird", not "tbird". > > it doesnt make sense to me to have these named "tbird_" And here we have a good example of the problem with having a max length of 20 chars... thunderbird_l10n_en_gb would be 23 From bchill at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 09:45:24 2010 From: bchill at opencsw.org (Brian Hill) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:45:24 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync Message-ID: <201003110845.o2B8jOvt028945@login.bo.opencsw.org> * librsync: new package + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From hson at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 11:01:28 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:01:28 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newspkgs poppler Message-ID: <4B98BF78.6010101@opencsw.org> Update to 0.10.6 poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From hson at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 13:35:31 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:35:31 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs poppler_data Message-ID: <4B98E393.6020507@opencsw.org> Update to 0.4.0 poppler_data-0.4.0,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz From hson at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 15:53:13 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:53:13 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newspkgs poppler In-Reply-To: <4B98BF78.6010101@opencsw.org> References: <4B98BF78.6010101@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B9903D9.4000101@opencsw.org> Roger H?kansson wrote: > Update to 0.10.6 > > poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz I've found a small problem which I'm solving so I've removed those packages from newpkg. From dam at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 16:32:47 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:32:47 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gtar Message-ID: <201003111532.o2BFWlgw019646@login.bo.opencsw.org> * gtar: minor version upgrade - from: 1.22,REV=2009.04.02 - to: 1.23,REV=2010.03.11 + gtar-1.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + gtar-1.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 18:33:47 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:33:47 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs urxvt In-Reply-To: <201003101546.o2AFkJ6u008289@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003101546.o2AFkJ6u008289@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > Now a brand new build for the brand new Solaris 8. ?Linked against OpenCSW X11 > libs. > > * urxvt: new package > ?+ urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- kewl. although I'm not sure what you mean by "new solaris 8" :-} but anyways,.. waitaminit.. why is this depending on CSWbash? that does not make sense to me. From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 18:34:35 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:34:35 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gxmessage In-Reply-To: <201003101903.o2AJ3Fxj013809@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003101903.o2AJ3Fxj013809@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: batched On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > A tool to display notifications on a GTK desktop. > > * gxmessage: new package > ?+ gxmessage-2.12.4,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ gxmessage-2.12.4,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 18:35:56 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:35:56 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: <201003110845.o2B8jOvt028945@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003110845.o2B8jOvt028945@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Err... I dont see an actual LIBRARY file, in this alleged library package? On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Brian Hill wrote: > * librsync: new package > ?+ librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 18:36:47 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:36:47 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gtar In-Reply-To: <201003111532.o2BFWlgw019646@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003111532.o2BFWlgw019646@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Batchie On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * gtar: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 1.22,REV=2009.04.02 > ?- ? to: 1.23,REV=2010.03.11 > ?+ gtar-1.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ gtar-1.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 18:37:59 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:37:59 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) pkgutil In-Reply-To: <625385e31003100716r54a05739rde420e188440ff5b@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31003100716r54a05739rde420e188440ff5b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: batched On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > pkgutil-1.10,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > pkgutil-1.10,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > pkgutilplus-1.10,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > From maciej at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 18:38:31 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:38:31 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs urxvt In-Reply-To: References: <201003101546.o2AFkJ6u008289@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> Now a brand new build for the brand new Solaris 8. ?Linked against OpenCSW X11 >> libs. >> >> * urxvt: new package >> ?+ urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> ?+ urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> >> -- > > kewl. although I'm not sure what you mean by "new solaris 8" :-} > > but anyways,.. waitaminit.. why is this depending on CSWbash? that > does not make sense to me. There is a bash wrapper to work around an issue which crops up on Solaris. You can see the contents of /opt/csw/bin in this package. From phil at bolthole.com Thu Mar 11 18:39:27 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:39:27 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxdg_basedir In-Reply-To: <201003102022.o2AKMUue016260@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003102022.o2AKMUue016260@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Excellent. Thanks for the hax.. I mean, patch work :-) On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > Turns out, libxdg_basedir had hardcoded things such as /usr/local and wasn't > pointing at OpenCSW directories at all. ?I patched it so that it points at > /opt/csw/share and /etc/opt/csw/xdg. > > This release also adds 64-bit libraries. > > * libxdg_basedir: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2009.09.26 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.10 > ?+ libxdg_basedir-1.0.2,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxdg_basedir-1.0.2,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > From maciej at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 18:51:28 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:51:28 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs urxvt In-Reply-To: References: <201003101546.o2AFkJ6u008289@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > There is a bash wrapper to work around an issue which crops up on > Solaris. ?You can see the contents of /opt/csw/bin in this package. > I usually document things in the build descriptions, for example: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/urxvt/trunk/Makefile The patches can also be seen there, in the files/ subdirectory. Do you usually read build descriptions when you examine packages? From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 19:02:55 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:02:55 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs urxvt In-Reply-To: References: <201003101546.o2AFkJ6u008289@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > > I usually document things in the build descriptions, for example: > https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/urxvt/trunk/Makefile > > The patches can also be seen there, in the files/ subdirectory. ?Do > you usually read build descriptions when you examine packages? > no i do not. that would take a whoole lot more time, and I already spend a great deal of time on release stuff as it is :-/ From phil at bolthole.com Thu Mar 11 19:09:02 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:09:02 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs urxvt In-Reply-To: References: <201003101546.o2AFkJ6u008289@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >>> Now a brand new build for the brand new Solaris 8. ?Linked against OpenCSW X11 >>> libs. >>> >>> * urxvt: new package >>> ?+ urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>> ?+ urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >>> >>> -- >> >> kewl. although I'm not sure what you mean by "new solaris 8" :-} >> >> but anyways,.. waitaminit.. why is this depending on CSWbash? that >> does not make sense to me. > > There is a bash wrapper to work around an issue which crops up on > Solaris. ?You can see the contents of /opt/csw/bin in this package. > What unique features of bash does the wrapper use, that require you to add in this extra dependancy? It seems like a very short wrapper. Have you tried just substituting "#!/bin/ksh" for #!/opt/csw/bin/bash ? at first glance, looks like that would fulfill the requirements just fine, and eliminate pulling in bash, to run this X11 based program, without you even having to recode the wrapper otherwise. From hson at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 20:26:55 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 20:26:55 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newspkgs poppler In-Reply-To: <4B9903D9.4000101@opencsw.org> References: <4B98BF78.6010101@opencsw.org> <4B9903D9.4000101@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B9943FF.8090900@opencsw.org> On 2010-03-11 15:53, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Roger H?kansson wrote: >> Update to 0.10.6 >> >> poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > I've found a small problem which I'm solving so I've removed those > packages from newpkg. Problem fixed so now they are ready for release From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 20:57:16 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:57:16 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newspkgs poppler In-Reply-To: <4B9943FF.8090900@opencsw.org> References: <4B98BF78.6010101@opencsw.org> <4B9903D9.4000101@opencsw.org> <4B9943FF.8090900@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > On 2010-03-11 15:53, Roger H?kansson wrote: >> >> Roger H?kansson wrote: >>> >>> Update to 0.10.6 >>> >>> poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>> poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> >> I've found a small problem which I'm solving so I've removed those >> packages from newpkg. > > Problem fixed so now they are ready for release > ha ha okay, so is the poppler_data package there clean and compatible with this also? just wanted to make sure since completely different "version numbers", 0.4.0 From hson at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 21:05:10 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:05:10 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newspkgs poppler In-Reply-To: References: <4B98BF78.6010101@opencsw.org> <4B9903D9.4000101@opencsw.org> <4B9943FF.8090900@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B994CF6.4010101@opencsw.org> On 2010-03-11 20:57, Philip Brown wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: >> On 2010-03-11 15:53, Roger H?kansson wrote: >>> >>> Roger H?kansson wrote: >>>> >>>> Update to 0.10.6 >>>> >>>> poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>>> poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >>> >>> I've found a small problem which I'm solving so I've removed those >>> packages from newpkg. >> >> Problem fixed so now they are ready for release >> > > ha ha > > > okay, so is the poppler_data package there clean and compatible with this also? > just wanted to make sure since completely different "version numbers", 0.4.0 Yup, I don't know why they don't bump the -data version number together with the main package. From skayser at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 21:31:33 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:31:33 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) pkgutil In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31003100716r54a05739rde420e188440ff5b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B995325.9010506@opencsw.org> Philip Brown wrote on 11.03.2010 18:37: > batched > > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Peter Bonivart wrote: >> pkgutil-1.10,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> pkgutil-1.10,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> pkgutilplus-1.10,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz Peter, any objections to put this version onto the mirror roots also? Sebastian From phil at bolthole.com Thu Mar 11 21:56:08 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:56:08 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newspkgs poppler In-Reply-To: <4B994CF6.4010101@opencsw.org> References: <4B98BF78.6010101@opencsw.org> <4B9903D9.4000101@opencsw.org> <4B9943FF.8090900@opencsw.org> <4B994CF6.4010101@opencsw.org> Message-ID: ok, thanks for the updates. poppler* batching From dam at opencsw.org Thu Mar 11 23:32:30 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 23:32:30 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_butils, pm_poetestloops, xjobs Message-ID: <201003112232.o2BMWUVs024234@login.bo.opencsw.org> * xjobs: major version upgrade - from: 20100203,REV=2010.02.04 - to: 20100311,REV=2010.03.11 + xjobs-20100311,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + xjobs-20100311,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_poetestloops: new package + pm_poetestloops-1.033,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_butils: new package + pm_butils-0.11,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pm_butils-0.11,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From william at wbonnet.net Fri Mar 12 00:21:31 2010 From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:21:31 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs thunderbird_af, thunderbird_be, thund(...) Message-ID: <201003112321.o2BNLVN6028525@login.bo.opencsw.org> * thunderbird: new package + thunderbird_af-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_be-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_bg-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_ca-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_cs-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_da-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_de-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_el-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_en_gb-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_es_ar-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_es_es-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_eu-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_fi-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_ga_ie-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_he-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_hu-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_it-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_ja-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_ko-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_lt-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_mk-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_nb_no-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_nl-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_nn_no-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_pa_in-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_pl-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_pt_br-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_pt_pt-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_ru-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_sk-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_sl-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_sv_se-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_tr-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_uk-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_zh_cn-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + thunderbird_zh_tw-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * thunderbird_fr: major version upgrade - from: 1.5.0.7,REV=2006.09.26 - to: 2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11 + thunderbird_fr-2.0.0.23,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz Hi, These are the renaming of the already submited packages, this time without l10n in the name cheers W. -- Generated by submitpkg From william at wbonnet.net Fri Mar 12 00:25:30 2010 From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:25:30 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tbird_l10n_af, tbird_l10n_be, tbird_l(...) In-Reply-To: References: <201003091932.o29JWqwB025741@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B997BEA.7090405@wbonnet.net> Hi > it doesnt make sense to me to have these named "tbird_" > well... it did, at least for a few minutes, but after some time and some talks, i do agree with you. It is better to rename these packages and firefox packages to be consistent with what we released so far. New packages have been submitted and FF packages will be updated before the end of the month to take upgrade to 3.0.18 in account (if everythng goes right... ) cheers W. > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > -- William http://www.wbonnet.net http://www.sunwizard.net Le site fran?ais des amateurs de stations Unix http://www.opencsw.org Community SoftWare for Solaris http://www.guses.org French speaking Solaris User Group From phil at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 00:29:44 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:29:44 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tbird_l10n_af, tbird_l10n_be, tbird_l(...) In-Reply-To: <4B997BEA.7090405@wbonnet.net> References: <201003091932.o29JWqwB025741@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B997BEA.7090405@wbonnet.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 3:25 PM, William Bonnet wrote: > Hi >... >> it doesnt make sense to me to have these named "tbird_" >> > > well... it did, at least for a few minutes, but after some time and some > talks, i do agree with you. It is better to rename these packages and > firefox packages to be consistent with what we released so far. > > New packages have been submitted and FF packages will be updated before the > end of the month to take upgrade to 3.0.18 in account (if everythng goes > right... ) Thanks William! From phil at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 00:40:51 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:40:51 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_butils, pm_poetestloops, xjobs In-Reply-To: <201003112232.o2BMWUVs024234@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003112232.o2BMWUVs024234@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay. batching. On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * xjobs: major version upgrade > ?- from: 20100203,REV=2010.02.04 > ?- ? to: 20100311,REV=2010.03.11 > ?+ xjobs-20100311,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ xjobs-20100311,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * pm_poetestloops: new package > ?+ pm_poetestloops-1.033,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > > * pm_butils: new package > ?+ pm_butils-0.11,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pm_butils-0.11,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- > Generated by submitpkg > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From maciej at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 09:51:29 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:51:29 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs urxvt In-Reply-To: References: <201003101546.o2AFkJ6u008289@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > What unique features of bash does the wrapper use, that require you to > add in this extra dependancy? It seems like a very short wrapper. > Have you tried just substituting "#!/bin/ksh" for #!/opt/csw/bin/bash ? > > at first glance, looks like that would fulfill the requirements just > fine, and eliminate pulling in bash, to run this X11 based program, > without you even having to recode the wrapper otherwise. There was nothing in the script that needed bash. I've modified the wrapper to use /bin/sh and removed the dependency. * urxvt: new package + urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 16:57:17 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:57:17 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif Message-ID: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> * gif: revision upgrade Now linked against CSW X11 - from: 2009.09.24 - to: 2010.03.12 + giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_doc-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libungif-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 17:34:43 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:34:43 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs urxvt In-Reply-To: References: <201003101546.o2AFkJ6u008289@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> What unique features of bash does the wrapper use, that require you to >> add in this extra dependancy? It seems like a very short wrapper. > There was nothing in the script that needed bash. ?I've modified the > wrapper to use /bin/sh and removed the dependency. > > * urxvt: new package > ?+ urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ urxvt-9.07,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > Thank you. in the future, please remove older versions of the package. they can lead to messups. (ideally, modify submitpkg to do this automatically?) From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 12 17:41:10 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:41:10 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * gif: revision upgrade > ?Now linked against CSW X11 > ?- from: 2009.09.24 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.12 > ?+ giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ giflib_doc-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libungif-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > a LIBRARY, "libgif", needs to be linked against libX11?? That's kinda messed up. Why would a potentially command line util, that wants gif support, need to be linked against libX11, just for linking against giflib/libgif? comparing... http://packages.debian.org/sid/libgif4 does not have any X dependancies. Can we improve our situation, please? From maciej at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 17:47:34 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:47:34 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs urxvt In-Reply-To: References: <201003101546.o2AFkJ6u008289@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > in the future, please remove older versions of the package. they can > lead to messups. > (ideally, modify submitpkg to do this automatically?) Yes, I'll do that. From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 17:50:48 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:50:48 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi Phil, Am 12.03.2010 um 17:41 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> * gif: revision upgrade >> Now linked against CSW X11 >> - from: 2009.09.24 >> - to: 2010.03.12 >> + giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> + giflib_doc-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz >> + giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> + libungif-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > a LIBRARY, "libgif", needs to be linked against libX11?? > That's kinda messed up. > Why would a potentially command line util, that wants gif support, > need to be linked against libX11, just for linking against > giflib/libgif? > > comparing... > > http://packages.debian.org/sid/libgif4 > > does not have any X dependancies. > > Can we improve our situation, please? From the source: * Module to dump graphic devices into a GIF file. Current supported devices: ... * 3. X11 using libX.a (#define __X11__). So you can directly grab X11 as gif. Something which you may or may not want. I can make a default without X11 and a full alternative which takes precedence if installed. Ok? Best regards -- Dago From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 12 18:00:27 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:00:27 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Phil, *wave* > From the source: > > ?* Module to dump graphic devices into a GIF file. Current supported > devices: > ... > ?* 3. X11 using libX.a (#define __X11__). > > So you can directly grab X11 as gif. Something which you may or may not > want. I can > make a default without X11 and a full alternative which takes precedence if > installed. > Ok? > > interesting. Okay, great. There are actually two ways you could do this. 1. Actually do the whole "compile two separate versions of the library, put it in, and use alternatives" 2. Compile a SINGLE, fully enabled library, but specify "lazy linking" for the X11 lib. Then in theory, the lib would only get used if the particular function needing it, gets called. I think. If you do method #2 (which I personally suggest as the better choice), then I would also suggest you add in some kind of comment in the description about "with optional X11 support", if checkpkg finds the "missing" shared lib usage and whines about missing dependencies. and of course, before submitting an updated package, you should test out this theoretical compile, with a command line util that uses libgif, on a machine that has had its libX11 removed :-} From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 18:08:29 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:08:29 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 12.03.2010 um 18:00 schrieb Philip Brown: >> From the source: >> >> * Module to dump graphic devices into a GIF file. Current supported >> devices: >> ... >> * 3. X11 using libX.a (#define __X11__). >> >> So you can directly grab X11 as gif. Something which you may or may >> not >> want. I can >> make a default without X11 and a full alternative which takes >> precedence if >> installed. >> Ok? >> >> > > interesting. Okay, great. > There are actually two ways you could do this. > > 1. Actually do the whole "compile two separate versions of the > library, put it in, and use alternatives" > > 2. Compile a SINGLE, fully enabled library, but specify "lazy linking" > for the X11 lib. > Then in theory, the lib would only get used if the particular function > needing it, gets called. > I think. > > If you do method #2 (which I personally suggest as the better choice), > then I would also suggest you add in some kind of comment in the > description about "with optional X11 support", if checkpkg finds the > "missing" shared lib usage and whines about missing dependencies. > > and of course, before submitting an updated package, you should test > out this theoretical compile, with a command line util that uses > libgif, on a machine that has had its libX11 removed :-} I would prefer #1 as with number #2 the library has the impression it can do X11 grabs and crashes if you do without the CSW X11 libs installed. Best regards -- Dago From hson at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 18:17:39 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:17:39 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B9A7733.4000702@opencsw.org> Philip Brown wrote: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >> Hi Phil, > > *wave* > > >> From the source: >> >> * Module to dump graphic devices into a GIF file. Current supported >> devices: >> ... >> * 3. X11 using libX.a (#define __X11__). >> >> So you can directly grab X11 as gif. Something which you may or may not >> want. I can >> make a default without X11 and a full alternative which takes precedence if >> installed. >> Ok? >> >> > > interesting. Okay, great. > There are actually two ways you could do this. > > 1. Actually do the whole "compile two separate versions of the > library, put it in, and use alternatives" > > 2. Compile a SINGLE, fully enabled library, but specify "lazy linking" > for the X11 lib. > Then in theory, the lib would only get used if the particular function > needing it, gets called. > I think. Correct, imagmagick uses this for its modules, but only on sparc for some reason. However, the package still need to have a dependency, otherwise the program will crash when you try to use that function... From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 12 18:39:06 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:39:06 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Phil, > > I would prefer #1 as with number #2 the library has the impression it > can do X11 grabs and crashes if you do without the CSW X11 libs > installed. > yes, I realize this. However: 1. in reality, almost everyone will have the libs installed already :) 2. Who the heck is going to try a "grab from X11", if they dont have the X11 libs installed already?!?! And if they dont, they are sysadmins who are smart enough to first realize, "hey I'm going to custom build a stripped down, small system without X libs", so they are smart enough to realize, "hey I just tried a really stupid thing, duh i should install the X libs" :-D From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 12 18:41:50 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:41:50 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >> Hi Phil, >> >> I would prefer #1 as with number #2 the library has the impression it >> can do X11 grabs and crashes if you do without the CSW X11 libs >> installed. >> > PS: you're going to have similar problems with the "separate" lib anyway. If you include it in the same package (which is nicest in a lot of ways), it still could result in the same situation, where "it crashes because the X libs arent installed". They wont be auto-installed, because the whole point of this excercise is to remove the X11 dependancy from the package. If you include it in a SEPARATE package, then it messes up our inter-package dependancy checking, due to the issues you already discovered a month or two ago, about why it is "bad" to use Alternatives on a shared lib split across multiple packages. From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 21:00:02 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:00:02 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 12.03.2010 um 18:41 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Philip Brown > wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Dagobert Michelsen >> wrote: >>> Hi Phil, >>> >>> I would prefer #1 as with number #2 the library has the impression >>> it >>> can do X11 grabs and crashes if you do without the CSW X11 libs >>> installed. > > PS: you're going to have similar problems with the "separate" lib > anyway. No. > If you include it in the same package (which is nicest in a lot of > ways), it still could result in the same situation, where "it crashes > because the X libs arent installed". > They wont be auto-installed, because the whole point of this excercise > is to remove the X11 dependancy from the package. > > If you include it in a SEPARATE package, then it messes up our > inter-package dependancy checking, due to the issues you already > discovered a month or two ago, about why it is "bad" to use > Alternatives on a shared lib split across multiple packages. It is not "bad". There are some things which you must do right, but then it works. This has been documented at and I made a GAR receipt as reference: Best regards -- Dago From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 21:04:47 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:04:47 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi Phil, Am 12.03.2010 um 18:39 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> Hi Phil, >> >> I would prefer #1 as with number #2 the library has the impression it >> can do X11 grabs and crashes if you do without the CSW X11 libs >> installed. > > yes, I realize this. However: > > 1. in reality, almost everyone will have the libs installed already :) They will have the Sun X11 libs, yes, but not necessarily the CSW X11 libs. > 2. Who the heck is going to try a "grab from X11", if they dont have > the X11 libs > installed already?!?! > And if they dont, they are sysadmins who are smart enough to first > realize, > "hey I'm going to custom build a stripped down, small system > without X libs", > so they are smart enough to realize, "hey I just tried a really > stupid thing, duh i should install the X libs" > > :-D Phil, this is not the right thing to do and certainly not our goal. The goal is to provide packages that "just work" and not crash and the sysadmin has to look and see "well, if I want X11 then I need to add these CSW X11 libraries also, I wonder why there are no dependencies installed, that was the point in pkg-get/pkgutil??" and they will file bug reports. Best regards -- Dago From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 12 21:40:00 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 12:40:00 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Phil, > > Am 12.03.2010 um 18:41 schrieb Philip Brown: >> If you include it in a SEPARATE package, then it messes up our >> inter-package dependancy checking, due to the issues you already >> discovered a month or two ago, about why it is "bad" to use >> Alternatives on a shared lib split across multiple packages. > > It is not "bad". There are some things which you must do right, but > then it works. This has been documented at > ? however, that same url also documents that it does NOT work. or at least, specifically, checkpkg no longer does, as i wrote above. An excerpt from the url: "No chance for checkpkg to verify the symbols unless GAR tells checkpkg the alternatives-pathes." but having a checkpkg that only functions within a GAR tree, is not very nice. From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 21:56:12 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:56:12 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <79B8782E-5A95-4E16-8FC9-5500D620E707@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 12.03.2010 um 21:40 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> Hi Phil, >> >> Am 12.03.2010 um 18:41 schrieb Philip Brown: > >>> If you include it in a SEPARATE package, then it messes up our >>> inter-package dependancy checking, due to the issues you already >>> discovered a month or two ago, about why it is "bad" to use >>> Alternatives on a shared lib split across multiple packages. >> >> It is not "bad". There are some things which you must do right, but >> then it works. This has been documented at >> > > however, that same url also documents that it does NOT work. > or at least, specifically, checkpkg no longer does, as i wrote above. That is not a problem in itself. The package may very well work, the maintainer just has to do some manual checks for that. Additionally, checkpkg could be made aware of alternatives and look inside the alternatives configuration itself. > An excerpt from the url: > "No chance for checkpkg to verify the symbols unless GAR tells > checkpkg the alternatives-pathes." > > but having a checkpkg that only functions within a GAR tree, is not > very nice. I prefer a clean, perfectly functioning package which needs manual checking instead of a package that needs overriding checks (missing dependencies) and crashes on usage. Best regards -- Dago From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 22:03:59 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:03:59 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs liboil, liboil_devel Message-ID: <201003122103.o2CL3x4h018356@login.bo.opencsw.org> * liboil: patchlevel upgrade - from: 0.3.16,REV=2009.11.25 - to: 0.3.17,REV=2010.03.12 + liboil-0.3.17,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + liboil-0.3.17,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * liboil_devel: new package + liboil_devel-0.3.17,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + liboil_devel-0.3.17,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 12 22:05:25 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:05:25 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: <79B8782E-5A95-4E16-8FC9-5500D620E707@opencsw.org> References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> <79B8782E-5A95-4E16-8FC9-5500D620E707@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > ... > I prefer a clean, perfectly functioning package which needs manual > checking instead of a package that needs overriding checks (missing > dependencies) and crashes on usage. > well, i do agree with you there. I suppose that as long as you put in the desc, "with optional X11 support", that will remind me in the future to ignore the X11 libs warnings for that package. So... do we want to keep things simple, and just have both versions of the lib in the same CSWgiflibrt (but without the explicit depend on CSWlibXxxxx) ? From phil at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 22:06:43 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:06:43 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs liboil, liboil_devel In-Reply-To: <201003122103.o2CL3x4h018356@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003122103.o2CL3x4h018356@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * liboil: patchlevel upgrade > ?- from: 0.3.16,REV=2009.11.25 > ?- ? to: 0.3.17,REV=2010.03.12 > ?+ liboil-0.3.17,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ liboil-0.3.17,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * liboil_devel: new package > ?+ liboil_devel-0.3.17,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ liboil_devel-0.3.17,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 12 22:08:29 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:08:29 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxrandr, libxrandr_devel In-Reply-To: <201003091928.o29JS2ln021154@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003091928.o29JS2ln021154@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: whoops. missed this one. batching On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 11:28 AM, William Bonnet wrote: > * libxrandr: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2010.02.24 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.09 > ?+ libxrandr-1.3.0,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxrandr-1.3.0,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxrandr_devel-1.3.0,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxrandr_devel-1.3.0,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > Fix bug : 4326 > From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 22:12:40 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:12:40 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> <79B8782E-5A95-4E16-8FC9-5500D620E707@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <9A408B12-3725-42DC-A579-0570B4ED3721@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 12.03.2010 um 22:05 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> ... >> I prefer a clean, perfectly functioning package which needs manual >> checking instead of a package that needs overriding checks (missing >> dependencies) and crashes on usage. >> > > well, i do agree with you there. > > I suppose that as long as you put in the desc, "with optional X11 > support", that will remind me in the future to ignore the X11 libs > warnings for that package. > > So... do we want to keep things simple, and just have both versions of > the lib in the same > CSWgiflibrt (but without the explicit depend on CSWlibXxxxx) ? No. The promise is pkg-get -i and dependencies have been taken care of. This would break the promise. Best regards -- Dago From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 12 22:13:48 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:13:48 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] subversion package in newpkgs... Message-ID: Hi Rupert, looking in newpkgs. there is still a set of subversion packages.... however, one of them is still subversion-1.6.9,REV=2010.02.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz So, just waiting on that to be fixed, and compiled from an official checked in version? From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 12 22:40:57 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:40:57 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: <9A408B12-3725-42DC-A579-0570B4ED3721@opencsw.org> References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> <79B8782E-5A95-4E16-8FC9-5500D620E707@opencsw.org> <9A408B12-3725-42DC-A579-0570B4ED3721@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > >> I suppose that as long as you put in the desc, "with optional X11 >> support", that will remind me in the future to ignore the X11 libs >> warnings for that package. >> >> So... do we want to keep things simple, and just have both versions of >> the lib in the same >> CSWgiflibrt (but without the explicit depend on CSWlibXxxxx) ?? > > No. The promise is > ? pkg-get -i > and dependencies have been taken care of. This would break the promise. not exactly. The functionality "out of the box", would be perfect. the default would be the no-X-version. Therefore, dependencies WOULD be taken care of. the only issue is what is required to enable additional functionality. The two candidates for "what will be required", would seem to be either: a) read docs, run pkg-get -i giflib_extraspiffy (which will do a download of that package, and possibly ALSO the additional libX11 download), then run [alternatives foo---], or b) read docs, POSSIBLY run pkg-get -i libX11 if needed, then run [alternatives foo---], i kinda like option b, since as I mentioned, they probably already have our libX11 anyway :) From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 22:46:45 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:46:45 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <020B1EDB-D547-4EFC-9D73-1B8AF3E501AF@opencsw.org> <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> <79B8782E-5A95-4E16-8FC9-5500D620E707@opencsw.org> <9A408B12-3725-42DC-A579-0570B4ED3721@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <7FDF367A-92D6-42F3-8AA4-6FA9E21BE8F4@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 12.03.2010 um 22:40 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> >>> I suppose that as long as you put in the desc, "with optional X11 >>> support", that will remind me in the future to ignore the X11 libs >>> warnings for that package. >>> >>> So... do we want to keep things simple, and just have both >>> versions of >>> the lib in the same >>> CSWgiflibrt (but without the explicit depend on CSWlibXxxxx) ? >> >> No. The promise is >> pkg-get -i >> and dependencies have been taken care of. This would break the >> promise. > > not exactly. > > The functionality "out of the box", would be perfect. the default > would be the no-X-version. > Therefore, dependencies WOULD be taken care of. > the only issue is what is required to enable additional functionality. > > > The two candidates for "what will be required", would seem to be > either: > > a) read docs, run pkg-get -i giflib_extraspiffy (which will do a > download of that package, and possibly ALSO the additional libX11 > download), then run [alternatives foo---], No, because the fancier one will take precedence and will automatically jump in. > or > > b) read docs, POSSIBLY run pkg-get -i libX11 if needed, then run > [alternatives foo---], > > > i kinda like option b, since as I mentioned, they probably already > have our libX11 anyway :) But you have to manually verify and think. This is bad for automation. And, what is worse, it is a non-standard way we have in no other package. Consistency is IMHO more important here. Best regards -- Dago From phil at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 23:00:38 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:00:38 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: <7FDF367A-92D6-42F3-8AA4-6FA9E21BE8F4@opencsw.org> References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> <79B8782E-5A95-4E16-8FC9-5500D620E707@opencsw.org> <9A408B12-3725-42DC-A579-0570B4ED3721@opencsw.org> <7FDF367A-92D6-42F3-8AA4-6FA9E21BE8F4@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > >> >> The two candidates for "what will be required", ?would seem to be either: >> >> a) read docs, run pkg-get -i giflib_extraspiffy (which will do a >> download of that package, and possibly ALSO the additional libX11 >> download), then run [alternatives foo---], > > No, because the fancier one will take precedence and will automatically > jump in. So you are saying, that you have decided that pkg-get -i giflib_extraspiffy will automatically invoke [alternatives ....] to give itself priority, whenever it is installed? How will you determine the difference between if things are in the "default" state, and it is "enhancing" things, vs 1. a user has done equivalent to [install all] 2. a user has explicitly chosen [alternatives simple-giflib] 3. a user has, months later, done pkg-get upgrade all, and a pkgrm, pkgadd of giflib_extraspiffy has then been triggered? In this case, you should not automatically override user preference, even though the preference looks like "the default". I'm asking this here, even if it doesnt make much sense in this specific case, because as you say, we need to be consistent for the general case behaviour as well. From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 12 23:46:25 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:46:25 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> <79B8782E-5A95-4E16-8FC9-5500D620E707@opencsw.org> <9A408B12-3725-42DC-A579-0570B4ED3721@opencsw.org> <7FDF367A-92D6-42F3-8AA4-6FA9E21BE8F4@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <5DD8C7D9-1876-4AC2-AB98-8E6B018C4C66@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 12.03.2010 um 23:00 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >>> The two candidates for "what will be required", would seem to be >>> either: >>> >>> a) read docs, run pkg-get -i giflib_extraspiffy (which will do a >>> download of that package, and possibly ALSO the additional libX11 >>> download), then run [alternatives foo---], >> >> No, because the fancier one will take precedence and will >> automatically >> jump in. > > So you are saying, that you have decided that > pkg-get -i giflib_extraspiffy > > will automatically invoke [alternatives ....] to give itself priority, > whenever it is installed? Yes, the fancier one has higher priority, and as it is plug-compatible you have more features at the moment you pkgadd. > How will you determine the difference between if things are in the > "default" state, and it is "enhancing" things, vs > > 1. a user has done equivalent to [install all] > 2. a user has explicitly chosen [alternatives simple-giflib] > 3. a user has, months later, done pkg-get upgrade all, and > a pkgrm, pkgadd of giflib_extraspiffy has then been triggered? > > In this case, you should not automatically override user preference, > even though the preference looks like "the default". Yes, this works exactly as you describe. A path-group can be in manual mode, then no automatic updating on priority is done. If the package containing the manual selection is removed the pathgroup switches to automatic mode and selects the path with the highest priority. On package install it is checked if the contained pathgroup was previously selected in manual mode. If this was the case, the previous selection is reinstantiated. > I'm asking this here, even if it doesnt make much sense in this > specific case, because as you say, we need to be consistent for the > general case behaviour as well. Yes. The only drawback is when someone selects a manual path, removes the package and then reinstalls it month later - then the previous selection is also redone. But without the notion of "update" on pkgrm/pkgadd this can not be solved. Best regards -- Dago From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 12 23:52:53 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:52:53 -0800 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, libungif In-Reply-To: <5DD8C7D9-1876-4AC2-AB98-8E6B018C4C66@opencsw.org> References: <201003121557.o2CFvHY2023932@login.bo.opencsw.org> <74828F5F-FE04-46B0-A4D4-B460DA0F74D7@opencsw.org> <79B8782E-5A95-4E16-8FC9-5500D620E707@opencsw.org> <9A408B12-3725-42DC-A579-0570B4ED3721@opencsw.org> <7FDF367A-92D6-42F3-8AA4-6FA9E21BE8F4@opencsw.org> <5DD8C7D9-1876-4AC2-AB98-8E6B018C4C66@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > > Yes, this works exactly as you describe. A path-group can be in > manual mode, then no automatic updating on priority is done. > If the package containing the manual selection is removed > the pathgroup switches to automatic mode and selects the path with > the highest priority. On package install it is checked if the > contained pathgroup was previously selected in manual mode. If > this was the case, the previous selection is reinstantiated. > very nice. Thumbs up from me. Bring it on :-) From maciej at opencsw.org Sat Mar 13 01:46:43 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 01:46:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs xcbutil Message-ID: <201003130046.o2D0khcv006063@login.bo.opencsw.org> * xcbutil: patchlevel upgrade - from: 0.3.5,REV=2009.06.12 - to: 0.3.6,REV=2010.03.12 + xcbutil-0.3.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + xcbutil-0.3.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Sat Mar 13 22:14:52 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 22:14:52 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_poe Message-ID: <201003132114.o2DLEq30010727@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pm_poe: new package + pm_poe-1.287,REV=2010.03.13-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From bwalton at opencsw.org Sat Mar 13 23:54:35 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 23:54:35 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit Message-ID: <201003132254.o2DMsZ4p012937@login.bo.opencsw.org> Hi Phil, This is a new package that implements some nice git-from-emacs functionality. * magit: new package + magit-0.7,REV=2010.03.13-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz Thanks -Ben -- Generated by submitpkg From bwalton at opencsw.org Sun Mar 14 05:00:45 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 23:00:45 -0500 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit In-Reply-To: <201003132254.o2DMsZ4p012937@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003132254.o2DMsZ4p012937@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <1268539159-sup-4185@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Sat Mar 13 17:54:35 -0500 2010: Hi Phil, > * magit: new package > + magit-0.7,REV=2010.03.13-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz Cancel this. I think I used the wrong git repo...it seems there are two (github and gitorious). I'll reroll if necessary when I've sorted things out. Thanks -Ben From hson at opencsw.org Sun Mar 14 10:08:25 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 10:08:25 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs poppler Message-ID: <4B9CA789.1040805@opencsw.org> Split package to fix issue 4339 libpoppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler_devel-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler_devel-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler_doc-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler_doc-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From hson at opencsw.org Sun Mar 14 15:11:09 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 15:11:09 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs liblqr Message-ID: <4B9CEE7D.5020705@opencsw.org> New package liblqr-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz liblqr-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz liblqr_devel-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz liblqr_devel-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From dam at opencsw.org Sun Mar 14 22:24:33 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:24:33 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Please delete CSWrenderproto Message-ID: <4E0D2381-68CA-4CC4-B978-47527E11DEE6@opencsw.org> Hi, please delete CSWrenderproto as there is now CSWx11renderproto with the same files. There are no dependencies. Best regards -- Dago From william at wbonnet.net Sun Mar 14 22:52:47 2010 From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:52:47 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxau, libxau_devel Message-ID: <201003142152.o2ELqlR4020254@login.bo.opencsw.org> * libxau: revision upgrade - from: 2010.03.08 - to: 2010.03.14 + libxau-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxau-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libxau_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libxau_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Fix dependency on CSWxproto -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 09:29:28 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 09:29:28 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, giflib(...) Message-ID: <201003150829.o2F8TS8Q003987@login.bo.opencsw.org> Now with alternatives for non-x11 and csw x11. * giflib_rt_x11: new package + giflib_rt_x11-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_rt_x11-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * gif: revision upgrade - from: 2009.09.24 - to: 2010.03.14 + giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_doc-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libungif-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 10:32:31 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:32:31 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Please delete colliding pre-x11 packages References: <32F374AE-554E-425D-BAFD-173917A96FFE@baltic-online.de> Message-ID: Hi Phil, please delete the following packages from the mirror and from GAR as they have been superseeded by the corresponding CSWx11*-packages: - CSWinputproto (now CSWx11inputproto) - CSWkbproto (now CSWx11kbproto) - CSWrenderproto (now CSWx11renderproto) - CSWxproto (now CSWx11xproto) William: You may want to add incompatible-deps to the x11-versions. Best regards -- Dago From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 10:39:26 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:39:26 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Please delete colliding pre-x11 packages In-Reply-To: References: <32F374AE-554E-425D-BAFD-173917A96FFE@baltic-online.de> Message-ID: <49DF65FA-98CD-499A-9523-95519C1A6AC1@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 15.03.2010 um 10:32 schrieb Dagobert Michelsen: > please delete the following packages from the mirror and from GAR Not GAR, I meant Mantis. Sorry... > as > they have been superseeded by the corresponding CSWx11*-packages: > > - CSWinputproto (now CSWx11inputproto) > - CSWkbproto (now CSWx11kbproto) > - CSWrenderproto (now CSWx11renderproto) > - CSWxproto (now CSWx11xproto) > > William: You may want to add incompatible-deps to the x11-versions. > > > Best regards > > -- Dago > > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 11:26:22 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:26:22 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs glib2, glib2_devel Message-ID: <201003151026.o2FAQMhJ021910@login.bo.opencsw.org> * glib2: minor version upgrade - from: 2.20.0,REV=2009.04.08 - to: 2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09 + glib2-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + glib2-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + glib2_devel-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + glib2_devel-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 11:28:15 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:28:15 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libatk, libatk_devel Message-ID: <201003151028.o2FASFcq023240@login.bo.opencsw.org> * libatk: minor version upgrade - from: 1.26.0,REV=2009.06.27 - to: 1.29.92,REV=2010.03.09 + libatk-1.29.92,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libatk-1.29.92,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * libatk_devel: new package + libatk_devel-1.29.92,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libatk_devel-1.29.92,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 14:03:09 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:03:09 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd, gflags, roxfiler In-Reply-To: <201003040902.o2492h10003745@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003040902.o2492h10003745@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > * roxfiler: minor version upgrade > ?Also fixes http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4187 > ?- from: 2.9,REV=2009.11.21 > ?- ? to: 2.10,REV=2010.03.03 > ?+ roxfiler-2.10,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ roxfiler-2.10,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz What about this package? I think we agreed that the dependencies are OK. From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 17:54:28 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 09:54:28 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs xcbutil In-Reply-To: <201003130046.o2D0khcv006063@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003130046.o2D0khcv006063@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > * xcbutil: patchlevel upgrade > ?- from: 0.3.5,REV=2009.06.12 > ?- ? to: 0.3.6,REV=2010.03.12 > ?+ xcbutil-0.3.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ xcbutil-0.3.6,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- okay From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 15 17:55:22 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 09:55:22 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_poe In-Reply-To: <201003132114.o2DLEq30010727@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003132114.o2DLEq30010727@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: okat On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * pm_poe: new package > ?+ pm_poe-1.287,REV=2010.03.13-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 15 17:56:48 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 09:56:48 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs poppler In-Reply-To: <4B9CA789.1040805@opencsw.org> References: <4B9CA789.1040805@opencsw.org> Message-ID: In the interests of getting other things out the door, i'll accept it this time. but please fix the build so that doc is ARCH=all On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 1:08 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Split package to fix issue 4339 > > libpoppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_devel-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_devel-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_doc-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_doc-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 18:03:30 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:03:30 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxau, libxau_devel In-Reply-To: <201003142152.o2ELqlR4020254@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003142152.o2ELqlR4020254@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: batching On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 1:52 PM, William Bonnet wrote: > * libxau: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2010.03.08 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.14 > ?+ libxau-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxau-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxau_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libxau_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 18:10:15 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:10:15 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Please delete colliding pre-x11 packages In-Reply-To: References: <32F374AE-554E-425D-BAFD-173917A96FFE@baltic-online.de> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 1:32 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Phil, > > please delete the following packages from the mirror and from GAR as > they have been superseeded by the corresponding CSWx11*-packages: > > - CSWinputproto (now CSWx11inputproto) > - CSWkbproto (now CSWx11kbproto) > - CSWrenderproto (now CSWx11renderproto) > - CSWxproto (now CSWx11xproto) > Now Deleted from GAR. I mean, mantis :) From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 15 18:17:20 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:17:20 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, giflib(...) In-Reply-To: <201003150829.o2F8TS8Q003987@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003150829.o2F8TS8Q003987@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Now with alternatives for non-x11 and csw x11. > great. batching now. From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 15 18:30:23 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:30:23 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs glib2, glib2_devel In-Reply-To: <201003151026.o2FAQMhJ021910@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003151026.o2FAQMhJ021910@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: erm.... I thought "harpchad" was maintainer for glib2. there is no mention of there being a collaborative "team" on this one, at http://wiki.opencsw.org/teams On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * glib2: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 2.20.0,REV=2009.04.08 > ?- ? to: 2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09 > ?+ glib2-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ glib2-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ glib2_devel-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ glib2_devel-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 15 18:30:50 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:30:50 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libatk, libatk_devel In-Reply-To: <201003151028.o2FASFcq023240@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003151028.o2FASFcq023240@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: added to batch. On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 3:28 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * libatk: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 1.26.0,REV=2009.06.27 > ?- ? to: 1.29.92,REV=2010.03.09 > ?+ libatk-1.29.92,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libatk-1.29.92,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * libatk_devel: new package > ?+ libatk_devel-1.29.92,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libatk_devel-1.29.92,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 18:31:57 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:31:57 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs liblqr In-Reply-To: <4B9CEE7D.5020705@opencsw.org> References: <4B9CEE7D.5020705@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > New package > > liblqr-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > liblqr-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > liblqr_devel-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > liblqr_devel-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > batching From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 18:34:32 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:34:32 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cupsd, gflags, roxfiler In-Reply-To: References: <201003040902.o2492h10003745@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 6:03 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> * roxfiler: minor version upgrade >> ?Also fixes http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4187 >> ?- from: 2.9,REV=2009.11.21 >> ?- ? to: 2.10,REV=2010.03.03 >> ?+ roxfiler-2.10,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> ?+ roxfiler-2.10,REV=2010.03.03-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > What about this package? ?I think we agreed that the dependencies are OK. > All right then. batching now From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 18:38:27 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:38:27 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs glib2, glib2_devel In-Reply-To: References: <201003151026.o2FAQMhJ021910@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <1E85F47D-A360-46D7-B1DA-459394730B94@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 15.03.2010 um 18:30 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> * glib2: minor version upgrade >> - from: 2.20.0,REV=2009.04.08 >> - to: 2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09 >> + glib2-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + glib2-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> + glib2_devel-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> >> + glib2_devel-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > erm.... I thought "harpchad" was maintainer for glib2. > > there is no mention of there being a collaborative "team" on this > one, at > > http://wiki.opencsw.org/teams Chad wrote to me in September he had very little time for OpenCSW, so I thought I don't bother him with updates which he certainly would have done if he had time. Chad, everything is committed to GAR. Do you want to bump glib2 or do we want to form the "gnome-team"? Best regards -- Dago From bonivart at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 14:31:52 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:31:52 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Preparing for release of perl 5.10.1 with another 80-90 packages Message-ID: <625385e31003150631w3315d094rf3f724ba1730283b@mail.gmail.com> The Perl project is coming to an end, is there anything special regarding the release when there are so many packages that need to be released together? http://wiki.opencsw.org/project-perl -- /peter From benny at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 19:44:08 2010 From: benny at opencsw.org (Benjamin von Mossner) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:44:08 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Preparing for release of perl 5.10.1 with another 80-90 packages In-Reply-To: <625385e31003150631w3315d094rf3f724ba1730283b@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31003150631w3315d094rf3f724ba1730283b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20100315184408.GC13437@vonmossner.de> Hey Peter, > The Perl project is coming to an end, is there anything special > regarding the release when there are so many packages that need to be > released together? i know Ihsan wanted to rebuild his perl packages, but promised to finish that by the end of the week. Ihsan, corret? Other than that i have no objections releasing the beast :-) Cheers, benny -- /"\ ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN | Benjamin von Mossner \ / AGAINST HTML MAIL | benny at vonmossner.de X / \ multiple exclamation marks are a sure sign of a diseased mind From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 15 20:59:15 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:59:15 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs poppler In-Reply-To: <4B9CA789.1040805@opencsw.org> References: <4B9CA789.1040805@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Drat. i accidentally released this already. rather than going through lots of wierd backflips, to backrev, then forward it again, i'm going to hope for a quick fix on this. Roger, please quickly fix the dependancy problem with this. libpoppler should not depend on poppler. particularly since poppler depends on libpoppler. On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 2:08 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Split package to fix issue 4339 > > libpoppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_devel-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_devel-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_doc-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_doc-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 21:24:28 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:24:28 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnutls, gnutls_devel, libtasn1, libta(...) Message-ID: <201003152024.o2FKOSQl015426@login.bo.opencsw.org> * libtasn1_devel: new package + libtasn1_devel-2.5,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libtasn1_devel-2.5,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * gnutls: minor version upgrade This is a version bump originally by Chad. Chad: do you want to respin or can I release it? Everything is in GAR - from: 2.6.4,REV=2009.03.16 - to: 2.8.6,REV=2010.03.15 + gnutls-2.8.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + gnutls-2.8.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + gnutls_devel-2.8.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + gnutls_devel-2.8.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * libtasn1: minor version upgrade - from: 2.4,REV=2010.01.18 - to: 2.5,REV=2010.03.15 + libtasn1-2.5,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libtasn1-2.5,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From ihsan at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 21:48:21 2010 From: ihsan at opencsw.org (Ihsan Dogan) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:48:21 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Preparing for release of perl 5.10.1 with another 80-90 packages In-Reply-To: <20100315184408.GC13437@vonmossner.de> References: <625385e31003150631w3315d094rf3f724ba1730283b@mail.gmail.com> <20100315184408.GC13437@vonmossner.de> Message-ID: <4B9E9D15.4010109@opencsw.org> Hello, Am 15.03.10 19:44, schrieb Benjamin von Mossner: >> The Perl project is coming to an end, is there anything special >> regarding the release when there are so many packages that need to be >> released together? > i know Ihsan wanted to rebuild his perl packages, but promised > to finish that by the end of the week. > Ihsan, corret? Yes, this is correct. I'm already working on it. Right now I'm testing the new rrdtool package. Ihsan -- ihsan at dogan.ch http://blog.dogan.ch/ From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 22:26:39 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:26:39 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnutls, gnutls_devel, libtasn1, libta(...) In-Reply-To: <201003152024.o2FKOSQl015426@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003152024.o2FKOSQl015426@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * libtasn1_devel: new package > ?+ libtasn1_devel-2.5,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libtasn1_devel-2.5,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * libtasn1: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 2.4,REV=2010.01.18 > ?- ? to: 2.5,REV=2010.03.15 > ?+ libtasn1-2.5,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libtasn1-2.5,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz these two have been batched From hson at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 21:56:40 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:56:40 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs poppler In-Reply-To: References: <4B9CA789.1040805@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B9E9F08.6040609@opencsw.org> On 2010-03-15 20:59, Philip Brown wrote: > Drat. i accidentally released this already. > rather than going through lots of wierd backflips, to backrev, then > forward it again, i'm going to hope for a quick fix on this. > > Roger, please quickly fix the dependancy problem with this. > > libpoppler should not depend on poppler. particularly since poppler > depends on libpoppler. > Damn, missed that one Well, I've sent a new batch of files to newpkgs libpoppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler_devel-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler_devel-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler_doc-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 15 23:03:17 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:03:17 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs poppler In-Reply-To: <4B9E9F08.6040609@opencsw.org> References: <4B9CA789.1040805@opencsw.org> <4B9E9F08.6040609@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Damn, missed that one > Well, I've sent a new batch of files to newpkgs > > libpoppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_devel-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_devel-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_doc-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > poppler-0.10.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > thank you. updating batch From bchill at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 03:00:01 2010 From: bchill at opencsw.org (Brian Hill) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 03:00:01 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync Message-ID: <201003160200.o2G201i8016016@login.bo.opencsw.org> * librsync: new package + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 08:18:13 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:18:13 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs sysstat Message-ID: <201003160718.o2G7IDEh024320@login.bo.opencsw.org> * sysstat: major version upgrade - from: 20091228a,REV=2009.12.29 - to: 20100315,REV=2010.03.16 + sysstat-20100315,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + sysstat-20100315,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 08:21:59 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:21:59 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: <201003160200.o2G201i8016016@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003160200.o2G201i8016016@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <3EA7516D-1172-4407-935C-DF62DAE22EC1@opencsw.org> Hi Brian, Am 16.03.2010 um 03:00 schrieb Brian Hill: > * librsync: new package > + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz > + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz Please note the UNCOMMITTED in the package name. That means you have uncommitted changes in your build recipe. As the path to the GAR recipe in the repository is stored in the package that means the package build is not reproducible. Please make sure you see only X gar when checking with "svn status" and then do a gmake platforms-repackage That should be sufficient. Best regards -- Dago From bchill at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 08:56:52 2010 From: bchill at opencsw.org (Brian Hill) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:56:52 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: <3EA7516D-1172-4407-935C-DF62DAE22EC1@opencsw.org> References: <201003160200.o2G201i8016016@login.bo.opencsw.org> <3EA7516D-1172-4407-935C-DF62DAE22EC1@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B9F39C4.7000404@opencsw.org> Hi Dago, I actually had committed the changes, but submitpkg left a newpkgs.mail file around after a couple of aborted runs of it. I removed that and it worked. Brian On 3/16/10 12:21 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Brian, > > Am 16.03.2010 um 03:00 schrieb Brian Hill: >> * librsync: new package >> + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz >> + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz > > Please note the UNCOMMITTED in the package name. That means you have > uncommitted changes in your build recipe. As the path to the GAR > recipe in the repository is stored in the package that means the > package build is not reproducible. Please make sure you see only > X gar > when checking with "svn status" and then do a > gmake platforms-repackage > That should be sufficient. > > > Best regards > > -- Dago > > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions From bchill at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 08:54:27 2010 From: bchill at opencsw.org (Brian Hill) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:54:27 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync Message-ID: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> * librsync: new package + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From bonivart at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 09:34:38 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:34:38 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) nicstat Message-ID: <625385e31003160134l6e7a7c9cy925021413f5bdef4@mail.gmail.com> nicstat-1.22,REV=2010.03.13-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz nicstat-1.22,REV=2010.03.13-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- /peter From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 10:14:48 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:14:48 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31002171033k2a4332c0sadd4583db8d47d1d@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002171208n3238e719i5ef6803a6388b0a1@mail.gmail.com> <49273.217.227.55.176.1266441071.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de> <625385e31002181411w106794bau8dd20cae48e7b9c1@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002181505x445953a2m6f4b4ab8046a186f@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> Hi, Am 19.02.2010 um 09:48 schrieb Peter Bonivart: > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 1:20 AM, Philip Brown > wrote: >>> Since this is Solaris specific that was pretty easy - no one else >>> (BW, >>> SFE, SFW) has it. So nothing to compare with. Except that the author >>> himself calls it pcp. >> >> seems like that is good news, and bad news. >> most of what we do, is provide "general packages, that solaris >> lacks". >> That is to say, the majority of people using our packages, use them >> to >> get stuff on solaris, that they are already used to having elsewhere. >> >> So seems to me, that the majority of people looking for "pcp", would >> be expecting the more general interpretation, not the solaris >> specific >> "php" > > But none of those have Performance Co-Pilot either so who knows what > people are looking for? > > Performance Co-Pilot was started in 1998 and from 2003 it has been > able to run on Solaris. Still no one has packaged it for Solaris and > you're holding your breath about possible collision/confusion? > > PCP is Solaris specific and it's the first one to be packaged, isn't > it logical that the second one will have to adjust? If it ever becomes > an issue. Ping? I just installed pcp and it works find. Could we please release it? Personally I vote for having pcp as pcp and something other as perfcp or similar. Best regards -- Dago From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 16:15:44 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:15:44 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Please delete fftw2 Message-ID: <890FD038-4905-412C-A82F-D1BD417BA21F@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, please delete fftw2 as we now have version 3 as fftw. There are no dependencies to fftw2. Best regards -- Dago From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 16 16:37:26 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:37:26 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Brian Hill wrote: > * librsync: new package > ?+ librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > sigh. it's a mess in newpkgs. Please clean up all older and non-desired versions of "librsync-*", and then let me know. From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 16:51:47 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:51:47 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <587EA9E4-2ABE-4F9D-BE96-82C8BC0C8443@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 16.03.2010 um 16:37 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Brian Hill > wrote: >> * librsync: new package >> + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > sigh. it's a mess in newpkgs. > Please clean up all older and non-desired versions of "librsync-*", > and then let me know. From a workflow-perspective I would prefer a one-way into newpkgs. You grab packages from inspection and either process or discard them on rejection. Best regards -- Dago From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 16:57:04 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:57:04 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> References: <625385e31002171033k2a4332c0sadd4583db8d47d1d@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002171208n3238e719i5ef6803a6388b0a1@mail.gmail.com> <49273.217.227.55.176.1266441071.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de> <625385e31002181411w106794bau8dd20cae48e7b9c1@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002181505x445953a2m6f4b4ab8046a186f@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > .... > Ping? I just installed pcp and it works find. Could we please release it? > Personally I vote for having pcp as pcp and something other as > perfcp or similar. > There was no call for a "vote". there is instead, some issues that I posted to the list, in my prior email in this thread, specifically directed towards Peter. I would be interested in what Peter has to say reguarding the points of reference I made. From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 16 16:54:37 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:54:37 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: <587EA9E4-2ABE-4F9D-BE96-82C8BC0C8443@opencsw.org> References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> <587EA9E4-2ABE-4F9D-BE96-82C8BC0C8443@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > > From a workflow-perspective I would prefer a one-way into newpkgs. you're not the primary person actually WORKING on the workflow :-P but anyways, this is a short term stopgap, since Maciej says he intends to update submitpkgs to do the cleanup automatically, when a new package is submitted. This is the true best way. From skayser at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 17:02:53 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:02:53 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <20100316160253.GH27943@sebastiankayser.de> * Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Brian Hill wrote: > > * librsync: new package > > ?+ librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > > ?+ librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > > > sigh. it's a mess in newpkgs. > Please clean up all older and non-desired versions of "librsync-*", > and then let me know. For users of submitpkg this is unfortunately an opaque detail. Maciej, could submitpkg be enhanced to prune old versions? Phil, as Brian is new to this game, what do you think about just considering the most current submitted version? skayser at bender:/home/newpkgs$ ls -1tr librsync-0.9.7\,REV\=2010.03.1* librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Sebastian From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 17:16:14 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:16:14 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: <20100316160253.GH27943@sebastiankayser.de> References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> <20100316160253.GH27943@sebastiankayser.de> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: > * Philip Brown wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Brian Hill wrote: >> > * librsync: new package >> > ?+ librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> > ?+ librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > >> >> sigh. it's a mess in newpkgs. >> Please clean up all older and non-desired versions of "librsync-*", >> and then let me know. > > For users of submitpkg this is unfortunately an opaque detail. Maciej, > could submitpkg be enhanced to prune old versions? Phil, as Brian is new > to this game, what do you think about just considering the most current > submitted version? > > skayser at bender:/home/newpkgs$ ls -1tr librsync-0.9.7\,REV\=2010.03.1* > librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz > librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz > librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz The definition of "most recent" needs some work. There's an algorithm that determines it, and it's not lexical sorting. I can implement something like this: "if package foo is sent for release, anything matching foo-* that is not what we're currently sending, gets deleted from bender:/home/newpkgs" From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 16 17:18:29 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:18:29 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) nicstat In-Reply-To: <625385e31003160134l6e7a7c9cy925021413f5bdef4@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31003160134l6e7a7c9cy925021413f5bdef4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > nicstat-1.22,REV=2010.03.13-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > nicstat-1.22,REV=2010.03.13-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > thanks. adding to batch From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 17:22:05 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:22:05 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> <20100316160253.GH27943@sebastiankayser.de> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > >... > The definition of "most recent" needs some work. ?There's an algorithm > that determines it, and it's not lexical sorting. Forget "most recent". just remove "all other versions". > I can implement > something like this: > > "if package foo is sent for release, anything matching foo-* that is > not what we're currently sending, gets deleted from > bender:/home/newpkgs" exactly. Although of course, users will then have to be careful to commit BOTH architectures of a package at once, to avoid: 1. submit foo-sparc 2. (remove all other foo-*) 3. submit foo-i386 4. (remove all other foo-*, which includes foo-sparc :-) I was going to suggest "well maybe you should only auto-remove the same arch", but that then does not properly cleanup issues where a package is migrated from ARCH=sparc to ARCH=all. Or vice versa. From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 17:24:34 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:24:34 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs sysstat In-Reply-To: <201003160718.o2G7IDEh024320@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003160718.o2G7IDEh024320@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * sysstat: major version upgrade > ?- from: 20091228a,REV=2009.12.29 > ?- ? to: 20100315,REV=2010.03.16 > ?+ sysstat-20100315,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ sysstat-20100315,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > okay, thanks From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 17:23:13 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:23:13 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> <20100316160253.GH27943@sebastiankayser.de> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Philip Brown wrote: > > > exactly. > Although of course, users will then have to be careful to commit BOTH > architectures of a package at once, >... hmm. actually, one could consider it a FEATURE, if submitpkg actually REFUSED to submit an arch-specific version of a package, without the corresponding other arch package. From bchill at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 17:37:35 2010 From: bchill at opencsw.org (Brian Hill) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:37:35 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4B9FB3CF.9020500@opencsw.org> Oke doke. All librsync undesirables have been removed.. Brian On 3/16/10 8:37 AM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Brian Hill wrote: > >> * librsync: new package >> + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + librsync-0.9.7,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> >> > sigh. it's a mess in newpkgs. > Please clean up all older and non-desired versions of "librsync-*", > and then let me know. > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 18:04:52 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:04:52 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs fftw Message-ID: <201003161704.o2GH4qZP011703@login.bo.opencsw.org> Now contains real libraries, please drop CSWfftw2 * fftw: revision upgrade - from: 2009.11.02 - to: 2010.03.16 + fftw-3.2.2,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + fftw-3.2.2,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 18:21:58 2010 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:21:58 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: (Philip Brown's message of "Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:57:04 -0700") References: <625385e31002171033k2a4332c0sadd4583db8d47d1d@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002171208n3238e719i5ef6803a6388b0a1@mail.gmail.com> <49273.217.227.55.176.1266441071.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de> <625385e31002181411w106794bau8dd20cae48e7b9c1@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002181505x445953a2m6f4b4ab8046a186f@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Philip Brown writes: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >> .... >> Ping? I just installed pcp and it works find. Could we please release it? >> Personally I vote for having pcp as pcp and something other as >> perfcp or similar. >> > > There was no call for a "vote". there is instead, some issues that I > posted to the list, in my prior email in this thread, specifically > directed towards Peter. > > I would be interested in what Peter has to say reguarding the points > of reference I made. Me think: just name it pcp. But maybe I'm answering the wrong question? -- Peter From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 18:11:52 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:11:52 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs fftw In-Reply-To: <201003161704.o2GH4qZP011703@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003161704.o2GH4qZP011703@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Now contains real libraries, please drop CSWfftw2 > > * fftw: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2009.11.02 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.16 > ?+ fftw-3.2.2,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ fftw-3.2.2,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > done, and done. From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 16 18:14:32 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:14:32 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: <4B9FB3CF.9020500@opencsw.org> References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B9FB3CF.9020500@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Brian Hill wrote: > Oke doke. All librsync undesirables have been removed.. > > Brian > Thanks Brian! definately makes my job easier now. remaining stuff has been batched. From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 18:35:00 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:35:00 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31002171033k2a4332c0sadd4583db8d47d1d@mail.gmail.com> <49273.217.227.55.176.1266441071.squirrel@ssl.skayser.de> <625385e31002181411w106794bau8dd20cae48e7b9c1@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002181505x445953a2m6f4b4ab8046a186f@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Peter FELECAN wrote: > Philip Brown writes: > >> I would be interested in what Peter has to say reguarding the points >> of reference I made. > > Me think: just name it pcp. But maybe I'm answering the wrong question? > sorry i meant Peter B :-) And my point, was in response to his note, that "none of those have Performance Co-Pilot either so who knows what people are looking for?" but my somewhat lengthier reply was as to the nature of "those"; pointing out that people looking for "free software", are going to be heavily influenced in their expectations by other "free software distributions", even if those distributions are not solaris-specific. in other words, my presumption is that most people will come to our package set with an expectation of, "well, [Debian/freebsdj/ubuntu/....] has it, so you should too", more than, "well, sunfreeware/blastwave/whatever has it". So, naming of applications, (particularly long-time well-known ones), matters in well known distributions, even if they are not strictly speaking solaris distributions. That was the essence of my issue, and I was waiting to see what the package submitter, Peter B., had to say on the matter. From bonivart at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 18:50:09 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:50:09 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31002171033k2a4332c0sadd4583db8d47d1d@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002181411w106794bau8dd20cae48e7b9c1@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002181505x445953a2m6f4b4ab8046a186f@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <625385e31003161050n76fdd844xfb0717be3cbfde8@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > in other words, my presumption is that most people will come to our > package set with an expectation of, "well, > [Debian/freebsdj/ubuntu/....] has it, so you should too", ? more than, > "well, sunfreeware/blastwave/whatever has it". > > So, naming of applications, (particularly long-time well-known ones), > matters in well known distributions, even if they are not strictly > speaking solaris distributions. But we don't have it so it's a non-issue with the naming. If we actually had both pcp and Performance Copilot, naming would be an issue and still it would be much more reasonable that the one actually called pcp is also called so by us and the one with a much longer name is shortened to something still recognizable, e.g. like Dago suggested perfcp. The descriptions field for both could give the "full name" to clear up any confusion. To just state that people will try to install Performance Copilot as pcp because they did that on Debian is vague to say the least (maybe if it was a popular package like Apache) and even if pcp is renamed to something that people who want pcp definitely will not look for it still doesn't help Debian people thinking they will get Performance Copilot since we don't have that. And we probably never will either since it's geared (as far as I can tell) towards Linux and we have the excellent DTrace instead. -- /peter From hson at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 19:11:51 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 19:11:51 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs lcms Message-ID: <4B9FC9E7.9020408@opencsw.org> Varsion update, package split, 64-bit build lcms-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz lcms-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz lcms_devel-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz lcms_devel-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz lcms_rt-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz lcms_rt-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz py_lcms-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz py_lcms-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 16 21:14:46 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:14:46 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: <625385e31003161050n76fdd844xfb0717be3cbfde8@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31002171033k2a4332c0sadd4583db8d47d1d@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002181505x445953a2m6f4b4ab8046a186f@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> <625385e31003161050n76fdd844xfb0717be3cbfde8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > >... and even if pcp is renamed to > something that people who want pcp definitely will not look for it > still doesn't help Debian people thinking they will get Performance > Copilot since we don't have that. And we probably never will either > since it's geared (as far as I can tell) towards Linux and we have the > excellent DTrace instead. > Hmm. well, if performance co-pilot were a completely linux -only application, I would agree with you to some degree. Apart from the fact that dtrace, while being very powerful, still is not GUI oriented. whereas Performance co-pilot is geared towards providing a GUI, and/or centralized view of system performance. Being sort of like a "performance dashboard".Whereas DTrace is more a low level "performance probe and debugging tool" >From http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp/faq.html#Q2 "Performance Co-Pilot uses a single, comprehensive, data model to describe all available performance data. " It actually sounds (and looks) quite nice. Even more generally, "Performance Co-Pilot (PCP) is a framework and services to support system-level performance monitoring and performance management. " Erm.. it also claims to be cross platform. http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp/index.html "PCP is a feature-rich, mature, extensible, cross-platform toolkit supporting both live and retrospective analysis. " AND.... from the INSTALL file: A.1 Linux Installation (rpm, deb) .2 Mac OS X Installation .3 AIX Installation .4 Solaris Installation .5 Windows Installation So, this can certainly be available on solaris. And i would like to at this point say, that we SHOULD provide it for solaris! Subsection from that file: == A.4 Solaris Installation At this stage, noone is making available pre-built Solaris binaries. A port to Solaris has been done, and merged, however - building from the source is currently the only option. Packaging work is not begun for PCP on Solaris at this stage. So, I would like to suggest that we be pioneers in being the first to provide a solaris package, of Performance Co-Pilot, as "pcp"! Sorry about that :-} But after reviewing the above facts, I do believe that our users would be best served in having "pcp" be the more widely known "performance co-pilot". From skayser at opencsw.org Tue Mar 16 21:24:16 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:24:16 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31002181505x445953a2m6f4b4ab8046a186f@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> <625385e31003161050n76fdd844xfb0717be3cbfde8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20100316202416.GI27943@sebastiankayser.de> * Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > > >... and even if pcp is renamed to > > something that people who want pcp definitely will not look for it > > still doesn't help Debian people thinking they will get Performance > > Copilot since we don't have that. And we probably never will either > > since it's geared (as far as I can tell) towards Linux and we have the > > excellent DTrace instead. > > > > Sorry about that :-} But after reviewing the above facts, I do > believe that our users would be best served in having "pcp" be the > more widely known "performance co-pilot". FWIW: Before this thread I have never ever heard about performance co-pilot. OTOH I have used the pcp script (downloaded manually) on various occassions. Speaking from the viewpoint of a Solaris sysadmin. Sebastian From hson at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 02:46:04 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 02:46:04 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs djvulibre Message-ID: <4BA0345C.3000006@opencsw.org> Version update, 64-bit build djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From dam at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 08:37:33 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 08:37:33 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: <20100316202416.GI27943@sebastiankayser.de> References: <625385e31002181505x445953a2m6f4b4ab8046a186f@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> <625385e31003161050n76fdd844xfb0717be3cbfde8@mail.gmail.com> <20100316202416.GI27943@sebastiankayser.de> Message-ID: <86C82B6F-0BA5-4E0D-A4D6-2957EC4B1E5E@opencsw.org> Hi, Am 16.03.2010 um 21:24 schrieb Sebastian Kayser: > * Philip Brown wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Peter Bonivart > > wrote: >>>> ... and even if pcp is renamed to >>> something that people who want pcp definitely will not look for it >>> still doesn't help Debian people thinking they will get Performance >>> Copilot since we don't have that. And we probably never will either >>> since it's geared (as far as I can tell) towards Linux and we have >>> the >>> excellent DTrace instead. >>> >> >> Sorry about that :-} But after reviewing the above facts, I do >> believe that our users would be best served in having "pcp" be the >> more widely known "performance co-pilot". > > FWIW: Before this thread I have never ever heard about performance > co-pilot. OTOH I have used the pcp script (downloaded manually) on > various occassions. > > Speaking from the viewpoint of a Solaris sysadmin. I suggest packaging the Performance Co-Pilot as CSWpcptoolkit with abbreviated components CSWpcpt(web|agent|...) and pid-con-port as pcp. For the cause of argumentation I also go with Sebastian. Best regards -- Dago From dam at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 08:44:10 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 08:44:10 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_mimetypes Message-ID: <201003170744.o2H7iAQq024837@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pm_mimetypes: minor version upgrade - from: 1.28,REV=2010.02.03 - to: 1.29,REV=2010.03.17 + pm_mimetypes-1.29,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 09:39:37 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:39:37 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, giflib(...) Message-ID: <201003170839.o2H8db4W018186@login.bo.opencsw.org> This version has an ugly typo in alternatives linking the 64 bit lib to libneon. * gif: revision upgrade - from: 2010.03.14 - to: 2010.03.17 + giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_doc-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_rt_x11-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + giflib_rt_x11-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libungif-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From hson at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 09:45:02 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:45:02 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs exiftool Message-ID: <4BA0968E.6050105@opencsw.org> Update to 8.14 exiftool-8.14,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz From dam at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 10:49:06 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:49:06 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs imlib2 Message-ID: <201003170949.o2H9n6rZ027942@login.bo.opencsw.org> * imlib2: patchlevel upgrade Now linked against CSW X11. - from: 1.4.2,REV=2009.11.09 - to: 1.4.3,REV=2010.03.17 + imlib2-1.4.3,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + imlib2-1.4.3,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 13:24:53 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:24:53 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs imlib2_loaders Message-ID: <201003171224.o2HCOrfg022685@login.bo.opencsw.org> * imlib2_loaders: new package + imlib2_loaders-1.4.3,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + imlib2_loaders-1.4.3,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From hson at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 14:51:52 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:51:52 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpaper Message-ID: <4BA0DE78.9070403@opencsw.org> New package: Library and tools for handling papersize libpaper-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libpaper-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libpaper_devel-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libpaper_devel-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From skayser at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 15:25:49 2010 From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:25:49 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B9FB3CF.9020500@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <20100317142549.GJ27943@sebastiankayser.de> * Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Brian Hill wrote: > > Oke doke. All librsync undesirables have been removed.. > > > > Brian > > > > Thanks Brian! definately makes my job easier now. > remaining stuff has been batched. Any hickups publishing librsync? It's not yet in Mantis, nor is it available in the catalog (Ibiblio's and the one from my German mirror). Sebastian From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 17:36:37 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:36:37 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librsync In-Reply-To: <20100317142549.GJ27943@sebastiankayser.de> References: <201003160754.o2G7sRmK025666@login.bo.opencsw.org> <4B9FB3CF.9020500@opencsw.org> <20100317142549.GJ27943@sebastiankayser.de> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 7:25 AM, Sebastian Kayser wrote: > >> Thanks Brian! definately makes my job easier now. >> remaining stuff has been batched. > > Any hickups publishing librsync? It's not yet in Mantis, nor is it > available in the catalog (Ibiblio's and the one from my German mirror). > yeah a little problem in the general publishing back end. nothing that YOU need to deal with, though. thanks :) From phil at bolthole.com Wed Mar 17 18:54:56 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:54:56 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs lcms In-Reply-To: <4B9FC9E7.9020408@opencsw.org> References: <4B9FC9E7.9020408@opencsw.org> Message-ID: batching On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Varsion update, package split, 64-bit build > > lcms-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > lcms-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > lcms_devel-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > lcms_devel-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > lcms_rt-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > lcms_rt-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > py_lcms-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > py_lcms-1.19,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 18:58:18 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:58:18 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs djvulibre In-Reply-To: <4BA0345C.3000006@opencsw.org> References: <4BA0345C.3000006@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Version update, 64-bit build > > djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > runtime would seem to be missing a dependancy on CSWiconv? From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 18:59:28 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:59:28 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs exiftool In-Reply-To: <4BA0968E.6050105@opencsw.org> References: <4BA0968E.6050105@opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Update to 8.14 > > exiftool-8.14,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 19:01:23 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:01:23 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpaper In-Reply-To: <4BA0DE78.9070403@opencsw.org> References: <4BA0DE78.9070403@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > New package: Library and tools for handling papersize > > libpaper-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpaper-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libpaper_devel-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpaper_devel-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > Hmm.. the "devel" would appear to be more "doc" than devel", really. and it's only 9k, gzipped! probably half the size, is the license! :) Do you really want to split this up? maybe better just as a single package? From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 19:02:43 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:02:43 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs imlib2 In-Reply-To: <201003170949.o2H9n6rZ027942@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003170949.o2H9n6rZ027942@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay got this and the loaders On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 2:49 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * imlib2: patchlevel upgrade > ?Now linked against CSW X11. > ?- from: 1.4.2,REV=2009.11.09 > ?- ? to: 1.4.3,REV=2010.03.17 > ?+ imlib2-1.4.3,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ imlib2-1.4.3,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at bolthole.com Wed Mar 17 19:04:12 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:04:12 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs giflib, giflib_doc, giflib_rt, giflib(...) In-Reply-To: <201003170839.o2H8db4W018186@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003170839.o2H8db4W018186@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 1:39 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > This version has an ugly typo in alternatives linking the 64 bit lib > to libneon. > erm.. presumably, you mean, FIXES an ugly typo :-} okay > * gif: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2010.03.14 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.17 > ?+ giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ giflib-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ giflib_doc-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ giflib_rt-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ giflib_rt_x11-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ giflib_rt_x11-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libungif-4.1.6,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > From hson at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 19:19:36 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:19:36 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs djvulibre In-Reply-To: References: <4BA0345C.3000006@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4BA11D38.10806@opencsw.org> On 2010-03-17 18:58, Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: >> Version update, 64-bit build >> >> djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > runtime would seem to be missing a dependancy on CSWiconv? Strange, GAR told me that CSWiconv wasn't needed so I removed it. I'll have a look at it. From hson at opencsw.org Wed Mar 17 19:19:40 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:19:40 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpaper In-Reply-To: References: <4BA0DE78.9070403@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4BA11D3C.3050001@opencsw.org> On 2010-03-17 19:01, Philip Brown wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: >> New package: Library and tools for handling papersize >> >> libpaper-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> libpaper-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> libpaper_devel-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> libpaper_devel-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > Hmm.. the "devel" would appear to be more "doc" than devel", really. > and it's only 9k, gzipped! probably half the size, is the license! :) > > Do you really want to split this up? maybe better just as a single package? Sure, I'll repackage Right now I'm in split-mode by default From phil at bolthole.com Wed Mar 17 19:42:37 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:42:37 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: <86C82B6F-0BA5-4E0D-A4D6-2957EC4B1E5E@opencsw.org> References: <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> <625385e31003161050n76fdd844xfb0717be3cbfde8@mail.gmail.com> <20100316202416.GI27943@sebastiankayser.de> <86C82B6F-0BA5-4E0D-A4D6-2957EC4B1E5E@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > > I suggest packaging the Performance Co-Pilot as CSWpcptoolkit Except that is not its name. It does not have "toolkit" as part of its name. If it did, I might be more inclined to accept that. Except that it doesnt. and the project itself, gives a suggested abbreviation as "PCP". http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp/ "Performance Co-Pilot (PCP) " Plus it already has a *well established presence* as "pcp" in the open source distribution community. From hson at opencsw.org Thu Mar 18 00:08:09 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:08:09 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs djvulibre In-Reply-To: References: <4BA0345C.3000006@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4BA160D9.6010006@opencsw.org> On 2010-03-17 18:58, Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: >> Version update, 64-bit build >> >> djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > runtime would seem to be missing a dependancy on CSWiconv? Fixed, old packages replaced with fixed ones djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From hson at opencsw.org Thu Mar 18 00:09:26 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:09:26 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpaper In-Reply-To: References: <4BA0DE78.9070403@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4BA16126.9010903@opencsw.org> On 2010-03-17 19:01, Philip Brown wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: >> New package: Library and tools for handling papersize >> >> libpaper-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> libpaper-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> libpaper_devel-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> libpaper_devel-1.1.23,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > Hmm.. the "devel" would appear to be more "doc" than devel", really. > and it's only 9k, gzipped! probably half the size, is the license! :) > > Do you really want to split this up? maybe better just as a single package? Removed old packages, this is replacement ones. libpaper-1.1.23+nmu1,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libpaper-1.1.23+nmu1,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From maciej at opencsw.org Thu Mar 18 08:31:18 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:31:18 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs djvulibre In-Reply-To: <4BA11D38.10806@opencsw.org> References: <4BA0345C.3000006@opencsw.org> <4BA11D38.10806@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > On 2010-03-17 18:58, Philip Brown wrote: >> >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Roger H?kansson ?wrote: >>> >>> Version update, 64-bit build >>> >>> djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>> djvulibre-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >>> djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>> djvulibre_devel-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >>> djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>> djvulibre_rt-3.5.22,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >>> >> >> runtime would seem to be missing a dependancy on CSWiconv? > > Strange, GAR told me that CSWiconv wasn't needed so I removed it. > I'll have a look at it. This isn't supposed to be happening, if it's a bug I need to fix it. I'm looking at it. From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 18 17:36:32 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 09:36:32 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpaper In-Reply-To: <4BA16126.9010903@opencsw.org> References: <4BA0DE78.9070403@opencsw.org> <4BA16126.9010903@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Removed old packages, this is replacement ones. > > libpaper-1.1.23+nmu1,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpaper-1.1.23+nmu1,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > Erm... i just noticed... maybe you shouldnt have the "NMU1" bit on it. that's a debian-ism. stands for "non-maintainer-update" usually. And the debian people are abusing their own use of it. ARrrg. Hmm.. actually, seems like the whole thing is a debian-ism. it doesnt have a proper 3rd-party home site?Ugh, i hate those kinds of things... but besides which, "nmu2" is out :-} perhaps you should bug them to "encourage" they migrate it to sourceforge. then there is no more "nmu" idiocy, and things will be cleaner for everyone. for example, bsd people apparently use this. As well as MacOS X ?!?!?! This is just... odd :-} From phil at opencsw.org Thu Mar 18 17:40:11 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 09:40:11 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs djvulibre In-Reply-To: <4BA160D9.6010006@opencsw.org> References: <4BA0345C.3000006@opencsw.org> <4BA160D9.6010006@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > > > Fixed, old packages replaced with fixed ones > thanks for the updates. batched From hson at opencsw.org Thu Mar 18 17:58:12 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 17:58:12 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpaper In-Reply-To: References: <4BA0DE78.9070403@opencsw.org> <4BA16126.9010903@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <4BA25BA4.40709@opencsw.org> On 2010-03-18 17:36, Philip Brown wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > >> Removed old packages, this is replacement ones. >> >> libpaper-1.1.23+nmu1,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> libpaper-1.1.23+nmu1,REV=2010.03.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > > Erm... i just noticed... maybe you shouldnt have the "NMU1" bit on it. > that's a debian-ism. stands for "non-maintainer-update" usually. And > the debian people are abusing their own use of it. ARrrg. > but besides which, "nmu2" is out :-} Which was why I chose to add nmu to the version number... But I've checked nmu2 and it only contains Debian-related changes, so there is no need to repackage (other than changing the version number) > > Hmm.. actually, seems like the whole thing is a debian-ism. it doesnt > have a proper 3rd-party home site?Ugh, i hate those kinds of things... > They explicitly say that the debian site is the home for this package. Which isn't that strange since the original author seemed to be involved with debian for a long time. > perhaps you should bug them to "encourage" they migrate it to > sourceforge. Well, I doubt that they will do it, I did see some posting about it and since the developers all are Debian-guys why should they care... Just gonna create more job for them. > then there is no more "nmu" idiocy, and things will be > cleaner for everyone. > for example, bsd people apparently use this. > As well as MacOS X ?!?!?! > This is just... odd :-} Even the OpenVMS dist lists packages.debian.org as the home ;) From phil at bolthole.com Thu Mar 18 19:00:55 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:00:55 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpaper In-Reply-To: <4BA25BA4.40709@opencsw.org> References: <4BA0DE78.9070403@opencsw.org> <4BA16126.9010903@opencsw.org> <4BA25BA4.40709@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > >> Hmm.. actually, seems like the whole thing is a debian-ism. it doesnt >> have a proper 3rd-party home site?Ugh, i hate those kinds of things... >> >> perhaps you should bug them to "encourage" they migrate it to >> sourceforge. >... > They explicitly say that the debian site is the home for this package. > Which isn't that strange since the original author seemed to be involved > with debian for a long time. Did you actually request it though? > Even the OpenVMS dist lists packages.debian.org as the home ;) yes, I am not debating this fact at all: debian.org is currently its "home". There is other software in a similar situation (eg: fakeroot) What I am suggesting, is that since this has clearly become a "greater than debian" project, and in order to foster even more widespread adoption, it would probably benefit both them and others, to put it up on sourceforge (or somewhere similar. savanna.gnu.org or whatever, if they prefer?) Nothing is lost by asking, hmm? From hson at opencsw.org Fri Mar 19 12:07:50 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:07:50 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs zlib Message-ID: <4BA35B06.2020704@opencsw.org> Update to 1.2.4 zlib-1.2.4,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz zlib-1.2.4,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 19 14:22:15 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:22:15 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pcre, pcre_rt Message-ID: <201003191322.o2JDMFAt007661@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pcre: minor version upgrade - from: 8.01,REV=2010.01.20 - to: 8.02,REV=2010.03.19 + pcre-8.02,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pcre-8.02,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + pcre_rt-8.02,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pcre_rt-8.02,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From benny at opencsw.org Fri Mar 19 14:29:25 2010 From: benny at opencsw.org (Benjamin von Mossner) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:29:25 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pbzip2 Message-ID: <201003191329.o2JDTPJ9015895@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pbzip2: minor version upgrade - from: 1.0.5,REV=2010.01.24 - to: 1.1.0,REV=2010.03.16 + pbzip2-1.1.0,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pbzip2-1.1.0,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 19 16:32:07 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:32:07 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gifsicle, pm_appconfig, pm_configgene(...) Message-ID: <201003191532.o2JFW7re013340@login.bo.opencsw.org> These are all takeover from Frederic van de Velde. The catalog name of CSWpmnetssh has been changed from pm_net_ssh to pm_netssh according to the standards. * pm_configgeneral: minor version upgrade - from: 2.40,REV=2008.11.18 - to: 2.44,REV=2010.03.19 + pm_configgeneral-2.44,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_objrealizelater: minor version upgrade - from: 0.15,REV=2007.02.26 - to: 0.18,REV=2010.03.19 + pm_objrealizelater-0.18,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_netssh: new package + pm_netssh-0.09,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * pm: revision upgrade - from: 2008.11.18 - to: 2010.03.19 + pm_appconfig-1.66,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + pm_fileremove-1.42,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + pm_iomultiplex-1.10,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz + pm_netserver-0.97,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * gifsicle: minor version upgrade - from: 1.48,REV=2007.04.18 - to: 1.59,REV=2010.03.19 + gifsicle-1.59,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + gifsicle-1.59,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_useridentity: minor version upgrade - from: 0.91,REV=2007.02.26 - to: 0.93,REV=2010.03.19 + pm_useridentity-0.93,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_logdispatchconf: minor version upgrade - from: 1.02,REV=2008.11.28 - to: 1.03,REV=2010.03.19 + pm_logdispatchconf-1.03,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 19 23:53:34 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:53:34 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs zlib In-Reply-To: <4BA35B06.2020704@opencsw.org> References: <4BA35B06.2020704@opencsw.org> Message-ID: batching On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Update to 1.2.4 > > zlib-1.2.4,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > zlib-1.2.4,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at opencsw.org Fri Mar 19 23:54:47 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:54:47 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pcre, pcre_rt In-Reply-To: <201003191322.o2JDMFAt007661@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003191322.o2JDMFAt007661@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 6:22 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * pcre: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 8.01,REV=2010.01.20 > ?- ? to: 8.02,REV=2010.03.19 > ?+ pcre-8.02,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pcre-8.02,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pcre_rt-8.02,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pcre_rt-8.02,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- > Generated by submitpkg > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at bolthole.com Fri Mar 19 23:55:40 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:55:40 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pbzip2 In-Reply-To: <201003191329.o2JDTPJ9015895@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003191329.o2JDTPJ9015895@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: all right On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 6:29 AM, Benjamin von Mossner wrote: > * pbzip2: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 1.0.5,REV=2010.01.24 > ?- ? to: 1.1.0,REV=2010.03.16 > ?+ pbzip2-1.1.0,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pbzip2-1.1.0,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From phil at opencsw.org Sat Mar 20 00:17:21 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:17:21 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gifsicle, pm_appconfig, pm_configgene(...) In-Reply-To: <201003191532.o2JFW7re013340@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003191532.o2JFW7re013340@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > These are all takeover from Frederic van de Velde. (who appears to be missing. I just updated his status. Shame) okay, working on them From bwalton at opencsw.org Sat Mar 20 02:57:25 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 02:57:25 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit Message-ID: <201003200157.o2K1vPlo016499@login.bo.opencsw.org> Hi Phil, This should be the real deal. * magit: new package + magit-0.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz Thanks -Ben -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Sat Mar 20 11:24:54 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:24:54 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs dnstracer Message-ID: <201003201024.o2KAOst8014747@login.bo.opencsw.org> Take over last package from Robin Clark. * dnstracer: minor version upgrade - from: 1.8 - to: 1.9,REV=2010.03.20 + dnstracer-1.9,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + dnstracer-1.9,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Sat Mar 20 12:39:53 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:39:53 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe Message-ID: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> Takeover from missing maintainer Markus Mayer. * joe: minor version upgrade - from: 3.3 - to: 3.7,REV=2010.03.20 + joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Sat Mar 20 13:34:25 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:34:25 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs nasm Message-ID: <201003201234.o2KCYP0u016611@login.bo.opencsw.org> Just a small version bump now build with GAR. You can consider it a courtesy upgrade. > In the meantime, please feel free to take over any packages you like. > Cheers! > Murray... Murray: You can peek at the GAR Makefile at http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/browser/csw/mgar/pkg/nasm/trunk/Makefile It is fairly basic and may give you a good start :-) * nasm: minor version upgrade - from: 2.05.01,REV=2009.07.28 - to: 2.08.01,REV=2010.03.20 + nasm-2.08.01,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + nasm-2.08.01,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Sat Mar 20 13:59:54 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:59:54 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_classsingleton Message-ID: <201003201259.o2KCxsL4006365@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pm_classsingleton: new package + pm_classsingleton-1.4,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From bwalton at opencsw.org Sun Mar 21 15:42:13 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 15:42:13 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs xmlto Message-ID: <201003211442.o2LEgD3H022329@login.bo.opencsw.org> Hi Phil, These address bug #4331. New dependency on textutils for gtail use. * xmlto: revision upgrade - from: 2009.09.27 - to: 2010.03.10 + xmlto-0.0.23,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + xmlto-0.0.23,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Thanks -Ben -- Generated by submitpkg From hson at opencsw.org Sun Mar 21 16:49:21 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:49:21 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs poppler Message-ID: <4BA64001.5060503@opencsw.org> Update to 0.12.4 libpoppler-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler_devel-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler_devel-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libpoppler_doc-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz poppler-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz poppler-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From hson at opencsw.org Sun Mar 21 16:58:29 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:58:29 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libproxy Message-ID: <4BA64225.9040909@opencsw.org> Further split the package, see issue 4307 libproxy-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libproxy-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libproxy_devel-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libproxy_devel-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libproxy_gnome-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libproxy_gnome-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libproxy_kde-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libproxy_kde-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz py_libproxy-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz From ihsan at opencsw.org Sun Mar 21 21:50:35 2010 From: ihsan at opencsw.org (Ihsan Dogan) Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:50:35 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ldns, ldns_devel Message-ID: <201003212050.o2LKoZKt013014@login.bo.opencsw.org> * ldns: patchlevel upgrade - from: 1.6.3,REV=2009.12.27 - to: 1.6.4,REV=2010.03.18 + ldns-1.6.4,REV=2010.03.18-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + ldns-1.6.4,REV=2010.03.18-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + ldns_devel-1.6.4,REV=2010.03.18-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + ldns_devel-1.6.4,REV=2010.03.18-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From hson at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 04:56:36 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 04:56:36 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs liblqr Message-ID: <4BA6EA74.1090805@opencsw.org> Update to fix linkage problem liblqr-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz liblqr-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz liblqr_devel-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz liblqr_devel-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 16:29:22 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:29:22 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_classsingleton In-Reply-To: <201003201259.o2KCxsL4006365@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003201259.o2KCxsL4006365@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 5:59 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * pm_classsingleton: new package > ?+ pm_classsingleton-1.4,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > okay From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 22 16:29:40 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:29:40 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs dnstracer In-Reply-To: <201003201024.o2KAOst8014747@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003201024.o2KAOst8014747@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Take over last package from Robin Clark. > > * dnstracer: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 1.8 > ?- ? to: 1.9,REV=2010.03.20 > ?+ dnstracer-1.9,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ dnstracer-1.9,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > okay From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 22 16:30:06 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:30:06 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs nasm In-Reply-To: <201003201234.o2KCYP0u016611@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003201234.o2KCYP0u016611@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: > * nasm: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 2.05.01,REV=2009.07.28 > ?- ? to: 2.08.01,REV=2010.03.20 > ?+ nasm-2.08.01,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ nasm-2.08.01,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > okay From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 22 16:30:35 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:30:35 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs xmlto In-Reply-To: <201003211442.o2LEgD3H022329@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003211442.o2LEgD3H022329@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Ben Walton wrote: > Hi Phil, > > These address bug #4331. ?New dependency on textutils for gtail use. > > * xmlto: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2009.09.27 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.10 > ?+ xmlto-0.0.23,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ xmlto-0.0.23,REV=2010.03.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > okay From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 16:30:59 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:30:59 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs poppler In-Reply-To: <4BA64001.5060503@opencsw.org> References: <4BA64001.5060503@opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Update to 0.12.4 > > libpoppler-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_devel-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_devel-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libpoppler_doc-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > poppler-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > poppler-0.12.4,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 22 16:31:45 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:31:45 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ldns, ldns_devel In-Reply-To: <201003212050.o2LKoZKt013014@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003212050.o2LKoZKt013014@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Ihsan Dogan wrote: > * ldns: patchlevel upgrade > ?- from: 1.6.3,REV=2009.12.27 > ?- ? to: 1.6.4,REV=2010.03.18 > ?+ ldns-1.6.4,REV=2010.03.18-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ ldns-1.6.4,REV=2010.03.18-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ ldns_devel-1.6.4,REV=2010.03.18-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ ldns_devel-1.6.4,REV=2010.03.18-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > okay From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 22 16:34:30 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:34:30 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit In-Reply-To: <201003200157.o2K1vPlo016499@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003200157.o2K1vPlo016499@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > Hi Phil, > > This should be the real deal. > > * magit: new package > ?+ magit-0.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > Hi Ben, the description is a bit wierd.. I'm used to seeing, "XYZ mode for emacs", not "emacs mode for XYZ" :-) but that being said, I would otherwise accept it... except that the VENDOR line is improper. Needs to be http or ftp worse case. "git://" does not fly. From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 16:35:18 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:35:18 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe In-Reply-To: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 4:39 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Takeover from missing maintainer Markus Mayer. > > * joe: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 3.3 > ?- ? to: 3.7,REV=2010.03.20 > ?+ joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > old version does not depend on ncurses. It's a nice simple, SINGLE package download. Please recompile without it. From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 16:37:13 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:37:13 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libproxy In-Reply-To: <4BA64225.9040909@opencsw.org> References: <4BA64225.9040909@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Further split the package, see issue 4307 > > > libproxy-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libproxy-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libproxy_devel-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libproxy_devel-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libproxy_gnome-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libproxy_gnome-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > libproxy_kde-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > libproxy_kde-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > py_libproxy-0.3.0,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > problem with dependancies: uses isaexec in ALL packages. not appropriate. For that matter, why is there even a 64bit binary at all? (/opt/csw/bin/sparcv9/libproxy) ? Yes, i understand the old version has one, but I'm wondering if it is really neccessary. even if it is appropriate, it may, or MAY NOT be appropriate to tie in use of isaexec with the top level package. From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 22 16:39:45 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:39:45 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs liblqr In-Reply-To: <4BA6EA74.1090805@opencsw.org> References: <4BA6EA74.1090805@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Update to fix linkage problem > > liblqr-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > liblqr-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > liblqr_devel-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > liblqr_devel-0.4.1,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > ______________ okay thanks From bwalton at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 16:42:44 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 11:42:44 -0400 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit In-Reply-To: References: <201003200157.o2K1vPlo016499@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <1269272514-sup-8326@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Mar 22 11:34:30 -0400 2010: > the description is a bit wierd.. I'm used to seeing, > "XYZ mode for emacs", not "emacs mode for XYZ" :-) Pedantic, but that's cool. Will fix. > but that being said, I would otherwise accept it... except that the > VENDOR line is improper. > Needs to be http or ftp worse case. > "git://" does not fly. Oops. Will fix. I assume we only accept ftp:// since all browsers will do anonymous ftp too? Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 17:02:59 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:02:59 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit In-Reply-To: <1269272514-sup-8326@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> References: <201003200157.o2K1vPlo016499@login.bo.opencsw.org> <1269272514-sup-8326@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Ben Walton wrote: > >> but that being said, I would otherwise accept it... except that the >> VENDOR line is improper. >> Needs to be http or ftp worse case. >> "git://" does not fly. > > Oops. ?Will fix. ?I assume we only accept ftp:// since all browsers > will do anonymous ftp too? > yes. but even then, it's only acceptible if there is no actual website for the software. Reason being, its normally easy to get from website -> downloading software, but sometimes it is more difficult to go from download location -> "home page". The url given should still be reasonably close to the url used to find "where to download", particularly for large complicated sites. From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 21:02:45 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:02:45 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe In-Reply-To: References: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi Phil, Am 22.03.2010 um 16:35 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 4:39 AM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> Takeover from missing maintainer Markus Mayer. >> >> * joe: minor version upgrade >> - from: 3.3 >> - to: 3.7,REV=2010.03.20 >> + joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > old version does not depend on ncurses. It's a nice simple, SINGLE > package download. > > Please recompile without it. Why? ncurses is on almost any machine anyway and joe needs ncurses to read updated terminal descriptions. Best regards -- Dago From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 22 21:09:15 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 13:09:15 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe In-Reply-To: References: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > >> Please recompile without it. > > Why? ncurses is on almost any machine anyway and joe needs ncurses to > read updated terminal descriptions. > > didnt we go through this already, a few months ago? :-) ncurses is not a significant add to functionality: existing solaris curses lib can pick up the extra functionality such as color, if you set your TERM correctly. If joe was a larger editor, i wouldnt fuss quite so much about it - however, it is a really nice, small, "one-shot download" editor. Adding ncurses, messes that up. So please remove the extra, unneccessary, dependancy. Here's another data point for you: the ncurses package itself, **is 4 times as big as the joe package** !!! -rw-r--r-- 1 dam staff 471246 Mar 20 12:38 joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 phil csw 1678650 Apr 7 2009 ncurses-5.7,REV=2009.04.06-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz ncurses is bloated and unneccessary in most cases. Dont use unless required. From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 21:10:46 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 20:10:46 +0000 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe In-Reply-To: References: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: 2010/3/22 Dagobert Michelsen : > Hi Phil, > > Am 22.03.2010 um 16:35 schrieb Philip Brown: >> >> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 4:39 AM, Dagobert Michelsen >> wrote: >>> >>> Takeover from missing maintainer Markus Mayer. >>> >>> * joe: minor version upgrade >>> ?- from: 3.3 >>> ?- ? to: 3.7,REV=2010.03.20 >>> ?+ joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>> ?+ joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.20-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >>> >> >> old version does not depend on ncurses. It's a nice simple, SINGLE >> package download. >> >> Please recompile without it. > > Why? ncurses is on almost any machine anyway and joe needs ncurses to > read updated terminal descriptions. Why don't we separate the terminfo out? For example: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/9326 From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 21:19:28 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:19:28 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe In-Reply-To: References: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <01897592-4C30-4E15-ADC2-78AE38A56D19@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 22.03.2010 um 21:09 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> >>> Please recompile without it. >> >> Why? ncurses is on almost any machine anyway and joe needs ncurses to >> read updated terminal descriptions. > > didnt we go through this already, a few months ago? :-) We did, and I am still not confident. Anyway, updated packages in newpkgs/. * joe: minor version upgrade - from: 3.3 - to: 3.7,REV=2010.03.22 + joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Best regards -- Dago From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 21:20:19 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:20:19 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe In-Reply-To: References: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi Maciej, Am 22.03.2010 um 21:10 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski: > Why don't we separate the terminfo out? > > For example: > http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/9326 Are there any programs that need terminfo, but not ncurses? joe binds to ncurses for the reading-routines of terminfo and of course needs terminfo also, so no gain here. Best regards -- Dago From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 22 21:22:51 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 13:22:51 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe In-Reply-To: References: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote: > Why don't we separate the terminfo out? > not a bad idea... but in the specific case of joe, it's not applicable/useful to do so. It doesnt help the core objection of, "this is useless bloat for joe". Unless you are suggesting that the ncurses terminfo is actually OPTIONAL. (i thougth it was mandatory, or the ncurses libs dont work right. i vaguely recall running into that problem previously) but even if it IS... even so, the raw ncurses library file, is larger than the joe executable itself. -rwxr-xr-x 1 root bin 417312 May 27 2005 /opt/csw/bin/joe -rwxr-xr-x 1 root bin 648252 Apr 5 2009 /opt/csw/lib/libncurses.so So, still not appropriate, even without the extra bulk of the terminfo defs. From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 22 21:24:32 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 13:24:32 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe In-Reply-To: <01897592-4C30-4E15-ADC2-78AE38A56D19@opencsw.org> References: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> <01897592-4C30-4E15-ADC2-78AE38A56D19@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Phil, > We did, and I am still not confident. Anyway, updated packages > in newpkgs/. > > * joe: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 3.3 > ?- ? to: 3.7,REV=2010.03.22 > ?+ joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > Um.... thanks..... but it seems like you forgot to update the depend file :-} From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 21:29:55 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:29:55 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe In-Reply-To: References: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> <01897592-4C30-4E15-ADC2-78AE38A56D19@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <2E1D5F50-B1A4-4E6F-B60C-14110B21E0BA@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 22.03.2010 um 21:24 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> Hi Phil, > >> We did, and I am still not confident. Anyway, updated packages >> in newpkgs/. >> >> * joe: minor version upgrade >> - from: 3.3 >> - to: 3.7,REV=2010.03.22 >> + joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + joe-3.7,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > Um.... thanks..... but it seems like you forgot to update the depend > file :-} *Groan* Updated packages in newpkgs/ again... Best regards -- Dago From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 22 22:08:11 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:08:11 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs joe In-Reply-To: <2E1D5F50-B1A4-4E6F-B60C-14110B21E0BA@opencsw.org> References: <201003201139.o2KBdrAZ017436@login.bo.opencsw.org> <01897592-4C30-4E15-ADC2-78AE38A56D19@opencsw.org> <2E1D5F50-B1A4-4E6F-B60C-14110B21E0BA@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >> Um.... thanks..... but it seems like you forgot to update the depend file >> :-} > > *Groan* Updated packages in newpkgs/ again... > Thanks much! :-) Added to batch From bwalton at opencsw.org Tue Mar 23 00:30:42 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:30:42 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit Message-ID: <201003222330.o2MNUgMc013699@login.bo.opencsw.org> Hi Phil, The requested changes...and now solaris 9 too. :) * magit: new package + magit-0.7,REV=2010.03.23-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz Thanks -Ben -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 23 11:36:50 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:36:50 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnutls, gnutls_devel, libtasn1, libta(...) In-Reply-To: <201003152024.o2FKOSQl015426@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003152024.o2FKOSQl015426@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: Hi Phil, Am 15.03.2010 um 18:38 schrieb Dagobert Michelsen: > Am 15.03.2010 um 18:30 schrieb Philip Brown: >> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Dagobert Michelsen >> wrote: >>> * glib2: minor version upgrade >>> - from: 2.20.0,REV=2009.04.08 >>> - to: 2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09 >>> + glib2-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>> + glib2-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >>> + glib2_devel-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>> >>> + glib2_devel-2.23.5,REV=2010.03.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> >> erm.... I thought "harpchad" was maintainer for glib2. >> >> there is no mention of there being a collaborative "team" on this >> one, at >> >> http://wiki.opencsw.org/teams > > Chad wrote to me in September he had very little time for OpenCSW, > so I thought > I don't bother him with updates which he certainly would have done > if he had time. > Chad, everything is committed to GAR. Do you want to bump glib2 or > do we > want to form the "gnome-team"? Am 15.03.2010 um 21:24 schrieb Dagobert Michelsen: > * gnutls: minor version upgrade > This is a version bump originally by Chad. > Chad: do you want to respin or can I release it? Everything is in GAR > - from: 2.6.4,REV=2009.03.16 > - to: 2.8.6,REV=2010.03.15 > + gnutls-2.8.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > + gnutls-2.8.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > + gnutls_devel-2.8.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > + gnutls_devel-2.8.6,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz A week has passed without response from Chad. Phil, if you prefer make it a courtesy release, but I think they should be released now as they are blocking things (especially glib2). Without the update of glib2 I can neither move forward nor backwards regarding CSW X11. Chad, feel free to take over, rebuild or jump in at any time :-) Best regards -- Dago From bonivart at opencsw.org Tue Mar 23 14:48:54 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 14:48:54 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) perl 5.10.1 + associated packages (a total of 200) Message-ID: <625385e31003230648m661ba414ia40e746b13647d2a@mail.gmail.com> This needs to hit the mirrors as a collection. To keep it separated from the rest of newpkgs I put it in a dir called perl5101. ap2_modapreq2-2.12,REV=2010.02.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz ap2_modapreq2-2.12,REV=2010.02.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz ap2_modperl-2.0.4,REV=2010.03.23-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz ap2_modperl-2.0.4,REV=2010.03.23-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz irssi-0.8.14,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz irssi-0.8.14,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libapreq2-2.12,REV=2010.02.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libapreq2-2.12,REV=2010.02.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libapreq2_devel-2.12,REV=2010.02.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libapreq2_devel-2.12,REV=2010.02.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz mod_perl-1.31,REV=2010.02.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz mod_perl-1.31,REV=2010.02.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz mrtg-2.16.3,REV=2010.03.18-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz mrtg-2.16.3,REV=2010.03.18-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz netsnmp-5.4.2.1,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz netsnmp-5.4.2.1,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz netsnmp_py-5.4.2.1,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz netsnmp_py-5.4.2.1,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz perl-5.10.1,REV=2009.12.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz perl-5.10.1,REV=2009.12.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz perldoc-5.10.1,REV=2009.12.15-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz pidgin-2.6.6,REV=2010.02.26-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pidgin-2.6.6,REV=2010.02.26-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_apachereq-1.34,REV=2010.02.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_apachereq-1.34,REV=2010.02.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_apreq2-2.12,REV=2010.02.10-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_apreq2-2.12,REV=2010.02.10-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_archivetar-stub,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_berkeleydb-0.42,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_berkeleydb-0.42,REV=2010.03.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_bitvec-7.1,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_bitvec-7.1,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_butils-0.11,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_butils-0.11,REV=2010.03.12-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cairo-1.061,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cairo-1.061,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_carpclan-6.04,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_carpclan-6.04,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_clone-0.31,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_clone-0.31,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_compressbzip2-2.09,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_compressbzip2-2.09,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_compressrawbz2-2.024,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_compressrawbz2-2.024,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_compressrawzlib-2.024,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_compressrawzlib-2.024,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_convertuulib-1.33,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_convertuulib-1.33,REV=2010.03.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cryptdes-2.05,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cryptdes-2.05,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cryptosslbignum-0.04,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cryptosslbignum-0.04,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cryptrijndael-1.09,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cryptrijndael-1.09,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cryptssleay-0.57,REV=2010.02.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cryptssleay-0.57,REV=2010.02.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cyrus-2.3.16,REV=2010.02.24-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_cyrus-2.3.16,REV=2010.02.24-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_datauuid-1.203,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_datauuid-1.203,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_datecalc-6.3,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_datecalc-6.3,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbdmysql-4.013,REV=2010.02.11-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbdmysql-4.013,REV=2010.02.11-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbdoracle-1.23,REV=2010.02.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbdoracle-1.23,REV=2010.02.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbdoraexplain-1.23,REV=2010.02.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbdoraexplain-1.23,REV=2010.02.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbdpg-2.16.1,REV=2010.02.16-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbdpg-2.16.1,REV=2010.02.16-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbdsqlite-1.29,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbdsqlite-1.29,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbi-1.609,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_dbi-1.609,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_develcaller-2.03,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_develcaller-2.03,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_develcover-0.65,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_develcover-0.65,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_devellexalias-0.04,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_devellexalias-0.04,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_digest-stub,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_digestnilsimsa-0.06,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_digestnilsimsa-0.06,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_digestsha-stub,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_digestsha1-2.12,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_digestsha1-2.12,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_eventlib-1.03,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_eventlib-1.03,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_fcgi-0.68,REV=2010.01.31-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_fcgi-0.68,REV=2010.01.31-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_filesysdf-0.92,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_filesysdf-0.92,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_fontfreetype-0.03,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_fontfreetype-0.03,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_gd-2.44,REV=2010.02.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_gd-2.44,REV=2010.02.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_glib-1.222,REV=2010.01.31-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_glib-1.222,REV=2010.01.31-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_gssapi-0.26,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_gssapi-0.26,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_gtk2-1.221,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_gtk2-1.221,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_htmlparser-3.64,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_htmlparser-3.64,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_iotty-1.08,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_iotty-1.08,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_ipcshrlite-0.17,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_ipcshrlite-0.17,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_listmoreutils-0.22,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_listmoreutils-0.22,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_localegettext-1.05,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_localegettext-1.05,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_mimebase64-3.09,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_mimebase64-3.09,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_modulebuild-stub,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netaddrip-4.027,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netaddrip-4.027,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netdns-0.66,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netdns-0.66,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netinet-1.011,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netinet-1.011,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netnis-0.43,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netnis-0.43,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netpatricia-1.16,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netpatricia-1.16,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netssleay-1.36,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netssleay-1.36,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_osslrandom-0.04,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_osslrandom-0.04,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_osslrsa-0.25,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_osslrsa-0.25,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_padwalker-1.7,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_padwalker-1.7,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_pango-1.221,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_pango-1.221,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_paramsutil-1.00,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_paramsutil-1.00,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_paramsvalidate-0.94,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_paramsvalidate-0.94,REV=2010.02.15-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_pdl-2.4.6,REV=2010.02.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_pdl-2.4.6,REV=2010.02.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_perlioeol-0.14,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_perlioeol-0.14,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_perliogzip-0.18,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_perliogzip-0.18,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_proctbl-0.45,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_proctbl-0.45,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_scopeguard-0.03,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_scopeguard-0.03,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_shout-2.1,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_shout-2.1,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_socket6-0.23,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_socket6-0.23,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_stringapprox-3.26,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_stringapprox-3.26,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_stringcrc32-1.4,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_stringcrc32-1.4,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_subname-0.04,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_subname-0.04,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_subversion-1.6.9,REV=2010.02.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_subversion-1.6.9,REV=2010.02.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_termreadkey-2.30,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_termreadkey-2.30,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_termreadlineg-1.19,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_termreadlineg-1.19,REV=2010.02.17-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_textcsvxs-0.70,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_textcsvxs-0.70,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_textdblmetaphone-0.07,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_textdblmetaphone-0.07,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_tk-804.028,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_tk-804.028,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_tt2-2.22,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_tt2-2.22,REV=2010.02.03-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_unicodemap-0.112,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_unicodemap-0.112,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_unicodestring-2.09,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_unicodestring-2.09,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_unixstatgrab-0.04,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_unixstatgrab-0.04,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_unixsyslog-1.0,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_unixsyslog-1.0,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_version-0.80,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_version-0.80,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_want-0.18,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_want-0.18,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_wwwcurl-4.11,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_wwwcurl-4.11,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_xmllibxml-1.70,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_xmllibxml-1.70,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_xmllibxmlcom-1.70,REV=2010.02.09-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_xmlparser-2.36,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_xmlparser-2.36,REV=2010.02.02-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_yamlsyck-1.07,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_yamlsyck-1.07,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz razor-2.85,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz razor-2.85,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz rrdtool-1.4.2,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz rrdtool-1.4.2,REV=2010.03.21-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz spamassassin-3.3.1,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz spamassassin-3.3.1,REV=2010.03.22-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- /peter From bonivart at opencsw.org Tue Mar 23 17:23:32 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:23:32 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) perl 5.10.1 + associated packages (a total of 200) In-Reply-To: <625385e31003230648m661ba414ia40e746b13647d2a@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31003230648m661ba414ia40e746b13647d2a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <625385e31003230923w5c0af931rf54d9c8ca9d027e2@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > pm_digest-stub,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > pm_modulebuild-stub,REV=2010.03.08-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz I removed the above two since they are now included in core Perl and have no dependents, they should be removed from the catalog. Also note that a few packages in the project could not be rebuilt for various reasons. We determined them to be less likely to cause problems, e.g. they handle syncing with Palm Pilots from the previous millenium. Notes are on the project page. http://wiki.opencsw.org/project-perl -- /peter From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 23 17:35:14 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:35:14 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit In-Reply-To: <201003222330.o2MNUgMc013699@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003222330.o2MNUgMc013699@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > Hi Phil, > > The requested changes...and now solaris 9 too. :) > > * magit: new package > ?+ magit-0.7,REV=2010.03.23-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz > okay good enough From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 23 17:37:06 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:37:06 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnutls, gnutls_devel, libtasn1, libta(...) In-Reply-To: References: <201003152024.o2FKOSQl015426@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 23 21:18:21 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:18:21 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) perl 5.10.1 + associated packages (a total of 200) In-Reply-To: <625385e31003230648m661ba414ia40e746b13647d2a@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31003230648m661ba414ia40e746b13647d2a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > This needs to hit the mirrors as a collection. To keep it separated > from the rest of newpkgs I put it in a dir called perl5101. okay. sigh. for the record, rrdtool really should be split into perl, and non-perl, parts. There is a pure C binary, that functions completely separate from whether the perl bits are installed. if I understand it correctly. oh. and you renamed pm_bitvec. which clashed. so I'm tossing it. You should not be attempting to do any "improvements", in a mass recompile-and-dump. also pm_proctbl pm_stringapprox From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 23 21:22:53 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:22:53 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] subversion still lacking Message-ID: Hi Rupert, this is a reminder that you still didnt upload/update fixed versions of the subversion package that is sitting in newpkgs. subversion-1.6.9,REV=2010.02.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz From bonivart at opencsw.org Tue Mar 23 23:14:43 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:14:43 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) perl 5.10.1 + associated packages (a total of 200) In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31003230648m661ba414ia40e746b13647d2a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <625385e31003231514o440181e8q824954c17f8f5647@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > for the record, rrdtool really should be split into perl, and non-perl, parts. > There is a pure C binary, that functions completely separate from > whether the perl bits are installed. if I understand it correctly. I'll let Ihsan take a look at that. > oh. and you renamed pm_bitvec. which clashed. so I'm tossing it. > You should not be attempting to do any "improvements", in a mass > recompile-and-dump. > > also > > pm_proctbl pm_stringapprox So what's the next step? Just resubmit these three tomorrow or what? -- /peter From rupert at opencsw.org Wed Mar 24 00:58:08 2010 From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 00:58:08 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] subversion still lacking In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6af4271003231658p5443cc69u1aab27b471a46e58@mail.gmail.com> i ran the tests last time and they did not finish clean. need to check on this or next weekend. On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 21:22, Philip Brown wrote: > Hi Rupert, > > this is a reminder that you still didnt upload/update fixed versions > of the subversion package that is sitting in newpkgs. > > subversion-1.6.9,REV=2010.02.14-SunOS5.8-sparc-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dam at opencsw.org Wed Mar 24 10:48:31 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:48:31 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) perl 5.10.1 + associated packages (a total of 200) In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31003230648m661ba414ia40e746b13647d2a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <08F38FB0-257A-4E2C-B988-EC519D640E51@opencsw.org> Hi, Am 23.03.2010 um 21:18 schrieb Philip Brown: >> This needs to hit the mirrors as a collection. To keep it separated >> from the rest of newpkgs I put it in a dir called perl5101. > > okay. sigh. > > for the record, rrdtool really should be split into perl, and non- > perl, parts. I would go further and split off CSWpmrrd Perl Module CSWpyrrd Python Module CSWrbrrd Ruby Module CSWrrdrt RRD Runtime Libs CSWrrddevel Devel and Docs CSWrrd Binaries, depend on CSWrrtrt only Best regards -- Dago From bwalton at opencsw.org Wed Mar 24 14:13:22 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:13:22 -0400 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit In-Reply-To: References: <201003222330.o2MNUgMc013699@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <1269436361-sup-4929@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Tue Mar 23 12:35:14 -0400 2010: Hi Phil, > > * magit: new package > okay good enough I went to send the devs a link to the package on our site today and it's not available there yet...another mantis registration issue? Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 24 17:20:31 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:20:31 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) perl 5.10.1 + associated packages (a total of 200) In-Reply-To: <625385e31003231514o440181e8q824954c17f8f5647@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31003230648m661ba414ia40e746b13647d2a@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31003231514o440181e8q824954c17f8f5647@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Philip Brown wrote: >> oh. and you renamed pm_bitvec. which clashed. so I'm tossing it. >> You should not be attempting to do any "improvements", in a mass >> recompile-and-dump. >> >> also >> >> pm_proctbl pm_stringapprox > > So what's the next step? Just resubmit these three tomorrow or what? > Yes please either resubmit under the original naming, or say "never mind go ahead and release the rest without them". From phil at bolthole.com Wed Mar 24 17:23:42 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:23:42 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit In-Reply-To: <1269436361-sup-4929@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> References: <201003222330.o2MNUgMc013699@login.bo.opencsw.org> <1269436361-sup-4929@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 6:13 AM, Ben Walton wrote: > Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Tue Mar 23 12:35:14 -0400 2010: > > Hi Phil, > >> > * magit: new package > >> okay good enough > > I went to send the devs a link to the package on our site today and > it's not available there yet...another mantis registration issue? > not an "issue", so much as to say, yes, "registration happens asynchronously" ;-) Link should now be there, however, actual package has not been released yet. That is because it is in the "big perl batch", which is stuck on peter B's final updates at the moment. From bonivart at opencsw.org Wed Mar 24 17:33:30 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 17:33:30 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) perl 5.10.1 + associated packages (a total of 200) In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31003230648m661ba414ia40e746b13647d2a@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31003231514o440181e8q824954c17f8f5647@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <625385e31003240933y38384671oae1d39ecea5195dc@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Philip Brown wrote: > Yes please either resubmit under the original naming, or say "never > mind go ahead and release the rest without them". I don't see a point in releasing intermediate packages with the old names just to re-release later with new names so please go ahead and release the rest. I thought you had already done that since it's listed on the web site but on the other hand nothing has happened mirror-wise. Since we're usually allowed to change catalog names I assume I can re-submit these three packages after you have processed the batch? -- /peter From bwalton at opencsw.org Wed Mar 24 17:38:06 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:38:06 -0400 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit In-Reply-To: References: <201003222330.o2MNUgMc013699@login.bo.opencsw.org> <1269436361-sup-4929@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <1269448637-sup-572@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 24 12:23:42 -0400 2010: > not an "issue", so much as to say, yes, "registration happens > asynchronously" ;-) Ok. I thought the 'ack' implied that it was registered _and_ pushed. My misunderstanding. > Link should now be there, however, actual package has not been released yet. > That is because it is in the "big perl batch", which is stuck on peter > B's final updates at the moment. Ok. Thanks. -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 24 17:48:18 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:48:18 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) perl 5.10.1 + associated packages (a total of 200) In-Reply-To: <625385e31003240933y38384671oae1d39ecea5195dc@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31003230648m661ba414ia40e746b13647d2a@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31003231514o440181e8q824954c17f8f5647@mail.gmail.com> <625385e31003240933y38384671oae1d39ecea5195dc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > > Since we're usually allowed to change catalog names I assume I can > re-submit these three packages after you have processed the batch? > well, "usually" is a bit of an overstatement :-) but yes, you can submit the renamed packages, in one set, with specific explainations on each one why you think we should rename it. From phil at opencsw.org Wed Mar 24 18:03:15 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:03:15 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit In-Reply-To: <1269448637-sup-572@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> References: <201003222330.o2MNUgMc013699@login.bo.opencsw.org> <1269436361-sup-4929@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> <1269448637-sup-572@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Ben Walton wrote: > Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 24 12:23:42 -0400 2010: > >> not an "issue", so much as to say, yes, "registration happens >> asynchronously" ;-) > > Ok. ?I thought the 'ack' implied that it was registered _and_ pushed. > My misunderstanding. Seems like a bit of information sharing is in order. Releasing is a COMPLICATED PROCESS. Dont make the mistake of thinking you understand it based on what I write below: I'm just giving you a /little/ information here :) Me sending an "okay" here, means, "I've at least looked at it, it seems okay, and it is in the pipeline to be publically pushed". (aka "it's been put into a release 'batch'") USUALLY(but not always) this means I've done the typical "update our website about the latest version of the package". and there is uuslaly another side effect; once the package is really "in the pipeline", our front web page picks up the package for its list of "recently released packages", even though it hasnt technically been publically pushed yet. (yeah, I know. It's complicated, like I said. dont bug me :) lastly, there is an ADDITIONAL registration, for "new" packages. For a variety of reasons, I do that separately. There is an unfortunate side effect of that, which means that until I do that bit, new packages dont have a functional www.opencsw.org/packages/xxxxxx page. So... now you know :) From bwalton at opencsw.org Wed Mar 24 18:10:00 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:10:00 -0400 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs magit In-Reply-To: References: <201003222330.o2MNUgMc013699@login.bo.opencsw.org> <1269436361-sup-4929@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> <1269448637-sup-572@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <1269450583-sup-908@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 24 13:03:15 -0400 2010: > So... now you know :) Thanks for the low down! -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 From bonivart at opencsw.org Thu Mar 25 14:34:04 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:34:04 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) pm_bitvec, pm_proctbl, pm_stringapprox Message-ID: <625385e31003250634g538c79acic7b4a547b360d2c7@mail.gmail.com> Here's the three modules needed for the 5.10.1 project, they had their catalog names "fixed": This one was shortened from pm_bitvector to match its package name, now CSWpmbitvec/pm_bitvec. Takeover from Cory Ormand by Benny. pm_bitvec-7.1,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_bitvec-7.1,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz This one was shortened from pm_procprocesstbl to match its package name, now CSWpmproctbl/pm_proctbl. Takeover from Alex Moore by Benny. pm_proctbl-0.45,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_proctbl-0.45,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz This one had an extra underscore in it, pm_string_approx, now with matching names CSWpmstringapprox/pm_stringapprox. Takeover from Frederic Van De Velde by Benny. pm_stringapprox-3.26,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz pm_stringapprox-3.26,REV=2010.02.01-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz I have put them in newpkgs. -- /peter From phil at bolthole.com Thu Mar 25 20:05:12 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 12:05:12 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) pm_bitvec, pm_proctbl, pm_stringapprox In-Reply-To: <625385e31003250634g538c79acic7b4a547b360d2c7@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31003250634g538c79acic7b4a547b360d2c7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 6:34 AM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > Here's the three modules needed for the 5.10.1 project, they had their > catalog names "fixed": > > This one was shortened from pm_bitvector to match its package name, > now CSWpmbitvec/pm_bitvec. Takeover from Cory Ormand by Benny. > batched > This one was shortened from pm_procprocesstbl to match its package > name, now CSWpmproctbl/pm_proctbl. Takeover from Alex Moore by Benny. batched > This one had an extra underscore in it, pm_string_approx, now with > matching names CSWpmstringapprox/pm_stringapprox. Takeover from > Frederic Van De Velde by Benny. I think this rename wasnt really warranted.. but since I was dealing with the ugliness of renames anyway.. sigh... did this one too. From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 26 09:24:20 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:24:20 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libao Message-ID: <201003260824.o2Q8OKCF012572@login.bo.opencsw.org> * libao: major version upgrade - from: 0.8.8,REV=2009.02.24 - to: 1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26 + libao-1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libao-1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Fri Mar 26 11:46:25 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 11:46:25 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs guppy, py_progressbar, pysvn, twisted Message-ID: <201003261046.o2QAkPl4012444@login.bo.opencsw.org> * py_progressbar: new package People keep asking me for progress bars, I'll give them some. + py_progressbar-2.2,REV=2010.03.23-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz * twisted: major version upgrade - from: 8.2.0,REV=2009.07.29 - to: 9.0.0,REV=2010.03.23 + twisted-9.0.0,REV=2010.03.23-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + twisted-9.0.0,REV=2010.03.23-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * pysvn: revision upgrade Was missing the dependency on CSWpython - from: 2009.12.24 - to: 2010.03.23 + pysvn-1.7.1,REV=2010.03.23-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pysvn-1.7.1,REV=2010.03.23-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * guppy: new package Memory usage profiler for Python + guppy-0.1.9,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + guppy-0.1.9,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 26 14:15:14 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:15:14 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libao, libogg, libvorbis Message-ID: <201003261315.o2QDFEHx021690@login.bo.opencsw.org> Xiph.org had a major release today. Here are the packages for it. * libvorbis: minor version upgrade - from: 1.2.3,REV=2009.07.27 - to: 1.3.1,REV=2010.03.26 + libvorbis-1.3.1,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libvorbis-1.3.1,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * libao: major version upgrade - from: 0.8.8,REV=2009.02.24 - to: 1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26 + libao-1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libao-1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * libogg: minor version upgrade - from: 1.1.4,REV=2009.06.25 - to: 1.2.0,REV=2010.03.26 + libogg-1.2.0,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libogg-1.2.0,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 26 14:46:08 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:46:08 +0100 (CET) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_bgenerate, pm_butils, pm_xmlparser Message-ID: <201003261346.o2QDk8jg016501@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pm_bgenerate: new package + pm_bgenerate-1.26,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pm_bgenerate-1.26,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_xmlparser: revision upgrade Fixing wrong linkage - from: 2010.02.02 - to: 2010.03.26 + pm_xmlparser-2.36,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pm_xmlparser-2.36,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_butils: revision upgrade Fixing wrong linkage - from: 2010.03.12 - to: 2010.03.26 + pm_butils-0.11,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pm_butils-0.11,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Fri Mar 26 14:55:57 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:55:57 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31002190048p3c1bc418t366dc8929e5979e0@mail.gmail.com> <6BF94FD0-D5D1-42F4-A623-56E8D7603A74@opencsw.org> <625385e31003161050n76fdd844xfb0717be3cbfde8@mail.gmail.com> <20100316202416.GI27943@sebastiankayser.de> <86C82B6F-0BA5-4E0D-A4D6-2957EC4B1E5E@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Am 17.03.2010 um 19:42 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> >> I suggest packaging the Performance Co-Pilot as CSWpcptoolkit > > Except that is not its name. It does not have "toolkit" as part of its > name. If it did, I might be more inclined to accept that. Except that > it doesnt. > and the project itself, gives a suggested abbreviation as "PCP". > > http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp/ > > "Performance Co-Pilot (PCP) " > > Plus it already has a *well established presence* as "pcp" in the open > source distribution community. From : "Specifically, the PCP toolkit provides: ..." Best regards -- Dago From phil at opencsw.org Fri Mar 26 17:01:09 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:01:09 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) dnstop, pcp In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31003161050n76fdd844xfb0717be3cbfde8@mail.gmail.com> <20100316202416.GI27943@sebastiankayser.de> <86C82B6F-0BA5-4E0D-A4D6-2957EC4B1E5E@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > > Am 17.03.2010 um 19:42 schrieb Philip Brown: >> Except that is not its name. It does not have "toolkit" as part of its >> name. If it did, I might be more inclined to accept that. Except that >> it doesnt. >> and the project itself, gives a suggested abbreviation as "PCP". >> >> http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp/ >> >> ?"Performance Co-Pilot (PCP) " >> >> Plus it already has a *well established presence* as "pcp" in the open >> source distribution community. > > From : > ?"Specifically, the PCP toolkit provides: ..." > "toolkit" is used there descriptively, not canonically. One reference to it using that description, does not change the proper name. The very top of that same page, reads, "The services offered by PCP are ...." NOT "the services offered by the PCP toolkit are..." From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 11:28:23 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 11:28:23 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_classxsaccessor, pm_inline, pm_par(...) Message-ID: <201003290928.o2T9SNUZ012800@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pm_classxsaccessor: new package + pm_classxsaccessor-1.05,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pm_classxsaccessor-1.05,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_inline: minor version upgrade - from: 0.45,REV=2010.02.17 - to: 0.46,REV=2010.03.29 + pm_inline-0.46,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_paramsvalidate: revision upgrade - from: 2010.02.15 - to: 2010.03.29 + pm_paramsvalidate-0.94,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + pm_paramsvalidate-0.94,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 11:36:52 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 11:36:52 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Wrong Maintainer on pm_bitvec References: <74563EDD-86FB-4ECA-8A5A-991017822F10@familie-michelsen.de> Message-ID: <2A2A35A8-EFAB-412F-9E0C-1826CD30DD36@opencsw.org> Hi, I just noticed that http://www.opencsw.org/packages/pm_bitvec shows the updated package version, but still sticks to Cory as maintainer. Would you mind having a look? Best regards -- Dago From hson at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 13:40:19 2010 From: hson at opencsw.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_H=E5kansson?=) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:40:19 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs imagemagick Message-ID: <4BB091A3.6070407@opencsw.org> Update to 6.6.0-9. imagemagick-6.6.0,REV=2010.03.29_rev=9-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz imagemagick-6.6.0,REV=2010.03.29_rev=9-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 13:45:02 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:45:02 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_autoxsheader, pm_commonsense Message-ID: <201003291145.o2TBj1gf023411@login.bo.opencsw.org> * pm_commonsense: new package + pm_commonsense-3.0,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz * pm_autoxsheader: new package + pm_autoxsheader-1.02,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 13:56:24 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:56:24 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ncsa_mosaic Message-ID: <201003291156.o2TBuOQX002011@login.bo.opencsw.org> NCSA Mosaic: Oh, the good old times! * ncsa_mosaic: new package + ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 14:23:37 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:23:37 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs qhull, qhull_rt Message-ID: <201003291223.o2TCNaXf013748@login.bo.opencsw.org> Contains the latest patchset. * qhull: revision upgrade - from: 2009.11.03 - to: 2010.03.29 + qhull-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + qhull-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + qhull_rt-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + qhull_rt-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 16:08:23 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 16:08:23 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs rc Message-ID: <201003291408.o2TE8Nmg011766@login.bo.opencsw.org> Take over from Chris Reece, now build with GAR. * rc: revision upgrade - from: 2007.02.28 - to: 2010.03.29 + rc-1.7.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + rc-1.7.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From bonivart at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 17:31:51 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:31:51 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Drop 5 packages from catalog Message-ID: <625385e31003290831s48c57fcbg4c0deb347fbe9ec5@mail.gmail.com> These packages should be dropped from the catalog as part of the cleanup after the Perl 5.10.1 project. CSWpilotlink CSWpmccsa CSWpmcs CSWpmdigest CSWpmmodulebuild -- /peter From phil at bolthole.com Mon Mar 29 18:24:57 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:24:57 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libao, libogg, libvorbis In-Reply-To: <201003261315.o2QDFEHx021690@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003261315.o2QDFEHx021690@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: got these over the weekend i believe On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 6:15 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Xiph.org had a major release today. Here are the packages for it. > > * libvorbis: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 1.2.3,REV=2009.07.27 > ?- ? to: 1.3.1,REV=2010.03.26 > ?+ libvorbis-1.3.1,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libvorbis-1.3.1,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * libao: major version upgrade > ?- from: 0.8.8,REV=2009.02.24 > ?- ? to: 1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26 > ?+ libao-1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libao-1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * libogg: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 1.1.4,REV=2009.06.25 > ?- ? to: 1.2.0,REV=2010.03.26 > ?+ libogg-1.2.0,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ libogg-1.2.0,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- > Generated by submitpkg > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 18:25:27 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:25:27 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_bgenerate, pm_butils, pm_xmlparser In-Reply-To: <201003261346.o2QDk8jg016501@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003261346.o2QDk8jg016501@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: did yesterday On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * pm_bgenerate: new package > ?+ pm_bgenerate-1.26,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pm_bgenerate-1.26,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * pm_xmlparser: revision upgrade > ?Fixing wrong linkage > ?- from: 2010.02.02 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.26 > ?+ pm_xmlparser-2.36,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pm_xmlparser-2.36,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * pm_butils: revision upgrade > ?Fixing wrong linkage > ?- from: 2010.03.12 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.26 > ?+ pm_butils-0.11,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pm_butils-0.11,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > From phil at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 18:27:01 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:27:01 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Wrong Maintainer on pm_bitvec In-Reply-To: <2A2A35A8-EFAB-412F-9E0C-1826CD30DD36@opencsw.org> References: <74563EDD-86FB-4ECA-8A5A-991017822F10@familie-michelsen.de> <2A2A35A8-EFAB-412F-9E0C-1826CD30DD36@opencsw.org> Message-ID: hmm. weird. fixed On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 2:36 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi, > > I just noticed that > ?http://www.opencsw.org/packages/pm_bitvec > shows the updated package version, but still sticks to Cory as maintainer. > Would you mind having a look? > > > Best regards > > ?-- Dago > > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From pfelecan at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 18:37:49 2010 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 18:37:49 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Drop 5 packages from catalog In-Reply-To: <625385e31003290831s48c57fcbg4c0deb347fbe9ec5@mail.gmail.com> (Peter Bonivart's message of "Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:31:51 +0200") References: <625385e31003290831s48c57fcbg4c0deb347fbe9ec5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Peter Bonivart writes: > These packages should be dropped from the catalog as part of the > cleanup after the Perl 5.10.1 project. > > CSWpilotlink I would like to disagree: jpilot is depending on it. -- Peter From dam at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 21:05:23 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 21:05:23 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Drop 5 packages from catalog In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31003290831s48c57fcbg4c0deb347fbe9ec5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8B5671EB-AFEF-41C2-BCD1-B9451B8A0980@opencsw.org> Hi Peter, Am 29.03.2010 um 18:37 schrieb Peter FELECAN: > Peter Bonivart writes: >> These packages should be dropped from the catalog as part of the >> cleanup after the Perl 5.10.1 project. >> >> CSWpilotlink > > I would like to disagree: jpilot is depending on it. Ok, does that mean you take over CSWpilotlink? Best regards -- Dago From bonivart at opencsw.org Mon Mar 29 21:41:30 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:41:30 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) botnet, cswclassutils, geolitedb, phpsysinfo Message-ID: <625385e31003291241kae6ce26l83caf71cfbbf356d@mail.gmail.com> botnet-0.8,REV=2010.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz cswclassutils-1.34,REV=2010.02.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz geolitedb-100302,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz phpsysinfo-3.0.4,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- /peter From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 30 02:32:05 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:32:05 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs guppy, py_progressbar, pysvn, twisted In-Reply-To: <201003261046.o2QAkPl4012444@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003261046.o2QAkPl4012444@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 3:46 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > > * > * guppy: new package > ?Memory usage profiler for Python > ?+ guppy-0.1.9,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ guppy-0.1.9,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > not py_guppy? From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 30 02:34:06 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:34:06 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs guppy, py_progressbar, pysvn, twisted In-Reply-To: <201003261046.o2QAkPl4012444@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003261046.o2QAkPl4012444@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 3:46 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > > * py_progressbar: new package > > * twisted: major version upgrade > > * pysvn: revision upgrade > okay From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 30 02:35:33 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:35:33 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_classxsaccessor, pm_inline, pm_par(...) In-Reply-To: <201003290928.o2T9SNUZ012800@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003290928.o2T9SNUZ012800@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * pm_classxsaccessor: new package > ?+ pm_classxsaccessor-1.05,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pm_classxsaccessor-1.05,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > * pm_inline: minor version upgrade > ?- from: 0.45,REV=2010.02.17 > ?- ? to: 0.46,REV=2010.03.29 > ?+ pm_inline-0.46,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz > > * pm_paramsvalidate: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2010.02.15 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.29 > ?+ pm_paramsvalidate-0.94,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ pm_paramsvalidate-0.94,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- > Generated by submitpkg > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 02:37:41 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:37:41 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs imagemagick In-Reply-To: <4BB091A3.6070407@opencsw.org> References: <4BB091A3.6070407@opencsw.org> Message-ID: okay On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 4:40 AM, Roger H?kansson wrote: > Update to 6.6.0-9. > > imagemagick-6.6.0,REV=2010.03.29_rev=9-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > imagemagick-6.6.0,REV=2010.03.29_rev=9-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > _______________________________________________ > pkgsubmissions mailing list > pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions > From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 02:38:33 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:38:33 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_autoxsheader, pm_commonsense In-Reply-To: <201003291145.o2TBj1gf023411@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003291145.o2TBj1gf023411@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 4:45 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > * pm_commonsense: new package > ?+ pm_commonsense-3.0,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz > > * pm_autoxsheader: new package > ?+ pm_autoxsheader-1.02,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz > > -- okay From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 30 02:40:52 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:40:52 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ncsa_mosaic In-Reply-To: <201003291156.o2TBuOQX002011@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003291156.o2TBuOQX002011@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > NCSA Mosaic: Oh, the good old times! > > * ncsa_mosaic: new package > ?+ ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > Ummm....... UUUMMMMMMM... I'm sorry, but I'm going to need a reason to justify adding in this piece of junk :-} I would presume it cant even properly render 50% of the websites out there, at this point From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 02:44:45 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:44:45 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs qhull, qhull_rt In-Reply-To: <201003291223.o2TCNaXf013748@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003291223.o2TCNaXf013748@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:23 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Contains the latest patchset. > > * qhull: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2009.11.03 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.29 > ?+ qhull-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ qhull-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ qhull_rt-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ qhull_rt-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > it seems to me as though root/opt/csw/share/checkpkg/overrides really does not belong in the *package* itself, for qhull_rt. gar repository, of course. But in the package like that? particularly in that semi-visible place? If it MUST be in the package itself, I would suggest a more appropriate place would be i checkpkg_overrides From phil at bolthole.com Tue Mar 30 02:45:51 2010 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:45:51 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs rc In-Reply-To: <201003291408.o2TE8Nmg011766@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003291408.o2TE8Nmg011766@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 7:08 AM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Take over from Chris Reece, now build with GAR. > > * rc: revision upgrade > ?- from: 2007.02.28 > ?- ? to: 2010.03.29 > ?+ rc-1.7.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ rc-1.7.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > okay From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 02:47:15 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:47:15 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) botnet, cswclassutils, geolitedb, phpsysinfo In-Reply-To: <625385e31003291241kae6ce26l83caf71cfbbf356d@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e31003291241kae6ce26l83caf71cfbbf356d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: okay On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Peter Bonivart wrote: > botnet-0.8,REV=2010.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz > cswclassutils-1.34,REV=2010.02.19-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz > geolitedb-100302,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz > phpsysinfo-3.0.4,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz > From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 07:23:52 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:23:52 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs qhull, qhull_rt In-Reply-To: References: <201003291223.o2TCNaXf013748@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <992CF47E-7BE8-42B6-8367-6201CA0C38A3@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 30.03.2010 um 02:44 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:23 AM, Dagobert Michelsen > wrote: >> Contains the latest patchset. >> >> * qhull: revision upgrade >> - from: 2009.11.03 >> - to: 2010.03.29 >> + qhull-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + qhull-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> + qhull_rt-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + qhull_rt-2003.1,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > it seems to me as though > > root/opt/csw/share/checkpkg/overrides > > really does not belong in the *package* itself, for qhull_rt. > > gar repository, of course. But in the package like that? particularly > in that semi-visible place? > > If it MUST be in the package itself, I would suggest a more > appropriate place would be > > i checkpkg_overrides The overrides are there for maybe 6 month now. Your concern is valid, however I am not sure if custom extensions with 'i' are allowed. I suggest you release the package for now and we start a discussion on maintainers at . Best regards -- Dago From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 07:32:01 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:32:01 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ncsa_mosaic In-Reply-To: References: <201003291156.o2TBuOQX002011@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <9996298B-74E2-418D-9C76-32B78F80129B@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Am 30.03.2010 um 02:40 schrieb Philip Brown: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Maciej Blizinski > wrote: >> NCSA Mosaic: Oh, the good old times! >> >> * ncsa_mosaic: new package >> + ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> + ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > Ummm....... UUUMMMMMMM... > > I'm sorry, but I'm going to need a reason to justify adding in this > piece of junk :-} > > I would presume it cant even properly render 50% of the websites out > there, at this point Because it is a piece of history. Consider it similar to xpilot. Or elm. Or xv. It is one of the things that give you baaad feeling about the past because Mosaic slowed down ftp :-) Joking aside: I find it really cool to have some decent Web 1.0 Browser at hand. Best regards -- Dago From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 10:34:16 2010 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:34:16 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Drop 5 packages from catalog In-Reply-To: <8B5671EB-AFEF-41C2-BCD1-B9451B8A0980@opencsw.org> (Dagobert Michelsen's message of "Mon, 29 Mar 2010 21:05:23 +0200") References: <625385e31003290831s48c57fcbg4c0deb347fbe9ec5@mail.gmail.com> <8B5671EB-AFEF-41C2-BCD1-B9451B8A0980@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Dagobert Michelsen writes: > Hi Peter, > > Am 29.03.2010 um 18:37 schrieb Peter FELECAN: >> Peter Bonivart writes: >>> These packages should be dropped from the catalog as part of the >>> cleanup after the Perl 5.10.1 project. >>> >>> CSWpilotlink >> >> I would like to disagree: jpilot is depending on it. > > Ok, does that mean you take over CSWpilotlink? It means that you cannot ask for the removal of a package if there are dependents on it. As for taking over the package I didn't consider it. It's astonishing that this package pops up in the context of the "Perl 5.10.1" project. I cannot understand where's the link... -- Peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 10:38:49 2010 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:38:49 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ncsa_mosaic In-Reply-To: <9996298B-74E2-418D-9C76-32B78F80129B@opencsw.org> (Dagobert Michelsen's message of "Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:32:01 +0200") References: <201003291156.o2TBuOQX002011@login.bo.opencsw.org> <9996298B-74E2-418D-9C76-32B78F80129B@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Dagobert Michelsen writes: > Hi Phil, > > Am 30.03.2010 um 02:40 schrieb Philip Brown: >> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Maciej Blizinski >> wrote: >>> NCSA Mosaic: Oh, the good old times! >>> >>> * ncsa_mosaic: new package >>> + ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >>> + ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> >> Ummm....... UUUMMMMMMM... >> >> I'm sorry, but I'm going to need a reason to justify adding in this >> piece of junk :-} >> >> I would presume it cant even properly render 50% of the websites out >> there, at this point > > Because it is a piece of history. Consider it similar to xpilot. > Or elm. Or xv. It is one of the things that give you baaad feeling > about the past because Mosaic slowed down ftp :-) Joking aside: > I find it really cool to have some decent Web 1.0 Browser at hand. clunkers lovers, unite! -- Peter From dam at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 10:41:46 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:41:46 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Drop 5 packages from catalog In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31003290831s48c57fcbg4c0deb347fbe9ec5@mail.gmail.com> <8B5671EB-AFEF-41C2-BCD1-B9451B8A0980@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <1DD1EC07-F6D3-4E73-985E-1EFC8294A2FD@opencsw.org> Hi Peter, Am 30.03.2010 um 10:34 schrieb Peter FELECAN: > Dagobert Michelsen writes: >> Am 29.03.2010 um 18:37 schrieb Peter FELECAN: >>> Peter Bonivart writes: >>>> These packages should be dropped from the catalog as part of the >>>> cleanup after the Perl 5.10.1 project. >>>> >>>> CSWpilotlink >>> >>> I would like to disagree: jpilot is depending on it. >> >> Ok, does that mean you take over CSWpilotlink? > > It means that you cannot ask for the removal of a package if there are > dependents on it. Right. This somehow slipped through :-( > As for taking over the package I didn't consider it. It would be natural as one of your packages depends on it and Murray is too busy to do it right now. > It's astonishing that this package pops up in the context of the "Perl > 5.10.1" project. I cannot understand where's the link... From the package: /opt/csw/lib/perl/csw/auto/PDA/Pilot/Pilot.so It will not work with the updated Perl due to a changed ABI of Perl. Best regards -- Dago From bonivart at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 10:50:18 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:50:18 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ncsa_mosaic In-Reply-To: References: <201003291156.o2TBuOQX002011@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: <625385e31003300150n4fa6f6del30b568605b52f94e@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Philip Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> NCSA Mosaic: Oh, the good old times! >> >> * ncsa_mosaic: new package >> ?+ ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> ?+ ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > Ummm....... ?UUUMMMMMMM... > > I'm sorry, but I'm going to need a reason to justify adding in this > piece of junk :-} > > I would presume it cant even properly render 50% of the websites out > there, at this point But it probably renders ours perfectly! -- /peter From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 11:48:44 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:48:44 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ncsa_mosaic In-Reply-To: References: <201003291156.o2TBuOQX002011@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: 2010/3/30 Philip Brown : > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> NCSA Mosaic: Oh, the good old times! >> >> * ncsa_mosaic: new package >> ?+ ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> ?+ ncsa_mosaic-2.7b6,REV=2010.03.26-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > Ummm....... ?UUUMMMMMMM... > > I'm sorry, but I'm going to need a reason to justify adding in this > piece of junk :-} > > I would presume it cant even properly render 50% of the websites out > there, at this point It won't be this kind of justification. Mosaic is of historical value. If we added, say, an Atari ST emulator, it would be the same reason. It's not like anybody would expect it to render web sites properly, or run gmail in it. We could add a disclaimer if you think some crazy person might complain about it. From pfelecan at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 14:58:23 2010 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:58:23 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Drop 5 packages from catalog In-Reply-To: <1DD1EC07-F6D3-4E73-985E-1EFC8294A2FD@opencsw.org> (Dagobert Michelsen's message of "Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:41:46 +0200") References: <625385e31003290831s48c57fcbg4c0deb347fbe9ec5@mail.gmail.com> <8B5671EB-AFEF-41C2-BCD1-B9451B8A0980@opencsw.org> <1DD1EC07-F6D3-4E73-985E-1EFC8294A2FD@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Dagobert Michelsen writes: > Hi Peter, > > Am 30.03.2010 um 10:34 schrieb Peter FELECAN: >> Dagobert Michelsen writes: >>> Am 29.03.2010 um 18:37 schrieb Peter FELECAN: >>>> Peter Bonivart writes: >>>>> These packages should be dropped from the catalog as part of the >>>>> cleanup after the Perl 5.10.1 project. >>>>> >>>>> CSWpilotlink >>>> >>>> I would like to disagree: jpilot is depending on it. >> It's astonishing that this package pops up in the context of the "Perl >> 5.10.1" project. I cannot understand where's the link... > > From the package: > /opt/csw/lib/perl/csw/auto/PDA/Pilot/Pilot.so > > It will not work with the updated Perl due to a changed ABI of Perl. That's a language binding which doesn't remove the main feature of it i.e to manage a communication channel with a Palm device and other Palm database stuff. With the new Perl packages it will not support the corresponding binding but it's not fatal; annoying only for Perl users... -- Peter From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 16:54:02 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:54:02 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_guppy Message-ID: <201003301454.o2UEs29Y000169@login.bo.opencsw.org> Renamed to py_guppy. * py_guppy: new package + py_guppy-0.1.9,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + py_guppy-0.1.9,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz I'll add this to checkpkg to catch that in the future. -- Generated by submitpkg From maciej at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 17:04:14 2010 From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:04:14 +0100 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs guppy, py_progressbar, pysvn, twisted In-Reply-To: References: <201003261046.o2QAkPl4012444@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: 2010/3/30 Philip Brown : > On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 3:46 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: >> >> * >> * guppy: new package >> ?Memory usage profiler for Python >> ?+ guppy-0.1.9,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz >> ?+ guppy-0.1.9,REV=2010.03.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz >> > > not py_guppy? Probably human error, no idea how it happened, the build description contained the py_guppy name. Rerolled, sent again. Sorry about that, I'll add a check for this. From bonivart at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 19:05:45 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 19:05:45 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] /newpkgs (current) bind, perl modules, qpopper Message-ID: <625385e31003301005i7ff8aff6oeea5147035612faa@mail.gmail.com> bind-9.7.0P1,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz bind-9.7.0P1,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz bind_chroot-9.7.0P1,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz bind_devel-9.7.0P1,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz bind_utils-9.7.0P1,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz bind_utils-9.7.0P1,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz libbind-9.7.0P1,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz libbind-9.7.0P1,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz pm_appcli-0.08,REV=2010.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_modcorelist-2.26,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_modload-0.18,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_modloadcond-0.36,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_netip-1.25,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_numberformat-1.73,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_olestoragelite-0.19,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_tstbldrtester-1.01,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz pm_txtreform-1.20,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz qpopper-4.0.19,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz qpopper-4.0.19,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- /peter From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 23:34:45 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:34:45 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs qhull, qhull_rt In-Reply-To: <992CF47E-7BE8-42B6-8367-6201CA0C38A3@opencsw.org> References: <201003291223.o2TCNaXf013748@login.bo.opencsw.org> <992CF47E-7BE8-42B6-8367-6201CA0C38A3@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:23 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > > The overrides are there for maybe 6 month now. Your concern is valid, > however I am not sure if custom extensions with 'i' are allowed. yes, you can put anything you like as an "i" package I think. From phil at opencsw.org Tue Mar 30 23:40:24 2010 From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:40:24 -0700 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_guppy In-Reply-To: <201003301454.o2UEs29Y000169@login.bo.opencsw.org> References: <201003301454.o2UEs29Y000169@login.bo.opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Maciej Blizinski wrote: > Renamed to py_guppy. > > * py_guppy: new package > ?+ py_guppy-0.1.9,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz > ?+ py_guppy-0.1.9,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz > > I'll add this to checkpkg to catch that in the future. > great. batching From bwalton at opencsw.org Wed Mar 31 02:16:35 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 02:16:35 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cswpkgloghooks Message-ID: <201003310016.o2V0GZbX023959@login.bo.opencsw.org> Hi Phil, This update drops the CSWbash dependency and uses #!env bash instead. * cswpkgloghooks: minor version upgrade - from: 1.0,REV=2010.01.11 - to: 1.1,REV=2010.03.30 + cswpkgloghooks-1.1,REV=2010.03.30-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From bwalton at opencsw.org Wed Mar 31 04:31:34 2010 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 04:31:34 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cswpkgloghooks Message-ID: <201003310231.o2V2VYlw008808@login.bo.opencsw.org> Hi Phil, Use this one instead. There was an issue with the previous version. * cswpkgloghooks: minor version upgrade - from: 1.0,REV=2010.01.11 - to: 1.1.1,REV=2010.03.31 + cswpkgloghooks-1.1.1,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz Thanks -Ben -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Wed Mar 31 10:17:28 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:17:28 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libidl Message-ID: <201003310817.o2V8HSiA013948@login.bo.opencsw.org> * libidl: patchlevel upgrade - from: 0.8.13,REV=2009.06.10 - to: 0.8.14,REV=2010.03.31 + libidl-0.8.14,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libidl-0.8.14,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From bonivart at opencsw.org Wed Mar 31 10:38:08 2010 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:38:08 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Drop 5 packages from catalog In-Reply-To: References: <625385e31003290831s48c57fcbg4c0deb347fbe9ec5@mail.gmail.com> <8B5671EB-AFEF-41C2-BCD1-B9451B8A0980@opencsw.org> <1DD1EC07-F6D3-4E73-985E-1EFC8294A2FD@opencsw.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Peter FELECAN wrote: > That's a language binding which doesn't remove the main feature of it > i.e to manage a communication channel with a Palm device and other Palm > database stuff. With the new Perl packages it will not support the > corresponding binding but it's not fatal; annoying only for Perl users... Ok, but can we agree to drop: CSWpmcs (no dependents, obsolete) CSWpmdigest (integrated into core perl) CSWpmmodulebuild (integrated into core perl) -- /peter From pfelecan at opencsw.org Wed Mar 31 11:09:39 2010 From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:09:39 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Drop 5 packages from catalog In-Reply-To: (Peter Bonivart's message of "Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:38:08 +0200") References: <625385e31003290831s48c57fcbg4c0deb347fbe9ec5@mail.gmail.com> <8B5671EB-AFEF-41C2-BCD1-B9451B8A0980@opencsw.org> <1DD1EC07-F6D3-4E73-985E-1EFC8294A2FD@opencsw.org> Message-ID: Peter Bonivart writes: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Peter FELECAN wrote: >> That's a language binding which doesn't remove the main feature of it >> i.e to manage a communication channel with a Palm device and other Palm >> database stuff. With the new Perl packages it will not support the >> corresponding binding but it's not fatal; annoying only for Perl users... > > Ok, but can we agree to drop: > > CSWpmcs (no dependents, obsolete) > CSWpmdigest (integrated into core perl) > CSWpmmodulebuild (integrated into core perl) Yes, we can drop the 3 packages above mentioned. As stated, I disagree only with the removal of CSWpilotlink. -- Peter From dam at opencsw.org Wed Mar 31 11:57:26 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:57:26 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs audiofile Message-ID: <201003310957.o2V9vQPl024580@login.bo.opencsw.org> * audiofile: patchlevel upgrade - from: 0.2.6,REV=2009.03.31 - to: 0.2.7,REV=2010.03.31 + audiofile-0.2.7,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + audiofile-0.2.7,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Wed Mar 31 15:29:04 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:29:04 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpcap, libpcap_devel, orbit2, tcpdump Message-ID: <201003311329.o2VDT35U019146@login.bo.opencsw.org> * libpcap: minor version upgrade - from: 1.0.0,REV=2009.10.01 - to: 1.1,REV=2010.03.31 + libpcap-1.1,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libpcap-1.1,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz + libpcap_devel-1.1,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + libpcap_devel-1.1,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * orbit2: patchlevel upgrade - from: 2.14.17,REV=2009.09.09 - to: 2.14.18,REV=2010.03.31 + orbit2-2.14.18,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + orbit2-2.14.18,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz * tcpdump: minor version upgrade - from: 4.0.0,REV=2009.10.01 - to: 4.1,REV=2010.03.31 + tcpdump-4.1,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz + tcpdump-4.1,REV=2010.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz -- Generated by submitpkg From dam at opencsw.org Wed Mar 31 16:11:16 2010 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:11:16 +0200 Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Newpkg: zebra Message-ID: <9568F535-EABE-472E-B761-A71D66DE2D7F@opencsw.org> Hi Phil, there is still a recompile of zebra laying around. The previous one had wrong binaries in it. Best regards -- Dago