From rupert at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  1 07:56:36 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 01:56:36 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
Message-ID: <201011010656.oA16uaLQ012938@login.bo.opencsw.org>

patch level upgrade, see http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/Announcement2.2.html

* ap: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 2.2.16,REV=2010.10.09
  -   to: 2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01
  + ap2_prefork-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ap2_suexec-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ap2_suexec-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ap2_worker-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ap2_worker-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2_devel-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2_devel-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2_manual-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2rt-2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From ai at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  1 13:24:48 2010
From: ai at opencsw.org (Andy Igoshin)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 15:24:48 +0300
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs nginx 0.8.53
Message-ID: <201011011524.48097.ai@opencsw.org>

nginx-0.8.53,REV=2010.10.30-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
nginx-0.8.53,REV=2010.10.30-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
nginx-0.8.53,REV=2010.10.30-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
nginx-0.8.53,REV=2010.10.30-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz


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

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  1 14:29:08 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:29:08 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <201011010656.oA16uaLQ012938@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011010656.oA16uaLQ012938@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <1288617957-sup-3784@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from THURNER Rupert's message of Mon Nov 01 02:56:36 -0400 2010:

Hi Rupert,

> * ap: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 2.2.16,REV=2010.10.09
>   -   to: 2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01

Can we hold off on this until we've nailed down some of the bugs in
the .16 release and possibly moved to the e build instead of ap2mod
setup for module handling?

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov  1 16:54:32 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 08:54:32 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs nginx 0.8.53
In-Reply-To: <201011011524.48097.ai@opencsw.org>
References: <201011011524.48097.ai@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikcVwOakooHNSE+iNgJEPexJ3EbfTEOVogLSwTD@mail.gmail.com>

thanks. batched


On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 5:24 AM, Andy Igoshin <ai at opencsw.org> wrote:
> nginx-0.8.53,REV=2010.10.30-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> nginx-0.8.53,REV=2010.10.30-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> nginx-0.8.53,REV=2010.10.30-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> nginx-0.8.53,REV=2010.10.30-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>
>
> --
> Andy Igoshin <ai at vsu.ru> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Voronezh State University
> Phone: +7 (4732) 522406 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Network Operation Center
> Fax: ? +7 (4732) 208820 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Voronezh, Russia
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov  1 16:56:04 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 08:56:04 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libcpptest0, libcpptest_devel,
	liburi(...)
In-Reply-To: <201010211318.o9LDI2HT007692@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201010211318.o9LDI2HT007692@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim7g5LFrgRCZFcsiS39j1uaVwG8CHN-=W+D-sg3@mail.gmail.com>

btw these were batched a while ago


On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 6:18 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> One of the last missing libraries from Xiph.org with dependencies
>
> * libxspf: new package
> ?+ libxspf4-1.2.0,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxspf4-1.2.0,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxspf_devel-1.2.0,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxspf_devel-1.2.0,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libcpptest: new package
> ?+ libcpptest0-1.1.1,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libcpptest0-1.1.1,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libcpptest_devel-1.1.1,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libcpptest_devel-1.1.1,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * liburiparser: new package
> ?+ liburiparser1-0.7.5,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ liburiparser1-0.7.5,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ liburiparser_devel-0.7.5,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ liburiparser_devel-0.7.5,REV=2010.10.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov  1 17:40:22 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:40:22 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=pghhYHLHdgnrf-oKPTEKY7Ds85RYYGu3-ca9B@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 12:25 AM, rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
>....
>....
> what should we do in this case?


you gave a lot of output, but no summary of problem.

I for one, have no idea how to reply to your question because of this.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  1 17:48:59 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 12:48:59 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from rupert THURNER's message of Sun Oct 31 03:25:07 -0400 2010:

Hi Rupert,

> CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWoldaprt +=
> non-uniform-lib-versions-in-package|sonames=['liblber-2.3.so.0',|'liblber-2.4.so.2',|'libldap-2.3.so.0',|'libldap-2.4.so.2',|'libldap_r-2.3.so.0',|'libldap_r-2.4.so.2']

This is from the new library splitting check.  Checkpkg wants you to
define additional packages and place the .so objects into them as
appropriate.  You'll then need to add dependencies on these lib
packages.

Many (almost all) of the lines spit out by checkpkg could be added to
the recipe file to do what is required.

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov  1 17:56:56 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:56:56 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from rupert THURNER's message of Sun Oct 31 03:25:07 -0400 2010:
>
> Hi Rupert,
>
>> CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWoldaprt +=
>> non-uniform-lib-versions-in-package|sonames=['liblber-2.3.so.0',|'liblber-2.4.so.2',|'libldap-2.3.so.0',|'libldap-2.4.so.2',|'libldap_r-2.3.so.0',|'libldap_r-2.4.so.2']
>
> This is from the new library splitting check. ?Checkpkg wants you to
> define additional packages and place the .so objects into them as
> appropriate. ?You'll then need to add dependencies on these lib
> packages.
>
> Many (almost all) of the lines spit out by checkpkg could be added to
> the recipe file to do what is required.
>

Ben, can you make the output be more friendly to maintainers?
eg: give them a specific header, "Hey there, GAR checkpkg suggests you
may want to add the following lines to your GAR file"

It would be even nicer if it give explanatory comments on a
section-by-section basis.
   Making-really-long-variable-control-names
is not a full substitute for some more human-oriented explanation.

From jcraig at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  1 19:02:26 2010
From: jcraig at opencsw.org (Jonathan Craig)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 19:02:26 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_calendarsimple
Message-ID: <201011011802.oA1I2Qv5005191@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* pm_calendarsimple: new package
  + pm_calendarsimple-1.21,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov  1 19:17:59 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 11:17:59 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_calendarsimple
In-Reply-To: <201011011802.oA1I2Qv5005191@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011011802.oA1I2Qv5005191@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTink1dcxNbn1Gk-71=VUTu=DSk0sHFp_ud_VsEa=@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Jonathan Craig <jcraig at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * pm_calendarsimple: new package
> ?+ pm_calendarsimple-1.21,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>

ERROR 1062 (23000) at line 6: Duplicate entry '/opt/csw/bin/pcal' for key 1
DB Update failed. Possibly a filename collision


it appears it is colliding with a package originally created long long
ago, when lengths were even shorter :-}

pm_calendarsimp


And unfortunately, there is a pre-existing dependency on it.

"rt".
Quite a useful package.

From jcraig at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  1 20:47:08 2010
From: jcraig at opencsw.org (Jonathan Craig)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 15:47:08 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_calendarsimple
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTink1dcxNbn1Gk-71=VUTu=DSk0sHFp_ud_VsEa=@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011011802.oA1I2Qv5005191@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTink1dcxNbn1Gk-71=VUTu=DSk0sHFp_ud_VsEa=@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikCjYbB4hR8QbcgmJbVMk=YEpAzz0jG6kxNJRwg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:

>
> ERROR 1062 (23000) at line 6: Duplicate entry '/opt/csw/bin/pcal' for key 1
> DB Update failed. Possibly a filename collision
>
>
> it appears it is colliding with a package originally created long long
> ago, when lengths were even shorter :-}
>
> pm_calendarsimp
>
>
> And unfortunately, there is a pre-existing dependency on it.
>
> "rt".
> Quite a useful package.

My bad, I didn't see it in GAR so I simply set it up.  I should have
thought about the need to re-use the old package name (obviously not
in GAR).  Is there a simple way for me to extricate myself from this
predicament? Do I need to delete my SVN stuff and rebuild it using the
original name or follow on to the "rt" package and rebuild that with
the new name as its dependency (same maintainer as Calendar::Simple,
who is retired).  Something will have to be done because the "rt"
package is essentially dead as it can no longer get this dependent
package.

From phil at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  1 20:58:19 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 12:58:19 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_calendarsimple
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikCjYbB4hR8QbcgmJbVMk=YEpAzz0jG6kxNJRwg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011011802.oA1I2Qv5005191@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTink1dcxNbn1Gk-71=VUTu=DSk0sHFp_ud_VsEa=@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikCjYbB4hR8QbcgmJbVMk=YEpAzz0jG6kxNJRwg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik01w86vVnrd8VTg2eDj7af3kFrZFzMcZyXaUZ-@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Jonathan Craig <jcraig at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> My bad, I didn't see it in GAR so I simply set it up. ?I should have
> thought about the need to re-use the old package name (obviously not
> in GAR). ?Is there a simple way for me to extricate myself from this
> predicament? Do I need to delete my SVN stuff and rebuild it using the
> original name


I'm not an expert on svn stuffs. Sometimes, deletes can be odd, so I
suggest you consult with an expert on that one.


> or follow on to the "rt" package and rebuild that with
> the new name as its dependency (same maintainer as Calendar::Simple,
> who is retired).

That would be very nice :)

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  1 21:20:02 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 21:20:02 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_calendarsimple
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikCjYbB4hR8QbcgmJbVMk=YEpAzz0jG6kxNJRwg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011011802.oA1I2Qv5005191@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTink1dcxNbn1Gk-71=VUTu=DSk0sHFp_ud_VsEa=@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikCjYbB4hR8QbcgmJbVMk=YEpAzz0jG6kxNJRwg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <30FAE0B0-C045-4FDB-91F1-C812DDEE1968@opencsw.org>

Hi Jon,

Am 01.11.2010 um 20:47 schrieb Jonathan Craig:
> On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>  
> wrote:
>> ERROR 1062 (23000) at line 6: Duplicate entry '/opt/csw/bin/pcal'  
>> for key 1
>> DB Update failed. Possibly a filename collision
>>
>>
>> it appears it is colliding with a package originally created long  
>> long
>> ago, when lengths were even shorter :-}
>>
>> pm_calendarsimp
>>
>>
>> And unfortunately, there is a pre-existing dependency on it.
>>
>> "rt".
>> Quite a useful package.
>
> My bad, I didn't see it in GAR so I simply set it up.  I should have
> thought about the need to re-use the old package name (obviously not
> in GAR).  Is there a simple way for me to extricate myself from this
> predicament? Do I need to delete my SVN stuff and rebuild it using the
> original name or follow on to the "rt" package and rebuild that with
> the new name as its dependency (same maintainer as Calendar::Simple,
> who is retired).  Something will have to be done because the "rt"
> package is essentially dead as it can no longer get this dependent
> package.

The best thing would be to add an empty CSWpmcalendarsimp depend on
the new CSWpmcalendarsimple, recompile the dependencies to depend
against the new one, than later delete the old one. For an example
on how to do this in GAR see e.g.
   http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/browser/csw/mgar/pkg/cpan/Params-Validate/trunk/Makefile
   http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/browser/csw/mgar/pkg/cpan/HTML-Format/trunk/Makefile
RT is quite big, but if you want to take a shot feel free :-)


Best regards

   -- Dago



From jcraig at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  2 01:03:29 2010
From: jcraig at opencsw.org (Jonathan Craig)
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 01:03:29 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_calendarsimp, pm_calendarsimple
Message-ID: <201011020003.oA203Tlg017693@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* pm_calendarsimple: new package
  + pm_calendarsimple-1.21,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_calendarsimp: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.17,REV=2008.03.13
  -   to: 1.21,REV=2010.11.02
  + pm_calendarsimp-1.21,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

pm_calendarsimp should be a empty package that pulls in pm_calendarsimple as a dependency.

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Nov  2 01:46:30 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 17:46:30 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_calendarsimp, pm_calendarsimple
In-Reply-To: <201011020003.oA203Tlg017693@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011020003.oA203Tlg017693@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimctU8vCk3-MCPMmdB9_jr=++kj8q7EnmVyHNmg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Jonathan Craig <jcraig at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * pm_calendarsimple: new package
> ?+ pm_calendarsimple-1.21,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_calendarsimp: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.17,REV=2008.03.13
> ?- ? to: 1.21,REV=2010.11.02
> ?+ pm_calendarsimp-1.21,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> pm_calendarsimp should be a empty package that pulls in pm_calendarsimple as a dependency.
>

erm.. it also depends on CSWperl.
please remove that, and the CSWcommon dependency.

From rupert at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  2 08:01:24 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 02:01:24 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs lzip
Message-ID: <201011020701.oA271OGi018144@login.bo.opencsw.org>

patch level upgrade of lzip

* lzip: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.10,REV=2010.05.26
  -   to: 1.11,REV=2010.11.02
  + lzip-1.11,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + lzip-1.11,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  2 09:12:34 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 09:12:34 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_ipccmd
Message-ID: <201011020812.oA28CYKq015610@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Update needed by pm_archiveextract.

* pm_ipccmd: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.60,REV=2010.10.06
  -   to: 0.64,REV=2010.11.02
  + pm_ipccmd-0.64,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  2 13:57:16 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 12:57:16 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 1 de Novembro de 2010 16:56, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Excerpts from rupert THURNER's message of Sun Oct 31 03:25:07 -0400 2010:
>>
>> Hi Rupert,
>>
>>> CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWoldaprt +=
>>> non-uniform-lib-versions-in-package|sonames=['liblber-2.3.so.0',|'liblber-2.4.so.2',|'libldap-2.3.so.0',|'libldap-2.4.so.2',|'libldap_r-2.3.so.0',|'libldap_r-2.4.so.2']
>>
>> This is from the new library splitting check. ?Checkpkg wants you to
>> define additional packages and place the .so objects into them as
>> appropriate. ?You'll then need to add dependencies on these lib
>> packages.
>>
>> Many (almost all) of the lines spit out by checkpkg could be added to
>> the recipe file to do what is required.
>>
>
> Ben, can you make the output be more friendly to maintainers?
> eg: give them a specific header, "Hey there, GAR checkpkg suggests you
> may want to add the following lines to your GAR file"
>
> It would be even nicer if it give explanatory comments on a
> section-by-section basis.

How about the following example?  http://paste.pocoo.org/show/284956/

Maciej

From maciej at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  2 13:45:48 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 12:45:48 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs sudo_ldap
In-Reply-To: <A5575ACC-0BBC-4AF2-9C68-CE77F10FBD87@opencsw.org>
References: <201010310646.o9V6kp3s011220@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Byy0H+WphLa-OFxzbn-KB7RwkKu715RuMi12B@mail.gmail.com>
	<A5575ACC-0BBC-4AF2-9C68-CE77F10FBD87@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim2ZF2bJpgv03yMP36x_RyOqssk_T5047rrtvLy@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 31 de Outubro de 2010 21:06, Dagobert Michelsen
<dam at opencsw.org> escreveu:
> Hi Maciej,
>
> Am 31.10.2010 um 21:41 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> batched
>
> I vaguely remember you said there were some issues you had with more recent
> versions. Can you remember which they were so we can check that the current
> version does not have them?

The problem was that sudo wouldn't grant privileges based on groups.
I couldn't use this package in my environment.  Unfortunately, from
now on I'll have to rely on other people testing and debugging it.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  2 15:38:44 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:38:44 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1288708687-sup-954@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski's message of Tue Nov 02 08:57:16 -0400 2010:

> How about the following example?
> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/284956/

A suggestion for a bit more clarity in the output.  I can make this
change if you're ok with it.

http://paste.pocoo.org/show/284984/

Thanks
-Ben

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


From maciej at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  2 16:16:01 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 15:16:01 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <1288708687-sup-954@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288708687-sup-954@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikB6jN2_mRMD3sjAaPk-mMeF_v_-z4+pfbk+1rG@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 2 de Novembro de 2010 14:38, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> escreveu:
> Excerpts from Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski's message of Tue Nov 02 08:57:16 -0400 2010:
>
>> How about the following example?
>> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/284956/
>
> A suggestion for a bit more clarity in the output. ?I can make this
> change if you're ok with it.
>
> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/284984/

Looks good, please go ahead.

From phil at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  2 16:50:38 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 08:50:38 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs lzip
In-Reply-To: <201011020701.oA271OGi018144@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011020701.oA271OGi018144@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=GfMmvJo0kXqryzj5rJNH-ErArbVajyYpnSAjj@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:01 AM, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> patch level upgrade of lzip
>
> * lzip: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.10,REV=2010.05.26
> ?- ? to: 1.11,REV=2010.11.02
> ?+ lzip-1.11,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ lzip-1.11,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Nov  2 17:08:17 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 09:08:17 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_ipccmd
In-Reply-To: <201011020812.oA28CYKq015610@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011020812.oA28CYKq015610@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinusznYXBSaHBq-GBQ1acTx1wSXAkJ=SNfye1h-@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 11/2/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Update needed by pm_archiveextract.
>
> * pm_ipccmd: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 0.60,REV=2010.10.06
>   -   to: 0.64,REV=2010.11.02
>   + pm_ipccmd-0.64,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Nov  2 17:19:24 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 09:19:24 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikygrbFJjwZ=ko18y-x91Tw4Jnt4xXxsduMy+pg@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/2/10, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> No dia 1 de Novembro de 2010 16:56, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>
> escreveu:

>> Ben, can you make the output be more friendly to maintainers?
>> eg: give them a specific header, "Hey there, GAR checkpkg suggests you
>> may want to add the following lines to your GAR file"
>>
>> It would be even nicer if it give explanatory comments on a
>> section-by-section basis.
>
> How about the following example?  http://paste.pocoo.org/show/284956/
>


This bit is nice. I think it might be improved further though:

# Checkpkg suggests adding the following lines to the GAR recipe:
# This is a summary; see above for details.
# Suggesting how to separate out shared libraries.
# You will most probably need to further edit these lines. Use with caution!


(Disclaimer; I'm obviously not a gar expert, so I'm making comments
only on the output I see from the above url)

The first two lines, start the general "gar suggestions" section.
The next two lines, are a reasonable explaination of "What all these
CSWliblber2-3-0
type lines do".

I think it could be improved, by visually tying those "next two lines"
to the output below.
Putting in a sub-section marker or something? Otherwise, they just
seem part of the prior two lines.

Also, I think it would be helpful if the use of '#' was more consistent.
It's nice that the "start section" comments have the "#" prepended to them.

So it's then a bit visually confusing when the lower down stuff, such as

"Applying the overrides and analyzing the results.
If any of the reported errors were false positives, you can override t"

does not have the "#".

Basically, I'm suggesting that there be more visual separation between
output lines of
"Here's stuff you might want to actually cut-n-paste into your GAR recipie". vs
"here's stuff you just should scan through.

So that's my suggestion, do what you like with it :)

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  2 17:22:11 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 12:22:11 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikygrbFJjwZ=ko18y-x91Tw4Jnt4xXxsduMy+pg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikygrbFJjwZ=ko18y-x91Tw4Jnt4xXxsduMy+pg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1288714880-sup-1060@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Tue Nov 02 12:19:24 -0400 2010:

> The first two lines, start the general "gar suggestions" section.


> The next two lines, are a reasonable explaination of "What all these
> CSWliblber2-3-0
> type lines do".

The lines you suggest are fine, but I think that blurb at the end is
just 'general' at this point.  It's not specific to the suggested
changes.

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


From bonivart at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  2 23:02:51 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 23:02:51 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclamav, libclamav_devel
Message-ID: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* libclamav_devel: new package
  + libclamav_devel-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclamav_devel-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclamav_devel-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclamav_devel-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* clamav: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 0.96.3,REV=2010.09.21
  -   to: 0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28
  + clamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + clamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + clamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + clamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libclamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov  3 10:20:03 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:20:03 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Deprecation of CSWpmmailspfqry
Message-ID: <4A2F1DA1-B556-415B-97F6-5137E0734040@opencsw.org>

Hi,

CSWpmmailspfqry should be removed from the catalog as it is deprecated
upstream. The new module is CSWpmmailspf and as we have noe dependencies
it should be removed as it is not possible to cleanly build it and as it
has a number of critical issues for a couple of years open now.


Best regards

   -- Dago


From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Nov  3 14:07:40 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 13:07:40 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikygrbFJjwZ=ko18y-x91Tw4Jnt4xXxsduMy+pg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikygrbFJjwZ=ko18y-x91Tw4Jnt4xXxsduMy+pg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=-X56Hg7jLHSgJ9Ya2ht-TmqDppciJWNkOZEqY@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 2 de Novembro de 2010 16:19, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> I think it could be improved, by visually tying those "next two lines"
> to the output below.
> Putting in a sub-section marker or something? Otherwise, they just
> seem part of the prior two lines.

Yes, that's true, there currently isn't a visible separation between
the general bit and the bits specific to error tags.

Separating the error tags isn't very easy, as I haven't arrived at a
data structure general enough.  There are cases where it's
straightforward what to suggest.  In other cases, it isn't as clear
any more, for example when one problem can be solved in two different
ways.  For example, a binary might need libgcc_s.so.1, which is
provided by both gcc3corert and gcc4corert.  Checkpkg needs to present
an alternative: you need to depend on either gcc3corert or gcc4corert,
and you have to determine yourself, which one should it be. (Barring
very specific heuristics such as "no /opt/csw/gcc4 in RPATH, therefore
probably gcc3corert".)

> Also, I think it would be helpful if the use of '#' was more consistent.
> It's nice that the "start section" comments have the "#" prepended to them.

The idea behind the hashes is that they might be part of what you cut and paste.

As far as visual separators are concerned, the problem is that there
are too many small sections to be separated.  There are generally
three kinds of messages:

- Description of the problem (let's call them D)
- GAR lines to add if you want to fix the issue (F)
- GAR lines to add if you want to override (O)

The current message model is:

"""
Introductory bit
D1
D2
D3
...
F1
F2
F3
...
O1
O2
O3
...

General ending explaining that you shouldn't override the errors
without thinking first.
"""

Another model could be:

"""
Introductory bit

D1
F1
O1

D2
F2
O2

...

Ending bit
"""

My idea behind grouping all Fs and Ds was that it's easier to work with.

Another idea was to only display Ds and Fs, and display the Os only on
demand, for example:

checkpkg --display-overrides foo.pkg.gz ...

> So it's then a bit visually confusing when the lower down stuff, such as
>
> "Applying the overrides and analyzing the results.
> If any of the reported errors were false positives, you can override t"
>
> does not have the "#".

The "Applying the overrides..." message could be entirely removed, it
doesn't say anything interesting to the user.

> Basically, I'm suggesting that there be more visual separation between
> output lines of
> "Here's stuff you might want to actually cut-n-paste into your GAR recipie". vs
> "here's stuff you just should scan through.
>
> So that's my suggestion, do what you like with it :)

Thanks, I'd be interested what people think about the message grouping issue.

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov  3 17:02:06 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:02:06 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=-X56Hg7jLHSgJ9Ya2ht-TmqDppciJWNkOZEqY@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikygrbFJjwZ=ko18y-x91Tw4Jnt4xXxsduMy+pg@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=-X56Hg7jLHSgJ9Ya2ht-TmqDppciJWNkOZEqY@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=R_xCeJYg7HCB=N+OuYWP2NKZ09Xa=QVNaUmvG@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/3/10, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
>...
>
> Another model could be:
>
> """
> Introductory bit
>
> D1
> F1
> O1
>
> D2
> F2
> O2
>
> ...


Personally, I think this model is easier to parse for humans.. With
the slight risk that someone might only see the last set, rather than
go all the way back to the first one, if there are multiple issues.

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov  3 17:30:55 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:30:55 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Deprecation of CSWpmmailspfqry
In-Reply-To: <4A2F1DA1-B556-415B-97F6-5137E0734040@opencsw.org>
References: <4A2F1DA1-B556-415B-97F6-5137E0734040@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimy4C8qeD8Whci0M9a33yqm7N3USqmXf8LY0-Ny@mail.gmail.com>

okie dokie. removal is batched.


On 11/3/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> CSWpmmailspfqry should be removed from the catalog as it is deprecated
> upstream. The new module is CSWpmmailspf and as we have noe dependencies
> it should be removed as it is not possible to cleanly build it and as it
> has a number of critical issues for a couple of years open now.
>
>
> Best regards
>
>    -- Dago
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov  3 17:33:12 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:33:12 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <1288617957-sup-3784@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201011010656.oA16uaLQ012938@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1288617957-sup-3784@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikgvLLNAj3VCgWNrE_zA+PE8=TtNT2VwWyuMVq9@mail.gmail.com>

ETA on fixing these bugs?


On 11/1/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from THURNER Rupert's message of Mon Nov 01 02:56:36 -0400 2010:
>
> Hi Rupert,
>
>> * ap: patchlevel upgrade
>>   - from: 2.2.16,REV=2010.10.09
>>   -   to: 2.2.17,REV=2010.11.01
>
> Can we hold off on this until we've nailed down some of the bugs in
> the .16 release and possibly moved to the e build instead of ap2mod
> setup for module handling?
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
> --
> Ben Walton
> Systems Programmer - CHASS
> University of Toronto
> C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov  3 17:35:20 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:35:20 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclamav, libclamav_devel
In-Reply-To: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>

Remind me why there are separate sol9 and sol10 releases please?


On 11/2/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * libclamav_devel: new package
>   + libclamav_devel-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclamav_devel-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclamav_devel-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclamav_devel-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * clamav: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 0.96.3,REV=2010.09.21
>   -   to: 0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28
>   + clamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + clamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + clamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + clamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libclamav-0.96.4,REV=2010.10.28-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Nov  3 17:35:48 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 12:35:48 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikgvLLNAj3VCgWNrE_zA+PE8=TtNT2VwWyuMVq9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011010656.oA16uaLQ012938@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1288617957-sup-3784@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTikgvLLNAj3VCgWNrE_zA+PE8=TtNT2VwWyuMVq9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1288802093-sup-4720@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Nov 03 12:33:12 -0400 2010:

> ETA on fixing these bugs?

Well, I started work on the 'e build' stuff over the last two nights.
I'm not able to do anything tonight but can hopefully wrap them up in
the next few days after that.

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


From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Nov  3 17:39:27 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 16:39:27 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclamav, libclamav_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinnL-sOU2CpDgy-Bo3_YTatV0iexyd+4dj5bW73@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 3 de Novembro de 2010 16:35, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> Remind me why there are separate sol9 and sol10 releases please?

Can there be a place in packages themselves to put such messages?  I
usually write comments in build descriptions to explain why things are
done the way they are; but I'm unaware of a way to enclose that in
packages.  Phil, where would you expect such information?

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Nov  3 17:44:12 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 17:44:12 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclamav, libclamav_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin-ZYQB+gvBewPG=1bDB4m+NEqX0-2Jdk2D-m8f@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> Remind me why there are separate sol9 and sol10 releases please?

There's a history of problems with ClamAV on Solaris 8 and 9 regarding
open files count. Solaris 10 is better in that aspect and patches have
been produced by people who understand these things (not me).
According to them the only way to get a "good" ClamAV is to compile on
Solaris 10.

So we should either compile on both separately or drop Solaris 9.

/peter

From ai at opencsw.org  Wed Nov  3 17:58:56 2010
From: ai at opencsw.org (Andy Igoshin)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 19:58:56 +0300
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs proftpd 1.3.3c
Message-ID: <201011031958.56277.ai@opencsw.org>

proftpd-1.3.3c,REV=2010.11.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
proftpd-1.3.3c,REV=2010.11.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz


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

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov  3 18:14:38 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:14:38 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclamav, libclamav_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinnL-sOU2CpDgy-Bo3_YTatV0iexyd+4dj5bW73@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinnL-sOU2CpDgy-Bo3_YTatV0iexyd+4dj5bW73@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikzvoxo4QnOZF-4P1r7b8Kg9OSF+arxZ+-d2uXP@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/3/10, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> No dia 3 de Novembro de 2010 16:35, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>
> escreveu:
>> Remind me why there are separate sol9 and sol10 releases please?
>
> Can there be a place in packages themselves to put such messages?  I
> usually write comments in build descriptions to explain why things are
> done the way they are; but I'm unaware of a way to enclose that in
> packages.  Phil, where would you expect such information?


I would love a standard place for this sort of thing, but havent come
up with one yet.
If the information required were shorter, I might suggest some sort of
simple one-liner pkginfo line, but some things probably benefit from a
longer explanation.

a special "i" file?
prototype(4) says that "i" files are "information" files. The question
is, are the names reserved, or can we randomly make up our own?

Empirical experimentation says yes we can. I just created a package with an

i completelyfake

file :-)

So now we just need a standardized name.

i cswreleasemgr

?
The definition/description for this file in our docs would be something like,
"This optional file contains notes for the release manager(and
maintainer) describing why this package has exceptions to normally
expected package behaviour or layout"

Sound good?

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov  3 18:16:07 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:16:07 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs proftpd 1.3.3c
In-Reply-To: <201011031958.56277.ai@opencsw.org>
References: <201011031958.56277.ai@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=c_riAh7bvCniMKkBf+dXB4twHOt785uXD9MXo@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks. batched.


On 11/3/10, Andy Igoshin <ai at opencsw.org> wrote:
> proftpd-1.3.3c,REV=2010.11.03-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> proftpd-1.3.3c,REV=2010.11.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>
>
> --
> Andy Igoshin <ai at vsu.ru>                 Voronezh State University
> Phone: +7 (4732) 522406                  Network Operation Center
> Fax:   +7 (4732) 208820                  Voronezh, Russia
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Nov  3 18:21:42 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 17:21:42 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclamav, libclamav_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikzvoxo4QnOZF-4P1r7b8Kg9OSF+arxZ+-d2uXP@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinnL-sOU2CpDgy-Bo3_YTatV0iexyd+4dj5bW73@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvoxo4QnOZF-4P1r7b8Kg9OSF+arxZ+-d2uXP@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimqCBi5ychKb01NKz02nCVDveH43uKmbf8XvRfV@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 3 de Novembro de 2010 17:14, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> Empirical experimentation says yes we can. I just created a package with an
>
> i completelyfake
>
> file :-)
>
> So now we just need a standardized name.
>
> i cswreleasemgr
>
> ?
> The definition/description for this file in our docs would be something like,
> "This optional file contains notes for the release manager(and
> maintainer) describing why this package has exceptions to normally
> expected package behaviour or layout"
>
> Sound good?

Sounds good to me, what about having a shortcut for this in GAR, Dago?

From jcraig at opencsw.org  Fri Nov  5 03:46:10 2010
From: jcraig at opencsw.org (Jonathan Craig)
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 03:46:10 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_calendarsimp, pm_calendarsimple
Message-ID: <201011050246.oA52kAbR022310@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* pm_calendarsimple: new package
  + pm_calendarsimple-1.21,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_calendarsimp: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.17,REV=2008.03.13
  -   to: 1.21,REV=2010.11.02
  + pm_calendarsimp-1.21,REV=2010.11.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

Phil,

I took your suggestion and simply unpacked cleaned and repacked 
the stub to eliminate the extra fluff (and dependencies).  
Please let me know if this works or what needs fixing.  The
pm_calendarsimp package has a checkpkg error at the end because
its dependency pm_calendarsimple isnt in the database yet.

Thanks, Jon

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Nov  5 16:52:12 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 08:52:12 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnspr4, libnspr4_devel, nspr,
	nspr_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=KZUL0E=pA0eamvh7Yqqnj5w3u+AjFOzh0720p@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010151317.o9FDHlxr014035@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=dH9F0qwry0tNiKc-qubt5iOd4UEHbMJ991O2=@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimUYY7jYvPSkMKZE-6SKUOkqfX_Zg0KU0okZoph@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim_bGaJN9J+i8uBjbXeFv2mS-GCRyAKAKSR6Rha@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX2u3jZEyzrDYtY1hX1egEf44M+FDdTrXTZ_CT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinTt=0tAm=Vi_NpcJKCE-PGgAG=pN0tUOWoBdZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinHA5Guurf6gU2B1p=TTH9v0bvKkZ2UH7cpPKVU@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimghereEfViVoXwLk4Z=VVfo-jjzuH0G4saBTa_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=KZUL0E=pA0eamvh7Yqqnj5w3u+AjFOzh0720p@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikBzJ51Yzaydn+LbGOAjfoSpAFAaFk6OOH+=SPL@mail.gmail.com>

Where are we on this?
Do I toss the nspr packages in newpkgs, or what?

From maciej at opencsw.org  Fri Nov  5 17:00:56 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 16:00:56 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnspr4, libnspr4_devel, nspr,
	nspr_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikBzJ51Yzaydn+LbGOAjfoSpAFAaFk6OOH+=SPL@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010151317.o9FDHlxr014035@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=dH9F0qwry0tNiKc-qubt5iOd4UEHbMJ991O2=@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimUYY7jYvPSkMKZE-6SKUOkqfX_Zg0KU0okZoph@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim_bGaJN9J+i8uBjbXeFv2mS-GCRyAKAKSR6Rha@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX2u3jZEyzrDYtY1hX1egEf44M+FDdTrXTZ_CT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinTt=0tAm=Vi_NpcJKCE-PGgAG=pN0tUOWoBdZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinHA5Guurf6gU2B1p=TTH9v0bvKkZ2UH7cpPKVU@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimghereEfViVoXwLk4Z=VVfo-jjzuH0G4saBTa_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=KZUL0E=pA0eamvh7Yqqnj5w3u+AjFOzh0720p@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikBzJ51Yzaydn+LbGOAjfoSpAFAaFk6OOH+=SPL@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=VE+5L1PQx-RkKBVqZXScxgXzqWbEpviegVVXD@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 5 de Novembro de 2010 15:52, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> Where are we on this?
> Do I toss the nspr packages in newpkgs, or what?

I'm still shaving my yak. It'll take another week or two. The plan is
to strip down the mozilla package from unnecessary files and
re-relase, freeing up the namespace for nspr.

From rupert at opencsw.org  Sun Nov  7 21:00:31 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 14:00:31 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cmake
Message-ID: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* cmake: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 2.8.0,REV=2010.01.01
  -   to: 2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07
  + cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Sun Nov  7 21:02:37 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 14:02:37 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
Message-ID: <201011072002.oA7K2bmY014519@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* mercurial: upgrade to 1.7
  - from: 1.6.4,REV=2010.10.04
  -   to: 1.7,REV=2010.11.07
  + mercurial-1.7,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + mercurial-1.7,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  8 11:03:31 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 11:03:31 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclamav, libclamav_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin-ZYQB+gvBewPG=1bDB4m+NEqX0-2Jdk2D-m8f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin-ZYQB+gvBewPG=1bDB4m+NEqX0-2Jdk2D-m8f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin4L_pQKQU9wgVUn2HODvY1y4xeM_utGXm+z6A0@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>> Remind me why there are separate sol9 and sol10 releases please?
>
> There's a history of problems with ClamAV on Solaris 8 and 9 regarding
> open files count. Solaris 10 is better in that aspect and patches have
> been produced by people who understand these things (not me).
> According to them the only way to get a "good" ClamAV is to compile on
> Solaris 10.
>
> So we should either compile on both separately or drop Solaris 9.

So what's happening with this?

/peter

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov  8 18:36:47 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 09:36:47 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclamav, libclamav_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin4L_pQKQU9wgVUn2HODvY1y4xeM_utGXm+z6A0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin-ZYQB+gvBewPG=1bDB4m+NEqX0-2Jdk2D-m8f@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin4L_pQKQU9wgVUn2HODvY1y4xeM_utGXm+z6A0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=GVnrvheVGM6AaLJGZCGpFzt_eQ2=aF146mbMv@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/8/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> So what's happening with this?
>

My apologies for delay in communication.... I'm fine in the separate packages...
might be nice if you added the previously suggested "i cswreleasemgr"
file with explaination, but that's optional.


Unfortunately, while doing some cleanup for OTHER packages, I
inadvertantly removed the sol10 binaries for "clamav-"
I have all the other set, if it helps.
Could you please reupload that bit?

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov  8 18:37:33 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 09:37:33 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
In-Reply-To: <201011072002.oA7K2bmY014519@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011072002.oA7K2bmY014519@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimVbR-cSJRbuncPUAGtYwo0Dv_wmYQjpiL1kVYn@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 11/7/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * mercurial: upgrade to 1.7
>   - from: 1.6.4,REV=2010.10.04
>   -   to: 1.7,REV=2010.11.07
>   + mercurial-1.7,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + mercurial-1.7,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov  8 18:39:32 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 09:39:32 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cmake
In-Reply-To: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikJUEMiBvOnBZ=XA-MsDRZUOUvc1rCbU2dXspkT@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On 11/7/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * cmake: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 2.8.0,REV=2010.01.01
>   -   to: 2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07
>   + cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From maciej at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  8 18:44:58 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 17:44:58 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cmake
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikJUEMiBvOnBZ=XA-MsDRZUOUvc1rCbU2dXspkT@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikJUEMiBvOnBZ=XA-MsDRZUOUvc1rCbU2dXspkT@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikOAYELY=qf3bfnF6LRSEVhE41K5+KBt-ywnGiL@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 8 de Novembro de 2010 17:39, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> batched
>
>
> On 11/7/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> * cmake: patchlevel upgrade
>> ? - from: 2.8.0,REV=2010.01.01
>> ? - ? to: 2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07
>> ? + cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ? + cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

I've submitted r11525 which removes /opt/SUNWspro/lib and the like
from rpaths in the binaries.  I guess it'll be included in the next
release of cmake then.

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  8 19:27:35 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 19:27:35 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclamav, libclamav_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=GVnrvheVGM6AaLJGZCGpFzt_eQ2=aF146mbMv@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin-ZYQB+gvBewPG=1bDB4m+NEqX0-2Jdk2D-m8f@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin4L_pQKQU9wgVUn2HODvY1y4xeM_utGXm+z6A0@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=GVnrvheVGM6AaLJGZCGpFzt_eQ2=aF146mbMv@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=tG8=6E6LRtsYJ+_jP5OPsBCA5-Dkbzdznc9tq@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> On 11/8/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>
>> So what's happening with this?
>
> My apologies for delay in communication.... I'm fine in the separate packages...
> might be nice if you added the previously suggested "i cswreleasemgr"
> file with explaination, but that's optional.

I'll add that for the next one, the same goes for miltergreylist.

> Unfortunately, while doing some cleanup for OTHER packages, I
> inadvertantly removed the sol10 binaries for "clamav-"
> I have all the other set, if it helps.
> Could you please reupload that bit?

Sure, you should now have everything again.

/peter

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov  8 19:31:37 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 10:31:37 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs clamav, libclamav, libclamav_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=tG8=6E6LRtsYJ+_jP5OPsBCA5-Dkbzdznc9tq@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011022202.oA2M2pFW025550@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=k0o=QWPzu1esfOu-NzmNJi19ZKC+-xv=Przvq@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin-ZYQB+gvBewPG=1bDB4m+NEqX0-2Jdk2D-m8f@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin4L_pQKQU9wgVUn2HODvY1y4xeM_utGXm+z6A0@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=GVnrvheVGM6AaLJGZCGpFzt_eQ2=aF146mbMv@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=tG8=6E6LRtsYJ+_jP5OPsBCA5-Dkbzdznc9tq@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=wmp0RbLPGjuwTbiWDwudDgv-iwommKePY-mwk@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/8/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:

>> Could you please reupload that bit?
>
> Sure, you should now have everything again.
>

Thanks. working on it now.

From ai at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  8 20:47:58 2010
From: ai at opencsw.org (Andy Igoshin)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 22:47:58 +0300
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs apcupsd 3.14.8
Message-ID: <201011082247.58864.ai@opencsw.org>

apcupsd-3.14.8,REV=2010.11.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
apcupsd-3.14.8,REV=2010.11.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz

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

From maciej at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  8 20:57:30 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 20:57:30 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups
Message-ID: <201011081957.oA8JvUVW025660@login.bo.opencsw.org>

CUPS upgrade to 1.4.4, shared libraries split-off.

* cups: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.06.29
  -   to: 1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20
  + cups-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsclient-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsclient-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsdev-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsdev-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cupsdoc-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcups-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* libcups: new package
  + libcups2-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcups2-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupscgi1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupscgi1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsdriver1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsdriver1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsimage2-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsimage2-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsmime1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsmime1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsppdc1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcupsppdc1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov  8 21:10:12 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:10:12 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups
In-Reply-To: <201011081957.oA8JvUVW025660@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011081957.oA8JvUVW025660@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikVgBzacEx2U22XRQAn==admXRUdF7GeW1MEN-h@mail.gmail.com>

Hmm.. "bug" one, but in submitpkg:  claims "new" package is libcups,
not libcups2.
(yeah, no idea how you're gonna "fix" that one either...)

bug #2: erm... so how come something named "libcups **2**", has
version=1.4.4  ?
that's very confusing.



On 11/8/10, Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> CUPS upgrade to 1.4.4, shared libraries split-off.
>
> * cups: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.06.29
>   -   to: 1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20
>   + cups-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + cupsclient-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + cupsclient-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + cupsdev-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + cupsdev-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + cupsdoc-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcups-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libcups: new package
>   + libcups2-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcups2-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcupscgi1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcupscgi1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcupsdriver1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcupsdriver1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcupsimage2-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcupsimage2-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcupsmime1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcupsmime1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcupsppdc1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libcupsppdc1-1.4.4,REV=2010.10.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From skayser at opencsw.org  Mon Nov  8 23:35:26 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 23:35:26 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mairix
Message-ID: <201011082235.oA8MZQ34008331@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* mairix: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.21,REV=2009.03.05
  -   to: 0.22,REV=2010.11.08
  + mairix-0.22,REV=2010.11.08-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + mairix-0.22,REV=2010.11.08-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  9 10:37:27 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 09:37:27 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikVgBzacEx2U22XRQAn==admXRUdF7GeW1MEN-h@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011081957.oA8JvUVW025660@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikVgBzacEx2U22XRQAn==admXRUdF7GeW1MEN-h@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimTBCV0cVt1z5e70BjSc68s+x7ueposFHLd0hcc@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 8 de Novembro de 2010 20:10, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> Hmm.. "bug" one, but in submitpkg: ?claims "new" package is libcups,
> not libcups2.
> (yeah, no idea how you're gonna "fix" that one either...)

What's called "libcups" here, is not a name of a package, but a name
for a set of catalog names.  The set is:

libcups2, libcupscgi1, libcupsdriver1, libcupsimage2, libcupsmime1, libcupsppdc1

Current algorithm looks uses the longest common substring.  If you
have a better algorithm, I'm open to suggestions.

> bug #2: erm... so how come something named "libcups **2**", has
> version=1.4.4 ??
> that's very confusing.

It's the same naming scheme as with every other shared library.  If
you look at the soname, it's libcups.so.2, which gives us CSWlibcups2.
 It has been built from cups sources version 1.4.4, and hence the
version.

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  9 12:19:33 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 12:19:33 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsox, libsox_devel, sox
Message-ID: <201011091119.oA9BJXLM028559@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This fixes #4594 and has now the library split off.

* sox: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 14.3.0,REV=2009.11.13
  -   to: 14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06
  + sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libsox: new package
  + libsox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  9 12:35:40 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 11:35:40 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsox, libsox_devel, sox
In-Reply-To: <201011091119.oA9BJXLM028559@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011091119.oA9BJXLM028559@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin79N9sXv53GBdBKXTTTEVaC5JjsD7cdzCcp=yP@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 9 de Novembro de 2010 11:19, Dagobert Michelsen
<dam at opencsw.org> escreveu:
> This fixes #4594 and has now the library split off.
>
> * sox: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 14.3.0,REV=2009.11.13
> ?- ? to: 14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06
> ?+ sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libsox: new package
> ?+ libsox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.06-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

I saw that the GAR description splits the shared library off to CSWlibsox1:

https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/sox/trunk/Makefile

Why is there a mismatch?

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Nov  9 12:51:29 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 12:51:29 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsox1, libsox_devel, sox
Message-ID: <201011091151.oA9BpTP1013984@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Re-submit, thanks Maciej for catching it!

* libsox: new package
  + libsox1-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsox1-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* sox: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 14.3.0,REV=2009.11.13
  -   to: 14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09
  + sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Nov  9 17:47:23 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 08:47:23 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimTBCV0cVt1z5e70BjSc68s+x7ueposFHLd0hcc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011081957.oA8JvUVW025660@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikVgBzacEx2U22XRQAn==admXRUdF7GeW1MEN-h@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimTBCV0cVt1z5e70BjSc68s+x7ueposFHLd0hcc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinJt_a5Uainip1ekZjCTViCwZvg8B5bmVQwQPqW@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/9/10, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> No dia 8 de Novembro de 2010 20:10, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>
> escreveu:
>>
>> bug #2: erm... so how come something named "libcups **2**", has
>> version=1.4.4  ?
>> that's very confusing.
>
> It's the same naming scheme as with every other shared library.  If
> you look at the soname, it's libcups.so.2, which gives us CSWlibcups2.
>  It has been built from cups sources version 1.4.4, and hence the
> version.
>

I dont think "the same as every other shared library" quite fits,
here. There are many libxxx packages that do not fit that naming
scheme.
I'm thinking this is the "new" library naming scheme you proposed, yes?

Do we have the specifics of the proposal up somewhere, either  on main
site, or on wiki?
If not, please put it up: i think we need to work on it a little more.
out some glitches in it.
Although your libpython seems relatively fine.
your libcups2 package does not match that. oh wait, it sort of does...
this is a single-digit-rev shared lib.
Which fits my original addendum to the proposal, if I recall:
"[libraries with single-digit (version numbers in the file) do not
usually need to be split out"

This would seem to be the case for cups, where the SONAME has not
changed in over 3 years.

using our existing defacto standards of naming, having

softname
  and
softname2

usually means two separate, different-by-major-number versions of the software.
So libcups2 is confusing.
softname2_x_y  is a bit more indicative of the sharedlib scheme you've proposed.
Perhaps the proposal needs something a bit more explicit to denote
"this is a split-off shared lib", since we've found a case where
having a leading "lib" is not sufficient to denote that any more.

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Nov  9 18:03:11 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 09:03:11 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsox1, libsox_devel, sox
In-Reply-To: <201011091151.oA9BpTP1013984@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011091151.oA9BpTP1013984@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=z5kWxd+xz8ZOhCMnh6bscP9Q7H2E5xurgHTFR@mail.gmail.com>

holding the libsox1 package (and so holding the rest of them too),
pending discussion on the libcups thread.

(or, you could rerelease as "libsox" without the trailing "1" and I
would accept, as being compliant with existing package naming.)




On 11/9/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Re-submit, thanks Maciej for catching it!
>
> * libsox: new package
>   + libsox1-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libsox1-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * sox: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 14.3.0,REV=2009.11.13
>   -   to: 14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09
>   + sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 09:20:35 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 09:20:35 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsox1, libsox_devel, sox
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=z5kWxd+xz8ZOhCMnh6bscP9Q7H2E5xurgHTFR@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011091151.oA9BpTP1013984@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=z5kWxd+xz8ZOhCMnh6bscP9Q7H2E5xurgHTFR@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <52A9C3AA-40BC-4FEF-A3AC-2CCD00D3777A@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 09.11.2010 um 18:03 schrieb Philip Brown:
> holding the libsox1 package (and so holding the rest of them too),
> pending discussion on the libcups thread.
>
> (or, you could rerelease as "libsox" without the trailing "1" and I
> would accept, as being compliant with existing package naming.)

I prefer to wait as we don't have libsox at the moment
and possibly changing the name later would leave more dirt on the
road.


Best regards

   -- Dago

> On 11/9/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Re-submit, thanks Maciej for catching it!
>>
>> * libsox: new package
>>  + libsox1-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + libsox1-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> * sox: patchlevel upgrade
>>  - from: 14.3.0,REV=2009.11.13
>>  -   to: 14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09
>>  + sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> --
>> Generated by submitpkg
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>>
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions


From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 09:45:03 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 09:45:03 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cmake
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikOAYELY=qf3bfnF6LRSEVhE41K5+KBt-ywnGiL@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikJUEMiBvOnBZ=XA-MsDRZUOUvc1rCbU2dXspkT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikOAYELY=qf3bfnF6LRSEVhE41K5+KBt-ywnGiL@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F9392B98-CF39-4308-AF8A-2648E8AADA90@opencsw.org>

Hi Maciej,

Am 08.11.2010 um 18:44 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski:

> No dia 8 de Novembro de 2010 17:39, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>  
> escreveu:
>> batched
>>
>> On 11/7/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>> * cmake: patchlevel upgrade
>>>   - from: 2.8.0,REV=2010.01.01
>>>   -   to: 2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07
>>>   + cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>>   + cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> I've submitted r11525 which removes /opt/SUNWspro/lib and the like
> from rpaths in the binaries.  I guess it'll be included in the next
> release of cmake then.

I added the flags some time ago to the C compiler invocation
circumventing complicated libtool patching:
   http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/11358
So I am wondering why it still happens.


Best regards

   -- Dago

From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 10:29:20 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 09:29:20 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cmake
In-Reply-To: <F9392B98-CF39-4308-AF8A-2648E8AADA90@opencsw.org>
References: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikJUEMiBvOnBZ=XA-MsDRZUOUvc1rCbU2dXspkT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikOAYELY=qf3bfnF6LRSEVhE41K5+KBt-ywnGiL@mail.gmail.com>
	<F9392B98-CF39-4308-AF8A-2648E8AADA90@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin1GSSqOHK5t8OUfVKGm9NATWQLZmOUQECwfUPZ@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 10 de Novembro de 2010 08:45, Dagobert Michelsen
<dam at opencsw.org> escreveu:
> Hi Maciej,
>
> Am 08.11.2010 um 18:44 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski:
>
>> No dia 8 de Novembro de 2010 17:39, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>
>> escreveu:
>>>
>>> batched
>>>
>>> On 11/7/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> * cmake: patchlevel upgrade
>>>> ?- from: 2.8.0,REV=2010.01.01
>>>> ?- ? to: 2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07
>>>> ?+ cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>>> ?+ cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> I've submitted r11525 which removes /opt/SUNWspro/lib and the like
>> from rpaths in the binaries. ?I guess it'll be included in the next
>> release of cmake then.
>
> I added the flags some time ago to the C compiler invocation
> circumventing complicated libtool patching:
> ?http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/11358
> So I am wondering why it still happens.

>From poking around the build it seems like the cmake build system
figures the compiler by itself.  Interestingly it ignores CC and CXX,
and it embeds CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS in the result.

From skayser at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 10:17:37 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 10:17:37 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cmake
In-Reply-To: <F9392B98-CF39-4308-AF8A-2648E8AADA90@opencsw.org>
References: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikJUEMiBvOnBZ=XA-MsDRZUOUvc1rCbU2dXspkT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikOAYELY=qf3bfnF6LRSEVhE41K5+KBt-ywnGiL@mail.gmail.com>
	<F9392B98-CF39-4308-AF8A-2648E8AADA90@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <20101110091737.GB28050@sebastiankayser.de>

* Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Am 08.11.2010 um 18:44 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski:
> 
> >No dia 8 de Novembro de 2010 17:39, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>  
> >escreveu:
> >>batched
> >>
> >>On 11/7/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> >>>* cmake: patchlevel upgrade
> >>>  - from: 2.8.0,REV=2010.01.01
> >>>  -   to: 2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07
> >>>  + cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> >>>  + cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> >
> >I've submitted r11525 which removes /opt/SUNWspro/lib and the like
> >from rpaths in the binaries.  I guess it'll be included in the next
> >release of cmake then.
> 
> I added the flags some time ago to the C compiler invocation
> circumventing complicated libtool patching:
>   http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/11358
> So I am wondering why it still happens.

Maybe Rupert hasn't updated his gar/ tree yet? How about integrating
some sort of gar/ revision information in the pkginfo file so that this
becomes visible in general?

I am not quite sure how this would best be done though, as there is no
single GAR revision but a collection of files with different revisions.
Thoughts (besides switching from a moving gar/ target to versioned GAR
releases)?

Sebastian

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 16:20:28 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 16:20:28 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_convertebcdic, pm_cryptrc4,
	pm_tim(...)
Message-ID: <201011101520.oAAFKSRQ008755@login.bo.opencsw.org>

These two packages are new:

* pm_convertebcdic: new package
  + pm_convertebcdic-0.06,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_cryptrc4: new package
  + pm_cryptrc4-2.02,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

This sanitizes the package and catalog name. These shortened
names are such braindead without need that I again haven't
found it and only figured after looking in the repository.

* pm_timemodules: new package
  + pm_timemodules-2006.0814,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
* pm_timemods: revision upgrade
  - from: 2008.03.02
  -   to: 2010.11.10
  + pm_timemods-2006.0814,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 11:45:37 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 10:45:37 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cups
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinJt_a5Uainip1ekZjCTViCwZvg8B5bmVQwQPqW@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011081957.oA8JvUVW025660@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikVgBzacEx2U22XRQAn==admXRUdF7GeW1MEN-h@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimTBCV0cVt1z5e70BjSc68s+x7ueposFHLd0hcc@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinJt_a5Uainip1ekZjCTViCwZvg8B5bmVQwQPqW@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=3_5FSnaYQEiqmWRJxu9toUQnSYeZDtsUc=HpN@mail.gmail.com>

[+maintainers, bcc:pkgsubmissions]

Link back to the start of the thread on pkgsubmissions:
http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/2010-November/001528.html

No dia 9 de Novembro de 2010 16:47, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> On 11/9/10, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> No dia 8 de Novembro de 2010 20:10, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>
>> escreveu:
>>>
>>> bug #2: erm... so how come something named "libcups **2**", has
>>> version=1.4.4 ??
>>> that's very confusing.
>>
>> It's the same naming scheme as with every other shared library. ?If
>> you look at the soname, it's libcups.so.2, which gives us CSWlibcups2.
>> ?It has been built from cups sources version 1.4.4, and hence the
>> version.
>>
>
> I dont think "the same as every other shared library" quite fits,
> here. There are many libxxx packages that do not fit that naming
> scheme.
> I'm thinking this is the "new" library naming scheme you proposed, yes?

Yes, that's it.

> Do we have the specifics of the proposal up somewhere, either ?on main
> site, or on wiki?

There is a best practices writeup on the wiki, on the checkpkg error
tags page, about the shared-lib-pkgname-mismatch tag.  It links to the
original discussion on the mailing list; the rationale is written up
in the first post.  There's also a link to a file with unit tests and
examples of 12 different sonames and resulting package names.

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

> Although your libpython seems relatively fine.
> your libcups2 package does not match that. oh wait, it sort of does...
> this is a single-digit-rev shared lib.
> Which fits my original addendum to the proposal, if I recall:
> "[libraries with single-digit (version numbers in the file) do not
> usually need to be split out"
>
> This would seem to be the case for cups, where the SONAME has not
> changed in over 3 years.

I don't think your proposed addendum got accepted, did it?  I have
discussed this and explained why the number of elements in the soname
version does not affect the shared library life cycle.  Here's the
reference:

http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/2010-October/012850.html

> using our existing defacto standards of naming, having
>
> softname
> ?and
> softname2
>
> usually means two separate, different-by-major-number versions of the software.
> So libcups2 is confusing.

What do you mean by confusing - what else do you think it could be?

Let's consider a hypothetical release of cups version 2, which could
be installed together with cups 1.x (regardless of how much sense it
could have).  I think this is the scenario you had in mind. Cups
version two would probably increment the soname version of libcups, or
change the soname altogether.  Distributed files would be
libcups.so.3, or libcups2.so.1 (or similar).  Here's a rundown of
hypothetical sonames of cups2 and resulting package names:

example 1: libcups.so.3 - CSWlibcups3
example 2: libcups2.so.1 - CSWlibcups2-1
example 3: libcups2.so.2 - CSWlibcups2-2
example 4: libcups2.so - CSWlibcups2

Only the example 4 could be ambiguous; but changing the soname from
libcups.so.2 to libcups2.so would be an evil thing to do, and I don't
think cups developers would ever change the soname that way.  I doubt
that it was the scenario you had in mind.  Barring the hypothetical
libcups2.so example, the CSWlibcups2 package name is unique and
explicit.

Here's an important note on package names:

The package names (pkgname and catalogname) depend solely (!) on
sonames.  They explicitly do not depend on project names, or sources
versions.  CSWlibcups2 is named the way it is because it contains
libcups.so.2.  The "cups" word is there just by coincidence - it so
happens that the project name is embedded in the soname.  Does this
explanation make it more clear to you?

> softname2_x_y ?is a bit more indicative of the sharedlib scheme you've proposed.
> Perhaps the proposal needs something a bit more explicit to denote
> "this is a split-off shared lib", since we've found a case where
> having a leading "lib" is not sufficient to denote that any more.

Do you mean some kind of naming prefix unambiguously identifying
packages with shared libraries?  What would be its purpose?  The core
of the package naming policy is that every soname has its own pkgname
and catalogname.  It's not about a perfect mapping from pkgnames to
shared library names, or about identifying packages with shared
libraries just by package names.  The purpose of the soname-driven
naming is to facilitate a healthy shared library life cycle.

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 17:05:55 2010
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:05:55 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_netssh2
Message-ID: <201011101605.oAAG5tU9015432@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Built on request.

* pm_netssh2: new package
  + pm_netssh2-0.33,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_netssh2-0.33,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 17:31:52 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:31:52 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_modrefresh, pm_modulerefresh,
	pm_t(...)
Message-ID: <201011101631.oAAGVq1m020747@login.bo.opencsw.org>

More updates and name sanitizations.

* pm_textwrapper: new package
  + pm_textwrapper-1.02,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_textwrap: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.01,REV=2008.03.02
  -   to: 1.02,REV=2010.11.10
  + pm_textwrap-1.02,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_timeperiod: revision number added upgrade
  - from: 
  -   to: 2010.11.10
  + pm_timeperiod-1.20,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_modrefresh: revision upgrade
  - from: 2008.03.02
  -   to: 2010.11.10
  + pm_modrefresh-0.13,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_modulerefresh: new package
  + pm_modulerefresh-0.13,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 17:56:32 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:56:32 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
Message-ID: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>

..and some more.

* pm_textglob: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.09,REV=2008.02.14
  -   to: 0.08,REV=2010.11.10
  + pm_textglob-0.08,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_textwikiformat: new package
  + pm_textwikiformat-0.79,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_textwikifmt: revision upgrade
  - from: 2008.03.02
  -   to: 2010.11.10
  + pm_textwikifmt-0.79,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 22:19:42 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:19:42 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cmake
In-Reply-To: <20101110091737.GB28050@sebastiankayser.de>
References: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikJUEMiBvOnBZ=XA-MsDRZUOUvc1rCbU2dXspkT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikOAYELY=qf3bfnF6LRSEVhE41K5+KBt-ywnGiL@mail.gmail.com>
	<F9392B98-CF39-4308-AF8A-2648E8AADA90@opencsw.org>
	<20101110091737.GB28050@sebastiankayser.de>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimjT6BRJsshGaoUcgE4+DJ3AJK76=6jWP=3Pfq4@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:17, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Am 08.11.2010 um 18:44 schrieb Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski:
>>
>> >No dia 8 de Novembro de 2010 17:39, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>
>> >escreveu:
>> >>batched
>> >>
>> >>On 11/7/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> >>>* cmake: patchlevel upgrade
>> >>> ?- from: 2.8.0,REV=2010.01.01
>> >>> ?- ? to: 2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07
>> >>> ?+ cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> >>> ?+ cmake-2.8.2,REV=2010.11.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>> >
>> >I've submitted r11525 which removes /opt/SUNWspro/lib and the like
>> >from rpaths in the binaries. ?I guess it'll be included in the next
>> >release of cmake then.
>>
>> I added the flags some time ago to the C compiler invocation
>> circumventing complicated libtool patching:
>> ? http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/11358
>> So I am wondering why it still happens.
>
> Maybe Rupert hasn't updated his gar/ tree yet? How about integrating
> some sort of gar/ revision information in the pkginfo file so that this
> becomes visible in general?
>
> I am not quite sure how this would best be done though, as there is no
> single GAR revision but a collection of files with different revisions.
> Thoughts (besides switching from a moving gar/ target to versioned GAR
> releases)?

rupert is updating the gar tree before running a build, and there is
also a unique id, the subversion "revision" :) e.g. go direct to some
file in the gar folder in case there is a symbolic link to gar:

$ svn info gar/categories

Path: gar/categories
URL: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/gar/v2/categories
Repository Root: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar
Repository UUID: d3b55034-1cff-0310-a425-aefe953e1e90
Revision: 11556
Node Kind: directory
Schedule: normal
Last Changed Author: dmichelsen
Last Changed Rev: 11547
Last Changed Date: 2010-11-10 09:04:13 -0600 (Wed, 10 Nov 2010)

From skayser at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 23:21:36 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:21:36 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=-X56Hg7jLHSgJ9Ya2ht-TmqDppciJWNkOZEqY@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>	<AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikygrbFJjwZ=ko18y-x91Tw4Jnt4xXxsduMy+pg@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=-X56Hg7jLHSgJ9Ya2ht-TmqDppciJWNkOZEqY@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CDB1AF0.7010804@opencsw.org>

Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote on 03.11.2010 14:07:
> Another idea was to only display Ds and Fs, and display the Os only on
> demand, for example:
> 
> checkpkg --display-overrides foo.pkg.gz ...

Sounds appropriate. checkpkg's primary purpose is to notify on "policy"
violations. Overrides should be an exception and if it's necessary to
explicitly display them, the tempation to simply copy n' paste will
likely be less.

This all presumes that the thrown errors are presented and documented
well enough for people to follow the breadcrumbs intuitively on their own.

Sebastian

From skayser at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 10 23:37:09 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:37:09 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cmake
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimjT6BRJsshGaoUcgE4+DJ3AJK76=6jWP=3Pfq4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>	<AANLkTikJUEMiBvOnBZ=XA-MsDRZUOUvc1rCbU2dXspkT@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikOAYELY=qf3bfnF6LRSEVhE41K5+KBt-ywnGiL@mail.gmail.com>	<F9392B98-CF39-4308-AF8A-2648E8AADA90@opencsw.org>	<20101110091737.GB28050@sebastiankayser.de>
	<AANLkTimjT6BRJsshGaoUcgE4+DJ3AJK76=6jWP=3Pfq4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CDB1E95.5080209@opencsw.org>

rupert THURNER wrote on 10.11.2010 22:19:
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:17, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Maybe Rupert hasn't updated his gar/ tree yet? How about integrating
>> some sort of gar/ revision information in the pkginfo file so that this
>> becomes visible in general?
>>
>> I am not quite sure how this would best be done though, as there is no
>> single GAR revision but a collection of files with different revisions.
>> Thoughts (besides switching from a moving gar/ target to versioned GAR
>> releases)?
> 
> rupert is updating the gar tree before running a build

Ruper is a role model ;) I fell into that trap more than enough myself,
that's why I pointed it out. No offense intended.

> and there is
> also a unique id, the subversion "revision" :) e.g. go direct to some
> file in the gar folder in case there is a symbolic link to gar:
> 
> $ svn info gar/categories
> 
> Path: gar/categories
> URL: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/gar/v2/categories
> Repository Root: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar
> Repository UUID: d3b55034-1cff-0310-a425-aefe953e1e90
> Revision: 11556
> Node Kind: directory
> Schedule: normal
> Last Changed Author: dmichelsen
> Last Changed Rev: 11547
> Last Changed Date: 2010-11-10 09:04:13 -0600 (Wed, 10 Nov 2010)

So if one calls "svn info gar/" and reads the Revision: that's the
latest revision of any file that currently sits beneath the locally
checked out gar/? A revision which could then be embedded into pkginfo
by GAR to reference the employed point-in-time-copy of gar/?

Sebastian

From rupert at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 08:43:07 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 08:43:07 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cmake
In-Reply-To: <4CDB1E95.5080209@opencsw.org>
References: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikJUEMiBvOnBZ=XA-MsDRZUOUvc1rCbU2dXspkT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikOAYELY=qf3bfnF6LRSEVhE41K5+KBt-ywnGiL@mail.gmail.com>
	<F9392B98-CF39-4308-AF8A-2648E8AADA90@opencsw.org>
	<20101110091737.GB28050@sebastiankayser.de>
	<AANLkTimjT6BRJsshGaoUcgE4+DJ3AJK76=6jWP=3Pfq4@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CDB1E95.5080209@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik3aWkcgULd8Tsv659CUFgfrWLh09k=GcXL+pLU@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 23:37, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
> rupert THURNER wrote on 10.11.2010 22:19:
>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:17, Sebastian Kayser <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>> Maybe Rupert hasn't updated his gar/ tree yet? How about integrating
>>> some sort of gar/ revision information in the pkginfo file so that this
>>> becomes visible in general?
>>>
>>> I am not quite sure how this would best be done though, as there is no
>>> single GAR revision but a collection of files with different revisions.
>>> Thoughts (besides switching from a moving gar/ target to versioned GAR
>>> releases)?
>>
>> rupert is updating the gar tree before running a build
>
> Ruper is a role model ;) I fell into that trap more than enough myself,
> that's why I pointed it out. No offense intended.
>
>> and there is
>> also a unique id, the subversion "revision" :) e.g. go direct to some
>> file in the gar folder in case there is a symbolic link to gar:
>>
>> $ svn info gar/categories
>>
>> Path: gar/categories
>> URL: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/gar/v2/categories
>> Repository Root: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar
>> Repository UUID: d3b55034-1cff-0310-a425-aefe953e1e90
>> Revision: 11556
>> Node Kind: directory
>> Schedule: normal
>> Last Changed Author: dmichelsen
>> Last Changed Rev: 11547
>> Last Changed Date: 2010-11-10 09:04:13 -0600 (Wed, 10 Nov 2010)
>
> So if one calls "svn info gar/" and reads the Revision: that's the
> latest revision of any file that currently sits beneath the locally
> checked out gar/? A revision which could then be embedded into pkginfo
> by GAR to reference the employed point-in-time-copy of gar/?

yes.

but, "gar" is sometimes a symbolic link to the gar checkout to make
make it possible to use a "svn update --ignore-externals", which is a
lot quicker then checking out the same gar many times. in this case
"svn info gar" won't work. "svn info gar/someghing-else" should always
work as long as somebody updates gar via svn.

the whole subversion repository has only one current revision number.
it does therefore not matter which file / folder you test in the
working copy. as long one updates the whole gar, of course. but that
should be an edge case.

rupert.

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 09:08:16 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:08:16 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <4CDB1AF0.7010804@opencsw.org>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>	<AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikygrbFJjwZ=ko18y-x91Tw4Jnt4xXxsduMy+pg@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=-X56Hg7jLHSgJ9Ya2ht-TmqDppciJWNkOZEqY@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CDB1AF0.7010804@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <F8473275-5F82-4C53-A08C-46AE5B812EA7@opencsw.org>

Hi,

Am 10.11.2010 um 23:21 schrieb Sebastian Kayser:
> Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote on 03.11.2010 14:07:
>> Another idea was to only display Ds and Fs, and display the Os only  
>> on
>> demand, for example:
>>
>> checkpkg --display-overrides foo.pkg.gz ...
>
> Sounds appropriate. checkpkg's primary purpose is to notify on  
> "policy"
> violations. Overrides should be an exception and if it's necessary to
> explicitly display them, the tempation to simply copy n' paste will
> likely be less.
>
> This all presumes that the thrown errors are presented and documented
> well enough for people to follow the breadcrumbs intuitively on  
> their own.

How about a summarized view like

   <checkpkg-error-tag> ! <present> ! <overridden>

where it can be easily detected if there are errors present not
overridden and also if there are overrides for non-present errors.


Best regards

   -- Dago

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 09:13:06 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:13:06 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cmake
In-Reply-To: <4CDB1E95.5080209@opencsw.org>
References: <201011072000.oA7K0VKH014498@login.bo.opencsw.org>	<AANLkTikJUEMiBvOnBZ=XA-MsDRZUOUvc1rCbU2dXspkT@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikOAYELY=qf3bfnF6LRSEVhE41K5+KBt-ywnGiL@mail.gmail.com>	<F9392B98-CF39-4308-AF8A-2648E8AADA90@opencsw.org>	<20101110091737.GB28050@sebastiankayser.de>
	<AANLkTimjT6BRJsshGaoUcgE4+DJ3AJK76=6jWP=3Pfq4@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CDB1E95.5080209@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <0431BE62-2487-4A27-9254-D541E5FEB061@opencsw.org>

Hi,

Am 10.11.2010 um 23:37 schrieb Sebastian Kayser:
> rupert THURNER wrote on 10.11.2010 22:19:
>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:17, Sebastian Kayser  
>> <skayser at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>> Maybe Rupert hasn't updated his gar/ tree yet? How about integrating
>>> some sort of gar/ revision information in the pkginfo file so that  
>>> this
>>> becomes visible in general?
>>>
>>> I am not quite sure how this would best be done though, as there  
>>> is no
>>> single GAR revision but a collection of files with different  
>>> revisions.
>>> Thoughts (besides switching from a moving gar/ target to versioned  
>>> GAR
>>> releases)?
>>
>> rupert is updating the gar tree before running a build
>
> Ruper is a role model ;) I fell into that trap more than enough  
> myself,
> that's why I pointed it out. No offense intended.
>
>> and there is
>> also a unique id, the subversion "revision" :) e.g. go direct to some
>> file in the gar folder in case there is a symbolic link to gar:
>>
>> $ svn info gar/categories
>>
>> Path: gar/categories
>> URL: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/gar/v2/categories
>> Repository Root: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar
>> Repository UUID: d3b55034-1cff-0310-a425-aefe953e1e90
>> Revision: 11556
>> Node Kind: directory
>> Schedule: normal
>> Last Changed Author: dmichelsen
>> Last Changed Rev: 11547
>> Last Changed Date: 2010-11-10 09:04:13 -0600 (Wed, 10 Nov 2010)
>
> So if one calls "svn info gar/" and reads the Revision: that's the
> latest revision of any file that currently sits beneath the locally
> checked out gar/? A revision which could then be embedded into pkginfo
> by GAR to reference the employed point-in-time-copy of gar/?

Well, my initial thought was if a releasable version is going to be
made a snapshot of trunk is done to tags/<software>-<revstamp> and
the external reference to GAR is changed to point to the fixed
version at the time of snapshot. The package build would then
include the SVN URL to the snapshot allowing specific tracking of
the GAR rev by looking at that external reference.

However, I always postponed that step as it makes most sense with
an automated build and would also benefit largely from the changed
release model we discussed during the camp as built packages would
automatically go into an experimental repository and submitpkg
would migrate from there to unstable.

Funny to see how all things are connected...


Best regards

   -- Dago

From maciej at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 11:18:59 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:18:59 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <F8473275-5F82-4C53-A08C-46AE5B812EA7@opencsw.org>
References: <201010231151.o9NBpFn9001868@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<D97EC644-34E0-44CD-BD20-07D56763D505@opencsw.org>
	<D5298651-6A05-46A9-AA8D-15F9D9478609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim46+-U9GEVZ1NDvcdh7V2bqTCexYKw8UXcWiLY@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinkGFQMvsKBOjpUiFT1FB8hBn_5jzZ==ZKOE_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<1288630046-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=mRqxAMUUWihiufe-5+O2RWC+n6Q=+pcc2F9s3@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinMLN_8FNTQ9TPnwVgUTaf=uuWhcGtkME=Rk0NU@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikygrbFJjwZ=ko18y-x91Tw4Jnt4xXxsduMy+pg@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=-X56Hg7jLHSgJ9Ya2ht-TmqDppciJWNkOZEqY@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CDB1AF0.7010804@opencsw.org>
	<F8473275-5F82-4C53-A08C-46AE5B812EA7@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimpEFczkORynWi0E6_AO-x_8d2aed-wLxjyiL1Y@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 11 de Novembro de 2010 08:08, Dagobert Michelsen
<dam at opencsw.org> escreveu:
> Hi,
>
> Am 10.11.2010 um 23:21 schrieb Sebastian Kayser:
>>
>> Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote on 03.11.2010 14:07:
>>>
>>> Another idea was to only display Ds and Fs, and display the Os only on
>>> demand, for example:
>>>
>>> checkpkg --display-overrides foo.pkg.gz ...
>>
>> Sounds appropriate. checkpkg's primary purpose is to notify on "policy"
>> violations. Overrides should be an exception and if it's necessary to
>> explicitly display them, the tempation to simply copy n' paste will
>> likely be less.
>>
>> This all presumes that the thrown errors are presented and documented
>> well enough for people to follow the breadcrumbs intuitively on their own.
>
> How about a summarized view like
>
> ?<checkpkg-error-tag> ! <present> ! <overridden>
>
> where it can be easily detected if there are errors present not
> overridden and also if there are overrides for non-present errors.

Apart from the error tag, there is also the tag-info part, which makes
error tags more specific.  Each error tag also has the pkgname
attached to it, so the summary would have to contain:

<pkgname> ! <checkpkg-error-tag> ! <tag-info> ! present ! <overriden>

This kind of view might be quite wide and hard to read.  Instead of
tag info, we could show tag counts:

<pkgname> ! <checkpkg-error-tag> ! <tag-count> ! present ! <overriden>

However, that would be not as helpful to maintainers, because tag-info
usually contains critical information, for instance - which file in
particular is affected here?  That's why I think displaying tag-info
is important.

It would be easier to discuss this if we had concrete examples to look
at.  Next time I work with checkpkg I'll see if I can improve the way
errors are displayed.

If anyone wants to have a go at tweaking the templates, the three main
ones are defined around line 72 of the checkpkg.py file:

http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/browser/csw/mgar/gar/v2/lib/python/checkpkg.py#L72

I'll be also happy to answer any questions about modifying checkpkg
sources, even if the questions are along the lines of "how do I get
started with this?"

Maciej

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 12:28:18 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:28:18 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_classautouse,
	pm_classdatainherita(...)
Message-ID: <201011111128.oABBSI5H011630@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Some more updated Perl modules with name sanitizations.

* pm_clsautouse: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.23,REV=2006.01.28
  -   to: 1.29,REV=2010.11.11
  + pm_clsautouse-1.29,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_classautouse: new package
  + pm_classautouse-1.29,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_clsdtainherit: revision upgrade
  - from: 2008.03.13
  -   to: 2010.11.11
  + pm_clsdtainherit-0.08,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_classdatainheritable: new package
  + pm_classdatainheritable-0.08,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_testlongstring: new package
  + pm_testlongstring-0.14,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_testlongstr: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.11,REV=2008.03.02
  -   to: 0.14,REV=2010.11.11
  + pm_testlongstr-0.14,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 15:13:46 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 15:13:46 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_nbrcompare, pm_numbercompare,
	pm_p(...)
Message-ID: <201011111413.oABEDkqw004149@login.bo.opencsw.org>

More Perl modules.

* pm_regexpcom: major version upgrade
  - from: 2.120
  -   to: 2010010201,REV=2010.11.11
  + pm_regexpcom-2010010201,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_podreadme: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.09,REV=2008.01.19
  -   to: 0.10,REV=2010.11.11
  + pm_podreadme-0.10,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_regexpcommon: new package
  + pm_regexpcommon-2010010201,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_nbrcompare: revision upgrade
  - from: 2008.02.14
  -   to: 2010.11.11
  + pm_nbrcompare-0.01,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_numbercompare: new package
  + pm_numbercompare-0.01,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_sortver: new package
  + pm_sortver-1.5,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_sortversions: revision upgrade
  - from: 2007.03.16
  -   to: 2010.11.11
  + pm_sortversions-1.5,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_podtests: major version upgrade
  - from: 0.18,REV=2008.02.14
  -   to: 1.19,REV=2010.11.11
  + pm_podtests-1.19,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Nov 11 18:05:43 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:05:43 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_netssh2
In-Reply-To: <201011101605.oAAG5tU9015432@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011101605.oAAG5tU9015432@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim1nTWCF8VEysuNVV39p27A5vkXia+RCRr6ZYPx@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 11/10/10, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Built on request.
>
> * pm_netssh2: new package
>   + pm_netssh2-0.33,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pm_netssh2-0.33,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Nov 11 18:38:53 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:38:53 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
In-Reply-To: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>

Ugh.
I hate temporary renames.
Especially when they come in clumps.

Is there some kind of long-term plan for all this?
I note that some of them have only "rt" using them.
Is someone redoing rt for sure?

Can these not just wait until rt is repackaged,and then we can just
replace the old with the new, skipping those temporary empty packages?



On 11/10/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> ..and some more.
>
> * pm_textglob: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 0.09,REV=2008.02.14
>   -   to: 0.08,REV=2010.11.10
>   + pm_textglob-0.08,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_textwikiformat: new package
>   + pm_textwikiformat-0.79,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_textwikifmt: revision upgrade
>   - from: 2008.03.02
>   -   to: 2010.11.10
>   + pm_textwikifmt-0.79,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From pfelecan at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 18:59:44 2010
From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter Felecan)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 18:59:44 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs svn2cl
Message-ID: <201011111759.oABHxia1007331@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* svn2cl: new package
  + svn2cl-0.13,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

Please note that chkpkg gives a false positive on
/opt/csw/share/doc/svn2cl/README which contains an installation
example using /usr/local. It can be safely ignored.
-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 19:05:17 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 19:05:17 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6EA62737-83FD-412A-9B07-12B2C16D0EBD@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 11.11.2010 um 18:38 schrieb Philip Brown:
> I hate temporary renames.
> Especially when they come in clumps.
>
> Is there some kind of long-term plan for all this?
> I note that some of them have only "rt" using them.
> Is someone redoing rt for sure?
>
> Can these not just wait until rt is repackaged,and then we can just
> replace the old with the new, skipping those temporary empty packages?

The problem is that quite a lot users utilize the OpenCSW packages
for Perl modules to run their own applications. That means we could
drop the original packages after a "guaranteed" upgrade cycle
(which we don't have right now, like 201010 to 201011 snapshots).
But even then the packages need to be released with renames first
so they can be propery tracked and upgraded on the systems.


Best regards

   -- Dago



From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Nov 11 19:35:51 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:35:51 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs svn2cl
In-Reply-To: <201011111759.oABHxia1007331@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011111759.oABHxia1007331@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=pR4X7fs+dR7g+EvnGrmtXHdRQh_iDRDuNLLO0@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On 11/11/10, Peter Felecan <pfelecan at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * svn2cl: new package
>   + svn2cl-0.13,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> Please note that chkpkg gives a false positive on
> /opt/csw/share/doc/svn2cl/README which contains an installation
> example using /usr/local. It can be safely ignored.
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Nov 11 19:45:03 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:45:03 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
In-Reply-To: <6EA62737-83FD-412A-9B07-12B2C16D0EBD@opencsw.org>
References: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>
	<6EA62737-83FD-412A-9B07-12B2C16D0EBD@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim=KS17g0b0L8HdxC6SrA+RzoLHe=VUJGo6iXFY@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/11/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>

*wave*


> Am 11.11.2010 um 18:38 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> I hate temporary renames.
>> Especially when they come in clumps.
>>
>> Is there some kind of long-term plan for all this?
>...
>
> The problem is that quite a lot users utilize the OpenCSW packages
> for Perl modules to run their own applications. That means we could
> drop the original packages after a "guaranteed" upgrade cycle
> (which we don't have right now, like 201010 to 201011 snapshots).
> But even then the packages need to be released with renames first
> so they can be propery tracked and upgraded on the systems.
>


okay. well, then... if you want us to handle things like a
professional service provider.. then we need to do it professionally.
With a properly drawn up project,and timetables, and "announcements to
affected users", etc.

Would you please draw up a specific plan/ascii doc/whatever, identifying

"These packages are going to be name-sanitized"

Then also identify "they will be completed&released on date X/Y/Z,
with temporary transition packages being released also"

and then "the temporary update packages will be REMOVED by date A/B/C"
and a full list of those packages that will be removed in that section.

[The reason for the "they will be completed by" date, is that we can
then provide our users with a guaranteed specific time window of 'no
change expected' between that date, and the removal of the transition
packages]

(you should probably also identify which packages of OURS, gate the
removal of those packages until they are updated)


Once we have all this stuff identified and timetabled, then we can
announce it to our users, and then we can start actually pushing this
stuff out. ugh.

I've made a subdir in newpkgs, named "dam", with your pm_ packages in
it, so you can queue stuff up there in the meantime, if you wish.

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 19:55:10 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 19:55:10 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim=KS17g0b0L8HdxC6SrA+RzoLHe=VUJGo6iXFY@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>
	<6EA62737-83FD-412A-9B07-12B2C16D0EBD@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim=KS17g0b0L8HdxC6SrA+RzoLHe=VUJGo6iXFY@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B7B569EA-57EC-41BB-901E-11D4FE971066@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 11.11.2010 um 19:45 schrieb Philip Brown:
> Would you please draw up a specific plan/ascii doc/whatever,  
> identifying
> "These packages are going to be name-sanitized"

The good thing is if you just release the packages and the empty stubs
everything will work as expected for us and the users. The removal is
just for beauty and not really needed.

Everything else requires acceptance of
   http://wiki.opencsw.org/releases-and-staging
first as we need tagged releases to allow for clean renames.


Best regards

   -- Dago


From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 20:56:17 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 20:56:17 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_checkisa, pm_dataoptlist,
	pm_datat(...)
Message-ID: <201011111956.oABJuHW6008723@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is basically Data::TreeDumper with its dependencies.
All new, so ready for immediate release.

* pm_testuseok: new package
  + pm_testuseok-0.02,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_subinstall: new package
  + pm_subinstall-0.925,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_develsize: new package
  + pm_develsize-0.71,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_develsize-0.71,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_subexporter: new package
  + pm_subexporter-0.982,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_datatreedumper: new package
  + pm_datatreedumper-0.37,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_checkisa: new package
  + pm_checkisa-0.04,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_termsize: new package
  + pm_termsize-0.207,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_termsize-0.207,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_sortnaturally: new package
  + pm_sortnaturally-1.02,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_dataoptlist: new package
  + pm_dataoptlist-0.106,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Nov 11 21:48:46 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:48:46 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
In-Reply-To: <B7B569EA-57EC-41BB-901E-11D4FE971066@opencsw.org>
References: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>
	<6EA62737-83FD-412A-9B07-12B2C16D0EBD@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim=KS17g0b0L8HdxC6SrA+RzoLHe=VUJGo6iXFY@mail.gmail.com>
	<B7B569EA-57EC-41BB-901E-11D4FE971066@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikBVbziX+4EkRQja-Ww01hs63wTMnrkrrFMjkpN@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/11/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 11.11.2010 um 19:45 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> Would you please draw up a specific plan/ascii doc/whatever,
>> identifying
>> "These packages are going to be name-sanitized"
>
> The good thing is if you just release the packages and the empty stubs
> everything will work as expected for us and the users. The removal is
> just for beauty and not really needed.


your renaming can also be considered "just for beauty and not really needed" :)

I'm not okay with leaving in these transition packages indefinately.
They need to have a finite lifetime. See below.

Additionally, we need specific tracking of which of our applications
need to have their dependancies changed. Having a specific retirement
date on the empty packages helps with that too.



>
> Everything else requires acceptance of
>    http://wiki.opencsw.org/releases-and-staging
> first as we need tagged releases to allow for clean renames.
>

I dont see how that is "needed" to have clean renames.

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Nov 11 21:51:57 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:51:57 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_checkisa, pm_dataoptlist,
	pm_datat(...)
In-Reply-To: <201011111956.oABJuHW6008723@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011111956.oABJuHW6008723@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=OPVBT6tXKLis-ejE-Ny5UrajthhjssBT6GxbJ@mail.gmail.com>

great, thanks.


On 11/11/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This is basically Data::TreeDumper with its dependencies.
> All new, so ready for immediate release.
>
> * pm_testuseok: new package
>   + pm_testuseok-0.02,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_subinstall: new package
>   + pm_subinstall-0.925,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_develsize: new package
>   + pm_develsize-0.71,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pm_develsize-0.71,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_subexporter: new package
>   + pm_subexporter-0.982,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_datatreedumper: new package
>   + pm_datatreedumper-0.37,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_checkisa: new package
>   + pm_checkisa-0.04,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_termsize: new package
>   + pm_termsize-0.207,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pm_termsize-0.207,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_sortnaturally: new package
>   + pm_sortnaturally-1.02,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_dataoptlist: new package
>   + pm_dataoptlist-0.106,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 12 08:57:21 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:57:21 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikBVbziX+4EkRQja-Ww01hs63wTMnrkrrFMjkpN@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>
	<6EA62737-83FD-412A-9B07-12B2C16D0EBD@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim=KS17g0b0L8HdxC6SrA+RzoLHe=VUJGo6iXFY@mail.gmail.com>
	<B7B569EA-57EC-41BB-901E-11D4FE971066@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikBVbziX+4EkRQja-Ww01hs63wTMnrkrrFMjkpN@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <DFAE24D8-9741-4E14-8473-8A44BD37136F@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 11.11.2010 um 21:48 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On 11/11/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Am 11.11.2010 um 19:45 schrieb Philip Brown:
>>> Would you please draw up a specific plan/ascii doc/whatever,
>>> identifying
>>> "These packages are going to be name-sanitized"
>>
>> The good thing is if you just release the packages and the empty  
>> stubs
>> everything will work as expected for us and the users. The removal is
>> just for beauty and not really needed.
>
> your renaming can also be considered "just for beauty and not really  
> needed" :)
>
> I'm not okay with leaving in these transition packages indefinately.
> They need to have a finite lifetime. See below.

Ok. 6 month.

> Additionally, we need specific tracking of which of our applications
> need to have their dependancies changed. Having a specific retirement
> date on the empty packages helps with that too.

After release I file bugs against all dependent packages as I
always do on renames :-P

>> Everything else requires acceptance of
>>   http://wiki.opencsw.org/releases-and-staging
>> first as we need tagged releases to allow for clean renames.
>
> I dont see how that is "needed" to have clean renames.

It would give the users clean "must-do" update cycles, which would
enforce name-change updates on the system. With hooks it would
also be quite easy with an upgrade hook to handle name changes,
but as half of the packaging tools doesn't support them this is
obviously not an option.


Best regards

   -- Dago



From rupert at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 13 13:48:19 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 06:48:19 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mediawiki
Message-ID: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* mediawiki: version upgrade
  - from: 1.14.0,REV=2009.10.05
  -   to: 1.16.0,REV=2010.11.13
  + mediawiki-1.16.0,REV=2010.11.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From ihsan at opencsw.org  Sun Nov 14 14:38:27 2010
From: ihsan at opencsw.org (Ihsan Dogan)
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 14:38:27 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs drill, libldns1, libldnsdevel,
	libunb(...)
Message-ID: <201011141338.oAEDcRsq009017@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* drill: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.6.5,REV=2010.06.25
  -   to: 1.6.7,REV=2010.11.11
  + drill-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + drill-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* unbound: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.4.1,REV=2009.12.27
  -   to: 1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12
  + unbound-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + unbound-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* unbound: new package
  + libunbound2-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libunbound2-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + unbound_devel-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + unbound_devel-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + unbound_host-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + unbound_host-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libldns: new package
  + libldns1-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libldns1-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libldnsdevel-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libldnsdevel-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

NOTE:
Please remove CSWldns and CSWldnsdevel from the catalog.

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From pefelecan at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 11 18:34:31 2010
From: pefelecan at opencsw.org (Peter Felecan)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 18:34:31 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs svn2cl
Message-ID: <201011111734.oABHYV2b001229@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* svn2cl: new package
  + svn2cl-0.13,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

Please note that chkpkg gives a false positive on
/opt/csw/share/doc/svn2cl/README which contains an installation
example using /usr/local. It can be safely ignored.
-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Sun Nov 14 23:25:30 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 16:25:30 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs trac
Message-ID: <201011142225.oAEMPU3C004536@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* trac: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.11.7,REV=2010.03.13
  -   to: 0.12.1,REV=2010.11.14
  + trac-0.12.1,REV=2010.11.14-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From pfelecan at opencsw.org  Mon Nov 15 09:47:44 2010
From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN)
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:47:44 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs svn2cl
In-Reply-To: <201011111734.oABHYV2b001229@login.bo.opencsw.org> (Peter
	Felecan's message of "Thu, 11 Nov 2010 18:34:31 +0100 (CET)")
References: <201011111734.oABHYV2b001229@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <x6r5enj7m7.fsf@opencsw.org>

Peter Felecan <pefelecan at opencsw.org> writes:

> * svn2cl: new package
>   + svn2cl-0.13,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> Please note that chkpkg gives a false positive on
> /opt/csw/share/doc/svn2cl/README which contains an installation
> example using /usr/local. It can be safely ignored.

Note that this is redundant due to an error in the parameters of
submitpkg tool; it was corrected. The <pefelecan at opencsw.org> doesn't
exist...

-- 
Peter

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Nov 15 19:20:58 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 19:20:58 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] [csw-maintainers]
	http://www.opencsw.org/packages/<pkg>: Add GAR build recipe
	URL to package page?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik0iWrkpeu+N3_V8jeHZfActj9K3Pha2PqxbP7T@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTinDZMHfx3gf=unSnYWPhpPGzcM4ppmg3pfeYntu@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=oCjs+VqVvr8iAkApYAcXpDurhSmE+heEv79e=@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim1d82p_u9+YpT877jQRpb0dz4HqzFTVs+zHi1M@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=CfQpjWCn4R72QzX=6nKZkf3OKDrc_tjBAvYFe@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikFLm7HBncpo4tqCB0aD+0NKC8f07wZ3jopA7ys@mail.gmail.com>
	<20101105162742.GA15588@sebastiankayser.de>
	<AANLkTi=qiP57EoqARAaCK=nPgxw+U2B=-fWvx3KKs7V=@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CDB292D.3090108@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikYhpD4mZ0-Xx9jMRYZzzOBaY65S0jqHY0OwoYi@mail.gmail.com>
	<EDB0F459-82F6-42E8-9E39-44141E84EE57@opencsw.org>
	<20101111171050.GP28050@sebastiankayser.de>
	<AANLkTimW2xVb=nwQuqKi7G1Qgb21GRttoZ7JOJGPboGT@mail.gmail.com>
	<1289672497-sup-4152@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTik0iWrkpeu+N3_V8jeHZfActj9K3Pha2PqxbP7T@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1F550B4F-E5CA-405C-A6ED-52AB09EA3023@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 15.11.2010 um 18:32 schrieb Philip Brown:
> within the context for that only --
> For that, the actual database space could be somewhat fixed.
> After all, we are now agreed that package names should be 31 chars or less.

Does that mean all my waiting packages get released now including the Perl
modules with longer names than previously allowed but <31?

> And that the location for a package in our repository is usually
> [top]/softwarename
> Or in some rare cases (which I'd personally like to do away with)
> [top]/(maybe-ONE subdir)/softwarename
> 
> So we could actually pick some reasonable fixed size for it. The exact
> length, would depend on the answer to your followup question:
> 
>> I also think that the common portion of the SourceForge.net URL should
>> be stripped out of the storage here and appended by php as a
>> statically defined string in the code.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the existing string in pkginfo be left as is,
> but when inserted into the database, we auto-strip out {top of
> repository} ?
> 
> sounds potentially reasonable.
> 
> If so, then the database size for storing the OPENCSW_REPOSITORY info
> could be limited to
> 31 + fileseparator + 31 = 63.   Make it 64 just to be 'rounded'
> 
> hmmm?

Nope. The server name prefix to the repository should be stripped
up to the repository root, which is
  Repository Root: https://gar.svn.sf.net/svnroot/gar
The path length is not directly connected to the catalog-, nor
the package name, but the upstream name which may or may not
be similar in length. Short answer: Just user 255 and we never
will have this discussion again :-) If you have doubts about the
database size: an extra GB of RAM shouldn't matter which will
suffice for about 1.000.000.000 / (255 - 63) ~ 5 million
extra package. Some room available :-)


Best regards

  -- Dago



From phil at opencsw.org  Tue Nov 16 00:21:11 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:21:11 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs trac
In-Reply-To: <201011142225.oAEMPU3C004536@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011142225.oAEMPU3C004536@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=0eSyiKq3bxUiz=LUfm3EcPgtZrx-vrUirEpj3@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 2:25 PM, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * trac: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.11.7,REV=2010.03.13
> ?- ? to: 0.12.1,REV=2010.11.14
> ?+ trac-0.12.1,REV=2010.11.14-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Nov 16 00:23:28 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:23:28 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mediawiki
In-Reply-To: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=QpEk0ceBA7UzpjKpfeq0sPOtrhoqo4Z-k4+SF@mail.gmail.com>

Two problems.

1. you made it not relocatable any more

2. you included a bunch of ".git" files in the package.

Oddly, the prior release WAS in gar.
Cant you just take the prior stuff, and dont change anything except
the shipped mediawiki files?


On 11/13/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * mediawiki: version upgrade
>   - from: 1.14.0,REV=2009.10.05
>   -   to: 1.16.0,REV=2010.11.13
>   + mediawiki-1.16.0,REV=2010.11.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Nov 16 00:31:45 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:31:45 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs drill, libldns1, libldnsdevel,
	libunb(...)
In-Reply-To: <201011141338.oAEDcRsq009017@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011141338.oAEDcRsq009017@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=6kt1L15VR32fLEoyA3egRF7o=rucER_c-8yGa@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Ihsan,

I'm not sure this is a good idea. why are you choosing to rename?

It's worth noticing that the software's own name, is "ldns".
As noted by the URL that you still preserve in the pkginfo itself:

http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/projects/ldns/

so calling the package "libldns" seems to be against the author's
wishes to some degree.




and then there is the needless making it "libldns1" instead of just
plain "libldns".
What is up with this stuff?

I unfortunately hadnt gotten around to reviewing the url that Maciej
put together yet. my "free" weekend ended up having me stay up until
midnight with (day job) at one point.

But this is putting me rather against it, if people are going to start
labeling everything
"libXXX1", instead of just "libXXX".

My next message, on maintainers, will hopefully be about that.


On 11/14/10, Ihsan Dogan <ihsan at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * drill: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 1.6.5,REV=2010.06.25
>   -   to: 1.6.7,REV=2010.11.11
>   + drill-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + drill-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * unbound: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 1.4.1,REV=2009.12.27
>   -   to: 1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12
>   + unbound-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + unbound-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * unbound: new package
>   + libunbound2-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libunbound2-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + unbound_devel-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + unbound_devel-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + unbound_host-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + unbound_host-1.4.7,REV=2010.11.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libldns: new package
>   + libldns1-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libldns1-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libldnsdevel-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libldnsdevel-1.6.7,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> NOTE:
> Please remove CSWldns and CSWldnsdevel from the catalog.
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From maciej at opencsw.org  Tue Nov 16 11:52:21 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 10:52:21 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs drill, libldns1, libldnsdevel,
	libunb(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=6kt1L15VR32fLEoyA3egRF7o=rucER_c-8yGa@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011141338.oAEDcRsq009017@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=6kt1L15VR32fLEoyA3egRF7o=rucER_c-8yGa@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=L9AztCAVzUK07j3eL0Nagw5p8A5Y0j8Gbo4n9@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 15 de Novembro de 2010 23:31, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> Hi Ihsan,
>
> I'm not sure this is a good idea. why are you choosing to rename?
>
> It's worth noticing that the software's own name, is "ldns".
> As noted by the URL that you still preserve in the pkginfo itself:
>
> http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/projects/ldns/
>
> so calling the package "libldns" seems to be against the author's
> wishes to some degree.
>
>
>
>
> and then there is the needless making it "libldns1" instead of just
> plain "libldns".
> What is up with this stuff?

You've read the proposal by now, so you probably know the idea of
naming packages after the shared libraries they contain.  In this
case, the actual library file is named libldns.so.1.6.7, hence the
package name.

From ihsan at opencsw.org  Tue Nov 16 16:11:51 2010
From: ihsan at opencsw.org (Ihsan Dogan)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:11:51 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs drill, libldns1, libldnsdevel,
	libunb(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=6kt1L15VR32fLEoyA3egRF7o=rucER_c-8yGa@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011141338.oAEDcRsq009017@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=6kt1L15VR32fLEoyA3egRF7o=rucER_c-8yGa@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CE29F37.8080101@opencsw.org>

Hello Phil,

On 11/16/10 12:31 AM, Philip Brown wrote:

> I'm not sure this is a good idea. why are you choosing to rename?

Because of http://wiki.opencsw.org/packaging-shared-libraries .

> It's worth noticing that the software's own name, is "ldns".
> As noted by the URL that you still preserve in the pkginfo itself:
>
> http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/projects/ldns/
>
> so calling the package "libldns" seems to be against the author's
> wishes to some degree.

It doesn't say that I can't name the package libldns1.

> and then there is the needless making it "libldns1" instead of just
> plain "libldns".
> What is up with this stuff?

I've spent quite some time with packaging and testing unbound and 
libldns1 properly and I really don't see what's wrong with these packages.



Ihsan

-- 
ihsan at dogan.ch		http://blog.dogan.ch/

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 17 17:10:30 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:10:30 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnet, libnet1, libnet_devel
Message-ID: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is the long-awaited update of libnet rework. For the layout details please see
  http://wiki.opencsw.org/project-libnet

Best regards

  -- Dago

* libnet: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.0.2,REV=2004.04.08_rev=a
  -   to: 1.0.2a,REV=2010.11.09
  + libnet-1.0.2a,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnet-1.0.2a,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libnet: new package
  + libnet1-1.1.5,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnet1-1.1.5,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnet_devel-1.1.5,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libnet_devel-1.1.5,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 17 18:57:26 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 09:57:26 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnet, libnet1, libnet_devel
In-Reply-To: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>

Two comments:

1. the SONAME is libnet.so.1
  Why do you then provide a symlink
 /opt/csw/lib/libnet.so=libnet.so.1.0.2
It would seem to be completely unneccessary.

2. Given that this is a "lib" package... having "lib_devel" would seem
to be redundant.
What do you think of my addendum to the wiki proposal, where for
'lib*' packages specifically, we just put the "devel" stuff in the
straight "lib" package?

So, overall what I am suggesting to you, is:
- move contents of libnet_devel into libnet
- remove libnet.so.1.0.2 symlink entirely.

comments?



On 11/17/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This is the long-awaited update of libnet rework. For the layout details
> please see
>   http://wiki.opencsw.org/project-libnet
>
> Best regards
>
>   -- Dago
>
> * libnet: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 1.0.2,REV=2004.04.08_rev=a
>   -   to: 1.0.2a,REV=2010.11.09
>   + libnet-1.0.2a,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libnet-1.0.2a,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libnet: new package
>   + libnet1-1.1.5,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libnet1-1.1.5,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libnet_devel-1.1.5,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libnet_devel-1.1.5,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 17 19:50:10 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 10:50:10 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnet, libnet1, libnet_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=mxaaYfhMSJgP4jX8MXcCzpxiSyLd=P0zGuK9a@mail.gmail.com>

PS: After reading the wiki page you mentioned, I then did a search to
see if any packages are requiring a SONAME of libnet.so.1.0.2

According to our search database, none do.
They would seem to instead require just "libnet.so"

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 17 20:11:24 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 11:11:24 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
In-Reply-To: <DFAE24D8-9741-4E14-8473-8A44BD37136F@opencsw.org>
References: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>
	<6EA62737-83FD-412A-9B07-12B2C16D0EBD@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim=KS17g0b0L8HdxC6SrA+RzoLHe=VUJGo6iXFY@mail.gmail.com>
	<B7B569EA-57EC-41BB-901E-11D4FE971066@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikBVbziX+4EkRQja-Ww01hs63wTMnrkrrFMjkpN@mail.gmail.com>
	<DFAE24D8-9741-4E14-8473-8A44BD37136F@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinZ1QqfuO0AmJND=_XpyghbZ1nNv9RWZR2iD9C9@mail.gmail.com>

Sorry for delay in replying...



On 11/11/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> Am 11.11.2010 um 21:48 schrieb Philip Brown:
> ...
>> I'm not okay with leaving in these transition packages indefinately.
>> They need to have a finite lifetime. See below.
>
> Ok. 6 month.
>
>> Additionally, we need specific tracking of which of our applications
>> need to have their dependancies changed. Having a specific retirement
>> date on the empty packages helps with that too.
>
> After release I file bugs against all dependent packages as I
> always do on renames :-P

I think we need to identify dependancies ahead of time (BEFORE
release!), so we can consider if there will be any "problem upgrades".
Right now, I think that neither of us has a good view of all packages
affected, and that's a bad situation to be in, before making
widespread changes.

From rupert at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 17 21:11:26 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:11:26 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
Message-ID: <201011172011.oAHKBQUs018373@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* mercurial: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.11.07
  -   to: 2010.11.17
  + mercurial-1.7.1,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + mercurial-1.7.1,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 18 12:50:03 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:50:03 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnet, libnet1, libnet_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinfmi=vEeqJQb5nzmoMLq0K3fTTH30oJtBKKi-u@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 17 de Novembro de 2010 17:57, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> Two comments:
>
> 1. the SONAME is libnet.so.1

Are you sure?  As far as I can tell, there's no soname defined in the library:

/usr/ccs/bin/dump -Lv root/opt/csw/lib/libnet.so.1.0.2 | grep SONAME | wc -l
0

Which makes me wonder, whether it's possible to inject a soname into
an existing binary.  Has anyone done this before?

> ?Why do you then provide a symlink
> ?/opt/csw/lib/libnet.so=libnet.so.1.0.2
> It would seem to be completely unneccessary.

> After reading the wiki page you mentioned, I then did a search to
> see if any packages are requiring a SONAME of libnet.so.1.0.2

> According to our search database, none do.
> They would seem to instead require just "libnet.so"

Isn't it a standard practice to have the following?

libfoo.so.1 ? libfoo.so.1.0
libfoo.so.1.0 ? libfoo.so.1.0.2

If upstream does it, why shouldn't we?

Also, <name>.so should never be the actual library if it doesn't have
version embedded in <name>, in such a case it should always be a
symlink.

> 2. Given that this is a "lib" package... having "lib_devel" would seem
> to be redundant.
> What do you think of my addendum to the wiki proposal, where for
> 'lib*' packages specifically, we just put the "devel" stuff in the
> straight "lib" package?
>
> So, overall what I am suggesting to you, is:
> - move contents of libnet_devel into libnet

How would you remove the libnet.so library from the catalog?

"Re-release libnet" is not a good answer.  We've discussed it that
removing shared libraries should not consist of repackaging existing
packages.

> - remove libnet.so.1.0.2 symlink entirely.

libnet.so.1.0.2 is not a symlink, it's the file with data.

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 18 13:42:39 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:42:39 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnet, libnet1, libnet_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <008C0724-E797-4FBF-A85D-25EF610C9AE1@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 17.11.2010 um 18:57 schrieb Philip Brown:
> Two comments:
>
> 1. the SONAME is libnet.so.1

Partly correct. The SONAME of libnet.so.1.0.2 is libnet.so which is
the one all existing packages link to:
   http://www.opencsw.org/packages/libnet

> Why do you then provide a symlink
> /opt/csw/lib/libnet.so=libnet.so.1.0.2
> It would seem to be completely unneccessary.

Just for clarity. I could put the libnet.so.1.0.2 directly in
libnet.so without loss of functionality, but personally I prefer to
make the version explicit as there is no other place where you
can see the library version.

> 2. Given that this is a "lib" package... having "lib_devel" would seem
> to be redundant.
> What do you think of my addendum to the wiki proposal, where for
> 'lib*' packages specifically, we just put the "devel" stuff in the
> straight "lib" package?

I don't like it because the devel part of some libraries are excessively
large where you would like to keep the devel package. Special cases
are in almost all cases bad, so we either always have devel packages or
never and I so see the advantage of having devel package at all.

One more argument for having a separate devel: When we split out
real libraries like CSWlibnet1 containing libnet.so.1.1.5 the
merging of devel in there makes some of the advantages useless.
When some libnet.so.2.x comes out CSWlibnet1 would need to be respun
to rip out the devel stuff as this would now be shipped in CSWlibnet2.

> So, overall what I am suggesting to you, is:
> - move contents of libnet_devel into libnet
> - remove libnet.so.1.0.2 symlink entirely.
>
> comments?

Please see above :-)


Best regards

   -- Dago


From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 18 13:56:31 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:56:31 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinZ1QqfuO0AmJND=_XpyghbZ1nNv9RWZR2iD9C9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>
	<6EA62737-83FD-412A-9B07-12B2C16D0EBD@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim=KS17g0b0L8HdxC6SrA+RzoLHe=VUJGo6iXFY@mail.gmail.com>
	<B7B569EA-57EC-41BB-901E-11D4FE971066@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikBVbziX+4EkRQja-Ww01hs63wTMnrkrrFMjkpN@mail.gmail.com>
	<DFAE24D8-9741-4E14-8473-8A44BD37136F@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinZ1QqfuO0AmJND=_XpyghbZ1nNv9RWZR2iD9C9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B813A711-E502-4F0A-8657-3E4C6D027A8D@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 17.11.2010 um 20:11 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On 11/11/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>
>> Am 11.11.2010 um 21:48 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> ...
>>> I'm not okay with leaving in these transition packages indefinately.
>>> They need to have a finite lifetime. See below.
>>
>> Ok. 6 month.
>>
>>> Additionally, we need specific tracking of which of our applications
>>> need to have their dependancies changed. Having a specific  
>>> retirement
>>> date on the empty packages helps with that too.
>>
>> After release I file bugs against all dependent packages as I
>> always do on renames :-P
>
> I think we need to identify dependancies ahead of time (BEFORE
> release!), so we can consider if there will be any "problem upgrades".
> Right now, I think that neither of us has a good view of all packages
> affected, and that's a bad situation to be in, before making
> widespread changes.

Ok, lets see...

* No renames, some new, some normal updates:

pm_convertebcdic-0.06,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_cryptrc4-2.02,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_timeperiod-1.20,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_textglob-0.08,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_podreadme-0.10,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_podtests-1.19,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_checkisa-0.04,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_dataoptlist-0.106,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_datatreedumper-0.37,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_develsize-0.71,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_develsize-0.71,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_sortnaturally-1.02,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_subexporter-0.982,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_subinstall-0.925,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_termsize-0.207,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_termsize-0.207,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_testuseok-0.02,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz


* Renames (old, new):

pm_timemods-2006.0814,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_timemodules-2006.0814,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
Dependencies:
- dirvish (orphaned, looks easy to rebuild)
- rt

pm_modrefresh-0.13,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_modulerefresh-0.13,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
Dependencies:
- perlconsole (maintained by Sebastian Kayser)
- rt

pm_textwrap-1.02,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_textwrapper-1.02,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
Dependencies:
- rt

pm_textwikifmt-0.79,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_textwikiformat-0.79,REV=2010.11.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
Dependencies:
- rt

pm_clsautouse-1.29,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_classautouse-1.29,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
Dependencies:
- pm_testinline (orphaned, already planned to update)
- svk (maintained by Peter Bonivart)

pm_clsdtainherit-0.08,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_classdatainheritable-0.08,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
Dependencies:
- pm_exceptcls (orphaned, already planned to update)
- svk (maintained by Peter Bonivart)

pm_testlongstr-0.14,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_testlongstring-0.14,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
Dependencies:
- pm_testwwwmech (orphaned, already planned to update)

pm_nbrcompare-0.01,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_numbercompare-0.01,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
Dependencies:
- pm_filefindrule (orphaned, already planned to update)

pm_regexpcom-2010010201,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_regexpcommon-2010010201,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
Dependencies:
- rt

pm_sortver-1.5,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_sortversions-1.5,REV=2010.11.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
(catalog name is pm_sortversions with package CSWpmsortver ATM)
Dependencies:
(none at the moment)

WIth the exception of RT this all should be doable in the very near  
future.


Best regards

   -- Dago


From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 18 15:13:51 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 15:13:51 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
Message-ID: <201011181413.oAIEDpkn018448@login.bo.opencsw.org>

I fixed a number of things which are buggy in the package previously in
newpkgs/. This includes fixing the startscript and the postinstall script:
  http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset?new=11651%40csw%2Fmgar%2Fpkg%2Fopenldap%2Ftrunk&old=11452%40csw%2Fmgar%2Fpkg%2Fopenldap%2Ftrunk

Phil: Please discard the existing packages as I am not allowed to.

Geoff, Rupert: This rebuild also includes all of your previous changes - thanks!!


Best regards

  -- Dago


* openldap: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 2.4.22,REV=2010.06.08
  -   to: 2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17
  + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* openldap_devel: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 2.4.22,REV=2010.06.07
  -   to: 2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17
  + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 18 15:17:35 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 15:17:35 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gvim, vim, vimrt
Message-ID: <201011181417.oAIEHZTD022280@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is a courtesy update for Chad Harp.

* vim: minor version upgrade
  - from: 7.2.148,REV=2009.04.08
  -   to: 7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15
  + gvim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gvim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + vim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + vim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + vimrt-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Nov 18 20:49:03 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:49:03 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
In-Reply-To: <201011172011.oAHKBQUs018373@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011172011.oAHKBQUs018373@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimquiKq9UdpuoCM1dscNZtHXSHgynpv5qTjJooo@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 11/17/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * mercurial: revision upgrade
>   - from: 2010.11.07
>   -   to: 2010.11.17
>   + mercurial-1.7.1,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + mercurial-1.7.1,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Nov 18 20:54:38 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:54:38 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <201011181413.oAIEDpkn018448@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011181413.oAIEDpkn018448@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikjHCWbA_r8nibPLLqhUuH-m_33K_0bNf6LOixR@mail.gmail.com>

Hmm. openldap_rt references /usr/local/var/ldapi
only a manpage, and a non-important one at that. Might be nice if you
patched it for future versions though.

Seems fine otherwise, though. thanks for clearing the logjam.
batching now.


On 11/18/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> I fixed a number of things which are buggy in the package previously in
> newpkgs/. This includes fixing the startscript and the postinstall script:
>
> http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset?new=11651%40csw%2Fmgar%2Fpkg%2Fopenldap%2Ftrunk&old=11452%40csw%2Fmgar%2Fpkg%2Fopenldap%2Ftrunk
>
> Phil: Please discard the existing packages as I am not allowed to.
>
> Geoff, Rupert: This rebuild also includes all of your previous changes -
> thanks!!
>
>
> Best regards
>
>   -- Dago
>
>
> * openldap: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 2.4.22,REV=2010.06.08
>   -   to: 2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17
>   + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * openldap_devel: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 2.4.22,REV=2010.06.07
>   -   to: 2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17
>   + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Nov 18 20:57:08 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:57:08 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikjHCWbA_r8nibPLLqhUuH-m_33K_0bNf6LOixR@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011181413.oAIEDpkn018448@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikjHCWbA_r8nibPLLqhUuH-m_33K_0bNf6LOixR@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim4XO7tVU5+CF4ceim4x+-LUKC18VsOLSyuSs-J@mail.gmail.com>

waitamin...
file conflict, found a potential error.

liblber.so "moved" from _rt, to _devel?

Seems like it would belong in _rt to me?



On 11/18/10, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> Hmm. openldap_rt references /usr/local/var/ldapi
> only a manpage, and a non-important one at that. Might be nice if you
> patched it for future versions though.
>
> Seems fine otherwise, though. thanks for clearing the logjam.
> batching now.
>
>
> On 11/18/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> I fixed a number of things which are buggy in the package previously in
>> newpkgs/. This includes fixing the startscript and the postinstall
>> script:
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset?new=11651%40csw%2Fmgar%2Fpkg%2Fopenldap%2Ftrunk&old=11452%40csw%2Fmgar%2Fpkg%2Fopenldap%2Ftrunk
>>
>> Phil: Please discard the existing packages as I am not allowed to.
>>
>> Geoff, Rupert: This rebuild also includes all of your previous changes -
>> thanks!!
>>
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>>   -- Dago
>>
>>
>> * openldap: patchlevel upgrade
>>   - from: 2.4.22,REV=2010.06.08
>>   -   to: 2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17
>>   + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> * openldap_devel: patchlevel upgrade
>>   - from: 2.4.22,REV=2010.06.07
>>   -   to: 2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17
>>   + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>   + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> --
>> Generated by submitpkg
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>>
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Nov 18 22:51:23 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:51:23 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnet, libnet1, libnet_devel
In-Reply-To: <008C0724-E797-4FBF-A85D-25EF610C9AE1@opencsw.org>
References: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
	<008C0724-E797-4FBF-A85D-25EF610C9AE1@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimTuzD_W7FT53rkgcLcMG0hSRJHSjkEZt+Suw8x@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/18/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 17.11.2010 um 18:57 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> Two comments:
>>
>> 1. the SONAME is libnet.so.1
>
> Partly correct. The SONAME of libnet.so.1.0.2 is libnet.so which is
> the one all existing packages link to:
>    http://www.opencsw.org/packages/libnet


For other peoples' benefit, here is full information:

1. OLD "libnet" package contained a libnet.so* file, which other
programs required
as only "libnet.so"

2. The "real filename" of the old package was libnet.so.1.0.2.
However, that is kinda irrelevant since nothing referenced it directly
as such

3. NEW "libnet", contains a symlink "libnet.so.1.0.2". This is, as I
mentioned, completely irrelevent, since no "old" stuff uses it,and
"new" stuff has libnet.so.1.6.0

4. NEW "libnet" has an actual SONAME of "libnet.so.1"


>> Why do you then provide a symlink
>> /opt/csw/lib/libnet.so=libnet.so.1.0.2
>> It would seem to be completely unneccessary.
>
> Just for clarity. I could put the libnet.so.1.0.2 directly in
> libnet.so without loss of functionality, but personally I prefer to
> make the version explicit as there is no other place where you
> can see the library version.

clarity of what? I Dont Get It.
And speaking of "I Dont Get It"... I also dont get what provides the
backwards capability for older stuff needing libnet.so.

oh wait, I didnt notice that you provide the actual binary compat lib
in "libnet", in addition to the symlink.
Justaminute... Even though I'm suggesting not following the proposed
standards.. doesnt your implementation, break the proposed standards
too? :)
Seems like CSWlibnet, should depend on a new "CSWlibnet0" for now:
Then that, and only that, should have the older compat
libnet.so.1.0.2, and libnet.so symlink to it.


>> 2. Given that this is a "lib" package... having "lib_devel" would seem
>> to be redundant.
>> What do you think of my addendum to the wiki proposal, where for
>> 'lib*' packages specifically, we just put the "devel" stuff in the
>> straight "lib" package?
>
> I don't like it because the devel part of some libraries are excessively
> large where you would like to keep the devel package.


I may be missing something here.

 What I'm seeing, is that if we stuck to the proposal,it would mean:

   applications that need the lib, would depend on CSWlibfoo#-#-#.
They would not pull in  CSWlibfoo-devel, or anything else. To compile
stuff, people have to add in CSWlibfoo-devel

What I an suggesting is almost identical:
   applications that need the lib, would depend on CSWlibfoo#-#-#.
They would not pull in  CSWlibfoo, or anything else. To compile stuff,
people have to add in CSWlibfoo


To me, this makes contextual sense, because if a user explicitly wants
to use "libfoo" directly, they can say "I want libfoo installed", aka
"pkg-get install libfoo", and be ready to go. The "_devel" part is
redundant to a library package, if you've already split out the actual
shared library itself to a different package.

I dont see how a user ever ends up with 'devel' type stuff that they
dont need, in either case shown above






> One more argument for having a separate devel: When we split out
> real libraries like CSWlibnet1 containing libnet.so.1.1.5 the
> merging of devel in there makes some of the advantages useless.
> When some libnet.so.2.x comes out CSWlibnet1 would need to be respun
> to rip out the devel stuff as this would now be shipped in CSWlibnet2.

well yes. IF (andonly if) we thought it advantageous to be able to
develop on both versions of the library, we would want to maintain
"libnet1", and "libnet2"

However, in most sane cases, we only care about development with "the
latest" version of something. So do most people.
Again, if they want to pull in "libfoo" to compile with, they probably
are just using some kind of general requirement, and dont really want
to think about "well, I need to get 'libfoo-vx-y. IF it's available.
oh wait, opencsw doesnt have that yet. Hmm.. I wonder what version
they have.. .checking... okay I'll specifically select libfoo-x-y to
install now'".

Kinda annoying. I'm thinking most users are just ripping through
compile requirements, and they just want to "get the latest".
So having "CSWlibfoo" track to "development for 'the latest' libfoo",
I see as a feature for the users, rather than a negative overall.

So to be more explicit, I'm suggesting that, *specifically for library
packages only",
 "libfoo" contains
  - a dependancy on the latest shared library version we support
  - the dev files to compile against it.

Does that sound more appealing?

*(bat)*

From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 19 10:12:36 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:12:36 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikjHCWbA_r8nibPLLqhUuH-m_33K_0bNf6LOixR@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011181413.oAIEDpkn018448@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikjHCWbA_r8nibPLLqhUuH-m_33K_0bNf6LOixR@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3B10E442-17D5-4D6D-9204-4F0AD963AB66@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 18.11.2010 um 20:54 schrieb Philip Brown:
> Hmm. openldap_rt references /usr/local/var/ldapi
> only a manpage, and a non-important one at that. Might be nice if you
> patched it for future versions though.

I think you mean
   /opt/csw/share/man/man5/ldap.conf.5
Good catch, but it is really just an example, that's why the pathes are
not substituted during installation. If you configure OpenLDAP to use
sockets you must set the path also in slapd.conf or startup arguments.
But I'll note it in the GAR Makefile.


Best regards

   -- Dago

> Seems fine otherwise, though. thanks for clearing the logjam.
> batching now.
>
>
> On 11/18/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> I fixed a number of things which are buggy in the package  
>> previously in
>> newpkgs/. This includes fixing the startscript and the postinstall  
>> script:
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset?new=11651%40csw%2Fmgar%2Fpkg%2Fopenldap%2Ftrunk&old=11452%40csw%2Fmgar%2Fpkg%2Fopenldap%2Ftrunk
>>
>> Phil: Please discard the existing packages as I am not allowed to.
>>
>> Geoff, Rupert: This rebuild also includes all of your previous  
>> changes -
>> thanks!!
>>
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>>  -- Dago
>>
>>
>> * openldap: patchlevel upgrade
>>  - from: 2.4.22,REV=2010.06.08
>>  -   to: 2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17
>>  + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + openldap-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + openldap_client-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + openldap_rt-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> * openldap_devel: patchlevel upgrade
>>  - from: 2.4.22,REV=2010.06.07
>>  -   to: 2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17
>>  + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + openldap_devel-2.4.23,REV=2010.11.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> --
>> Generated by submitpkg
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>>
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions


From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 19 10:16:03 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:16:03 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim4XO7tVU5+CF4ceim4x+-LUKC18VsOLSyuSs-J@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011181413.oAIEDpkn018448@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikjHCWbA_r8nibPLLqhUuH-m_33K_0bNf6LOixR@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4XO7tVU5+CF4ceim4x+-LUKC18VsOLSyuSs-J@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9DBA33A8-1E2C-43B2-95A0-CECF2456F2DE@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 18.11.2010 um 20:57 schrieb Philip Brown:
> waitamin...
> file conflict, found a potential error.
>
> liblber.so "moved" from _rt, to _devel?
>
> Seems like it would belong in _rt to me?

Nope, the .so is only needed for compilation to pull in the versioned
.so.* with the direct SONAME in it. But now as I looked I think
   /opt/csw/libexec/openldap/*.so
should also go into _devel.


Best regards

   -- Dago


From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 19 10:44:27 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:44:27 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnet, libnet1, libnet_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimTuzD_W7FT53rkgcLcMG0hSRJHSjkEZt+Suw8x@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
	<008C0724-E797-4FBF-A85D-25EF610C9AE1@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimTuzD_W7FT53rkgcLcMG0hSRJHSjkEZt+Suw8x@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1B29F174-1A6F-4442-8648-E931119B832B@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 18.11.2010 um 22:51 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On 11/18/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Am 17.11.2010 um 18:57 schrieb Philip Brown:
>>> Two comments:
>>>
>>> 1. the SONAME is libnet.so.1
>>
>> Partly correct. The SONAME of libnet.so.1.0.2 is libnet.so which is
>> the one all existing packages link to:
>>   http://www.opencsw.org/packages/libnet
>
> For other peoples' benefit, here is full information:
>
> 1. OLD "libnet" package contained a libnet.so* file, which other
> programs required
> as only "libnet.so"
>
> 2. The "real filename" of the old package was libnet.so.1.0.2.
> However, that is kinda irrelevant since nothing referenced it directly
> as such
>
> 3. NEW "libnet", contains a symlink "libnet.so.1.0.2".

Umh, no. /opt/csw/lib/libnet.so.1.0.2 is a file as always and libnet.so
is a symlink pointing to it as always.

> This is, as I
> mentioned, completely irrelevent, since no "old" stuff uses it,and
> "new" stuff has libnet.so.1.6.0

I think it is good to have libnet.so pointing to libnet.so.1.0.2 to
make it explicit what version libnet.so is pointing to instead of
having just a file libnet.so with the contents of libnet.so.1.0.2
in it.

> 4. NEW "libnet" has an actual SONAME of "libnet.so.1"

Right.

>>> Why do you then provide a symlink
>>> /opt/csw/lib/libnet.so=libnet.so.1.0.2
>>> It would seem to be completely unneccessary.
>>
>> Just for clarity. I could put the libnet.so.1.0.2 directly in
>> libnet.so without loss of functionality, but personally I prefer to
>> make the version explicit as there is no other place where you
>> can see the library version.
>
> clarity of what? I Dont Get It.
> And speaking of "I Dont Get It"... I also dont get what provides the
> backwards capability for older stuff needing libnet.so.
>
> oh wait, I didnt notice that you provide the actual binary compat lib
> in "libnet", in addition to the symlink.

Yes.

> Justaminute... Even though I'm suggesting not following the proposed
> standards.. doesnt your implementation, break the proposed standards
> too? :)

Probably, because it is a legacy library and does not have a SONAME  
anyway.

> Seems like CSWlibnet, should depend on a new "CSWlibnet0" for now:
> Then that, and only that, should have the older compat
> libnet.so.1.0.2, and libnet.so symlink to it.

...which would break the standards too as .so should be in _devel.
But again, libnet is not a standard library. It is a legacy piece
of crap where the library broke even existing SONAME standards.

>>> 2. Given that this is a "lib" package... having "lib_devel" would  
>>> seem
>>> to be redundant.
>>> What do you think of my addendum to the wiki proposal, where for
>>> 'lib*' packages specifically, we just put the "devel" stuff in the
>>> straight "lib" package?
>>
>> I don't like it because the devel part of some libraries are  
>> excessively
>> large where you would like to keep the devel package.
>
> I may be missing something here.
>
> What I'm seeing, is that if we stuck to the proposal,it would mean:
>
>   applications that need the lib, would depend on CSWlibfoo#-#-#.
> They would not pull in  CSWlibfoo-devel, or anything else. To compile
> stuff, people have to add in CSWlibfoo-devel

Correct.

> What I an suggesting is almost identical:
>   applications that need the lib, would depend on CSWlibfoo#-#-#.
> They would not pull in  CSWlibfoo, or anything else. To compile stuff,
> people have to add in CSWlibfoo

This would be good if all libraries would play well. A ton of packages
depends on CSWlibnet, so that one must contain the old libnet.so. If you
want to add the devel stuff to CSWlibnet that is doable, but it would be
the devel-files **from the new** libnet library. Personally I would find
this very confusing.

> To me, this makes contextual sense, because if a user explicitly wants
> to use "libfoo" directly, they can say "I want libfoo installed", aka
> "pkg-get install libfoo", and be ready to go. The "_devel" part is
> redundant to a library package, if you've already split out the actual
> shared library itself to a different package.
>
> I dont see how a user ever ends up with 'devel' type stuff that they
> dont need, in either case shown above.

As I said: existing packages depend on CSWlibnet which would then
contain devel-stuff from another version. Additionally, having
a clean _devel-policy like "if you want to compile x you must install
x_devel" is very simple and could be even be made an automated
check, but only if done consistently.

>> One more argument for having a separate devel: When we split out
>> real libraries like CSWlibnet1 containing libnet.so.1.1.5 the
>> merging of devel in there makes some of the advantages useless.
>> When some libnet.so.2.x comes out CSWlibnet1 would need to be respun
>> to rip out the devel stuff as this would now be shipped in  
>> CSWlibnet2.
>
> well yes. IF (andonly if) we thought it advantageous to be able to
> develop on both versions of the library, we would want to maintain
> "libnet1", and "libnet2"

We don't want this. And I don't see how this related to my statement.
Putting devel together with a library will lead to repackaging
of the library package if another SONAME comes out as the devel
part needs to be relocated to the new package, so both need to
be rebuilt. *Not* to rebuild all packages is one of the goals
of the library suffixing with the so-number.

> However, in most sane cases, we only care about development with "the
> latest" version of something. So do most people.
> Again, if they want to pull in "libfoo" to compile with, they probably
> are just using some kind of general requirement, and dont really want
> to think about "well, I need to get 'libfoo-vx-y. IF it's available.
> oh wait, opencsw doesnt have that yet. Hmm.. I wonder what version
> they have.. .checking... okay I'll specifically select libfoo-x-y to
> install now'".
>
> Kinda annoying. I'm thinking most users are just ripping through
> compile requirements, and they just want to "get the latest".
> So having "CSWlibfoo" track to "development for 'the latest' libfoo",
> I see as a feature for the users, rather than a negative overall.

I don't see how this is more difficult than to say "If I want to
develop with libfoo I need to install CSWlibfoo-devel".

> So to be more explicit, I'm suggesting that, *specifically for library
> packages only",
> "libfoo" contains
>  - a dependancy on the latest shared library version we support
>  - the dev files to compile against it.
>
> Does that sound more appealing?

In general this sounds not too bad, but
- it is really bad for legacy libraries like libnet
- it is not consistent to have _devel for some packages but not for  
others.

Having a consistent _devel would allow something like "List all CSW
packages and install <pkg>-devel" and everything will work.


Best regards

   -- Dago


From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 19 10:54:50 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:54:50 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libnet, libnet1, libnet_devel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimTuzD_W7FT53rkgcLcMG0hSRJHSjkEZt+Suw8x@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011171610.oAHGAUls000290@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Rr4EBAEtwdbnKtM0Vp54ZtG6-BmOj7w-b6oW5@mail.gmail.com>
	<008C0724-E797-4FBF-A85D-25EF610C9AE1@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimTuzD_W7FT53rkgcLcMG0hSRJHSjkEZt+Suw8x@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ED2945A9-DEE0-46B2-8E6A-9E5969F6F434@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 18.11.2010 um 22:51 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On 11/18/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Am 17.11.2010 um 18:57 schrieb Philip Brown:
>>> Two comments:
>>>
>>> 1. the SONAME is libnet.so.1
>>
>> Partly correct. The SONAME of libnet.so.1.0.2 is libnet.so which is
>> the one all existing packages link to:
>>  http://www.opencsw.org/packages/libnet
>
> For other peoples' benefit, here is full information:
>
> 1. OLD "libnet" package contained a libnet.so* file, which other
> programs required
> as only "libnet.so"
>
> 2. The "real filename" of the old package was libnet.so.1.0.2.
> However, that is kinda irrelevant since nothing referenced it directly
> as such
>
> 3. NEW "libnet", contains a symlink "libnet.so.1.0.2".

Umh, no. /opt/csw/lib/libnet.so.1.0.2 is a file as always and libnet.so
is a symlink pointing to it as always.

> This is, as I
> mentioned, completely irrelevent, since no "old" stuff uses it,and
> "new" stuff has libnet.so.1.6.0

I think it is good to have libnet.so pointing to libnet.so.1.0.2 to
make it explicit what version libnet.so is pointing to instead of
having just a file libnet.so with the contents of libnet.so.1.0.2
in it.

> 4. NEW "libnet" has an actual SONAME of "libnet.so.1"

Right.

>>> Why do you then provide a symlink
>>> /opt/csw/lib/libnet.so=libnet.so.1.0.2
>>> It would seem to be completely unneccessary.
>>
>> Just for clarity. I could put the libnet.so.1.0.2 directly in
>> libnet.so without loss of functionality, but personally I prefer to
>> make the version explicit as there is no other place where you
>> can see the library version.
>
> clarity of what? I Dont Get It.
> And speaking of "I Dont Get It"... I also dont get what provides the
> backwards capability for older stuff needing libnet.so.
>
> oh wait, I didnt notice that you provide the actual binary compat lib
> in "libnet", in addition to the symlink.

Yes.

> Justaminute... Even though I'm suggesting not following the proposed
> standards.. doesnt your implementation, break the proposed standards
> too? :)

Probably, because it is a legacy library and does not have a SONAME  
anyway.

> Seems like CSWlibnet, should depend on a new "CSWlibnet0" for now:
> Then that, and only that, should have the older compat
> libnet.so.1.0.2, and libnet.so symlink to it.

...which would break the standards too as .so should be in _devel.
But again, libnet is not a standard library. It is a legacy piece
of crap where the library broke even existing SONAME standards.

>>> 2. Given that this is a "lib" package... having "lib_devel" would  
>>> seem
>>> to be redundant.
>>> What do you think of my addendum to the wiki proposal, where for
>>> 'lib*' packages specifically, we just put the "devel" stuff in the
>>> straight "lib" package?
>>
>> I don't like it because the devel part of some libraries are  
>> excessively
>> large where you would like to keep the devel package.
>
> I may be missing something here.
>
> What I'm seeing, is that if we stuck to the proposal,it would mean:
>
>  applications that need the lib, would depend on CSWlibfoo#-#-#.
> They would not pull in  CSWlibfoo-devel, or anything else. To compile
> stuff, people have to add in CSWlibfoo-devel

Correct.

> What I an suggesting is almost identical:
>  applications that need the lib, would depend on CSWlibfoo#-#-#.
> They would not pull in  CSWlibfoo, or anything else. To compile stuff,
> people have to add in CSWlibfoo

This would be good if all libraries would play well. A ton of packages
depends on CSWlibnet, so that one must contain the old libnet.so. If you
want to add the devel stuff to CSWlibnet that is doable, but it would be
the devel-files **from the new** libnet library. Personally I would find
this very confusing.

> To me, this makes contextual sense, because if a user explicitly wants
> to use "libfoo" directly, they can say "I want libfoo installed", aka
> "pkg-get install libfoo", and be ready to go. The "_devel" part is
> redundant to a library package, if you've already split out the actual
> shared library itself to a different package.
>
> I dont see how a user ever ends up with 'devel' type stuff that they
> dont need, in either case shown above.

As I said: existing packages depend on CSWlibnet which would then
contain devel-stuff from another version. Additionally, having
a clean _devel-policy like "if you want to compile x you must install
x_devel" is very simple and could be even be made an automated
check, but only if done consistently.

>> One more argument for having a separate devel: When we split out
>> real libraries like CSWlibnet1 containing libnet.so.1.1.5 the
>> merging of devel in there makes some of the advantages useless.
>> When some libnet.so.2.x comes out CSWlibnet1 would need to be respun
>> to rip out the devel stuff as this would now be shipped in  
>> CSWlibnet2.
>
> well yes. IF (andonly if) we thought it advantageous to be able to
> develop on both versions of the library, we would want to maintain
> "libnet1", and "libnet2"

We don't want this. And I don't see how this related to my statement.
Putting devel together with a library will lead to repackaging
of the library package if another SONAME comes out as the devel
part needs to be relocated to the new package, so both need to
be rebuilt. *Not* to rebuild all packages is one of the goals
of the library suffixing with the so-number.

> However, in most sane cases, we only care about development with "the
> latest" version of something. So do most people.
> Again, if they want to pull in "libfoo" to compile with, they probably
> are just using some kind of general requirement, and dont really want
> to think about "well, I need to get 'libfoo-vx-y. IF it's available.
> oh wait, opencsw doesnt have that yet. Hmm.. I wonder what version
> they have.. .checking... okay I'll specifically select libfoo-x-y to
> install now'".
>
> Kinda annoying. I'm thinking most users are just ripping through
> compile requirements, and they just want to "get the latest".
> So having "CSWlibfoo" track to "development for 'the latest' libfoo",
> I see as a feature for the users, rather than a negative overall.

I don't see how this is more difficult than to say "If I want to
develop with libfoo I need to install CSWlibfoo-devel".

> So to be more explicit, I'm suggesting that, *specifically for library
> packages only",
> "libfoo" contains
> - a dependancy on the latest shared library version we support
> - the dev files to compile against it.
>
> Does that sound more appealing?

In general this sounds not too bad, but
- it is really bad for legacy libraries like libnet
- it is not consistent to have _devel for some packages but not for  
others.

Having a consistent _devel would allow something like "List all CSW
packages and install <pkg>-devel" and everything will work.


Best regards

  -- Dago


From pfelecan at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 19 10:49:22 2010
From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:49:22 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <3B10E442-17D5-4D6D-9204-4F0AD963AB66@opencsw.org> (Dagobert
	Michelsen's message of "Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:12:36 +0100")
References: <201011181413.oAIEDpkn018448@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikjHCWbA_r8nibPLLqhUuH-m_33K_0bNf6LOixR@mail.gmail.com>
	<3B10E442-17D5-4D6D-9204-4F0AD963AB66@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <x639qx7ie5.fsf@opencsw.org>

Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> writes:

> Am 18.11.2010 um 20:54 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> Hmm. openldap_rt references /usr/local/var/ldapi
>> only a manpage, and a non-important one at that. Might be nice if you
>> patched it for future versions though.
>
> I think you mean
>   /opt/csw/share/man/man5/ldap.conf.5
> Good catch, but it is really just an example, that's why the pathes are
> not substituted during installation. If you configure OpenLDAP to use
> sockets you must set the path also in slapd.conf or startup arguments.
> But I'll note it in the GAR Makefile.

This false positive given by checkpkg is annoying, especially for
general documentation as README or examples. Maybe an override mechanism
is due, such as the other checker provides for other concepts.
-- 
Peter

From kester at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 19 14:29:40 2010
From: kester at opencsw.org (Kester Habermann)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:29:40 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_django_auth_ldap
Message-ID: <20101119132940.52491279@mail.opencsw.org>

repackaged without override for package name length

* py_django_auth_ldap: new package
  + py_django_auth_ldap-1.0.6,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 19 17:06:36 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:06:36 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs doxygen, doxygen_doc
Message-ID: <201011191606.oAJG6a5B007294@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Just a small version bump.

* doxygen: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.7.1,REV=2010.06.28
  -   to: 1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19
  + doxygen-1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + doxygen-1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + doxygen_doc-1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Nov 19 18:12:06 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 09:12:06 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <9DBA33A8-1E2C-43B2-95A0-CECF2456F2DE@opencsw.org>
References: <201011181413.oAIEDpkn018448@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikjHCWbA_r8nibPLLqhUuH-m_33K_0bNf6LOixR@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim4XO7tVU5+CF4ceim4x+-LUKC18VsOLSyuSs-J@mail.gmail.com>
	<9DBA33A8-1E2C-43B2-95A0-CECF2456F2DE@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinfhkJ+-fS0W+h=d+Lz81AKdOyZ+4qA2x9mAYva@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/19/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 18.11.2010 um 20:57 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> waitamin...
>> file conflict, found a potential error.
>>
>> liblber.so "moved" from _rt, to _devel?
>>
>> Seems like it would belong in _rt to me?
>
> Nope, the .so is only needed for compilation to pull in the versioned
> .so.* with the direct SONAME in it.


ah.. the 'actual' liblber-*.so.* stuff is in openldap_rt still.

okay.

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Nov 19 18:13:47 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 09:13:47 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openldap, openldap_client,
	openldap_d(...)
In-Reply-To: <x639qx7ie5.fsf@opencsw.org>
References: <201011181413.oAIEDpkn018448@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikjHCWbA_r8nibPLLqhUuH-m_33K_0bNf6LOixR@mail.gmail.com>
	<3B10E442-17D5-4D6D-9204-4F0AD963AB66@opencsw.org>
	<x639qx7ie5.fsf@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim1ZC+dsAUJmHzWKuU8R2jkfegx5gFTaHnuK35P@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/19/10, Peter FELECAN <pfelecan at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> This false positive given by checkpkg is annoying, especially for
> general documentation as README or examples. Maybe an override mechanism
> is due, such as the other checker provides for other concepts.
>

MMm. at some point in the future, I might make my version look at
overrides files for that purpose also.
If it is using the simplified format that I suggested a while back.
I havent looked at it to check for quite a while now.

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Nov 19 18:57:37 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 09:57:37 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_django_auth_ldap
In-Reply-To: <20101119132940.52491279@mail.opencsw.org>
References: <20101119132940.52491279@mail.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=vVhNbLvgbJUQ9jWVN0+Zsfby7=g6EysecU4mG@mail.gmail.com>

batched.
Congratulations :)


On 11/19/10, Kester Habermann <kester at opencsw.org> wrote:
> repackaged without override for package name length
>
> * py_django_auth_ldap: new package
>   + py_django_auth_ldap-1.0.6,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Nov 19 19:00:26 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:00:26 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs doxygen, doxygen_doc
In-Reply-To: <201011191606.oAJG6a5B007294@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011191606.oAJG6a5B007294@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin+xZAZdaky=-juX50ouiL2GVr_jRHnJu-mo8uT@mail.gmail.com>

There appears to be use of
#!/usr/local/bin/perl


in doxygen_doc


On 11/19/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Just a small version bump.
>
> * doxygen: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 1.7.1,REV=2010.06.28
>   -   to: 1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19
>   + doxygen-1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + doxygen-1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + doxygen_doc-1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Nov 19 19:18:10 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:18:10 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gvim, vim, vimrt
In-Reply-To: <201011181417.oAIEHZTD022280@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011181417.oAIEHZTD022280@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=+w40Ro8Nc=29x78ZYM6Bp2nf4Fh4jyZzVrdmU@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 11/18/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This is a courtesy update for Chad Harp.
>
> * vim: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 7.2.148,REV=2009.04.08
>   -   to: 7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15
>   + gvim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + gvim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + vim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + vim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + vimrt-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Nov 19 19:50:17 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:50:17 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs drill, libldns1, libldnsdevel,
	libunb(...)
In-Reply-To: <4CE29F37.8080101@opencsw.org>
References: <201011141338.oAEDcRsq009017@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=6kt1L15VR32fLEoyA3egRF7o=rucER_c-8yGa@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CE29F37.8080101@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikzcM_9G9ZjiHkp=-fAu0L=Mb5P8qPoCvuy3br+@mail.gmail.com>

Getting back to this... sigh..



On 11/16/10, Ihsan Dogan <ihsan at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hello Phil,

*wave*


> On 11/16/10 12:31 AM, Philip Brown wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure this is a good idea. why are you choosing to rename?
>
> Because of http://wiki.opencsw.org/packaging-shared-libraries .
>
>> It's worth noticing that the software's own name, is "ldns".
>> As noted by the URL that you still preserve in the pkginfo itself:
>>
>> http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/projects/ldns/
>>
>> so calling the package "libldns" seems to be against the author's
>> wishes to some degree.
>
> It doesn't say that I can't name the package libldns1.

It doesnt say that you "cant" name it
"wubbawubba-foo-fruity-ldns-is-cool" either.
That's not the point here :-}



>> and then there is the needless making it "libldns1" instead of just
>> plain "libldns".
>> What is up with this stuff?
>
> I've spent quite some time with packaging and testing unbound and
> libldns1 properly and I really don't see what's wrong with these packages.


Ihsan, I have every confidence in you, that you made properly
functional packages :)
Naming is important too, though.

There are two additional factors here that are under consideration:

1. The package was previously released, and for quite a long time,
under the name "ldns".
If it were a brand new package, I would be a bit less picky about this

2. I went to compare other distribution naming.  If it was a standard
to call the related stuff "libldns", I would have said "okay".
Unfortunately, it is split:  debian does indeed call it "libldns".
However, redhat calls it "ldns".

(along with "ldns-python")

debian appears to be inconsistent about its naming.
On the one hand, it has "libldns", but then it has "ldnsutils"
AND, "python-ldns".

This indicates to me that debian "loses" influence, because of inconsistency.

I acknowlege that it would be an irritation to repackage, given that
you would have to redo multiple ones, due to dependancy use :(

In light of the additional information I've mentioned above, though;
would you consider repackaging please?

before you do, though.. now that I've had to do some more digging:-/
there's also the question of why "drill" is a uniquely named package
by itself.
To compare;  debian includes it as one of multiple programs, in "ldnsutils".
redhat just includes it in the core "ldns" package, along with those same utils.
 (the utils are built by doing a make in the 'examples' dir)

Doi you want to bring us up to the level of the other distros, and
include those in some package?

One possible path you might consider, is:
 -  put the "drill" binary, along with the other utils like
ldns-read-zone, in a "ldns" package.
 - repackage an "empty" 'drill' package, that just depends on ldns
 - 'ldns' depends on libldns1
 - leave rest of packages as-is

How does that sound?

From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 19 20:37:42 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 20:37:42 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs doxygen, doxygen_doc
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin+xZAZdaky=-juX50ouiL2GVr_jRHnJu-mo8uT@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011191606.oAJG6a5B007294@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin+xZAZdaky=-juX50ouiL2GVr_jRHnJu-mo8uT@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <58D9EF8F-B027-47A1-B900-AA3FE0F29E5D@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 19.11.2010 um 19:00 schrieb Philip Brown:
> There appears to be use of
> #!/usr/local/bin/perl
> in doxygen_doc

Yes, in
  /opt/csw/share/doc/doxygen/examples/Makefile
I would figure that for the plain docs you won't need it. Pulling
in Perl for 1% of people trying the examples seems a bit heavy IMHO.

BTW, it would help if you could directly give the concerning file.


Best regards

  -- Dago


> 
> 
> On 11/19/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Just a small version bump.
>> 
>> * doxygen: patchlevel upgrade
>>  - from: 1.7.1,REV=2010.06.28
>>  -   to: 1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19
>>  + doxygen-1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + doxygen-1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + doxygen_doc-1.7.2,REV=2010.11.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> 
>> --
>> Generated by submitpkg
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions


From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Nov 19 22:07:04 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 13:07:04 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs doxygen, doxygen_doc
In-Reply-To: <58D9EF8F-B027-47A1-B900-AA3FE0F29E5D@opencsw.org>
References: <201011191606.oAJG6a5B007294@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin+xZAZdaky=-juX50ouiL2GVr_jRHnJu-mo8uT@mail.gmail.com>
	<58D9EF8F-B027-47A1-B900-AA3FE0F29E5D@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimXOcX92BctGr=K95r+hmnGE5TCdKj8R2J0RoEm@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/19/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 19.11.2010 um 19:00 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> There appears to be use of
>> #!/usr/local/bin/perl
>> in doxygen_doc
>
> Yes, in
>   /opt/csw/share/doc/doxygen/examples/Makefile
> I would figure that for the plain docs you won't need it.

I guess I was unclear in my email.
I wasnt complaining "you need perl". I was noting a reference to /usr/local :-}

>  Pulling
> in Perl for 1% of people trying the examples seems a bit heavy IMHO.

I agree.

that being said, it seems potentialy overridable in the doxygen-wierd
config stuffs. might be nice if in future versions, you could make it
be /usr/bin/perl, or at least /opt/csw/bin/perl


I'll accept the stuff in newpkgs for now.

>
> BTW, it would help if you could directly give the concerning file.
>


yeah, I know. unfortunatly, its a large code change for me to do that
in my versions, so not a high priority for me.

From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 19 22:12:55 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:12:55 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs doxygen, doxygen_doc
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimXOcX92BctGr=K95r+hmnGE5TCdKj8R2J0RoEm@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011191606.oAJG6a5B007294@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin+xZAZdaky=-juX50ouiL2GVr_jRHnJu-mo8uT@mail.gmail.com>
	<58D9EF8F-B027-47A1-B900-AA3FE0F29E5D@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimXOcX92BctGr=K95r+hmnGE5TCdKj8R2J0RoEm@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <095D8349-87E0-4648-BA24-BD3FAAAACB68@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 19.11.2010 um 22:07 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> Pulling
>> in Perl for 1% of people trying the examples seems a bit heavy IMHO.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> that being said, it seems potentialy overridable in the doxygen-wierd
> config stuffs. might be nice if in future versions, you could make it
> be /usr/bin/perl, or at least /opt/csw/bin/perl

Ok, noted in Makefile for next time. The runpathes should be stripped
also when I give this a thorough review.


Best regards

  -- Dago


From pfelecan at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 20 10:10:43 2010
From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN)
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 10:10:43 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs doxygen, doxygen_doc
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimXOcX92BctGr=K95r+hmnGE5TCdKj8R2J0RoEm@mail.gmail.com>
	(Philip Brown's message of "Fri, 19 Nov 2010 13:07:04 -0800")
References: <201011191606.oAJG6a5B007294@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin+xZAZdaky=-juX50ouiL2GVr_jRHnJu-mo8uT@mail.gmail.com>
	<58D9EF8F-B027-47A1-B900-AA3FE0F29E5D@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimXOcX92BctGr=K95r+hmnGE5TCdKj8R2J0RoEm@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <x6lj4o5pik.fsf@opencsw.org>

Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:

> On 11/19/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Hi Phil,
>>
>> Am 19.11.2010 um 19:00 schrieb Philip Brown:
>>> There appears to be use of
>>> #!/usr/local/bin/perl
>>> in doxygen_doc
>>
>> Yes, in
>>   /opt/csw/share/doc/doxygen/examples/Makefile
>> I would figure that for the plain docs you won't need it.
>
> I guess I was unclear in my email.
> I wasnt complaining "you need perl". I was noting a reference to /usr/local :-}

What you don't get is that the error is in fact a false positive. As I
proposed elsewhere you should implement an override mechanism for this
kind of stuff. Correcting the reference is more aesthetics than pragmatics.

-- 
Peter

From maciej at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 20 12:17:16 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 11:17:16 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs drill, libldns1, libldnsdevel,
	libunb(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikzcM_9G9ZjiHkp=-fAu0L=Mb5P8qPoCvuy3br+@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011141338.oAEDcRsq009017@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=6kt1L15VR32fLEoyA3egRF7o=rucER_c-8yGa@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CE29F37.8080101@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikzcM_9G9ZjiHkp=-fAu0L=Mb5P8qPoCvuy3br+@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=Z3DPcR480eHp5mqsuRKpj=H4iRQEPa1wTQqbh@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 19 de Novembro de 2010 18:50, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> debian appears to be inconsistent about its naming.
> On the one hand, it has "libldns", but then it has "ldnsutils"
> AND, "python-ldns".

Debian is perfectly consistent.  You need to consider upstream
software name, and the library soname:

upstream_name=ldns
soname=$(normalize libldns.so.1)

${upstream_name}utils-${version} with the utilities
${soname}-${version} with the library

From phil at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 20 19:04:40 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 10:04:40 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs doxygen, doxygen_doc
In-Reply-To: <x6lj4o5pik.fsf@opencsw.org>
References: <201011191606.oAJG6a5B007294@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin+xZAZdaky=-juX50ouiL2GVr_jRHnJu-mo8uT@mail.gmail.com>
	<58D9EF8F-B027-47A1-B900-AA3FE0F29E5D@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimXOcX92BctGr=K95r+hmnGE5TCdKj8R2J0RoEm@mail.gmail.com>
	<x6lj4o5pik.fsf@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinVKHHRpL6m0UpUcey6+3p1FEmqqW5E2FyGVewM@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Peter FELECAN <pfelecan at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:
>
>> On 11/19/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Phil,
>>>
>>> Am 19.11.2010 um 19:00 schrieb Philip Brown:
>>>> There appears to be use of
>>>> #!/usr/local/bin/perl
>>>> in doxygen_doc
>>
>> I wasnt complaining "you need perl". I was noting a reference to /usr/local :-}
>
> What you don't get is that the error is in fact a false positive. As I
> proposed elsewhere you should implement an override mechanism for this
> kind of stuff.

I already replied to that prior message of yours.
What you missed is that in this case, the error is actually 100%
valid, which is why Dago put a note about it to fix it "next time".
It's just not a "release critical" error at this time.

From yann at opencsw.org  Sun Nov 21 21:27:02 2010
From: yann at opencsw.org (Yann Rouillard)
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 21:27:02 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs bash
Message-ID: <4CE98096.20309@opencsw.org>

* bash: added missing rbash symlink (closes #4600)
   - from: 2010.09.01
   -   to: 2010.11.20
   + bash-4.1.7,REV=2010.11.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
   + bash-4.1.7,REV=2010.11.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

--
Generated by submitpkg

From yann at opencsw.org  Sun Nov 21 23:01:26 2010
From: yann at opencsw.org (Yann Rouillard)
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 23:01:26 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openssl, openssl_devel, openssl_rt,
	openssl_utils
Message-ID: <4CE996B6.7080104@opencsw.org>

* openssl: security update
   - from: 0.9.8o,REV=2010.09.03
   -   to: 0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21
   + openssl-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
   + openssl_devel-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
   + openssl_devel-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
   + openssl_rt-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
   + openssl_rt-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
   + openssl_utils-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
   + openssl_utils-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

--
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov 22 18:45:50 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 09:45:50 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs bash
In-Reply-To: <4CE98096.20309@opencsw.org>
References: <4CE98096.20309@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=j+CRDAPAqRMw4ETGxBHNY4Mq8jmUJmTxNRuKq@mail.gmail.com>

I'll batch this for now. however, please note that there is a minor
bug in 'bashbug'.
It has hardcoded paths for checking /usr/local/bin/xyz, instead of
$prefix/bin/xyz, for auto-selection of EDITOR variable.
Would be nice if you fixed it.


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

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Nov 22 18:51:57 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 09:51:57 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs openssl, openssl_devel, openssl_rt,
	openssl_utils
In-Reply-To: <4CE996B6.7080104@opencsw.org>
References: <4CE996B6.7080104@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=wzWop_X84H2bSQUQoXGch7r74cAfZ06Wnbwfp@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 11/21/10, Yann Rouillard <yann at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * openssl: security update
>    - from: 0.9.8o,REV=2010.09.03
>    -   to: 0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21
>    + openssl-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>    + openssl_devel-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>    + openssl_devel-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>    + openssl_rt-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>    + openssl_rt-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>    + openssl_utils-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>    + openssl_utils-0.9.8p,REV=2010.11.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Nov 23 15:48:26 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 15:48:26 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs dia
Message-ID: <201011231448.oANEmQpC028528@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Phil, this is a quick courtesy for you :-) It seems to work quite good,
however, one test is failing in glib2 on i386, but this is most probably
a problem in glib2 which needs to be refreshed anyway.

* dia: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.94
  -   to: 0.97,REV=2010.11.23
  + dia-0.97,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + dia-0.97,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Nov 23 16:13:53 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 16:13:53 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Fwd:  newpkgs libsox1, libsox_devel, sox
References: <44178538-001D-4079-BE27-96829DE39850@baltic-online.de>
Message-ID: <00076E29-FFC8-4DA4-B3E6-D4C569D3C748@opencsw.org>

(Resend from CSW account)

Anfang der weitergeleiteten E-Mail:

> Von: Dagobert Michelsen <dam at baltic-online.de>
> Datum: 23. November 2010 16:07:40 MEZ
> An: Release Manager <pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org>
> Betreff: Re: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsox1, libsox_devel, sox
> 
> Hi Phil,
> 
> Am 10.11.2010 um 09:20 schrieb Dagobert Michelsen:
>> Am 09.11.2010 um 18:03 schrieb Philip Brown:
>>> holding the libsox1 package (and so holding the rest of them too),
>>> pending discussion on the libcups thread.
>>> 
>>> (or, you could rerelease as "libsox" without the trailing "1" and I
>>> would accept, as being compliant with existing package naming.)
>> 
>> I prefer to wait as we don't have libsox at the moment
>> and possibly changing the name later would leave more dirt on the
>> road.
> 
> As the library naming issue seems to have been settled it would be
> nice if you could release the package as James is waiting on the fix:
>  https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4594
> 
> Best regards
> 
>  -- Dago
> 
>>> On 11/9/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>>> Re-submit, thanks Maciej for catching it!
>>>> 
>>>> * libsox: new package
>>>> + libsox1-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>>> + libsox1-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>>> + libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>>> + libsox_devel-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>>> 
>>>> * sox: patchlevel upgrade
>>>> - from: 14.3.0,REV=2009.11.13
>>>> -   to: 14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09
>>>> + sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>>> + sox-14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Generated by submitpkg
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>>>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>>>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>> 
> 


From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Nov 23 16:24:42 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 16:24:42 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] taglib et. al.
Message-ID: <2A0CB655-24E2-45C9-8EDF-AA3972211E45@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

there is still taglib waiting for release in newpkgs/:

-rw-r--r--   1 dam      staff     498010 Nov 18 15:15 taglib-1.6.3,REV=2010.10.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
-rw-r--r--   1 dam      staff     497052 Nov 18 15:15 taglib-1.6.3,REV=2010.10.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
-rw-r--r--   1 dam      staff      77007 Nov 18 15:15 taglib_devel-1.6.3,REV=2010.10.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
-rw-r--r--   1 dam      staff      76468 Nov 18 15:15 taglib_devel-1.6.3,REV=2010.10.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
-rw-r--r--   1 dam      staff     456210 Nov 18 15:15 taglib_gcc-1.6.3,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
-rw-r--r--   1 dam      staff     440081 Nov 18 15:15 taglib_gcc-1.6.3,REV=2010.11.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz

Any issues with it?


Best regard

  -- Dago

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Nov 23 18:52:18 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:52:18 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_dbd_sybase_freetds,
	pm_dbd_sybase_ocs
Message-ID: <201011231752.oANHqINE005742@login.bo.opencsw.org>

These are the first Perl modules in the new naming convention.
I would like to also provide DBD::Sybase for i386, but I
really tried hard to get a 32 bit Sybase 12.5 for i386, but failed.


* pm_dbd_sybase: new package
  + pm_dbd_sybase_freetds-1.11,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_dbd_sybase_freetds-1.11,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_dbd_sybase_ocs-1.11,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 04:04:18 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:04:18 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs dia
In-Reply-To: <201011231448.oANEmQpC028528@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011231448.oANEmQpC028528@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=V9Ratwayv57B5rW=QqCEL7m0szUJehg-4kAmN@mail.gmail.com>

thank you :)
batched

On Tuesday, November 23, 2010, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Phil, this is a quick courtesy for you :-) It seems to work quite good,
> however, one test is failing in glib2 on i386, but this is most probably
> a problem in glib2 which needs to be refreshed anyway.
>
> * dia: minor version upgrade
>  ?- from: 0.94
>  ?- ? to: 0.97,REV=2010.11.23
>  ?+ dia-0.97,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>  ?+ dia-0.97,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 04:16:21 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:16:21 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] taglib et. al.
In-Reply-To: <2A0CB655-24E2-45C9-8EDF-AA3972211E45@opencsw.org>
References: <2A0CB655-24E2-45C9-8EDF-AA3972211E45@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikzS=aLm+KZZ0AYmYpvg9mKTqqutf9Umxz+OXEk@mail.gmail.com>

On Tuesday, November 23, 2010, Dagobert Michelsen  wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> there is still taglib waiting for release in newpkgs/:
>....
>
> Any issues with it?
>
>
> Best regard



oops. didn't see prior message about it. looks good. batching.

side note: oh look! you didn't completely follow our "grand new
standard" of mandatory splitting out shared libraries, and renaming
the package to match lib name.
fine with me, glad you agree it should not be mandatory :)

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 24 09:16:53 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:16:53 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libemf, libemf1, libemf_devel
Message-ID: <201011240816.oAO8GrlQ020374@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is an optional dependency for dia.

* libemf: new package
  + libemf-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libemf-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libemf1-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libemf1-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libemf_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libemf_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 24 13:08:41 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 13:08:41 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libltdl3, libltdl7, libtool, libtool_rt
Message-ID: <201011241208.oAOC8f6c023752@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is a complete rework of the libtool package factoring out
the runtime libraries (now built from different descriptions
significantly easifying the Makefiles) and patched to not
strip -norunpath. 

* libltdl7: new package
  + libltdl7-2.4,REV=2010.11.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libltdl7-2.4,REV=2010.11.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libtool: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.2.10,REV=2010.06.19
  -   to: 2.4,REV=2010.11.24
  + libtool-2.4,REV=2010.11.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libtool-2.4,REV=2010.11.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libtool_rt-2.4,REV=2010.11.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* libltdl3: new package
  + libltdl3-1.5.26,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libltdl3-1.5.26,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 18:41:17 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:41:17 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libemf, libemf1, libemf_devel
In-Reply-To: <201011240816.oAO8GrlQ020374@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011240816.oAO8GrlQ020374@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik+VOXRnw5eac7gBh3sobKQYa1Nm5rwUCgD82ie@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 11/24/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This is an optional dependency for dia.
>
> * libemf: new package
>   + libemf-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libemf-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libemf1-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libemf1-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libemf_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + libemf_devel-1.0.4,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 18:45:18 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:45:18 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libltdl3, libltdl7, libtool,
	libtool_rt
In-Reply-To: <201011241208.oAOC8f6c023752@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011241208.oAOC8f6c023752@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=eEjNEjX65h9Aw9QsBKvP8+t02128dTO_3XvNf@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/24/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This is a complete rework of the libtool package factoring out
> the runtime libraries (now built from different descriptions
> significantly easifying the Makefiles) and patched to not
> strip -norunpath.
>

wow, nice!

batched.

erm... you should really put in a
/opt/csw/share/doc/libtool/README.CSW mentionoing that you patched it,
though.

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 18:48:06 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:48:06 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_dbd_sybase_freetds,
	pm_dbd_sybase_ocs
In-Reply-To: <201011231752.oANHqINE005742@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011231752.oANHqINE005742@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=BCt3kwcyHF25F=P40SKvUVQpxVOKE2J0VyBCd@mail.gmail.com>

problem in CSWpm-dbd-sybase-freetds. bad path.


./root/opt/csw/lib/perl/site_perl/DBD/Sybase.pm:     $dbh =
DBI->connect("dbi:Sybase:interfaces=/usr/local/sybase/interfaces",


On 11/23/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> These are the first Perl modules in the new naming convention.
> I would like to also provide DBD::Sybase for i386, but I
> really tried hard to get a 32 bit Sybase 12.5 for i386, but failed.
>
>
> * pm_dbd_sybase: new package
>   + pm_dbd_sybase_freetds-1.11,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pm_dbd_sybase_freetds-1.11,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + pm_dbd_sybase_ocs-1.11,REV=2010.11.23-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 bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 18:50:48 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:50:48 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Fwd: newpkgs libsox1, libsox_devel, sox
In-Reply-To: <00076E29-FFC8-4DA4-B3E6-D4C569D3C748@opencsw.org>
References: <44178538-001D-4079-BE27-96829DE39850@baltic-online.de>
	<00076E29-FFC8-4DA4-B3E6-D4C569D3C748@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimF9w3iGxXpBMHYDxXDNkSArNGggom=52bJDNyL@mail.gmail.com>

batched

From rupert at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 24 19:16:42 2010
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 19:16:42 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Fwd:  newpkgs mediawiki
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=hVNvQFo6nTDJKCTuwDvPLUMzvEgnxzGh1FKx9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=QpEk0ceBA7UzpjKpfeq0sPOtrhoqo4Z-k4+SF@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=d4YZfMNVMMY7hptqgfKOY5-TcTRwJ=Dku0Tyv@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimmBK8EztRjT=rm_5PKoMdpigxNRJTBt=Q+J83Z@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim04CHe0U2WWe8j__zEQKW49sv3s3b59v3hQGMH@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX=ONe-sAy01-5xRd5tQEheVBA-3N92Z3QV=ns@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=hVNvQFo6nTDJKCTuwDvPLUMzvEgnxzGh1FKx9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim0oLTaLUVTU78=Gz-dZgKa1qC_dyMJL3QpywiO@mail.gmail.com>

i did an upgrade of the verison number in the mediawiki package, which then
resulted, according to phil, in:
>>> > 1. you made it not relocatable any more
>>> >
>>> > 2. you included a bunch of ".git" files in the package.

what in gar might have changed so upgrading the version number of mediawiki
gave such a result?

rupert.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>
Date: Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 04:25
Subject: Re: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mediawiki
To: rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org>


hmm.
well actually it seems that current package in catalog does not have
the .git problem. so yes perjaps there is a bug in later versions of
gar

version used in 2009 did not have git use


On Monday, November 22, 2010, rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> because if the prior versions was good, it would mean gar introduced some
unwanted "feature" :) and as you look on packages before releasing them i
thought this might be the case.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 00:15, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>
>
> Well, unfortunately, i'm not saying that the version prior to when you
> touched it, was correct. it may well have been incorrect as well. I
> just noticed the problems, on the most recent release you made :(
>
>
> On 11/22/10, rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> yes i saw it ... and i was wondering what i did - except upgrading the
>> verison number, see
>>
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/11595/csw/mgar/pkg/mediawiki
>> .
>>
>> rupert.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 23:42, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>>
>>> hiya,
>>>
>>> did you not see my message on the mailing list?
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/15/10, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>>> > Two problems.
>>> >
>>> > 1. you made it not relocatable any more
>>> >
>>> > 2. you included a bunch of ".git" files in the package.
>>> >
>>> > Oddly, the prior release WAS in gar.
>>> > Cant you just take the prior stuff, and dont change anything except
>>> > the shipped mediawiki files?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 11/13/10, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>> >> * mediawiki: version upgrade
>>> >>   - from: 1.14.0,REV=2009.10.05
>>> >>   -   to: 1.16.0,REV=2010.11.13
>>> >>   + mediawiki-1.16.0,REV=2010.11.13-SunOS5.9-all-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: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20101124/219fcd25/attachment-0001.html>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 24 19:26:12 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 13:26:12 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Fwd: newpkgs mediawiki
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim0oLTaLUVTU78=Gz-dZgKa1qC_dyMJL3QpywiO@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=QpEk0ceBA7UzpjKpfeq0sPOtrhoqo4Z-k4+SF@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=d4YZfMNVMMY7hptqgfKOY5-TcTRwJ=Dku0Tyv@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimmBK8EztRjT=rm_5PKoMdpigxNRJTBt=Q+J83Z@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim04CHe0U2WWe8j__zEQKW49sv3s3b59v3hQGMH@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX=ONe-sAy01-5xRd5tQEheVBA-3N92Z3QV=ns@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=hVNvQFo6nTDJKCTuwDvPLUMzvEgnxzGh1FKx9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim0oLTaLUVTU78=Gz-dZgKa1qC_dyMJL3QpywiO@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1290623084-sup-8336@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from rupert THURNER's message of Wed Nov 24 13:16:42 -0500 2010:

> what in gar might have changed so upgrading the version number of
> mediawiki gave such a result?

I just looked.  The install-custom target is doing:

cd $(WORKSRC); pax -rw -v ./ $(abspath $(DESTDIR)$(RELOCATE_PREFIX)/mediawiki)

This will also capture the .git directory that is setup to allow for
`gmake makepatch` stuff.  Tell pax to ignore it or add an extra
command to remove it from the $(DESTDIR) area afterwards.

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 19:40:27 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 10:40:27 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Fwd: newpkgs mediawiki
In-Reply-To: <1290623084-sup-8336@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=QpEk0ceBA7UzpjKpfeq0sPOtrhoqo4Z-k4+SF@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=d4YZfMNVMMY7hptqgfKOY5-TcTRwJ=Dku0Tyv@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimmBK8EztRjT=rm_5PKoMdpigxNRJTBt=Q+J83Z@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim04CHe0U2WWe8j__zEQKW49sv3s3b59v3hQGMH@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX=ONe-sAy01-5xRd5tQEheVBA-3N92Z3QV=ns@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=hVNvQFo6nTDJKCTuwDvPLUMzvEgnxzGh1FKx9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim0oLTaLUVTU78=Gz-dZgKa1qC_dyMJL3QpywiO@mail.gmail.com>
	<1290623084-sup-8336@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTincoP9muKFb-mxPF0VaqVNNecwcAsXnRKJ-n2KR@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/24/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from rupert THURNER's message of Wed Nov 24 13:16:42 -0500 2010:
>
>> what in gar might have changed so upgrading the version number of
>> mediawiki gave such a result?
>
> I just looked.  The install-custom target is doing:
>
> cd $(WORKSRC); pax -rw -v ./ $(abspath
> $(DESTDIR)$(RELOCATE_PREFIX)/mediawiki)
>
> This will also capture the .git directory that is setup to allow for
> `gmake makepatch` stuff.  Tell pax to ignore it or add an extra
> command to remove it from the $(DESTDIR) area afterwards.
>

werent you also going to add some kind of option to allow maintainers
to flag, "I dont want git"?
This would seem to be a good candidate to enable it, if it's in there already.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 24 20:14:18 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:14:18 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Fwd: newpkgs mediawiki
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTincoP9muKFb-mxPF0VaqVNNecwcAsXnRKJ-n2KR@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=QpEk0ceBA7UzpjKpfeq0sPOtrhoqo4Z-k4+SF@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=d4YZfMNVMMY7hptqgfKOY5-TcTRwJ=Dku0Tyv@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimmBK8EztRjT=rm_5PKoMdpigxNRJTBt=Q+J83Z@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim04CHe0U2WWe8j__zEQKW49sv3s3b59v3hQGMH@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX=ONe-sAy01-5xRd5tQEheVBA-3N92Z3QV=ns@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=hVNvQFo6nTDJKCTuwDvPLUMzvEgnxzGh1FKx9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim0oLTaLUVTU78=Gz-dZgKa1qC_dyMJL3QpywiO@mail.gmail.com>
	<1290623084-sup-8336@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTincoP9muKFb-mxPF0VaqVNNecwcAsXnRKJ-n2KR@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1290626028-sup-8958@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Nov 24 13:40:27 -0500 2010:

> werent you also going to add some kind of option to allow
> maintainers to flag, "I dont want git"?  This would seem to be a
> good candidate to enable it, if it's in there already.

Yes, but I haven't yet due to lack of time of the low priority of it.

Thanks
-Ben

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 20:32:24 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:32:24 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
In-Reply-To: <B813A711-E502-4F0A-8657-3E4C6D027A8D@opencsw.org>
References: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>
	<6EA62737-83FD-412A-9B07-12B2C16D0EBD@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim=KS17g0b0L8HdxC6SrA+RzoLHe=VUJGo6iXFY@mail.gmail.com>
	<B7B569EA-57EC-41BB-901E-11D4FE971066@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikBVbziX+4EkRQja-Ww01hs63wTMnrkrrFMjkpN@mail.gmail.com>
	<DFAE24D8-9741-4E14-8473-8A44BD37136F@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinZ1QqfuO0AmJND=_XpyghbZ1nNv9RWZR2iD9C9@mail.gmail.com>
	<B813A711-E502-4F0A-8657-3E4C6D027A8D@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinbRuoe+ECVe=Q2U1NgNY84tVMtmefDcxkKg9PE@mail.gmail.com>

Soooo... getting back to this mess :-)

First of all, thank you very much for doing the dependancy analysis.

Dago, will you be repackaging all these to be compliant with the new
pm naming proposal using CSWpm-

?

If so, please submit them in smaller batches?

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 24 21:51:58 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 21:51:58 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_dbd_sybase_freetds,
	pm_dbd_sybase_ocs
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=BCt3kwcyHF25F=P40SKvUVQpxVOKE2J0VyBCd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011231752.oANHqINE005742@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=BCt3kwcyHF25F=P40SKvUVQpxVOKE2J0VyBCd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B3ECE93D-EDE2-4DF8-AA6B-37602FF4C2B3@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 24.11.2010 um 18:48 schrieb Philip Brown:
> problem in CSWpm-dbd-sybase-freetds. bad path.
> 
> ./root/opt/csw/lib/perl/site_perl/DBD/Sybase.pm:     $dbh =
> DBI->connect("dbi:Sybase:interfaces=/usr/local/sybase/interfaces",

This is in the example of the documentation. You have to set it
whereever you installed your Sybase in your own code. There is no default location
and I can't recommend one as I can't package Sybase OCS to
/opt/csw/sybase/OCS-12_5 because of this stupid license :-/


Best regards

  -- Dago

> 
> 
> On 11/23/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> These are the first Perl modules in the new naming convention.
>> I would like to also provide DBD::Sybase for i386, but I
>> really tried hard to get a 32 bit Sybase 12.5 for i386, but failed.
>> 
>> 
>> * pm_dbd_sybase: new package
>>  + pm_dbd_sybase_freetds-1.11,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + pm_dbd_sybase_freetds-1.11,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + pm_dbd_sybase_ocs-1.11,REV=2010.11.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> 
>> --
>> Generated by submitpkg
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions


From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 24 21:55:29 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 21:55:29 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Fwd:  newpkgs mediawiki
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim0oLTaLUVTU78=Gz-dZgKa1qC_dyMJL3QpywiO@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=QpEk0ceBA7UzpjKpfeq0sPOtrhoqo4Z-k4+SF@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=d4YZfMNVMMY7hptqgfKOY5-TcTRwJ=Dku0Tyv@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimmBK8EztRjT=rm_5PKoMdpigxNRJTBt=Q+J83Z@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim04CHe0U2WWe8j__zEQKW49sv3s3b59v3hQGMH@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX=ONe-sAy01-5xRd5tQEheVBA-3N92Z3QV=ns@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=hVNvQFo6nTDJKCTuwDvPLUMzvEgnxzGh1FKx9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim0oLTaLUVTU78=Gz-dZgKa1qC_dyMJL3QpywiO@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C615FB0E-6CA5-4989-B868-DE815CA47D3D@opencsw.org>

Hi Rupert,

Am 24.11.2010 um 19:16 schrieb rupert THURNER:
> i did an upgrade of the verison number in the mediawiki package, which then resulted, according to phil, in:
> >>> > 1. you made it not relocatable any more

There has been no such change. I made an experimental relocatable branch
some time ago, but I don't think mediawiki wasb built with it - more as it was a
"manual" build.

> >>> > 2. you included a bunch of ".git" files in the package.
> 
> what in gar might have changed so upgrading the version number of mediawiki gave such a result?

See Maciejs comment or jdk6 as example untils Bens patch is active:
   @(cd $(WORKDIR); pax -r -w -s ',.*/\.git.*,,' $(DISTNAME) $(DESTDIR)$(prefix)/java/jdk)


Best regards

  -- Dago

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 24 21:56:18 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 21:56:18 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_textglob, pm_textwikifmt,
	pm_textw(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinbRuoe+ECVe=Q2U1NgNY84tVMtmefDcxkKg9PE@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011101656.oAAGuWE6006447@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikEVk1t6ZWeT6CEqZOBPy4mQz_1ZxUimR=9xJoL@mail.gmail.com>
	<6EA62737-83FD-412A-9B07-12B2C16D0EBD@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim=KS17g0b0L8HdxC6SrA+RzoLHe=VUJGo6iXFY@mail.gmail.com>
	<B7B569EA-57EC-41BB-901E-11D4FE971066@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikBVbziX+4EkRQja-Ww01hs63wTMnrkrrFMjkpN@mail.gmail.com>
	<DFAE24D8-9741-4E14-8473-8A44BD37136F@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinZ1QqfuO0AmJND=_XpyghbZ1nNv9RWZR2iD9C9@mail.gmail.com>
	<B813A711-E502-4F0A-8657-3E4C6D027A8D@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinbRuoe+ECVe=Q2U1NgNY84tVMtmefDcxkKg9PE@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <381E34F9-FC21-4852-9AE0-5B261D442DBE@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 24.11.2010 um 20:32 schrieb Philip Brown:
> Soooo... getting back to this mess :-)
> 
> First of all, thank you very much for doing the dependancy analysis.
> 
> Dago, will you be repackaging all these to be compliant with the new
> pm naming proposal using CSWpm-
> 
> ?
> 
> If so, please submit them in smaller batches?

Yes, and yes. After I integrated automated PM dependency tracking...


Beste regards

  -- Dago


From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Nov 24 22:18:47 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 22:18:47 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libltdl3, libltdl7, libtool,
	libtool_rt
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=eEjNEjX65h9Aw9QsBKvP8+t02128dTO_3XvNf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011241208.oAOC8f6c023752@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=eEjNEjX65h9Aw9QsBKvP8+t02128dTO_3XvNf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <31A2839A-69F8-44A4-9A3D-7C8FB7A0539C@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 24.11.2010 um 18:45 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On 11/24/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> This is a complete rework of the libtool package factoring out
>> the runtime libraries (now built from different descriptions
>> significantly easifying the Makefiles) and patched to not
>> strip -norunpath.
>> 
> 
> wow, nice!
> 
> batched.
> 
> erm... you should really put in a
> /opt/csw/share/doc/libtool/README.CSW mentionoing that you patched it,
> though.

Probably... Or a link to the build description where all this
is "documented".


Best regards

  -- Dago



From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 23:10:58 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:10:58 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libltdl3, libltdl7, libtool,
	libtool_rt
In-Reply-To: <31A2839A-69F8-44A4-9A3D-7C8FB7A0539C@opencsw.org>
References: <201011241208.oAOC8f6c023752@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=eEjNEjX65h9Aw9QsBKvP8+t02128dTO_3XvNf@mail.gmail.com>
	<31A2839A-69F8-44A4-9A3D-7C8FB7A0539C@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=NVq90LU5JqAw7U=QPpcBjNs9t0A3G1ftPwQJc@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/24/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
>> erm... you should really put in a
>> /opt/csw/share/doc/libtool/README.CSW mentionoing that you patched it,
>> though.
>
> Probably... Or a link to the build description where all this
> is "documented".
>

People need this kind of information directly in the installed package itself.

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 23:13:13 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:13:13 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Fwd: newpkgs mediawiki
In-Reply-To: <C615FB0E-6CA5-4989-B868-DE815CA47D3D@opencsw.org>
References: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=QpEk0ceBA7UzpjKpfeq0sPOtrhoqo4Z-k4+SF@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=d4YZfMNVMMY7hptqgfKOY5-TcTRwJ=Dku0Tyv@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimmBK8EztRjT=rm_5PKoMdpigxNRJTBt=Q+J83Z@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim04CHe0U2WWe8j__zEQKW49sv3s3b59v3hQGMH@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX=ONe-sAy01-5xRd5tQEheVBA-3N92Z3QV=ns@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=hVNvQFo6nTDJKCTuwDvPLUMzvEgnxzGh1FKx9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim0oLTaLUVTU78=Gz-dZgKa1qC_dyMJL3QpywiO@mail.gmail.com>
	<C615FB0E-6CA5-4989-B868-DE815CA47D3D@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinoOt=7C+5g-L7QGtjC+1GBN9BYBTQKZfpn1pdn@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/24/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Rupert,
>
> Am 24.11.2010 um 19:16 schrieb rupert THURNER:
>> i did an upgrade of the verison number in the mediawiki package, which
>> then resulted, according to phil, in:
>> >>> > 1. you made it not relocatable any more
>
> There has been no such change. I made an experimental relocatable branch
> some time ago, but I don't think mediawiki wasb built with it - more as it
> was a
> "manual" build.

well, then that's a problem.
especially since the pkginfo of the existingly released package,
mediawiki-1.14.0,REV=2009.10.05-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz

CLAIMS, it was built from
OPENCSW_REPOSITORY=https://gar.svn.sf.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/mediawiki/trunk at 6713

and is indeed, relocatable.

BASEDIR=/opt/csw/share/www

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Nov 24 23:16:08 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:16:08 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_dbd_sybase_freetds,
	pm_dbd_sybase_ocs
In-Reply-To: <B3ECE93D-EDE2-4DF8-AA6B-37602FF4C2B3@opencsw.org>
References: <201011231752.oANHqINE005742@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=BCt3kwcyHF25F=P40SKvUVQpxVOKE2J0VyBCd@mail.gmail.com>
	<B3ECE93D-EDE2-4DF8-AA6B-37602FF4C2B3@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=vnywN0YyvXFe+07nRCR_wP8hDQp4Nsmop91hk@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/24/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 24.11.2010 um 18:48 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> problem in CSWpm-dbd-sybase-freetds. bad path.
>>
>> ./root/opt/csw/lib/perl/site_perl/DBD/Sybase.pm:     $dbh =
>> DBI->connect("dbi:Sybase:interfaces=/usr/local/sybase/interfaces",
>
> This is in the example of the documentation. You have to set it
> whereever you installed your Sybase in your own code. There is no default
> location
> and I can't recommend one as I can't package Sybase OCS to
> /opt/csw/sybase/OCS-12_5 because of this stupid license :-/
>
>

oh, drat. I hate multi-line comments :-}

I'll point out that there's no reasonable generic way to disable the
warning on this, since its clearly in a non-"doc" type file, and we
dont want to disable warnings about bad paths on an actual program
file.


I'll release it this time, but would be nice if you patched it for next time.

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 25 09:37:38 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 09:37:38 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Fwd: newpkgs mediawiki
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinoOt=7C+5g-L7QGtjC+1GBN9BYBTQKZfpn1pdn@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=QpEk0ceBA7UzpjKpfeq0sPOtrhoqo4Z-k4+SF@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=d4YZfMNVMMY7hptqgfKOY5-TcTRwJ=Dku0Tyv@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimmBK8EztRjT=rm_5PKoMdpigxNRJTBt=Q+J83Z@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim04CHe0U2WWe8j__zEQKW49sv3s3b59v3hQGMH@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimX=ONe-sAy01-5xRd5tQEheVBA-3N92Z3QV=ns@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=hVNvQFo6nTDJKCTuwDvPLUMzvEgnxzGh1FKx9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim0oLTaLUVTU78=Gz-dZgKa1qC_dyMJL3QpywiO@mail.gmail.com>
	<C615FB0E-6CA5-4989-B868-DE815CA47D3D@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinoOt=7C+5g-L7QGtjC+1GBN9BYBTQKZfpn1pdn@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F3EA0452-31FB-487F-8CFB-764465D16498@opencsw.org>

Hi,

Am 24.11.2010 um 23:13 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On 11/24/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Hi Rupert,
>> 
>> Am 24.11.2010 um 19:16 schrieb rupert THURNER:
>>> i did an upgrade of the verison number in the mediawiki package, which
>>> then resulted, according to phil, in:
>>>>>>> 1. you made it not relocatable any more
>> 
>> There has been no such change. I made an experimental relocatable branch
>> some time ago, but I don't think mediawiki wasb built with it - more as it
>> was a
>> "manual" build.
> 
> well, then that's a problem.
> especially since the pkginfo of the existingly released package,
> mediawiki-1.14.0,REV=2009.10.05-SunOS5.8-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> 
> CLAIMS, it was built from
> OPENCSW_REPOSITORY=https://gar.svn.sf.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/mediawiki/trunk at 6713
> 
> and is indeed, relocatable.
> 
> BASEDIR=/opt/csw/share/www

As Ben has investigated this was in fact built from my relocatable branch.
I wasn't aware that we actually released something from it. As we did
it seems pretty usable and we should see that we merge the changes in
the main branch.


Best regards

 -- Dago



From pfelecan at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 25 09:54:53 2010
From: pfelecan at opencsw.org (Peter FELECAN)
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 09:54:53 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_dbd_sybase_freetds,
	pm_dbd_sybase_ocs
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=vnywN0YyvXFe+07nRCR_wP8hDQp4Nsmop91hk@mail.gmail.com>
	(Philip Brown's message of "Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:16:08 -0800")
References: <201011231752.oANHqINE005742@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=BCt3kwcyHF25F=P40SKvUVQpxVOKE2J0VyBCd@mail.gmail.com>
	<B3ECE93D-EDE2-4DF8-AA6B-37602FF4C2B3@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=vnywN0YyvXFe+07nRCR_wP8hDQp4Nsmop91hk@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <x6oc9d236q.fsf@opencsw.org>

Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:

> On 11/24/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Hi Phil,
>>
>> Am 24.11.2010 um 18:48 schrieb Philip Brown:
>>> problem in CSWpm-dbd-sybase-freetds. bad path.
>>>
>>> ./root/opt/csw/lib/perl/site_perl/DBD/Sybase.pm:     $dbh =
>>> DBI->connect("dbi:Sybase:interfaces=/usr/local/sybase/interfaces",
>>
>> This is in the example of the documentation. You have to set it
>> whereever you installed your Sybase in your own code. There is no default
>> location
>> and I can't recommend one as I can't package Sybase OCS to
>> /opt/csw/sybase/OCS-12_5 because of this stupid license :-/
>>
>>
>
> oh, drat. I hate multi-line comments :-}
>
> I'll point out that there's no reasonable generic way to disable the
> warning on this, since its clearly in a non-"doc" type file, and we
> dont want to disable warnings about bad paths on an actual program
> file.

What about taking into account overrides?
-- 
Peter

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 25 12:20:54 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 12:20:54 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gif2png
Message-ID: <201011251120.oAPBKsLe028649@login.bo.opencsw.org>

A small direct converter from Eric Raymond.

* gif2png: new package
  + gif2png-2.5.4,REV=2010.11.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gif2png-2.5.4,REV=2010.11.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Nov 25 15:19:41 2010
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 15:19:41 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gvim, vim, vimrt
Message-ID: <201011251419.oAPEJf3c004339@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This fixes a wrong path showing up when using certain extensions.

* vim: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.11.15
  -   to: 2010.11.25
  + gvim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gvim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + vim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + vim-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + vimrt-7.3.055,REV=2010.11.25-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 26 03:18:17 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 03:18:17 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cas_cpsampleconf, cas_crontab,
	cas_et(...)
Message-ID: <201011260218.oAQ2IHQJ011327@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Time to stop sitting on these and get them out.  cswclassutils
depends on the rest of them, so dependencies on cswclassutils
will still work.  Once this is out, I'll add some GAR mods to
make the dependencies explicit.

This also includes a minor fix to cswinitsmf and any other
changes that people made to scripts since the last release.

In the future, the 'owner' of the script will update a script,
re-roll the package and then release only the cas_$foo that
is appropriate.

Thanks
-Ben

* cas: new package
  + cas_cpsampleconf-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cas_crontab-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cas_etcservices-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cas_inetd-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cas_initsmf-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cas_migrateconf-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cas_postmsg-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cas_preserveconf-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cas_pycompile-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cas_texinfo-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + cas_usergroup-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* cswclassutils: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.38,REV=2010.06.15
  -   to: 1.42,REV=2010.11.26
  + cswclassutils-1.42,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 26 09:55:09 2010
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski)
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 08:55:09 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mediawiki
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=QpEk0ceBA7UzpjKpfeq0sPOtrhoqo4Z-k4+SF@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011131248.oADCmJwx001273@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=QpEk0ceBA7UzpjKpfeq0sPOtrhoqo4Z-k4+SF@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinP_sHUtsihCim8L7=bkB_xVN8_1P+tfuHu89z5@mail.gmail.com>

No dia 15 de Novembro de 2010 23:23, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> escreveu:
> 2. you included a bunch of ".git" files in the package.

>From r11727 onwards, .git files will be caught by checkpkg.

http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/changeset/11727

From skayser at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 26 10:23:58 2010
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 10:23:58 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs fio
Message-ID: <201011260923.oAQ9Nwbl014936@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Flexible I/O tester, http://freshmeat.net/projects/fio/

Separate packages for 9 and 10 as fio requires getopt_long, which is
available on 10, but no on 9. Linked against system libgetopt on 10,
linked against our libgnugetopt on 9.

Note: the helper script fio_generate_plots relies on gnuplot, but it
explicitly says so if gnuplot isn't installed. Thus, I didn't put in
a dependency on gnuplot to avoid the hefty dependency chain.

* fio: new package
  + fio-1.44.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + fio-1.44.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + fio-1.44.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.10-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + fio-1.44.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.10-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Nov 26 23:50:59 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 23:50:59 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
Message-ID: <201011262250.oAQMoxdl004534@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Version bump.

Thanks
-Ben

* git: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.09.25
  -   to: 2010.11.26
  + git-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_completion-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_cvs-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_devel-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_devel-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_doc-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_emacs-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_gui-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_svn-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gitk-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.26-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 27 06:40:34 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:40:34 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <201011262250.oAQMoxdl004534@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011262250.oAQMoxdl004534@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=wHVvqfvB4Q42xiNme_CJC+1TWnp4ur+gGN8ju@mail.gmail.com>

THere is a problem in gitdevel.
it has a header file that hardcodes a default path of /usr/local/bin
instead of /opt/csw/bin.
please fix. and also go through other files in other packages.
Most are in docs.
Some are generic doc type references. However, others are more
specific "the git default template path is in /usr/share/..."

From phil at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 27 06:42:40 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:42:40 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs fio
In-Reply-To: <201011260923.oAQ9Nwbl014936@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011260923.oAQ9Nwbl014936@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimiJHtDepZPY5LzVPWKspZ2HhspJEvLt_3wA6Kv@mail.gmail.com>

batched.
nice use of sol9 vs sol10.

From phil at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 27 06:42:56 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:42:56 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cas_cpsampleconf, cas_crontab,
	cas_et(...)
In-Reply-To: <201011260218.oAQ2IHQJ011327@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011260218.oAQ2IHQJ011327@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=cGQbct1pYz2h3BFAgfFQjmyeJBN+t89Ujiyyj@mail.gmail.com>

batched

From phil at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 27 06:43:07 2010
From: phil at opencsw.org (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:43:07 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gvim, vim, vimrt
In-Reply-To: <201011251419.oAPEJf3c004339@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011251419.oAPEJf3c004339@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=e7aZHbuUxptegz4UW3Oq2ep_NTi8XBWu=h=sn@mail.gmail.com>

batched

From phil at bolthole.com  Sat Nov 27 06:43:17 2010
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:43:17 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gif2png
In-Reply-To: <201011251120.oAPBKsLe028649@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201011251120.oAPBKsLe028649@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikpy_icrAZ3Eqx24JidgUyGU30vUjzNKQ1kRnZe@mail.gmail.com>

batched

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 27 14:18:07 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 08:18:07 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=wHVvqfvB4Q42xiNme_CJC+1TWnp4ur+gGN8ju@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011262250.oAQMoxdl004534@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=wHVvqfvB4Q42xiNme_CJC+1TWnp4ur+gGN8ju@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1290863804-sup-1472@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Sat Nov 27 00:40:34 -0500 2010:

> it has a header file that hardcodes a default path of /usr/local/bin
> instead of /opt/csw/bin.

Please start providing better feedback than this.  Presumably your
script is spitting out a filename.  That would be more useful.  If
it's not, please fix your script so that you can be more useful in
your feedback.

/me goes to run grep himself.

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


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 27 14:22:04 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 08:22:04 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=wHVvqfvB4Q42xiNme_CJC+1TWnp4ur+gGN8ju@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201011262250.oAQMoxdl004534@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=wHVvqfvB4Q42xiNme_CJC+1TWnp4ur+gGN8ju@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1290864046-sup-6628@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Sat Nov 27 00:40:34 -0500 2010:
> THere is a problem in gitdevel.

> it has a header file that hardcodes a default path of /usr/local/bin
> instead of /opt/csw/bin.

I would argue that this is fine:

#ifndef _PATH_DEFPATH
#define _PATH_DEFPATH "/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin"                           
#endif

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


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Nov 27 15:53:52 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 09:53:52 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <1290864046-sup-6628@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201011262250.oAQMoxdl004534@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=wHVvqfvB4Q42xiNme_CJC+1TWnp4ur+gGN8ju@mail.gmail.com>
	<1290864046-sup-6628@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <1290869606-sup-3102@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Sat Nov 27 08:22:04 -0500 2010:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Sat Nov 27 00:40:34 -0500 2010:
> > THere is a problem in gitdevel.
> 
> > it has a header file that hardcodes a default path of /usr/local/bin
> > instead of /opt/csw/bin.
> 
> I would argue that this is fine:
> 
> #ifndef _PATH_DEFPATH
> #define _PATH_DEFPATH "/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin"                           
> #endif

Never mind.  We don't have _PATH_DEFPATH on solaris.  Patched.

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


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sun Nov 28 04:43:34 2010
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 04:43:34 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
Message-ID: <201011280343.oAS3hYPE028516@login.bo.opencsw.org>


Re-rolled with the /usr/local/bin removed.  Fixed a few other minor
items in a similar vein.  There are still a few paths like that in
various comments or examples, but they're fine.

Thanks
-Ben

* git: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.09.25
  -   to: 2010.11.28
  + git-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_completion-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_cvs-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_devel-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_devel-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_doc-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_emacs-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_gui-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_svn-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gitk-1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org  Sun Nov 21 19:51:51 2010
From: yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org (Yann Rouillard)
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:51:51 -0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs bash
Message-ID: <4CE96A40.3050608@pleiades.fr.eu.org>

* bash: added missing rbash symlink (closes #4600)
   - from: 2010.09.01
   -   to: 2010.11.20
   + bash-4.1.7,REV=2010.11.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
   + bash-4.1.7,REV=2010.11.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

--
Generated by submitpkg