From bwalton at opencsw.org  Tue Mar  1 03:04:12 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 03:04:12 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cswhookdebug
Message-ID: <201103010204.p2124CoY010551@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

This is a quick package I hacked together to make debugging package hooks
easier.

Thanks
-Ben

* cswhookdebug: new package
  + cswhookdebug-1.0,REV=2011.03.01-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Mar  1 13:11:59 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 13:11:59 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs help2man
Message-ID: <201103011211.p21CBxlo019411@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* help2man: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.38.4,REV=2011.01.03
  -   to: 1.39.1,REV=2011.03.01
  + help2man-1.39.1,REV=2011.03.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + help2man-1.39.1,REV=2011.03.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Mar  1 13:12:11 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 13:12:11 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs memconf
Message-ID: <201103011212.p21CCBMR019635@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* memconf: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.16,REV=2010.08.09
  -   to: 2.17,REV=2011.03.01
  + memconf-2.17,REV=2011.03.01-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar  1 23:59:10 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:59:10 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs memconf
In-Reply-To: <201103011212.p21CCBMR019635@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103011212.p21CCBMR019635@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinHH2ahxSVW4f-RABqvWQ+Jx=w9-oJbOv7LWh-m@mail.gmail.com>

On 3/1/11, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * memconf: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 2.16,REV=2010.08.09
>   -   to: 2.17,REV=2011.03.01
>   + memconf-2.17,REV=2011.03.01-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>

curious why you are doing this, and the current maintainer is not?

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  2 00:02:41 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 15:02:41 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cswhookdebug
In-Reply-To: <201103010204.p2124CoY010551@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103010204.p2124CoY010551@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=OQtTfn61r4UMk_cOMnG+tEE4n3xFj3rj9h+1-@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On 2/28/11, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> This is a quick package I hacked together to make debugging package hooks
> easier.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * cswhookdebug: new package
>   + cswhookdebug-1.0,REV=2011.03.01-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  Wed Mar  2 00:03:06 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 15:03:06 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs help2man
In-Reply-To: <201103011211.p21CBxlo019411@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103011211.p21CBxlo019411@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTincYR2rLS+mgRx8n=DpQyZboaZpdobOxLRURbDV@mail.gmail.com>

batced

On 3/1/11, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * help2man: minor version upgrade
>   - from: 1.38.4,REV=2011.01.03
>   -   to: 1.39.1,REV=2011.03.01
>   + help2man-1.39.1,REV=2011.03.01-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>   + help2man-1.39.1,REV=2011.03.01-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  2 02:47:59 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 02:47:59 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cas_initsmf
Message-ID: <201103020147.p221lxpB028271@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This addresses mantis 4635 by ensuring /etc/opt/csw/init.d exists.

Thanks
-Ben

* cas_initsmf: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.11.26
  -   to: 2011.03.01
  + cas_initsmf-1.42,REV=2011.03.01-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  2 02:53:10 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 20:53:10 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] apache2c removal
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=cYfG+Lg=J50k8Fz_SodO8zKiqxkAoa2+8JD0v@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1298902550-sup-2746@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTim-crigUWxakugi2Qw--m5bQJzp3D4dSYfd_eJZ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D6BF80B.1040609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=cYfG+Lg=J50k8Fz_SodO8zKiqxkAoa2+8JD0v@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299030703-sup-1151@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Feb 28 16:12:35 -0500 2011:

> THanks. apache2c removed in current mirrors
> (change batched, anyways)

I still see apache2c sitting at http://mirror.opencsw.org/opencsw.
What is the schedule for this?  Is there something wrong that it
hasn't happened yet?

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  2 06:36:12 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 21:36:12 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] apache2c removal
In-Reply-To: <1299030703-sup-1151@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <1298902550-sup-2746@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTim-crigUWxakugi2Qw--m5bQJzp3D4dSYfd_eJZ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D6BF80B.1040609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=cYfG+Lg=J50k8Fz_SodO8zKiqxkAoa2+8JD0v@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299030703-sup-1151@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinp4Xn3bOxob9xMG=Zo3-wtS2scuzRTAtkMrhwD@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:

> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Feb 28 16:12:35 -0500 2011:
>
> > THanks. apache2c removed in current mirrors
> > (change batched, anyways)
>
> I still see apache2c sitting at http://mirror.opencsw.org/opencsw.
> What is the schedule for this?  Is there something wrong that it
> hasn't happened yet?
>
>
maybe mirror is broken?
It was removed from master at least 6 hours ago, maybe longer.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20110301/698ab388/attachment.html>

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  2 09:23:14 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 09:23:14 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs memconf
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinHH2ahxSVW4f-RABqvWQ+Jx=w9-oJbOv7LWh-m@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103011212.p21CCBMR019635@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinHH2ahxSVW4f-RABqvWQ+Jx=w9-oJbOv7LWh-m@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B0328B00-BFD2-4EDD-92F5-E222AA9D594A@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 01.03.2011 um 23:59 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On 3/1/11, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> * memconf: minor version upgrade
>>  - from: 2.16,REV=2010.08.09
>>  -   to: 2.17,REV=2011.03.01
>>  + memconf-2.17,REV=2011.03.01-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> 
> curious why you are doing this, and the current maintainer is not?

I thought I was, looks like I maintain too many packages.
Peter, would you mind respinning or do we both just don't care
who does the bump?


Best regards

  -- Dago



From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  2 10:11:30 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:11:30 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gm4
Message-ID: <201103020911.p229BUqR006606@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* gm4: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.4.15,REV=2010.08.31
  -   to: 1.4.16,REV=2011.03.02
  + gm4-1.4.16,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gm4-1.4.16,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  2 10:23:16 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:23:16 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs memconf
Message-ID: <201103020923.p229NG8R009534@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Respin of Dagos update.

* memconf: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.16,REV=2010.08.09
  -   to: 2.17,REV=2011.03.02
  + memconf-2.17,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  2 11:53:52 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 11:53:52 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs parallel
Message-ID: <201103021053.p22Arqvb008831@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* parallel: major version upgrade
  - from: 20101222,REV=2010.12.29
  -   to: 20110205,REV=2011.03.02
  + parallel-20110205,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  2 18:22:59 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 09:22:59 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] apache2c removal
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinp4Xn3bOxob9xMG=Zo3-wtS2scuzRTAtkMrhwD@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1298902550-sup-2746@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTim-crigUWxakugi2Qw--m5bQJzp3D4dSYfd_eJZ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D6BF80B.1040609@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=cYfG+Lg=J50k8Fz_SodO8zKiqxkAoa2+8JD0v@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299030703-sup-1151@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinp4Xn3bOxob9xMG=Zo3-wtS2scuzRTAtkMrhwD@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimjXsv3b-X=_oVxwurjSSGXzU43YP1C2L2W=4LJ@mail.gmail.com>

Ah! sorry, correction; master was updated, but NOT pushed.
I just checked the logs. push was cancelled, because apache2c is
*required*, by other packages.

drupal, mediawiki, squirrelmail.

so.. .restored apache2c.



On 3/1/11, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
>> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Feb 28 16:12:35 -0500 2011:
>>
>> > THanks. apache2c removed in current mirrors
>> > (change batched, anyways)
>>
>> I still see apache2c sitting at http://mirror.opencsw.org/opencsw.
>> What is the schedule for this?  Is there something wrong that it
>> hasn't happened yet?
>>
>>
> maybe mirror is broken?
> It was removed from master at least 6 hours ago, maybe longer.
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  2 19:37:14 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:37:14 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs cas_initsmf
In-Reply-To: <201103020147.p221lxpB028271@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103020147.p221lxpB028271@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimFoYh-xNqzh0QySFFE7a_f8MOFrsr2JNh1cGgo@mail.gmail.com>

Arrg. I keep meaning to rewrite this so that it no longer needs to use
/etc/opt/csw, but uses
/opt/csw/etc instead.
But I wont hold it up for that.

batched


On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:

> This addresses mantis 4635 by ensuring /etc/opt/csw/init.d exists.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * cas_initsmf: revision upgrade
>  - from: 2010.11.26
>  -   to: 2011.03.01
>  + cas_initsmf-1.42,REV=2011.03.01-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/20110302/9bd746b4/attachment.html>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  2 19:38:14 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:38:14 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gm4
In-Reply-To: <201103020911.p229BUqR006606@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103020911.p229BUqR006606@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=UCbwG5qDB8mDWZGp-V1dyFJGtZkubE6Zd4wMZ@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 1:11 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:

> * gm4: patchlevel upgrade
>  - from: 1.4.15,REV=2010.08.31
>  -   to: 1.4.16,REV=2011.03.02
>  + gm4-1.4.16,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + gm4-1.4.16,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20110302/76250f7f/attachment-0001.html>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  2 19:38:42 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:38:42 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs memconf
In-Reply-To: <201103020923.p229NG8R009534@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103020923.p229NG8R009534@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=nYws_vvkjGb2iw7eUng9eyuEHofkc5gQo8-nC@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 1:23 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:

> Respin of Dagos update.
>
> * memconf: minor version upgrade
>  - from: 2.16,REV=2010.08.09
>  -   to: 2.17,REV=2011.03.02
>  + memconf-2.17,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20110302/018ccf67/attachment.html>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  2 19:45:50 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:45:50 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs parallel
In-Reply-To: <201103021053.p22Arqvb008831@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103021053.p22Arqvb008831@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin-Jnr8beg-KLNXfC0Kj4SbpHYhBoSJFJNsQiDz@mail.gmail.com>

Hmmm...
batched, since its no worse than previous.
But for future versions.. or if you are in a cleanup mood...
It seems wrong to allow this package to claim the namespace of
/opt/csw/bin/sql


As a comparison, debian seems to contain the 'parallel' util, in a larger
collection of utils, called "moreutils".
It does not contain this 'sql' binary/tool.

On the flip side.. the "sql" util does seem useful in and of itself, when I
read its docs. but having it in a package named "parallel" just seems rather
wrong.

Maybe worth splitting it out into its own package?



On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 2:53 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:

> * parallel: major version upgrade
>  - from: 20101222,REV=2010.12.29
>  -   to: 20110205,REV=2011.03.02
>  + parallel-20110205,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20110302/5c7950b8/attachment.html>

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  2 19:50:35 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 19:50:35 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs parallel
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin-Jnr8beg-KLNXfC0Kj4SbpHYhBoSJFJNsQiDz@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103021053.p22Arqvb008831@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTin-Jnr8beg-KLNXfC0Kj4SbpHYhBoSJFJNsQiDz@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <43042CFB-5F5F-4815-9723-99548DDC5F62@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 02.03.2011 um 19:45 schrieb Philip Brown:
> Hmmm...
> batched, since its no worse than previous.
> But for future versions.. or if you are in a cleanup mood...
> It seems wrong to allow this package to claim the namespace of
> /opt/csw/bin/sql

Probably when something comes around that needs /opt/csw/bin/sql.
Until then I would prefer to stay pristine uptsream.

> As a comparison, debian seems to contain the 'parallel' util, in a larger collection of utils, called "moreutils".
> It does not contain this 'sql' binary/tool.

That is completely different and "parallel" from there is obsolete:
  http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist at lists.debian.org/msg825134.html

> On the flip side.. the "sql" util does seem useful in and of itself, when I read its docs. but having it in a package named "parallel" just seems rather wrong.
> 
> Maybe worth splitting it out into its own package?

Not until there actually is a collision.


Best regards

  -- Dago

> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 2:53 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * parallel: major version upgrade
>  - from: 20101222,REV=2010.12.29
>  -   to: 20110205,REV=2011.03.02
>  + parallel-20110205,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> 
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110302/e4dbf2c3/attachment.html>

From rupert at opencsw.org  Fri Mar  4 02:46:32 2011
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 19:46:32 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
Message-ID: <201103040146.p241kWc5003012@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* mercurial: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.7.5,REV=2011.02.19
  -   to: 1.8,REV=2011.03.04
  + mercurial-1.8,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* mercurial: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.7.5,REV=2011.02.19
  -   to: 1.8,REV=2011.03.03
  + mercurial-1.8,REV=2011.03.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Fri Mar  4 15:35:59 2011
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 15:35:59 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_dev,
	py_li(...)
Message-ID: <201103041435.p24EZx34004430@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Fixes bug 4703.

https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4703

* py_libmagic: minor version upgrade
  - from: 5.04,REV=2010.06.08
  -   to: 5.05,REV=2011.03.04
  + py_libmagic-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* various packages: revision upgrade
  - from: 2011.01.21
  -   to: 2011.03.04
  + gfile-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gfile-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmagic1-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmagic1-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmagic_dev-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmagic_dev-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Sat Mar  5 00:45:18 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 15:45:18 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
In-Reply-To: <201103040146.p241kWc5003012@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103040146.p241kWc5003012@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik_7_eBXiEGr8NR8UqrDX=3S_a5NavxCeakwM+j@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:46 PM, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * mercurial: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.7.5,REV=2011.02.19
> ?- ? to: 1.8,REV=2011.03.04
> ?+ mercurial-1.8,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * mercurial: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.7.5,REV=2011.02.19
> ?- ? to: 1.8,REV=2011.03.03
> ?+ mercurial-1.8,REV=2011.03.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>

you packaged it across the time boundary. would you please repackage
the laggy one?

From phil at bolthole.com  Sat Mar  5 00:46:46 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 15:46:46 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_dev,
	py_li(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103041435.p24EZx34004430@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103041435.p24EZx34004430@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=ESK1d=+ez+rSriw+1u0iHXwO6C-EJjesDrK-2@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Fixes bug 4703.
>
> https://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4703
>
> * py_libmagic: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 5.04,REV=2010.06.08
> ?- ? to: 5.05,REV=2011.03.04
> ?+ py_libmagic-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * various packages: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2011.01.21
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.04
> ?+ gfile-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gfile-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libmagic1-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libmagic1-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libmagic_dev-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libmagic_dev-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Sat Mar  5 01:02:58 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 01:02:58 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs dnstop
Message-ID: <201103050002.p2502w5x018307@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* dnstop: major version upgrade
  - from: 20090128,REV=2010.02.17
  -   to: 20110127,REV=2011.03.05
  + dnstop-20110127,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + dnstop-20110127,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Sat Mar  5 01:16:13 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:16:13 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs dnstop
In-Reply-To: <201103050002.p2502w5x018307@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103050002.p2502w5x018307@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=cxmQd-kPw0FPM+1SUGf_N6r8x3guLgabT=Ain@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * dnstop: major version upgrade
> ?- from: 20090128,REV=2010.02.17
> ?- ? to: 20110127,REV=2011.03.05
> ?+ dnstop-20110127,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ dnstop-20110127,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Mar  5 02:00:54 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 02:00:54 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ggettext, ggettext_data,
	ggettext_dev(...)
Message-ID: <201103050100.p2510sPl009130@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This needs to go as a bundle or not at all.

It's the update from 0.17.  Libraries are now split out, so this will
be the last release for *14*, *17* an libintl < 8.  The gettextrt
package is just a placeholder now so that the legacy library packages
get pulled in.

Thanks
-Ben

* ggettextdoc: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.17,REV=2009.02.11
  -   to: 0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12
  + ggettextdoc-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* lib: new package
  + ggettext_data-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ggettext_dev-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ggettext_dev-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libasprintf0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libasprintf0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextlib0_14_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextlib0_14_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextlib0_17-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextlib0_17-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextlib0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextlib0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextpo0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextpo0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextsrc0_17-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextsrc0_17-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextsrc0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextsrc0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libintl2-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libintl2-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libintl3-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libintl3-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libintl8-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libintl8-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* ggettext: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.17,REV=2009.02.13
  -   to: 0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12
  + ggettext-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ggettext-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ggettextrt-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.02.12-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Sat Mar  5 09:23:40 2011
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 09:23:40 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_unittest2
Message-ID: <201103050823.p258Nech007847@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Python unit test framework version 2.7 enhancements backported to 2.3+.

* py_unittest2: new package
  + py_unittest2-0.5.1,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Sat Mar  5 09:28:34 2011
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 09:28:34 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_mock
Message-ID: <201103050828.p258SYuu011531@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Python mock object framework.

* py_mock: new package
  + py_mock-0.7.0,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Sat Mar  5 22:18:40 2011
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 22:18:40 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik_7_eBXiEGr8NR8UqrDX=3S_a5NavxCeakwM+j@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103040146.p241kWc5003012@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTik_7_eBXiEGr8NR8UqrDX=3S_a5NavxCeakwM+j@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikikHWwM_40+mTFZtYLFKs14Q3oTVUS9c-tTDH6@mail.gmail.com>

should a "gmake replatforms" construct a consistent package name?

rupert

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 00:45, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:46 PM, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> * mercurial: minor version upgrade
>> ?- from: 1.7.5,REV=2011.02.19
>> ?- ? to: 1.8,REV=2011.03.04
>> ?+ mercurial-1.8,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> * mercurial: minor version upgrade
>> ?- from: 1.7.5,REV=2011.02.19
>> ?- ? to: 1.8,REV=2011.03.03
>> ?+ mercurial-1.8,REV=2011.03.03-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>
> you packaged it across the time boundary. would you please repackage
> the laggy one?
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Mar  7 04:30:42 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 22:30:42 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] libasprintf0 ??
Message-ID: <1299468639-sup-7518@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>


Hi Phil,

I happened to notice that most of the ggettext update went out the
door, but libasprintf0 is still sitting in newpkgs.  I didn't see a
'batched' for the rest, but it's "out there."  Was there a problem
with libasprintf0 or did it just get missed?

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar  7 05:18:24 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 20:18:24 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] libasprintf0 ??
In-Reply-To: <1299468639-sup-7518@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <1299468639-sup-7518@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik8j22UNOv-1etduX3v5g+xO4CuOgj8yKEbk5XT@mail.gmail.com>

sorry, sending that out now.

On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Phil,
>
> I happened to notice that most of the ggettext update went out the
> door, but libasprintf0 is still sitting in newpkgs. ?I didn't see a
> 'batched' for the rest, but it's "out there." ?Was there a problem
> with libasprintf0 or did it just get missed?
>
> 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 dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar  7 20:07:25 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 20:07:25 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb3, berkeleydb3_devel,
	berke(...)
Message-ID: <201103071907.p27J7PnE002064@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This fixes #4708.

* berkeleydb3: revision upgrade
  - from: 2009.10.18
  -   to: 2011.03.07
  + berkeleydb3-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + berkeleydb3-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + berkeleydb3_devel-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + berkeleydb3_devel-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + berkeleydb3_doc-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar  7 21:28:27 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:28:27 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb3, berkeleydb3_devel,
	berke(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103071907.p27J7PnE002064@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103071907.p27J7PnE002064@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=PF2EB6TqthxVOE5YhN4C6yyPXvPPSwbBOChF2@mail.gmail.com>

Errr.... now I'm confused.

Didnt we just go through a bunch of hassle to "standardize" suffixes
for devel -> dev?
but you're submitting _devel ?


On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This fixes #4708.
>
> * berkeleydb3: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2009.10.18
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.07
> ?+ berkeleydb3-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ berkeleydb3-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ berkeleydb3_devel-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ berkeleydb3_devel-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ berkeleydb3_doc-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar  7 22:01:11 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 22:01:11 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb3, berkeleydb3_devel,
	berke(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=PF2EB6TqthxVOE5YhN4C6yyPXvPPSwbBOChF2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103071907.p27J7PnE002064@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=PF2EB6TqthxVOE5YhN4C6yyPXvPPSwbBOChF2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D5C93E22-4DAB-4C56-BABB-6A4EF318C96E@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 07.03.2011 um 21:28 schrieb Philip Brown:
> Errr.... now I'm confused.
> 
> Didnt we just go through a bunch of hassle to "standardize" suffixes
> for devel -> dev?
> but you're submitting _devel ?

I have not changed a thing apart from the dependency to CSWtcl as reported
in #4708. One of the faults of the past was to change too many things at
the same time. A general overhault will be done for release "dublin".

Best regards

  -- Dago

> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> This fixes #4708.
>> 
>> * berkeleydb3: revision upgrade
>>  - from: 2009.10.18
>>  -   to: 2011.03.07
>>  + berkeleydb3-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + berkeleydb3-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + berkeleydb3_devel-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + berkeleydb3_devel-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + berkeleydb3_doc-3.3.11,REV=2011.03.07_rev=p2-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  Mon Mar  7 22:55:14 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 13:55:14 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb3, berkeleydb3_devel,
	berke(...)
In-Reply-To: <D5C93E22-4DAB-4C56-BABB-6A4EF318C96E@opencsw.org>
References: <201103071907.p27J7PnE002064@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=PF2EB6TqthxVOE5YhN4C6yyPXvPPSwbBOChF2@mail.gmail.com>
	<D5C93E22-4DAB-4C56-BABB-6A4EF318C96E@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimwyF0tQw8UCsRyOtHGsC+ZvZXa90GWkGQhjjZ0@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 07.03.2011 um 21:28 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> Errr.... now I'm confused.
>>
>> Didnt we just go through a bunch of hassle to "standardize" suffixes
>> for devel -> dev?
>> but you're submitting _devel ?
>
> I have not changed a thing apart from the dependency to CSWtcl as reported
> in #4708. One of the faults of the past was to change too many things at
> the same time. A general overhault will be done for release "dublin".
>



Gaaaahhhh....
sorry, it doesnt work that way.
You, and others just voted for,
"Our new, OFFICIAL, standard is _dev."

not "_dev or _devel".

_dev.
Only.

Official Standard.

So just as I couldnt accept _dev before... now I can no longer accept _devel.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Tue Mar  8 01:30:17 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 19:30:17 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb3, berkeleydb3_devel,
	berke(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimwyF0tQw8UCsRyOtHGsC+ZvZXa90GWkGQhjjZ0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103071907.p27J7PnE002064@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=PF2EB6TqthxVOE5YhN4C6yyPXvPPSwbBOChF2@mail.gmail.com>
	<D5C93E22-4DAB-4C56-BABB-6A4EF318C96E@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimwyF0tQw8UCsRyOtHGsC+ZvZXa90GWkGQhjjZ0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299544165-sup-2350@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Mar 07 16:55:14 -0500 2011:

> So just as I couldnt accept _dev before... now I can no longer
> accept _devel.

This is fair, I think.  Dago, the new obsoletes mechanism should make
this change fairly trivial anyway, no?

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar  8 01:39:06 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 16:39:06 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb3, berkeleydb3_devel,
	berke(...)
In-Reply-To: <1299544165-sup-2350@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103071907.p27J7PnE002064@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=PF2EB6TqthxVOE5YhN4C6yyPXvPPSwbBOChF2@mail.gmail.com>
	<D5C93E22-4DAB-4C56-BABB-6A4EF318C96E@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimwyF0tQw8UCsRyOtHGsC+ZvZXa90GWkGQhjjZ0@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299544165-sup-2350@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=vCxiWd=fEQCTS97tbzWH-5Ok8-NrfR7s_JfLX@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Mar 07 16:55:14 -0500 2011:
>
>> So just as I couldnt accept _dev before... now I can no longer
>> accept _devel.
>
> This is fair, I think. ?Dago, the new obsoletes mechanism should make
> this change fairly trivial anyway, no?
>

"new obsoletes mechanism" ?

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Tue Mar  8 02:08:15 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 20:08:15 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb3, berkeleydb3_devel,
	berke(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=vCxiWd=fEQCTS97tbzWH-5Ok8-NrfR7s_JfLX@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103071907.p27J7PnE002064@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=PF2EB6TqthxVOE5YhN4C6yyPXvPPSwbBOChF2@mail.gmail.com>
	<D5C93E22-4DAB-4C56-BABB-6A4EF318C96E@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimwyF0tQw8UCsRyOtHGsC+ZvZXa90GWkGQhjjZ0@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299544165-sup-2350@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=vCxiWd=fEQCTS97tbzWH-5Ok8-NrfR7s_JfLX@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299546394-sup-8696@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Mar 07 19:39:06 -0500 2011:

> "new obsoletes mechanism" ?

A GAR addition that makes it easier to change names for things.  We
can now trivially create the _devel package that depends on the _dev
package but delivers no files.  It's prototype has 'i obsoletes='
which will be a visible flag for package tools to clean up the
packages later.

It is not obsoletes in the sense that dpkg or rpm would consider, but
a transition tool

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar  8 15:25:26 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 06:25:26 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_mock
In-Reply-To: <201103050828.p258SYuu011531@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103050828.p258SYuu011531@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim4OQXtSaYCQvcLoOt4RvTh-sKm5jrJNxmm+2Dn@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Python mock object framework.
>
> * py_mock: new package
> ?+ py_mock-0.7.0,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar  8 15:25:35 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 06:25:35 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs py_unittest2
In-Reply-To: <201103050823.p258Nech007847@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103050823.p258Nech007847@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik1ujnDJ34CWbGxFZTzQYzJR5p_7msWjgTau5jT@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Python unit test framework version 2.7 enhancements backported to 2.3+.
>
> * py_unittest2: new package
> ?+ py_unittest2-0.5.1,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Tue Mar  8 19:14:04 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 19:14:04 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_algorithm_checkdigits,
	pm_algorith(...)
Message-ID: <201103081814.p28IE4Pd019387@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Bunch of Perl modules updated in version and renamed according to Perl-Dublin.
Old package is a stub depending on the new, in a few cases a new catalog name had
to be constructed (by adding a 2) for the old package because the new package
needs the same name. The old packages will be cleaned out anyway, both from
catalogs and from local systems, it's just transitional.

pm_class_accessor_chained/pm_clsaccessorchnd is a takeover from Alex Moore.
All others are mine already.

* pm_geoippureperl: revision upgrade
  - from: 2011.02.06
  -   to: 2011.03.06
  + pm_geoippureperl-1.25,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_geo_ip_pureperl: new package
  + pm_geo_ip_pureperl-1.25,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_authensasl: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.12,REV=2009.06.08
  -   to: 2.15,REV=2011.03.06
  + pm_authensasl-2.15,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_schedule_at: new package
  + pm_schedule_at-1.11,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_dbi2: new package
  + pm_dbi2-1.616,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_podsimple: minor version upgrade
  - from: 3.14,REV=2010.09.08
  -   to: 3.15,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_podsimple-3.15,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_modulesign: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.63,REV=2010.03.31
  -   to: 0.66,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_modulesign-0.66,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_termui: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.20,REV=2010.10.06
  -   to: 0.26,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_termui-0.26,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_ipccmd: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.64,REV=2010.11.02
  -   to: 0.70,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_ipccmd-0.70,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_cgisession: minor version upgrade
  - from: 4.42,REV=2010.06.08
  -   to: 4.43,REV=2011.03.06
  + pm_cgisession-4.43,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_logmsgsimple: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.06,REV=2010.10.08
  -   to: 0.08,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_logmsgsimple-0.08,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_algorithmchkdig: major version upgrade
  - from: 0.53,REV=2010.06.08
  -   to: v1.1.1,REV=2011.03.06
  + pm_algorithmchkdig-v1.1.1,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_text_vfile_asdata: new package
  + pm_text_vfile_asdata-0.07,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_class_accessor_chained: new package
  + pm_class_accessor_chained-0.01,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_testnowarnings: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.01,REV=2010.07.10
  -   to: 1.02,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_testnowarnings-1.02,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_mimebase64: minor version upgrade
  - from: 3.09,REV=2010.02.02
  -   to: 3.13,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_mimebase64-3.13,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_params_check: new package
  + pm_params_check-0.28,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_ldap: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.39,REV=2009.04.07
  -   to: 0.4001,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_ldap-0.4001,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_ipc_cmd: new package
  + pm_ipc_cmd-0.70,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_modloadcond: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.38,REV=2010.10.06
  -   to: 0.44,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_modloadcond-0.44,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_netcidr: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.13,REV=2009.03.25
  -   to: 0.14,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_netcidr-0.14,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_iosocketinet6: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.65,REV=2010.09.01
  -   to: 2.67,REV=2011.03.06
  + pm_iosocketinet6-2.67,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_net_cidr: new package
  + pm_net_cidr-0.14,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_htmlparser: minor version upgrade
  - from: 3.64,REV=2010.02.02
  -   to: 3.68,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_htmlparser-3.68,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_dbi: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.609,REV=2010.02.02
  -   to: 1.616,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_dbi-1.616,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_dbi-1.616,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_cgi_session: new package
  + pm_cgi_session-4.43,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_testdeep: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.106,REV=2010.06.24
  -   to: 0.108,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_testdeep-0.108,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_ldap2: new package
  + pm_ldap2-0.4001,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_authen_sasl: new package
  + pm_authen_sasl-2.15,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_test_deep: new package
  + pm_test_deep-0.108,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_gssapi: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.26,REV=2010.02.02
  -   to: 0.28,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_gssapi-0.28,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_gssapi-0.28,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_www_curl: new package
  + pm_www_curl-4.15,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_www_curl-4.15,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_libwww: minor version upgrade
  - from: 5.833,REV=2009.10.15
  -   to: 5.837,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_libwww-5.837,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_log_message_simple: new package
  + pm_log_message_simple-0.08,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_file_fetch: new package
  + pm_file_fetch-0.32,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_app_cli: new package
  + pm_app_cli-0.313,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_netidnencode: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.000,REV=2010.07.10
  -   to: 1.100,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_netidnencode-1.100,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_algorithm_checkdigits: new package
  + pm_algorithm_checkdigits-v1.1.1,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_filefetch: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.24,REV=2010.10.06
  -   to: 0.32,REV=2011.03.06
  + pm_filefetch-0.32,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_net_idn_encode: new package
  + pm_net_idn_encode-1.100,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_iosocketssl: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.33,REV=2010.09.01
  -   to: 1.39,REV=2011.03.06
  + pm_iosocketssl-1.39,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_clsaccessorchnd: revision number added upgrade
  - from: 
  -   to: 2011.03.08
  + pm_clsaccessorchnd-0.01,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_archiveextract: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.46,REV=2011.01.07
  -   to: 0.48,REV=2011.03.06
  + pm_archiveextract-0.48,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_wwwcurl: minor version upgrade
  - from: 4.11,REV=2010.02.02
  -   to: 4.15,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_wwwcurl-4.15,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_libwww_perl: new package
  + pm_libwww_perl-5.837,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_html_parser: new package
  + pm_html_parser-3.68,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_html_parser-3.68,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_module_load_conditional: new package
  + pm_module_load_conditional-0.44,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_dbdsqlite: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.29,REV=2010.02.02
  -   to: 1.31,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_dbdsqlite-1.31,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_io_socket_inet6: new package
  + pm_io_socket_inet6-2.67,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_io_socket_ssl: new package
  + pm_io_socket_ssl-1.39,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_mime_base64: new package
  + pm_mime_base64-3.13,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_mime_base64-3.13,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_pod_simple: new package
  + pm_pod_simple-3.15,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_json: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.21,REV=2010.06.11
  -   to: 2.50,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_json-2.50,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_term_ui: new package
  + pm_term_ui-0.26,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_json2: new package
  + pm_json2-2.50,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* compress: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.032,REV=2011.01.06
  -   to: 2.033,REV=2011.03.07
  + pm_compressrawbz2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_iocompress-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_dbd_sqlite: new package
  + pm_dbd_sqlite-1.31,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_dbd_sqlite-1.31,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_test_nowarnings: new package
  + pm_test_nowarnings-1.02,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_archive_extract: new package
  + pm_archive_extract-0.48,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_prmscheck: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.26,REV=2010.10.06
  -   to: 0.28,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_prmscheck-0.28,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_scheduleat: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.10,REV=2010.06.10
  -   to: 1.11,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_scheduleat-1.11,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* compress: new package
  + pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_io_compress-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pmcompressrawzlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_textvfileasdata: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.05,REV=2010.06.16
  -   to: 0.07,REV=2011.03.08
  + pm_textvfileasdata-0.07,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_appcli: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.08,REV=2010.03.29
  -   to: 0.313,REV=2011.03.06
  + pm_appcli-0.313,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_gssapi2: new package
  + pm_gssapi2-0.28,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_module_signature: new package
  + pm_module_signature-0.66,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar  8 23:49:09 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 14:49:09 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_algorithm_checkdigits,
	pm_algorith(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103081814.p28IE4Pd019387@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103081814.p28IE4Pd019387@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=Zb_3T+4_KEb4GZiHEJamVxF9c0nMxowj_ObF6@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Bunch of Perl modules updated in version and renamed according to Perl-Dublin.

that is a lot. and renaming is a pain, and messy. To assist in this,
and avoid inaccurate messiness :-}
would you please make some kind of list, relating

pm_oldname -> pm_newname

where there are renames required?
I dont see any identifiers like that in the output given.


> Old package is a stub depending on the new, in a few cases a new catalog name had
> to be constructed (by adding a 2) for the old package because the new package
> needs the same name. The old packages will be cleaned out anyway, both from
> catalogs and from local systems, it's just transitional.
>
> pm_class_accessor_chained/pm_clsaccessorchnd is a takeover from Alex Moore.
> All others are mine already.
>
> * pm_geoippureperl: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2011.02.06
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.06
> ?+ pm_geoippureperl-1.25,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_geo_ip_pureperl: new package
> ?+ pm_geo_ip_pureperl-1.25,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_authensasl: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 2.12,REV=2009.06.08
> ?- ? to: 2.15,REV=2011.03.06
> ?+ pm_authensasl-2.15,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_schedule_at: new package
> ?+ pm_schedule_at-1.11,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_dbi2: new package
> ?+ pm_dbi2-1.616,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_podsimple: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 3.14,REV=2010.09.08
> ?- ? to: 3.15,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_podsimple-3.15,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_modulesign: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.63,REV=2010.03.31
> ?- ? to: 0.66,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_modulesign-0.66,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_termui: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.20,REV=2010.10.06
> ?- ? to: 0.26,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_termui-0.26,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_ipccmd: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.64,REV=2010.11.02
> ?- ? to: 0.70,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_ipccmd-0.70,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_cgisession: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 4.42,REV=2010.06.08
> ?- ? to: 4.43,REV=2011.03.06
> ?+ pm_cgisession-4.43,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_logmsgsimple: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.06,REV=2010.10.08
> ?- ? to: 0.08,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_logmsgsimple-0.08,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_algorithmchkdig: major version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.53,REV=2010.06.08
> ?- ? to: v1.1.1,REV=2011.03.06
> ?+ pm_algorithmchkdig-v1.1.1,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_text_vfile_asdata: new package
> ?+ pm_text_vfile_asdata-0.07,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_class_accessor_chained: new package
> ?+ pm_class_accessor_chained-0.01,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_testnowarnings: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.01,REV=2010.07.10
> ?- ? to: 1.02,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_testnowarnings-1.02,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_mimebase64: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 3.09,REV=2010.02.02
> ?- ? to: 3.13,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_mimebase64-3.13,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_params_check: new package
> ?+ pm_params_check-0.28,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_ldap: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.39,REV=2009.04.07
> ?- ? to: 0.4001,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_ldap-0.4001,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_ipc_cmd: new package
> ?+ pm_ipc_cmd-0.70,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_modloadcond: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.38,REV=2010.10.06
> ?- ? to: 0.44,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_modloadcond-0.44,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_netcidr: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.13,REV=2009.03.25
> ?- ? to: 0.14,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_netcidr-0.14,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_iosocketinet6: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 2.65,REV=2010.09.01
> ?- ? to: 2.67,REV=2011.03.06
> ?+ pm_iosocketinet6-2.67,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_net_cidr: new package
> ?+ pm_net_cidr-0.14,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_htmlparser: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 3.64,REV=2010.02.02
> ?- ? to: 3.68,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_htmlparser-3.68,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_dbi: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.609,REV=2010.02.02
> ?- ? to: 1.616,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_dbi-1.616,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_dbi-1.616,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_cgi_session: new package
> ?+ pm_cgi_session-4.43,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_testdeep: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.106,REV=2010.06.24
> ?- ? to: 0.108,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_testdeep-0.108,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_ldap2: new package
> ?+ pm_ldap2-0.4001,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_authen_sasl: new package
> ?+ pm_authen_sasl-2.15,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_test_deep: new package
> ?+ pm_test_deep-0.108,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_gssapi: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.26,REV=2010.02.02
> ?- ? to: 0.28,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_gssapi-0.28,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_gssapi-0.28,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_www_curl: new package
> ?+ pm_www_curl-4.15,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_www_curl-4.15,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_libwww: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 5.833,REV=2009.10.15
> ?- ? to: 5.837,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_libwww-5.837,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_log_message_simple: new package
> ?+ pm_log_message_simple-0.08,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_file_fetch: new package
> ?+ pm_file_fetch-0.32,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_app_cli: new package
> ?+ pm_app_cli-0.313,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_netidnencode: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.000,REV=2010.07.10
> ?- ? to: 1.100,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_netidnencode-1.100,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_algorithm_checkdigits: new package
> ?+ pm_algorithm_checkdigits-v1.1.1,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_filefetch: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.24,REV=2010.10.06
> ?- ? to: 0.32,REV=2011.03.06
> ?+ pm_filefetch-0.32,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_net_idn_encode: new package
> ?+ pm_net_idn_encode-1.100,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_iosocketssl: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.33,REV=2010.09.01
> ?- ? to: 1.39,REV=2011.03.06
> ?+ pm_iosocketssl-1.39,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_clsaccessorchnd: revision number added upgrade
> ?- from:
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_clsaccessorchnd-0.01,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_archiveextract: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.46,REV=2011.01.07
> ?- ? to: 0.48,REV=2011.03.06
> ?+ pm_archiveextract-0.48,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_wwwcurl: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 4.11,REV=2010.02.02
> ?- ? to: 4.15,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_wwwcurl-4.15,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_libwww_perl: new package
> ?+ pm_libwww_perl-5.837,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_html_parser: new package
> ?+ pm_html_parser-3.68,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_html_parser-3.68,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_module_load_conditional: new package
> ?+ pm_module_load_conditional-0.44,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_dbdsqlite: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.29,REV=2010.02.02
> ?- ? to: 1.31,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_dbdsqlite-1.31,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_io_socket_inet6: new package
> ?+ pm_io_socket_inet6-2.67,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_io_socket_ssl: new package
> ?+ pm_io_socket_ssl-1.39,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_mime_base64: new package
> ?+ pm_mime_base64-3.13,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_mime_base64-3.13,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_pod_simple: new package
> ?+ pm_pod_simple-3.15,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_json: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 2.21,REV=2010.06.11
> ?- ? to: 2.50,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_json-2.50,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_term_ui: new package
> ?+ pm_term_ui-0.26,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_json2: new package
> ?+ pm_json2-2.50,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * compress: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 2.032,REV=2011.01.06
> ?- ? to: 2.033,REV=2011.03.07
> ?+ pm_compressrawbz2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_iocompress-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_dbd_sqlite: new package
> ?+ pm_dbd_sqlite-1.31,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_dbd_sqlite-1.31,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_test_nowarnings: new package
> ?+ pm_test_nowarnings-1.02,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_archive_extract: new package
> ?+ pm_archive_extract-0.48,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_prmscheck: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.26,REV=2010.10.06
> ?- ? to: 0.28,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_prmscheck-0.28,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_scheduleat: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.10,REV=2010.06.10
> ?- ? to: 1.11,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_scheduleat-1.11,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * compress: new package
> ?+ pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_io_compress-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pmcompressrawzlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_textvfileasdata: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.05,REV=2010.06.16
> ?- ? to: 0.07,REV=2011.03.08
> ?+ pm_textvfileasdata-0.07,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_appcli: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.08,REV=2010.03.29
> ?- ? to: 0.313,REV=2011.03.06
> ?+ pm_appcli-0.313,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_gssapi2: new package
> ?+ pm_gssapi2-0.28,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_module_signature: new package
> ?+ pm_module_signature-0.66,REV=2011.03.08-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 bonivart at opencsw.org  Tue Mar  8 23:53:06 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 23:53:06 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_algorithm_checkdigits,
	pm_algorith(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=Zb_3T+4_KEb4GZiHEJamVxF9c0nMxowj_ObF6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103081814.p28IE4Pd019387@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Zb_3T+4_KEb4GZiHEJamVxF9c0nMxowj_ObF6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikDNcdcZDAL3_vwKtLznYLXgHrgM1cywJmN0EmM@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> that is a lot. and renaming is a pain, and messy. To assist in this,
> and avoid inaccurate messiness :-}
> would you please make some kind of list, relating
>
> pm_oldname -> pm_newname
>
> where there are renames required?
> I dont see any identifiers like that in the output given.

There's no actual renames. The whole point with the obsolete idea is
that the old package becomes a stub depending on the new one. Sooner
or later we can remove the old one.

So all you have to do is to treat half the packages as updates and
half as new. No renames.

/peter

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 00:00:15 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 00:00:15 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_algorithm_checkdigits,
	pm_algorith(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikDNcdcZDAL3_vwKtLznYLXgHrgM1cywJmN0EmM@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103081814.p28IE4Pd019387@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Zb_3T+4_KEb4GZiHEJamVxF9c0nMxowj_ObF6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikDNcdcZDAL3_vwKtLznYLXgHrgM1cywJmN0EmM@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikwqoh9_aH9EP86wTqoAYCGZoAEvXAeN9qG2_Zx@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> There's no actual renames. The whole point with the obsolete idea is
> that the old package becomes a stub depending on the new one. Sooner
> or later we can remove the old one.
>
> So all you have to do is to treat half the packages as updates and
> half as new. No renames.

Or actually, a few of the old, now stubs, had to have the catalogname
changed because the new package needed it, like for example pm_dbi so
I renamed the old one to pm_dbi2 but the package names are still not
renamed. Usually the catalogname didn't clash because we now stick
underscores in as separators but for one word modules that doesn't
separate them.

Example, normal obsolete:

CSWpmfoobar/pm_foobar becomes CSWpm-foo-bar/pm_foo_bar. Old names are
now stubs depending on new names which have the actual content.

Example, forced rename of catalogname due to single word:

CSWfoo/pm_foo becomes CSWpm-foo/pm_foo. Since new catalogname is same
as old the old has a "2" added to it to make it unique.

/peter

From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 01:39:58 2011
From: maciej at opencsw.org (Maciej Blizinski)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 01:39:58 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_data,
	libm(...)
Message-ID: <201103090039.p290dwAG025328@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

This is a bit of an emergency downgrade.  It turns out, that file-5.05
compiles py_libmagic with the shared object missing, which results in
a horrible breakage of checkpkg on the buildfarm.

Before I analyze what's wrong with 5.05 and fix it, please push the downgrade
of gfile to 5.04.

Maciej


* libmagic_data: revision upgrade
  - from: 2011.01.21
  -   to: 2011.03.04
  + libmagic_data-5.05,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* various packages: minor version downgrade
  - from: 5.05,REV=2011.03.04
  -   to: 5.04,REV=2011.03.09
  + gfile-5.04,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gfile-5.04,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmagic1-5.04,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmagic1-5.04,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmagic_dev-5.04,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmagic_dev-5.04,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_libmagic-5.04,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 01:44:30 2011
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 18:44:30 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
Message-ID: <201103090044.p290iUa2026627@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* mercurial: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.7.5,REV=2011.02.19
  -   to: 1.8,REV=2011.03.05
  + mercurial-1.8,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + mercurial-1.8,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 03:14:39 2011
From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Blizi=C5=84ski?=)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 02:14:39 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_data,
	libm(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103090039.p290dwAG025328@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103090039.p290dwAG025328@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim1XCGe_yQMMMq_cYM1yP3Bw=nMdkYDA9Q-nTmu@mail.gmail.com>

2011/3/9 Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org>:
> Hi Phil,
>
> This is a bit of an emergency downgrade. ?It turns out, that file-5.05
> compiles py_libmagic with the shared object missing, which results in
> a horrible breakage of checkpkg on the buildfarm.
>
> Before I analyze what's wrong with 5.05 and fix it, please push the downgrade
> of gfile to 5.04.

I'm having some problems with binaries in py_libmagic.  What I built
the last time, had issues with mislabeling of architectures.  Please
hold on.

From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 04:27:03 2011
From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Blizi=C5=84ski?=)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 03:27:03 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_data,
	libm(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim1XCGe_yQMMMq_cYM1yP3Bw=nMdkYDA9Q-nTmu@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103090039.p290dwAG025328@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim1XCGe_yQMMMq_cYM1yP3Bw=nMdkYDA9Q-nTmu@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTingEmLOM4eDQO7=eZqvPC8SXzObHr2HMr2anm1O@mail.gmail.com>

2011/3/9 Maciej Blizi?ski <maciej at opencsw.org>:
> 2011/3/9 Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org>:
>> Hi Phil,
>>
>> This is a bit of an emergency downgrade. ?It turns out, that file-5.05
>> compiles py_libmagic with the shared object missing, which results in
>> a horrible breakage of checkpkg on the buildfarm.
>>
>> Before I analyze what's wrong with 5.05 and fix it, please push the downgrade
>> of gfile to 5.04.
>
> I'm having some problems with binaries in py_libmagic. ?What I built
> the last time, had issues with mislabeling of architectures. ?Please
> hold on.

I had to sort out two more issues.  I also tested that py_magic 5.04
can be used with libmagic1-5.05, so we can do a less invasive change
and only downgrade py_libmagic.  Here are the packages:

* py_libmagic: minor version downgrade
  - from: 5.05,REV=2011.03.04
  -   to: 5.04,REV=2011.03.09
  + py_libmagic-5.04,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_libmagic-5.04,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

Maciej

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 04:32:14 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 04:32:14 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs coreutils
Message-ID: <201103090332.p293WEhX024157@login.bo.opencsw.org>


I think this resolves the open issues with gtouch.

Thanks
-Ben

* coreutils: minor version upgrade
  - from: 8.8,REV=2011.01.14
  -   to: 8.10,REV=2011.03.08
  + coreutils-8.10,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + coreutils-8.10,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 04:42:41 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 22:42:41 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_data,
	libm(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTingEmLOM4eDQO7=eZqvPC8SXzObHr2HMr2anm1O@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103090039.p290dwAG025328@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim1XCGe_yQMMMq_cYM1yP3Bw=nMdkYDA9Q-nTmu@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTingEmLOM4eDQO7=eZqvPC8SXzObHr2HMr2anm1O@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299642116-sup-2348@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Maciej Blizi?ski's message of Tue Mar 08 22:27:03 -0500 2011:

> I had to sort out two more issues.  I also tested that py_magic 5.04
> can be used with libmagic1-5.05, so we can do a less invasive change
> and only downgrade py_libmagic.  Here are the packages:

As this was a bit of an emergency (blocks all use of checkpkg on the
buildfarm), I've performed the downgrade there already.

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


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 04:44:27 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 22:44:27 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs coreutils
In-Reply-To: <201103090332.p293WEhX024157@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103090332.p293WEhX024157@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <1299642232-sup-6822@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Tue Mar 08 22:32:14 -0500 2011:

> I think this resolves the open issues with gtouch.

If this can be pushed fairly quickly, I'd appreciate it.  My update to
gettext is waiting on it as the build uses some of these tools.

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  9 05:47:54 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 20:47:54 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_data,
	libm(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim1XCGe_yQMMMq_cYM1yP3Bw=nMdkYDA9Q-nTmu@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103090039.p290dwAG025328@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim1XCGe_yQMMMq_cYM1yP3Bw=nMdkYDA9Q-nTmu@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikuQG=HaBrJ2yfXnF1wxVPp8rcO_sNDR15FUcwp@mail.gmail.com>

2011/3/8 Maciej Blizi?ski <maciej at opencsw.org>:
> 2011/3/9 Maciej Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org>:
>> Hi Phil,
>>
>> This is a bit of an emergency downgrade. ?It turns out, that file-5.05
>> compiles py_libmagic with the shared object missing, which results in
>> a horrible breakage of checkpkg on the buildfarm.
>>
>> Before I analyze what's wrong with 5.05 and fix it, please push the downgrade
>> of gfile to 5.04.
>
> I'm having some problems with binaries in py_libmagic. ?What I built
> the last time, had issues with mislabeling of architectures. ?Please
> hold on.

note1: If something is "an emergency", please put it FIRST in the subject line.
which I guess means not using submitpg, if it doesnt let you change
subject line.


note2: based on this secondary email, Im leaving this stuff alone,
until I see a clear message of,
"okay, please push packages (xyz)"

From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 09:49:40 2011
From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Blizi=C5=84ski?=)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 08:49:40 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_data,
	libm(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikuQG=HaBrJ2yfXnF1wxVPp8rcO_sNDR15FUcwp@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103090039.p290dwAG025328@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim1XCGe_yQMMMq_cYM1yP3Bw=nMdkYDA9Q-nTmu@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikuQG=HaBrJ2yfXnF1wxVPp8rcO_sNDR15FUcwp@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=hokAW2OxcaCUa=rrvQ_YTSiOk1ZF62KuYJqm9@mail.gmail.com>

2011/3/9 Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>:
> note1: If something is "an emergency", please put it FIRST in the subject line.
> which I guess means not using submitpg, if it doesnt let you change
> subject line.

Noted.

> note2: based on this secondary email, Im leaving this stuff alone,
> until I see a clear message of,
> "okay, please push packages (xyz)"

Please push py_libmagic for both architectures.  Other packages are fine.

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 12:20:19 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:20:19 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs help2man
Message-ID: <201103091120.p29BKJq4027426@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* help2man: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.39.1,REV=2011.03.01
  -   to: 1.39.2,REV=2011.03.09
  + help2man-1.39.2,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + help2man-1.39.2,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 17:06:49 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 17:06:49 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libidn, libidn11, libidn_dev,
	libidn_utils
Message-ID: <201103091606.p29G6n3f009172@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* libidn: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.19,REV=2010.05.22
  -   to: 1.20,REV=2011.03.04
  + libidn-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* libidn: new package
  + libidn11-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libidn11-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libidn_dev-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libidn_dev-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libidn_utils-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libidn_utils-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 17:18:13 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 17:18:13 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsox1, libsox_dev, libsox_devel, sox
Message-ID: <201103091618.p29GIDXf025521@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* libsox_dev: new package
  + libsox_dev-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsox_dev-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* sox: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09
  -   to: 14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02
  + libsox1-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsox1-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libsox_devel-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + sox-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + sox-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 17:19:51 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 17:19:51 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gd, libgd2, libgd_dev, libwmf,
	libwmf(...)
Message-ID: <201103091619.p29GJpZr025872@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This update adjusts the DEFAULT_FONTPATH from an invalid /usr/share/fonts/truetype to
/opt/csw/share/fonts/truetype

* wmf: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.02.27
  -   to: 2011.02.22
  + libwmf-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libwmf_devel-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libwmf_doc-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libwmf_gtk-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libwmf_gtk-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + wmf-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + wmf-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + wmf_fonts-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* libwmf: new package
  + libwmf0_2_7-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libwmf0_2_7-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libwmf_dev-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libwmf_dev-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libwmflite0_2_7-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libwmflite0_2_7-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* gd: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.05.31
  -   to: 2011.02.20
  + gd-2.0.35,REV=2011.02.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gd-2.0.35,REV=2011.02.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libgd: new package
  + libgd2-2.0.35,REV=2011.02.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgd2-2.0.35,REV=2011.02.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgd_dev-2.0.35,REV=2011.02.20-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgd_dev-2.0.35,REV=2011.02.20-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  9 18:25:06 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 09:25:06 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_data,
	libm(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=hokAW2OxcaCUa=rrvQ_YTSiOk1ZF62KuYJqm9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103090039.p290dwAG025328@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim1XCGe_yQMMMq_cYM1yP3Bw=nMdkYDA9Q-nTmu@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikuQG=HaBrJ2yfXnF1wxVPp8rcO_sNDR15FUcwp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=hokAW2OxcaCUa=rrvQ_YTSiOk1ZF62KuYJqm9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimtcyoVbEfwVAPwUpAVkhScQGswR0CsE-Kc+ZvH@mail.gmail.com>

2011/3/9 Maciej Blizi?ski <maciej at opencsw.org>:
> 2011/3/9 Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>:
>> note2: based on this secondary email, Im leaving this stuff alone,
>> until I see a clear message of,
>> "okay, please push packages (xyz)"
>
> Please push py_libmagic for both architectures. ?Other packages are fine.
>

Errrm... sorry to be what may seem at first to be overly picky, but..
the wording of this, makes me worry that some information to me is
missing.
Why did you not say, "go ahead and push all pacakges in the prior
email, its fine now"?
Do you mean, "you have provided a NEW py_libmagic.. all the others are
unchanged, and are fine"?

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 18:49:45 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 18:49:45 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_cache_memcached,
	pm_cachememcached(...)
Message-ID: <201103091749.p29HnjaJ019456@login.bo.opencsw.org>

These are takeovers from Cory Ormand. Updated and "renamed".

* pm_podpom: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.17,REV=2006.08.15
  -   to: 0.27,REV=2011.03.09
  + pm_podpom-0.27,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_pod_pom: new package
  + pm_pod_pom-0.27,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_cachememcached: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.15,REV=2005.12.13
  -   to: 1.29,REV=2011.03.09
  + pm_cachememcached-1.29,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_cache_memcached: new package
  + pm_cache_memcached-1.29,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_configinifiles: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.38,REV=2006.02.12
  -   to: 2.66,REV=2011.03.09
  + pm_configinifiles-2.66,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_config_inifiles: new package
  + pm_config_inifiles-2.66,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_cgiapp: minor version upgrade
  - from: 4.06,REV=2006.05.31
  -   to: 4.31,REV=2011.03.09
  + pm_cgiapp-4.31,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_cgi_application: new package
  + pm_cgi_application-4.31,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  9 19:33:32 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 10:33:32 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs coreutils
In-Reply-To: <1299642232-sup-6822@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103090332.p293WEhX024157@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1299642232-sup-6822@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTiknGgV19MBfiHs3pW1f2NNacA5UdMa3sgHp8S6Q@mail.gmail.com>

batched. go ahead and install manually if you wish/

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Tue Mar 08 22:32:14 -0500 2011:
>
>> I think this resolves the open issues with gtouch.
>
> If this can be pushed fairly quickly, I'd appreciate it. ?My update to
> gettext is waiting on it as the build uses some of these tools.
>
>

From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 20:02:55 2011
From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Blizi=C5=84ski?=)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 19:02:55 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_data,
	libm(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimtcyoVbEfwVAPwUpAVkhScQGswR0CsE-Kc+ZvH@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103090039.p290dwAG025328@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim1XCGe_yQMMMq_cYM1yP3Bw=nMdkYDA9Q-nTmu@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikuQG=HaBrJ2yfXnF1wxVPp8rcO_sNDR15FUcwp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=hokAW2OxcaCUa=rrvQ_YTSiOk1ZF62KuYJqm9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimtcyoVbEfwVAPwUpAVkhScQGswR0CsE-Kc+ZvH@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimP4wFs7kTgQo5aTEx_ncR-xe9AKq8NpFgiDObq@mail.gmail.com>

2011/3/9 Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>:
> 2011/3/9 Maciej Blizi?ski <maciej at opencsw.org>:
>> 2011/3/9 Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>:
>>> note2: based on this secondary email, Im leaving this stuff alone,
>>> until I see a clear message of,
>>> "okay, please push packages (xyz)"
>>
>> Please push py_libmagic for both architectures. ?Other packages are fine.
>>
>
> Errrm... sorry to be what may seem at first to be overly picky, but..
> the wording of this, makes me worry that some information to me is
> missing.
> Why did you not say, "go ahead and push all pacakges in the prior
> email, its fine now"?
> Do you mean, "you have provided a NEW py_libmagic.. all the others are
> unchanged, and are fine"?

The broken packages were py_libmagic-5.05.  Other 5.05 packages are
okay.  py_libmagic-5.04 works with libmagic1-5.05, so I'd like to
py_libmagic-5.04 to be pushed out while leaving other related packages
at 5.05.

Maciej

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  9 20:54:14 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 11:54:14 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gfile, libmagic1, libmagic_data,
	libm(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimP4wFs7kTgQo5aTEx_ncR-xe9AKq8NpFgiDObq@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103090039.p290dwAG025328@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim1XCGe_yQMMMq_cYM1yP3Bw=nMdkYDA9Q-nTmu@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikuQG=HaBrJ2yfXnF1wxVPp8rcO_sNDR15FUcwp@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=hokAW2OxcaCUa=rrvQ_YTSiOk1ZF62KuYJqm9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimtcyoVbEfwVAPwUpAVkhScQGswR0CsE-Kc+ZvH@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimP4wFs7kTgQo5aTEx_ncR-xe9AKq8NpFgiDObq@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=Y9sXcCc1MFruppMPKrq6J=ZQocsB2oPrwOP9Z@mail.gmail.com>

2011/3/9 Maciej Blizi?ski <maciej at opencsw.org>:
> 2011/3/9 Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>:
>
>> Do you mean, "you have provided a NEW py_libmagic.. all the others are
>> unchanged, and are fine"?
>
> The broken packages were py_libmagic-5.05. ?Other 5.05 packages are
> okay. ?py_libmagic-5.04 works with libmagic1-5.05, so I'd like to
> py_libmagic-5.04 to be pushed out while leaving other related packages
> at 5.05.
>

oookay.. so. I am processing py_libmagic-5.04,REV=2011.03.09*
and it will be out shortly.
Based on what you said, I am leaving everything else alone.

If there are other packages you wish me to change, please upload them
to newpkgs, and let me know specifically about them.
This includes if you still want me to "downgrade" anything.

if not... happy happy, lets move on

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  9 21:03:25 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:03:25 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_cache_memcached,
	pm_cachememcached(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103091749.p29HnjaJ019456@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103091749.p29HnjaJ019456@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin3L=5UnRyhkwRr5YN3Z_FnbhXHL1XKy-y=SPw1@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> These are takeovers from Cory Ormand. Updated and "renamed".
>
> * pm_podpom: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.17,REV=2006.08.15
> ?- ? to: 0.27,REV=2011.03.09
> ?+ pm_podpom-0.27,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_pod_pom: new package
> ?+ pm_pod_pom-0.27,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_cachememcached: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.15,REV=2005.12.13
> ?- ? to: 1.29,REV=2011.03.09
> ?+ pm_cachememcached-1.29,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_cache_memcached: new package
> ?+ pm_cache_memcached-1.29,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_configinifiles: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 2.38,REV=2006.02.12
> ?- ? to: 2.66,REV=2011.03.09
> ?+ pm_configinifiles-2.66,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_config_inifiles: new package
> ?+ pm_config_inifiles-2.66,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_cgiapp: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 4.06,REV=2006.05.31
> ?- ? to: 4.31,REV=2011.03.09
> ?+ pm_cgiapp-4.31,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_cgi_application: new package
> ?+ pm_cgi_application-4.31,REV=2011.03.09-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  Wed Mar  9 21:06:22 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:06:22 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_algorithm_checkdigits,
	pm_algorith(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikwqoh9_aH9EP86wTqoAYCGZoAEvXAeN9qG2_Zx@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103081814.p28IE4Pd019387@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Zb_3T+4_KEb4GZiHEJamVxF9c0nMxowj_ObF6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikDNcdcZDAL3_vwKtLznYLXgHrgM1cywJmN0EmM@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwqoh9_aH9EP86wTqoAYCGZoAEvXAeN9qG2_Zx@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=54ZAH6qffHuvvSSH6up+PP=KXhMCRJZvvjsnv@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
>
> Or actually, a few of the old, now stubs, had to have the catalogname
> changed because the new package needed it, like for example pm_dbi so
> I renamed the old one to pm_dbi2 but the package names are still not
> renamed. Usually the catalogname didn't clash because we now stick
> underscores in as separators but for one word modules that doesn't
> separate them.
>
> Example, normal obsolete:
>
> CSWpmfoobar/pm_foobar becomes CSWpm-foo-bar/pm_foo_bar. Old names are
> now stubs depending on new names which have the actual content.
>
> Example, forced rename of catalogname due to single word:
>
> CSWfoo/pm_foo becomes CSWpm-foo/pm_foo. Since new catalogname is same
> as old the old has a "2" added to it to make it unique.
>

ERRRR... this sounds like a bad idea.
We're cleaning up catalog names, yet the same effort is making
PKGnames  messier, in the sense that we are now making catalog name
and PKGname be out of sync?
I thought we were supposed to be moving to have things more IN sync,
not away from it?

Maybe we need to come up with a better transition plan?

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  9 21:08:34 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:08:34 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs help2man
In-Reply-To: <201103091120.p29BKJq4027426@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103091120.p29BKJq4027426@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinV8Cv6cMKYF=M77sx7EDvcYBm3Vt8nBmqXWTjk@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:20 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * help2man: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 1.39.1,REV=2011.03.01
> ?- ? to: 1.39.2,REV=2011.03.09
> ?+ help2man-1.39.2,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ help2man-1.39.2,REV=2011.03.09-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 Mar  9 21:21:57 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:21:57 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gd, libgd2, libgd_dev, libwmf,
	libwmf(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103091619.p29GJpZr025872@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103091619.p29GJpZr025872@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinjz0T8--N49zqTB9B3jss0WKFK=ApxHnp+6o+m@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:19 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This update adjusts the DEFAULT_FONTPATH from an invalid /usr/share/fonts/truetype to
> /opt/csw/share/fonts/truetype
>

AND removes dependancy on CSWlibx11  (hurray!)


> * wmf: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2010.02.27
> ?- ? to: 2011.02.22
> ?+ libwmf-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
...


> ?+ libwmf_devel-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

Errr.. this package seems to have been generated for no good reason
whatsoever. So I'm dropping it.
It would be nice if could eliminate this stuff from appearing in the future.
Or better yet, have something appear that says, "Hey! Rename the old
devel to the new dev please"

It needs to be "loud".  I almost missed this. Ugh.

The other stuff seems okay. i guess.

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  9 21:22:51 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:22:51 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
In-Reply-To: <201103090044.p290iUa2026627@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103090044.p290iUa2026627@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=P+=huucDexYxCYBR5GTKr5Eb7Nb9rsxt30qJG@mail.gmail.com>

dang, fast updates from those people.

okay, batched


On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:44 PM, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * mercurial: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.7.5,REV=2011.02.19
> ?- ? to: 1.8,REV=2011.03.05
> ?+ mercurial-1.8,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ mercurial-1.8,REV=2011.03.05-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 21:24:50 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:24:50 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gd, libgd2, libgd_dev, libwmf,
	libwmf(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinjz0T8--N49zqTB9B3jss0WKFK=ApxHnp+6o+m@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103091619.p29GJpZr025872@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinjz0T8--N49zqTB9B3jss0WKFK=ApxHnp+6o+m@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299702175-sup-3332@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 09 15:21:57 -0500 2011:

> Errr.. this package seems to have been generated for no good reason
> whatsoever. So I'm dropping it.
> It would be nice if could eliminate this stuff from appearing in the future.
> Or better yet, have something appear that says, "Hey! Rename the old
> devel to the new dev please"

Actually, this is the obsoletes mechanism at work.  For users with the
old (_devel) package installed, an update will pull this in, which in
turn pulls in the new _dev package.  The old is easily identified by
/var/sadm/pkg/CSWfoo/obsolete.  In the fairly near future, pkgutil is
going to sprout an option to search and destroy on these packages.

The _devel package is empty of real content but provides a smooth
transition.

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


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 21:26:00 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:26:00 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_algorithm_checkdigits,
	pm_algorith(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=54ZAH6qffHuvvSSH6up+PP=KXhMCRJZvvjsnv@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103081814.p28IE4Pd019387@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Zb_3T+4_KEb4GZiHEJamVxF9c0nMxowj_ObF6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikDNcdcZDAL3_vwKtLznYLXgHrgM1cywJmN0EmM@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwqoh9_aH9EP86wTqoAYCGZoAEvXAeN9qG2_Zx@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=54ZAH6qffHuvvSSH6up+PP=KXhMCRJZvvjsnv@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299702300-sup-7675@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 09 15:06:22 -0500 2011:

> ERRRR... this sounds like a bad idea.

It's to make transition smoother.  It's easier on the user end.

> We're cleaning up catalog names, yet the same effort is making
> PKGnames  messier, in the sense that we are now making catalog name
> and PKGname be out of sync?

But only for the obsolete half of the renaming.  This end doesn't
matter as the package is a stub only.

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  9 21:31:35 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:31:35 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gd, libgd2, libgd_dev, libwmf,
	libwmf(...)
In-Reply-To: <1299702175-sup-3332@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103091619.p29GJpZr025872@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinjz0T8--N49zqTB9B3jss0WKFK=ApxHnp+6o+m@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299702175-sup-3332@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimMGM294BXA+5gaxsu8eMFZc0jOUmknLSmEjkBH@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 09 15:21:57 -0500 2011:
>
>> Errr.. this package seems to have been generated for no good reason
>> whatsoever. So I'm dropping it.
>> It would be nice if could eliminate this stuff from appearing in the future.
>> Or better yet, have something appear that says, "Hey! Rename the old
>> devel to the new dev please"
>
> Actually, this is the obsoletes mechanism at work. ?For users with the
> old (_devel) package installed, an update will pull this in, which in
> turn pulls in the new _dev package. ?The old is easily identified by
> /var/sadm/pkg/CSWfoo/obsolete. ?In the fairly near future, pkgutil is
> going to sprout an option to search and destroy on these packages.
>
> The _devel package is empty of real content but provides a smooth
> transition.

and do we have a writeup of all this somewheres?
It's usually a good idea to have documentation of major changes like
this stuff, BEFORE implementing it.
Not to mention, a discussion on the mailing list about it.

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  9 21:33:17 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:33:17 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_algorithm_checkdigits,
	pm_algorith(...)
In-Reply-To: <1299702300-sup-7675@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103081814.p28IE4Pd019387@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Zb_3T+4_KEb4GZiHEJamVxF9c0nMxowj_ObF6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikDNcdcZDAL3_vwKtLznYLXgHrgM1cywJmN0EmM@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwqoh9_aH9EP86wTqoAYCGZoAEvXAeN9qG2_Zx@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=54ZAH6qffHuvvSSH6up+PP=KXhMCRJZvvjsnv@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299702300-sup-7675@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTineQQAUeg1oRZoDhVxvjOUJ7RYs_Sb60f_RnDUb@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 09 15:06:22 -0500 2011:
>
>> ERRRR... this sounds like a bad idea.
>
> It's to make transition smoother. ?It's easier on the user end.
>
>> We're cleaning up catalog names, yet the same effort is making
>> PKGnames ?messier, in the sense that we are now making catalog name
>> and PKGname be out of sync?
>
> But only for the obsolete half of the renaming. ?This end doesn't
> matter as the package is a stub only.
>

Would one of you gents please give me a specific example of this?
Hopefuly, that will help me understand it better, and so not worry
about it.

From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 21:40:34 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 21:40:34 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gd, libgd2, libgd_dev, libwmf,
	libwmf(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinjz0T8--N49zqTB9B3jss0WKFK=ApxHnp+6o+m@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103091619.p29GJpZr025872@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinjz0T8--N49zqTB9B3jss0WKFK=ApxHnp+6o+m@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ED6A1E29-7D8E-4EA2-BC59-08B56370A39B@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 09.03.2011 um 21:21 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:19 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> This update adjusts the DEFAULT_FONTPATH from an invalid /usr/share/fonts/truetype to
>> /opt/csw/share/fonts/truetype
>> 
> 
> AND removes dependancy on CSWlibx11  (hurray!)
> 
> 
>> * wmf: revision upgrade
>>  - from: 2010.02.27
>>  -   to: 2011.02.22
>>  + libwmf-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ...
> 
> 
>>  + libwmf_devel-0.2.8.4,REV=2011.02.22-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> 
> Errr.. this package seems to have been generated for no good reason
> whatsoever. So I'm dropping it.
> 
> It would be nice if could eliminate this stuff from appearing in the future.
> Or better yet, have something appear that says, "Hey! Rename the old
> devel to the new dev please"
> 
> It needs to be "loud".  I almost missed this. Ugh.
> 
> The other stuff seems okay. i guess.

Please push also the devel package. It is marked as obsolete and makes
sure the new -dev package is pulled in. The current -devel is still
listed:
  http://www.opencsw.org/packages/CSWlibwmfdevel/

Best regards

  -- Dago



From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 21:44:41 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 21:44:41 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] Obsoleting packages
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimMGM294BXA+5gaxsu8eMFZc0jOUmknLSmEjkBH@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103091619.p29GJpZr025872@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinjz0T8--N49zqTB9B3jss0WKFK=ApxHnp+6o+m@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299702175-sup-3332@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTimMGM294BXA+5gaxsu8eMFZc0jOUmknLSmEjkBH@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <340FB746-74F2-4E77-8245-CD36ABE1EFA2@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 09.03.2011 um 21:31 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 09 15:21:57 -0500 2011:
>> 
>>> Errr.. this package seems to have been generated for no good reason
>>> whatsoever. So I'm dropping it.
>>> It would be nice if could eliminate this stuff from appearing in the future.
>>> Or better yet, have something appear that says, "Hey! Rename the old
>>> devel to the new dev please"
>> 
>> Actually, this is the obsoletes mechanism at work.  For users with the
>> old (_devel) package installed, an update will pull this in, which in
>> turn pulls in the new _dev package.  The old is easily identified by
>> /var/sadm/pkg/CSWfoo/obsolete.  In the fairly near future, pkgutil is
>> going to sprout an option to search and destroy on these packages.
>> 
>> The _devel package is empty of real content but provides a smooth
>> transition.
> 
> and do we have a writeup of all this somewheres?

A writeup to have an empty transitional package pulling in a new one?
We always handled renames this way in the past. The only new thing
is that we now have an idiom in GAR to make this as simple as possible:
  https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gar/wiki/ObsoletingPackages
And putting "i obsolete" with the obsoleting package names is rather
straight forward and done automatically.


Best regards

  -- Dago


From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 21:46:49 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 21:46:49 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_algorithm_checkdigits,
	pm_algorith(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTineQQAUeg1oRZoDhVxvjOUJ7RYs_Sb60f_RnDUb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103081814.p28IE4Pd019387@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Zb_3T+4_KEb4GZiHEJamVxF9c0nMxowj_ObF6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikDNcdcZDAL3_vwKtLznYLXgHrgM1cywJmN0EmM@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwqoh9_aH9EP86wTqoAYCGZoAEvXAeN9qG2_Zx@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=54ZAH6qffHuvvSSH6up+PP=KXhMCRJZvvjsnv@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299702300-sup-7675@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTineQQAUeg1oRZoDhVxvjOUJ7RYs_Sb60f_RnDUb@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikOCaxUANP2rnBu_cyASFx1W=a48AXRZMD70F76@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> Would one of you gents please give me a specific example of this?
> Hopefuly, that will help me understand it better, and so not worry
> about it.

I thought I did but here we go again:

Normally the CPAN modules have two or three words, example
Geo::IP::PurePerl, in this case it's no problem, here's the old names:

CSWpmgeoippureperl / pm_geoippureperl

They stay exactly the same but now have no content and depend on the new names:

CSWpm-geo-ip-pureperl / pm_geo_ip_pureperl

No clashes there. The problem is with one word CPAN modules like DBI. Old names:

CSWpmdbi / pm_dbi

New names here would be CSWpm-dbi / pm_dbi. Package name is ok since
we add a hyphen but catalogname will be the same, hence my creative
adding of a "2".

I remember we have used "_stub" before. We could also use "_obsolete".
Note that this doesn't affect the dependencies since the package names
are all intact, it's only very few catalognames that need to be
"fixed" and all of those old packages will go away soon anyway.

To me this is not important but if it's "very important" that these
2's become, e.g., pm_dbi_stub instead I could respin those, it's just
3-4 packages anyway.

/peter

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar  9 22:41:20 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:41:20 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_algorithm_checkdigits,
	pm_algorith(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikOCaxUANP2rnBu_cyASFx1W=a48AXRZMD70F76@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103081814.p28IE4Pd019387@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Zb_3T+4_KEb4GZiHEJamVxF9c0nMxowj_ObF6@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikDNcdcZDAL3_vwKtLznYLXgHrgM1cywJmN0EmM@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikwqoh9_aH9EP86wTqoAYCGZoAEvXAeN9qG2_Zx@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=54ZAH6qffHuvvSSH6up+PP=KXhMCRJZvvjsnv@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299702300-sup-7675@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTineQQAUeg1oRZoDhVxvjOUJ7RYs_Sb60f_RnDUb@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikOCaxUANP2rnBu_cyASFx1W=a48AXRZMD70F76@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi==PZ5vfQg3MMv2aCDYKsKAwYOOL=mQ_2cu+2Ny@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>> Would one of you gents please give me a specific example of this?
>> Hopefuly, that will help me understand it better, and so not worry
>> about it.
>
> I thought I did but here we go again:

Trouble is, it was ambiguous. it switches between examples.
and....


>
> Normally the CPAN modules have two or three words, example
> Geo::IP::PurePerl, in this case it's no problem, here's the old names:
>
> CSWpmgeoippureperl / pm_geoippureperl
>....
>
>
> No clashes there. The problem is with one word CPAN modules like DBI. Old names:
>
> CSWpmdbi / pm_dbi
>
> New names here would be CSWpm-dbi / pm_dbi. Package name is ok since
> we add a hyphen but catalogname will be the same, hence my creative
> adding of a "2".

and you didnt say WHICH package gets named with "2"
(you indicated a *set* of packages, but you didnt indicate specifically
 PKGx -> PKGx2.  I made the wrong guess as to which)



Looking at  "*dbi*" now..

ls *dbi*
pm_dbi-1.616,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_dbi-1.616,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_dbi2-1.616,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz


whereas previously in current, we have just pm_dbi


So , OLD package:

pm_dbi, CSWpmdbi

NEW packages


pm_dbi2, CSWpmdbi --  Depends on CSWpm-dbi. Transitional package to
pull in new one.
pm_dbi, CSWpm-dbi


>
> I remember we have used "_stub" before. We could also use "_obsolete".
> Note that this doesn't affect the dependencies since the package names
> are all intact, it's only very few catalognames that need to be
> "fixed" and all of those old packages will go away soon anyway.
>
> To me this is not important but if it's "very important" that these
> 2's become, e.g., pm_dbi_stub instead I could respin those, it's just
> 3-4 packages anyway.

I think that's a good idea. thanks for offering.

So looks to me like we are talking about:

 *json* *dbi* *ldap* *gssapi*

I've moved those aside, and I'm processing the others now

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Mar  9 23:18:32 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 23:18:32 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_dbi, pm_dbi_stub, pm_gssapi,
	pm_gs(...)
Message-ID: <201103092218.p29MIWkq012221@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Now the old catalognames are appended with "_stub".

* pm_json: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.21,REV=2010.06.11
  -   to: 2.50,REV=2011.03.09
  + pm_json-2.50,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_json_stub: new package
  + pm_json_stub-2.50,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_dbi: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.609,REV=2010.02.02
  -   to: 1.616,REV=2011.03.09
  + pm_dbi-1.616,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_dbi-1.616,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_dbi_stub: new package
  + pm_dbi_stub-1.616,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_ldap: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.39,REV=2009.04.07
  -   to: 0.4001,REV=2011.03.09
  + pm_ldap-0.4001,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_ldap_stub: new package
  + pm_ldap_stub-0.4001,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_gssapi: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.26,REV=2010.02.02
  -   to: 0.28,REV=2011.03.09
  + pm_gssapi-0.28,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_gssapi-0.28,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_gssapi_stub: new package
  + pm_gssapi_stub-0.28,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From markp at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 10 14:58:00 2011
From: markp at opencsw.org (Mark Phillips)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 14:58:00 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs facter
Message-ID: <201103101358.p2ADw0R2007204@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* facter: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.5.7,REV=2009.11.16
  -   to: 1.5.8,REV=2011.03.06
  + facter-1.5.8,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 10 15:38:03 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 15:38:03 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libhistory4, libhistory5,
	libhistory6(...)
Message-ID: <201103101438.p2AEc3YQ022969@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Version bump and split

* readline: minor version upgrade
  - from: 6.1,REV=2010.01.01
  -   to: 6.2,REV=2011.03.10
  + readline-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* lib: new package
  + libhistory5-5.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libhistory5-5.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libreadline5-5.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libreadline5-5.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* lib: new package
  + libhistory6-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libhistory6-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libreadline6-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libreadline6-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libreadline_dev-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libreadline_dev-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* lib: new package
  + libhistory4-4.3,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libhistory4-4.3,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libreadline4-4.3,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libreadline4-4.3,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 10 15:52:22 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 15:52:22 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpytalloc_util2, libtalloc2,
	libtal(...)
In-Reply-To: <201102031639.p13Gd2xX003851@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201102031639.p13Gd2xX003851@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <2F54D348-5F4C-4D83-A3CC-6DD0EF2CF127@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

ping?

Best regards

  -- Dago

Am 03.02.2011 um 17:39 schrieb Dagobert Michelsen:

> * talloc: new package
>  + libpytalloc_util2-2.0.5,REV=2011.02.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + libpytalloc_util2-2.0.5,REV=2011.02.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + libtalloc2-2.0.5,REV=2011.02.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + libtalloc2-2.0.5,REV=2011.02.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + libtalloc_dev-2.0.5,REV=2011.02.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + libtalloc_dev-2.0.5,REV=2011.02.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + py_talloc-2.0.5,REV=2011.02.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + py_talloc-2.0.5,REV=2011.02.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + py_talloc_dev-2.0.5,REV=2011.02.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>  + py_talloc_dev-2.0.5,REV=2011.02.02-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 bonivart at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 10 17:55:50 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:55:50 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_html_tagset, pm_htmltagset
Message-ID: <201103101655.p2AGto69026945@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Takeover from Dago. "Renamed". Fixes missing dep from pm_html_parser.

* pm_html_tagset: new package
  + pm_html_tagset-3.20,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_htmltagset: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.02.16
  -   to: 2011.03.10
  + pm_htmltagset-3.20,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Mar 10 18:09:51 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:09:51 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libpytalloc_util2, libtalloc2,
	libtal(...)
In-Reply-To: <2F54D348-5F4C-4D83-A3CC-6DD0EF2CF127@opencsw.org>
References: <201102031639.p13Gd2xX003851@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<2F54D348-5F4C-4D83-A3CC-6DD0EF2CF127@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=sJU+71-X7FsusGeP-H3VUeAeyp+bRGu7Y9=SR@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> ping?
>

Thanks for the reminder. batching.

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Mar 10 18:11:55 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:11:55 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs facter
In-Reply-To: <201103101358.p2ADw0R2007204@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103101358.p2ADw0R2007204@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikdA2A879A_DP_fFbDNR5Oqvs3E7-P_xFibFOca@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Mark Phillips <markp at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * facter: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 1.5.7,REV=2009.11.16
> ?- ? to: 1.5.8,REV=2011.03.06
> ?+ facter-1.5.8,REV=2011.03.06-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  Thu Mar 10 19:48:48 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:48:48 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libidn, libidn11, libidn_dev,
	libidn_utils
In-Reply-To: <201103091606.p29G6n3f009172@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103091606.p29G6n3f009172@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik_GJVaVmyi4cuGVnjrM7Xud=sia89E6Byf0qeb@mail.gmail.com>

Handling this now.

btw, I'm grabbing the "little" stuff before "bigger" stuff, in my
available freetime windows.


On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * libidn: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.19,REV=2010.05.22
> ?- ? to: 1.20,REV=2011.03.04
> ?+ libidn-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libidn: new package
> ?+ libidn11-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libidn11-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libidn_dev-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libidn_dev-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libidn_utils-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libidn_utils-1.20,REV=2011.03.04-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Mar 10 19:53:54 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:53:54 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libsox1, libsox_dev, libsox_devel,
	sox
In-Reply-To: <201103091618.p29GIDXf025521@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103091618.p29GIDXf025521@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTiktjaSjeR2k_Fqb7Rpff6AEtg=87JNi9Ld5v_aq@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * libsox_dev: new package
> ?+ libsox_dev-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsox_dev-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * sox: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 14.3.1,REV=2010.11.09
> ?- ? to: 14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02
> ?+ libsox1-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsox1-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libsox_devel-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ sox-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ sox-14.3.2,REV=2011.03.02-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Mar 10 20:06:20 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:06:20 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gd, libgd2, libgd_dev, libwmf,
	libwmf(...)
In-Reply-To: <ED6A1E29-7D8E-4EA2-BC59-08B56370A39B@opencsw.org>
References: <201103091619.p29GJpZr025872@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinjz0T8--N49zqTB9B3jss0WKFK=ApxHnp+6o+m@mail.gmail.com>
	<ED6A1E29-7D8E-4EA2-BC59-08B56370A39B@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimrgZm=J0CF8_xqDPvYk+uCpF=S4Vd8fbA5mgKD@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
>
> Please push also the devel package. It is marked as obsolete and makes
> sure the new -dev package is pulled in.

okay


> The current -devel is still
> listed:
> ?http://www.opencsw.org/packages/CSWlibwmfdevel/

arg. I think there's a bug in my rename routines somewhere :(
hard to see where though. it seems to do renaming in all of

packages table
depends table
mantis project name table

so i'm wondering what I'm missing

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Mar 10 20:32:48 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:32:48 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gd, libgd2, libgd_dev, libwmf,
	libwmf(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimrgZm=J0CF8_xqDPvYk+uCpF=S4Vd8fbA5mgKD@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103091619.p29GJpZr025872@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinjz0T8--N49zqTB9B3jss0WKFK=ApxHnp+6o+m@mail.gmail.com>
	<ED6A1E29-7D8E-4EA2-BC59-08B56370A39B@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimrgZm=J0CF8_xqDPvYk+uCpF=S4Vd8fbA5mgKD@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim=uYEoMwLuLbakRKYOY320zU8KYTXB1kx-dPiN@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>
>
>> The current -devel is still
>> listed:
>> ?http://www.opencsw.org/packages/CSWlibwmfdevel/
>
> arg. I think there's a bug in my rename routines somewhere :(

Correction:

I think my database access and rename routines are fine.. but William
isnt actually LOOKING at the database, for package display :(

I've sent him a separate private email about it.

From mark at probably.co.uk  Thu Mar 10 18:36:43 2011
From: mark at probably.co.uk (Mark Phillips)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:36:43 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs facter
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikdA2A879A_DP_fFbDNR5Oqvs3E7-P_xFibFOca@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103101358.p2ADw0R2007204@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikdA2A879A_DP_fFbDNR5Oqvs3E7-P_xFibFOca@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <425A0AF6-5575-4B16-BC8A-36877968BD79@probably.co.uk>

Magic, thanks Phil!

On 10 Mar 2011, at 17:11, Philip Brown wrote:

> batched
> 
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Mark Phillips <markp at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> * facter: patchlevel upgrade
>>  - from: 1.5.7,REV=2009.11.16
>>  -   to: 1.5.8,REV=2011.03.06
>>  + facter-1.5.8,REV=2011.03.06-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  Thu Mar 10 23:53:48 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 14:53:48 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_dbi, pm_dbi_stub, pm_gssapi,
	pm_gs(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103092218.p29MIWkq012221@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103092218.p29MIWkq012221@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=tPjxXh4dPhPp2rFbfGfKBZF1gURfc_hQM4n4i@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for the repackaging.
batching now.



On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Now the old catalognames are appended with "_stub".
>
> * pm_json: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 2.21,REV=2010.06.11
> ?- ? to: 2.50,REV=2011.03.09
> ?+ pm_json-2.50,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_json_stub: new package
> ?+ pm_json_stub-2.50,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_dbi: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.609,REV=2010.02.02
> ?- ? to: 1.616,REV=2011.03.09
> ?+ pm_dbi-1.616,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_dbi-1.616,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_dbi_stub: new package
> ?+ pm_dbi_stub-1.616,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_ldap: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.39,REV=2009.04.07
> ?- ? to: 0.4001,REV=2011.03.09
> ?+ pm_ldap-0.4001,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_ldap_stub: new package
> ?+ pm_ldap_stub-0.4001,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_gssapi: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.26,REV=2010.02.02
> ?- ? to: 0.28,REV=2011.03.09
> ?+ pm_gssapi-0.28,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_gssapi-0.28,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_gssapi_stub: new package
> ?+ pm_gssapi_stub-0.28,REV=2011.03.09-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  Thu Mar 10 23:56:45 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 14:56:45 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_html_tagset, pm_htmltagset
In-Reply-To: <201103101655.p2AGto69026945@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103101655.p2AGto69026945@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinM4QBCEiRRMF1uN+h3RzVDTJXAoUY4eqdBAFk3@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Takeover from Dago. "Renamed".

Thanks for the heads up.batched

Will get back to "The Big Batch" soon.

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 11 00:04:11 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 15:04:11 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libhistory4, libhistory5,
	libhistory6(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103101438.p2AEc3YQ022969@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103101438.p2AEc3YQ022969@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim32vqZ_U+jzs_c4WC=pnuaa7cACQ8FL_7KwEsc@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Version bump and split

I have some comments and questions about this split.


1. Is it really beneficial to split out separate "libhistory" and
"libreadline" here?
They will pretty much ALWAYS be upgraded together.
Splitting it makes it almost more likely to have a botched upgrade sometime


2. does it really make sense to have this package named this way, with
your current split?

> ?+ libreadline_dev-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libreadline_dev-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

Given the naming of the other "separate" libhistory and libreadline,
that almost implies it is only for "libreadline".. which may make
people looking at "libhistory" wonder where its dev files are.
If you're being strictly consistent, seems like you should Either make
a more generic
"readline_dev"

Or, make *both*
libreadline_dev
libhistory_dev


Contrariwise:
It may be simpler to just silently bundle in "libhistory.so.6" in with
the "libreadline6"  package ?
This also matches up with the naming conventions, since the "dev"
files for libhistory, are in
/opt/csw/include/readline/history.h

This implies they are a logical set and should not be split from each other.

thoughts?

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 11 02:08:15 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:08:15 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] update on perl batch
Message-ID: <AANLkTikDS5TP3NPyPx4+hD5z=-v4msma5Dv7pdxON-in@mail.gmail.com>

FYI: I've batched MOST of the big ol perl batch.

However, some still ran into collisions, so I apparently have to do
more by-hand sorting out of order, blah blah blah.

things still stuck in the pipe:

pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_geo_ip_pureperl-1.25,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_geoippureperl-1.25,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_net_idn_encode-1.100,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_netidnencode-1.100,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_test_nowarnings-1.02,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
pm_testnowarnings-1.02,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

Need a break.
will do them later or possibly tomorrow.

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 11 02:09:56 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:09:56 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gd, libgd2, libgd_dev, libwmf,
	libwmf(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim=uYEoMwLuLbakRKYOY320zU8KYTXB1kx-dPiN@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103091619.p29GJpZr025872@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinjz0T8--N49zqTB9B3jss0WKFK=ApxHnp+6o+m@mail.gmail.com>
	<ED6A1E29-7D8E-4EA2-BC59-08B56370A39B@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimrgZm=J0CF8_xqDPvYk+uCpF=S4Vd8fbA5mgKD@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTim=uYEoMwLuLbakRKYOY320zU8KYTXB1kx-dPiN@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin8xgVG9vTxe0WfCyrysR-PwbFHKiSi+GufLt1N@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>
>> arg. I think there's a bug in my rename routines somewhere :(
>
> Correction:
>
> I think my database access and rename routines are fine.. [...]

re-correction :)
found the bug in my code. hopefully that will settle that.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 11 02:26:23 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 02:26:23 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ggettext
Message-ID: <201103110126.p2B1QNZR012436@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This update adds additional dependencies on legacy libraries. 
Specifically, it addresses Mantis ID 4723.

-Ben

* ggettext: revision upgrade
  - from: 2011.02.12
  -   to: 2011.03.09
  + ggettext-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ggettext-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 11 14:36:17 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:36:17 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libmad, libmad0, libmad_dev
Message-ID: <201103111336.p2BDaHa5006738@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* libmad: new package
  + libmad0-0.15.1b,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmad0-0.15.1b,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmad_dev-0.15.1b,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libmad_dev-0.15.1b,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libmad: revision upgrade
  - from: 2009.10.29
  -   to: 2011.03.11
  + libmad-0.15.1b,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 11 19:30:03 2011
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 12:30:03 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
Message-ID: <201103111830.p2BIU3Ye015826@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* mercurial: revision upgrade
  - from: 2011.03.05
  -   to: 2011.03.11
  + mercurial-1.8.1,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + mercurial-1.8.1,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 11 19:45:57 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:45:57 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] update on perl batch
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikDS5TP3NPyPx4+hD5z=-v4msma5Dv7pdxON-in@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikDS5TP3NPyPx4+hD5z=-v4msma5Dv7pdxON-in@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinvomDoX---knwmLAoaQ_4v3N6Gw+nytQmuY-S9@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> things still stuck in the pipe:
>
> pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz


Problems with these.
conflict with CSWpmcompressrawzlib
[AND CSWpm-compress-raw-zlib? seems we need a little database purge :( ]


But ALSO, seems pointless since we also have

CSWperl 	/opt/csw/lib/perl/5.10.1/Compress/Raw/Zlib.pm

Maybe it should just be completely removed.
I'm guessing that the bzip package above, is the same way.

Good news is, all of the stuff below has been batched.




> pm_geo_ip_pureperl-1.25,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> pm_geoippureperl-1.25,REV=2011.03.06-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> pm_net_idn_encode-1.100,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> pm_netidnencode-1.100,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> pm_test_nowarnings-1.02,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> pm_testnowarnings-1.02,REV=2011.03.08-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 11 19:48:08 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:48:08 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ggettext
In-Reply-To: <201103110126.p2B1QNZR012436@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103110126.p2B1QNZR012436@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=Swoc=O+LW6vxbHDLRco2ZYN1YWmr+4hCssbY1@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This update adds additional dependencies on legacy libraries.
> Specifically, it addresses Mantis ID 4723.
>
> -Ben

wow. that's... sad.
Reverse dependencies ( 205)

owch.

anyways.. batched


>
> * ggettext: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2011.02.12
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.09
> ?+ ggettext-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ggettext-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.09-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 11 19:49:55 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:49:55 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs mercurial
In-Reply-To: <201103111830.p2BIU3Ye015826@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103111830.p2BIU3Ye015826@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin7TDbgkivFM_90YwGmcT+PGUQUG+NeEqw1RhmR@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:30 AM, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * mercurial: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2011.03.05
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.11
> ?+ mercurial-1.8.1,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ mercurial-1.8.1,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 11 19:52:26 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:52:26 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libmad, libmad0, libmad_dev
In-Reply-To: <201103111336.p2BDaHa5006738@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103111336.p2BDaHa5006738@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimujvgYUXuAv5+L0M_3yF-Er6AmEhVpv06B03Qo@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * libmad: new package
> ?+ libmad0-0.15.1b,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libmad0-0.15.1b,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libmad_dev-0.15.1b,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libmad_dev-0.15.1b,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libmad: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2009.10.29
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.11
> ?+ libmad-0.15.1b,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 11 20:15:41 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 20:15:41 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] update on perl batch
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinvomDoX---knwmLAoaQ_4v3N6Gw+nytQmuY-S9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikDS5TP3NPyPx4+hD5z=-v4msma5Dv7pdxON-in@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinvomDoX---knwmLAoaQ_4v3N6Gw+nytQmuY-S9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=+kiQ8bvRoAGsrOLUwT51k=Sc9x8AN5v83gdSm@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>> pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>> pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>> pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>
>
> Problems with these.
> conflict with CSWpmcompressrawzlib
> [AND CSWpm-compress-raw-zlib? seems we need a little database purge :( ]

How can it be a conflict when CSWpmcompressrawzlib is empty except for
a license?

/opt/csw/share/doc/pmcompressrawzlib/license

> But ALSO, seems pointless since we also have
>
> CSWperl ? ? ? ? /opt/csw/lib/perl/5.10.1/Compress/Raw/Zlib.pm

Not exactly pointless since that's version 2.020.

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 11 20:24:47 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 11:24:47 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] update on perl batch
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=+kiQ8bvRoAGsrOLUwT51k=Sc9x8AN5v83gdSm@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikDS5TP3NPyPx4+hD5z=-v4msma5Dv7pdxON-in@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinvomDoX---knwmLAoaQ_4v3N6Gw+nytQmuY-S9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=+kiQ8bvRoAGsrOLUwT51k=Sc9x8AN5v83gdSm@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin6F9cmJMhdnen=LwftFOWY7ArEUnpr1OhCu8or@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>>> pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>> pm_compress_raw_bzip2-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>> pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>> pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>>
>> Problems with these.
>> conflict with CSWpmcompressrawzlib
>> [AND CSWpm-compress-raw-zlib? seems we need a little database purge :( ]
>
> How can it be a conflict when CSWpmcompressrawzlib is empty except for
> a license?

What file are you looking at?

Ahhh.. you had a "new" one. which would have made things better..
But it was misnamed.
./pmcompressrawzlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz


so, I didnt pick it up for "the perl batch", since after all, it does
not have the proper perl prefix, so "couldnt" have been part of a perl
batch  :-D

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 11 20:38:15 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 20:38:15 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] update on perl batch
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin6F9cmJMhdnen=LwftFOWY7ArEUnpr1OhCu8or@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikDS5TP3NPyPx4+hD5z=-v4msma5Dv7pdxON-in@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinvomDoX---knwmLAoaQ_4v3N6Gw+nytQmuY-S9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=+kiQ8bvRoAGsrOLUwT51k=Sc9x8AN5v83gdSm@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin6F9cmJMhdnen=LwftFOWY7ArEUnpr1OhCu8or@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin=_0ooF8kphVHczCBUTdJD5zptR4Y0o=udc_tO@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> Ahhh.. you had a "new" one. which would have made things better..
> But it was misnamed.
> ./pmcompressrawzlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.07-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

You're right. I'll fix it and resubmit that pair.

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 11 20:52:34 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 20:52:34 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_compress_raw_zlib,
	pm_compressrawzlib
Message-ID: <201103111952.p2BJqY5j023740@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Fixed catalogname of obsoleted package.

* pm_compressrawzlib: minor version upgrade
  - from: 2.032,REV=2011.02.03
  -   to: 2.033,REV=2011.03.11
  + pm_compressrawzlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_compress_raw_zlib: new package
  + pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 11 22:08:09 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 13:08:09 -0800
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_compress_raw_zlib,
	pm_compressrawzlib
In-Reply-To: <201103111952.p2BJqY5j023740@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103111952.p2BJqY5j023740@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimMZyRnqP0kZfBvatwZsqSdy1usnrQ2dVhz2eU=@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you. and that clears out all the pending perl packages



On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Fixed catalogname of obsoleted package.
>
> * pm_compressrawzlib: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 2.032,REV=2011.02.03
> ?- ? to: 2.033,REV=2011.03.11
> ?+ pm_compressrawzlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_compress_raw_zlib: new package
> ?+ pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_compress_raw_zlib-2.033,REV=2011.03.11-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sun Mar 13 03:20:47 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 21:20:47 -0500
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] coreutils updates
Message-ID: <1299982784-sup-9547@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>


Hi Phil,

Please push the following updates to coreutils which contain a patch
for the gtouch core dump issue.  Mantis id 4671.

coreutils-8.10,p,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
coreutils-8.10,p,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz

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


From bonivart at opencsw.org  Sun Mar 13 12:18:15 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 12:18:15 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs bind, bind_chroot, bind_dev,
	bind_uti(...)
Message-ID: <201103131118.p2DBIFk9007815@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Updated versions and renamed dev-packages.

* dhcp: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 4.2.0P2,REV=2011.01.08
  -   to: 4.2.1,REV=2011.03.13
  + dhcp-4.2.1,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + dhcp-4.2.1,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* dhcp_dev: new package
  + dhcp_dev-4.2.1,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + dhcp_dev-4.2.1,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* bind: minor version upgrade
  - from: 9.7.3,REV=2011.02.23
  -   to: 9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13
  + bind-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + bind-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + bind_chroot-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + bind_utils-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + bind_utils-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libbind-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libbind-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* bind_dev: new package
  + bind_dev-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + bind_dev-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Sun Mar 13 18:55:31 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 10:55:31 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] coreutils updates
In-Reply-To: <1299982784-sup-9547@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <1299982784-sup-9547@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTin02YwdyEHtZ89ThHpH6gXeuHCipodhtC2Lzt5X@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Phil,
>
> Please push the following updates to coreutils which contain a patch
> for the gtouch core dump issue. ?Mantis id 4671.
>
> coreutils-8.10,p,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> coreutils-8.10,p,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> 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  Sun Mar 13 19:12:04 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 11:12:04 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs bind, bind_chroot, bind_dev,
	bind_uti(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103131118.p2DBIFk9007815@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103131118.p2DBIFk9007815@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimw=uLcUx5-sZxYtjD7-BLMUD0U71VvWLBdW2Ba@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 4:18 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Updated versions and renamed dev-packages.
>

Thanks for the notice.
batched

From markp at opencsw.org  Sun Mar 13 21:41:34 2011
From: markp at opencsw.org (Mark Phillips)
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 21:41:34 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs puppet, puppetmaster
Message-ID: <201103132041.p2DKfYoM009605@login.bo.opencsw.org>

I've had to do some oddities to make this work to CSW path standards. Puppet
enforces /var/lib/puppet and /etc/puppet as real paths, and not symlinks. This
means if we symlink to /etc/opt/csw/puppet and /var/opt/csw/puppet they'll
simply get trounced on as soon as the daemon(s) run up. It also completely
ignores our attempts to put our paths in as defaults. To this end, I've HAD
to create /etc/puppet - but in it contains an example puppet.conf designed to
make the daemon run in CSW paths. Also present in that directory is a
README.CSW pointing out how to use CSW paths.

Most large organisations I know of using Puppet choose to work in the default
[puppetlabs] path space though, to achieve cross platform similarities with
Linux.

I feel this cut of the packages sticks to our goals, but allows users to work
to their own, and the community defaults, with ease.

* puppet: major version upgrade
  - from: 0.25.4,REV=2010.02.17
  -   to: 2.6.6,REV=2011.03.13
  + puppet-2.6.6,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* puppetmaster: new package
  + puppetmaster-2.6.6,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 14 03:06:50 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 03:06:50 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gsed
Message-ID: <201103140206.p2E26o2h021427@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

This addresses an issue in the embedded gnulib.  Mantis id 4705.

Thanks
-Ben

* gsed: revision number added upgrade
  - from: 
  -   to: ('p',)
  + gsed-4.2.1,p,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gsed-4.2.1,p,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 14 05:32:25 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 21:32:25 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs puppet, puppetmaster
In-Reply-To: <201103132041.p2DKfYoM009605@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103132041.p2DKfYoM009605@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikNaGKwCzGy_fY7-pO0ceD0d+8Y6yJiE1pDdRKy@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Mark Phillips <markp at opencsw.org> wrote:
> I've had to do some oddities to make this work to CSW path standards. Puppet
> enforces /var/lib/puppet and /etc/puppet as real paths, and not symlinks. This
> means if we symlink to /etc/opt/csw/puppet and /var/opt/csw/puppet they'll
> simply get trounced on as soon as the daemon(s) run up. It also completely
> ignores our attempts to put our paths in as defaults. To this end, I've HAD
> to create /etc/puppet - but in it contains an example puppet.conf designed to
> make the daemon run in CSW paths. Also present in that directory is a
> README.CSW pointing out how to use CSW paths.


Hmm.. I got confused the first few times I read your email.
But what I *think* you are saying, is that you were forced to create
one somewhat non-standard path, /etc/puppet.. but other than that,
your default puppet configurations, make it follow our standard
layouts.
And you have put documentation in /etc/puppet to explain to people
coming from other systems, what the differences are.

Basically, that your "new" package, mostly follows the pre-existing
layout of our older puppet package.
Great!

Additionally, I have to say that a nice change you have made is to
split out the "puppetmaster" into a separate package.


(Although perhaps more of the stuff belongs in the "puppetmaster"
package and less in the "puppet" package?
 Your layout follows the debian style layout, but from my limited
understanding of puppet, I thought that most of the fancy modules,
etc. were only read by puppetmaster, and it synthesises a single,
customized "Now Do This!" set of instructions which the puppetd reads
from it. So that doesnt need all the other stuff?
 But okay, releasing as-is)

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 14 05:44:02 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 21:44:02 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] releases delayed a little
Message-ID: <AANLkTikq_UYeYqOC4pK=24kiRO2XQEvBotyQ0JyNGyKB@mail.gmail.com>

bender  (or my connection to it) is being very... VERY.. slow right now.

So I'm not going to process further packages until tomorrow, hoping
things will clear up by then.

From markp at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 14 09:58:23 2011
From: markp at opencsw.org (Mark Phillips)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 08:58:23 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs puppet, puppetmaster
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikNaGKwCzGy_fY7-pO0ceD0d+8Y6yJiE1pDdRKy@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103132041.p2DKfYoM009605@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikNaGKwCzGy_fY7-pO0ceD0d+8Y6yJiE1pDdRKy@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOC.4.64.1103140852200.18979@aucourant.360is.com>

On Sun, 13 Mar 2011, Philip Brown wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Mark Phillips <markp at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> I've had to do some oddities to make this work to CSW path standards. Puppet
>> enforces /var/lib/puppet and /etc/puppet as real paths, and not symlinks. This
>> means if we symlink to /etc/opt/csw/puppet and /var/opt/csw/puppet they'll
>> simply get trounced on as soon as the daemon(s) run up. It also completely
>> ignores our attempts to put our paths in as defaults. To this end, I've HAD
>> to create /etc/puppet - but in it contains an example puppet.conf designed to
>> make the daemon run in CSW paths. Also present in that directory is a
>> README.CSW pointing out how to use CSW paths.
>
>
> Hmm.. I got confused the first few times I read your email. But what I 
> *think* you are saying, is that you were forced to create one somewhat 
> non-standard path, /etc/puppet.. but other than that, your default 
> puppet configurations, make it follow our standard layouts. And you have 
> put documentation in /etc/puppet to explain to people coming from other 
> systems, what the differences are.

Hey Phil,

Yes, that's about it. It was Hobson's Choice really - I need to take up 
this forced behaviour with the puppetlabs folks - but at least everything 
installs into our paths.

> Basically, that your "new" package, mostly follows the pre-existing 
> layout of our older puppet package. Great!

Correct. The old package attempted to set the right paths but then had 
symlinks to make it behave correctly, although it didn't ;) Puppet 
immediately trounced the symlink and made it a path anyway.

> Additionally, I have to say that a nice change you have made is to
> split out the "puppetmaster" into a separate package.

I'd love to take credit for that, but it wasn't my idea - Dago did that. 
But yes, I agree with it; again for the big corporates running 
multiplatform estates it brings us inline with the [rapidly becoming] 
defacto, Linux.

> (Although perhaps more of the stuff belongs in the "puppetmaster"
> package and less in the "puppet" package?

Surprisingly not. Although your understanding is more or less correct, all 
the work is still done on the client end of things - so all the libraries 
containing the 'types' (things in Puppet that do stuff) are required 
locally, else it doesn't know that 'service:' types are handled by 
'service' on Linux, 'svcadm' on Solaris, and so on.

So really all we're doing with the puppet and puppetmaster packages is 
separating out the client and the server. Follows the Linux package too, 
which is split in the same way.

> But okay, releasing as-is)

That's brilliant news, thanks. There are a lot of folks asking for this 
much newer version, it'll go down well with the community that we've 
caught up!

Cheers,

--Mark

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 14 13:15:10 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 13:15:10 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs liblzma5, liblzma_dev, lzma, xz
Message-ID: <201103141215.p2ECFAYF024072@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* various packages: major version upgrade
  - from: 4.999.9beta,REV=2010.02.24
  -   to: 5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14
  + lzma-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + xz-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + xz-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* liblzma: new package
  + liblzma5-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + liblzma5-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + liblzma_dev-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + liblzma_dev-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 14 13:22:31 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 13:22:31 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs esound, libesd0, libesd_dev
Message-ID: <201103141222.p2ECMVpp001712@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* esound: revision upgrade
  - from: 2009.11.10
  -   to: 2011.03.14
  + esound-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + esound-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libesd: new package
  + libesd0-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libesd0-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libesd_dev-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libesd_dev-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 14 17:35:44 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:35:44 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gsed
In-Reply-To: <201103140206.p2E26o2h021427@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103140206.p2E26o2h021427@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim5cEbgnU6RmgNLomR03XO_u9iNZdQ7=LSd_Hnf@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> This addresses an issue in the embedded gnulib. ?Mantis id 4705.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * gsed: revision number added upgrade
> ?- from:
> ?- ? to: ('p',)
> ?+ gsed-4.2.1,p,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gsed-4.2.1,p,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 14 17:37:20 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:37:20 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs liblzma5, liblzma_dev, lzma, xz
In-Reply-To: <201103141215.p2ECFAYF024072@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103141215.p2ECFAYF024072@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=fYo51g36vz7iktiUdH1bro80sAS7LBv-=ttY8@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:15 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * various packages: major version upgrade
> ?- from: 4.999.9beta,REV=2010.02.24
> ?- ? to: 5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14
> ?+ lzma-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ xz-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ xz-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * liblzma: new package
> ?+ liblzma5-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ liblzma5-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ liblzma_dev-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ liblzma_dev-5.0.1,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 14 17:39:17 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:39:17 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs esound, libesd0, libesd_dev
In-Reply-To: <201103141222.p2ECMVpp001712@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103141222.p2ECMVpp001712@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=Zz6g4fzDcRf=uXG0p-G=dA-KdbD5nWnaCMRZ7@mail.gmail.com>

erm.


CSWlibesd0

depends on CSWlibaudiofile0

which doesnt exist yet?


On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * esound: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2009.11.10
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.14
> ?+ esound-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ esound-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libesd: new package
> ?+ libesd0-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libesd0-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libesd_dev-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libesd_dev-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 14 17:41:17 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 17:41:17 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs audiofile, libaudiofile0,
	libaudiofil(...)
Message-ID: <201103141641.p2EGfHOE001091@login.bo.opencsw.org>

It does exist now... Sorrry.

* audiofile: revision upgrade
  - from: 2010.03.31
  -   to: 2011.03.13
  + audiofile-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* libaudiofile: new package
  + libaudiofile0-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libaudiofile0-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libaudiofile_dev-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libaudiofile_dev-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libaudiofile_utils-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libaudiofile_utils-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 14 17:50:46 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:50:46 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs audiofile, libaudiofile0,
	libaudiofil(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103141641.p2EGfHOE001091@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103141641.p2EGfHOE001091@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=8Nbph-zioD==hNgkhGKtRbRfdyJTUWznirR+b@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> It does exist now... Sorrry.
>
> * audiofile: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2010.03.31
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.13
> ?+ audiofile-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libaudiofile: new package
> ?+ libaudiofile0-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libaudiofile0-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libaudiofile_dev-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libaudiofile_dev-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libaudiofile_utils-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libaudiofile_utils-0.2.7,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 14 17:51:04 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:51:04 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs esound, libesd0, libesd_dev
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=Zz6g4fzDcRf=uXG0p-G=dA-KdbD5nWnaCMRZ7@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103141222.p2ECMVpp001712@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=Zz6g4fzDcRf=uXG0p-G=dA-KdbD5nWnaCMRZ7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim78jgKQ+ygsKCERrHyr9_0htEKxmEvxfH+V+FL@mail.gmail.com>

now batched

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> erm.
>
>
> CSWlibesd0
>
> depends on CSWlibaudiofile0
>
> which doesnt exist yet?
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> * esound: revision upgrade
>> ?- from: 2009.11.10
>> ?- ? to: 2011.03.14
>> ?+ esound-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ esound-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> * libesd: new package
>> ?+ libesd0-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ libesd0-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ libesd_dev-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ libesd_dev-0.2.41,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> --
>> Generated by submitpkg
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>>
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 14 18:27:36 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:27:36 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libhistory4, libhistory5,
	libhistory6(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim32vqZ_U+jzs_c4WC=pnuaa7cACQ8FL_7KwEsc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103101438.p2AEc3YQ022969@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim32vqZ_U+jzs_c4WC=pnuaa7cACQ8FL_7KwEsc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F3D6D4A9-0ED3-4532-B242-8986783E36C1@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 11.03.2011 um 00:04 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Version bump and split
> 
> I have some comments and questions about this split.
> 
> 1. Is it really beneficial to split out separate "libhistory" and
> "libreadline" here?
> They will pretty much ALWAYS be upgraded together.

Right.

> Splitting it makes it almost more likely to have a botched upgrade sometime
> 
> 2. does it really make sense to have this package named this way, with
> your current split?

There are however lots of uses of libreadline.so but only very few
that use libhistory.so

>>  + libreadline_dev-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + libreadline_dev-6.2,REV=2011.03.10-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> 
> Given the naming of the other "separate" libhistory and libreadline,
> that almost implies it is only for "libreadline".. which may make
> people looking at "libhistory" wonder where its dev files are.
> If you're being strictly consistent, seems like you should Either make
> a more generic
> "readline_dev"
> 
> Or, make *both*
> libreadline_dev
> libhistory_dev

This is not good. Usually we have just one -dev package regardless of the
number of libraries involved where the name of the -dev package is
derived from the upstream name and usually is lent from one of the libraries.
This is also the case here. As CSWlibreadline-dev is an R-dep of libhistory
it should be fairly easy to find out :-)

> Contrariwise:
> It may be simpler to just silently bundle in "libhistory.so.6" in with
> the "libreadline6"  package ?
> This also matches up with the naming conventions, since the "dev"
> files for libhistory, are in
> /opt/csw/include/readline/history.h
> 
> This implies they are a logical set and should not be split from each other.
> 
> thoughts?

Splitting allows retiriing libraries one at a time. And indeed: libhistory.so.4
is not needed anywhere, but libreadline.so.4 is, so you could skip CSWlibhistory4
for release.


Best regards

  -- Dago



From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 14 18:51:26 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 10:51:26 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libhistory4, libhistory5,
	libhistory6(...)
In-Reply-To: <F3D6D4A9-0ED3-4532-B242-8986783E36C1@opencsw.org>
References: <201103101438.p2AEc3YQ022969@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim32vqZ_U+jzs_c4WC=pnuaa7cACQ8FL_7KwEsc@mail.gmail.com>
	<F3D6D4A9-0ED3-4532-B242-8986783E36C1@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinT7sCZumzLRvx3LnDhFSHo8f-Xnbd-vCMQL0Zr@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> Am 11.03.2011 um 00:04 schrieb Philip Brown:
>
>> Given the naming of the other "separate" libhistory and libreadline,
>> that almost implies it is only for "libreadline".. which may make
>> people looking at "libhistory" wonder where its dev files are.
>> If you're being strictly consistent, seems like you should Either make
>> a more generic
>> "readline_dev"
>>
>> Or, make *both*
>> libreadline_dev
>> libhistory_dev
>
> This is not good. Usually we have just one -dev package regardless of the
> number of libraries involved where the name of the -dev package is
> derived from the upstream name
>and usually is lent from one of the libraries.

If there is "only one" library (which is most commonly the case), then
it can make sense to have the _dev name follow from "the library".

but I dont think this is so good  in the case where there are multiple
libraries belonging to "one" package.

I think that, if there is only going to be one _dev package that
covers all the libraries for a software group, then it makes the most
sense to name the _dev package, after the core name.

And, interestingly, although I havent made a study of all the
multi-lib splits that we have
(I suspect we have very few...)
 in at least one case, you yourself have followed this methodology :)

libpcre0-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
libpcrecpp0-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
libpcreposix0-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
pcre-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
pcre_devel-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz


Can we standardize on this style for naming the dev package, in the
cases of multi-library, single-dev collections?





> Splitting allows retiriing libraries one at a time. And indeed: libhistory.so.4
> is not needed anywhere, but libreadline.so.4 is, so you could skip CSWlibhistory4
> for release.

well thats good to know, thanks :)

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 14 19:04:50 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:04:50 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libhistory4, libhistory5,
	libhistory6(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinT7sCZumzLRvx3LnDhFSHo8f-Xnbd-vCMQL0Zr@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103101438.p2AEc3YQ022969@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim32vqZ_U+jzs_c4WC=pnuaa7cACQ8FL_7KwEsc@mail.gmail.com>
	<F3D6D4A9-0ED3-4532-B242-8986783E36C1@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinT7sCZumzLRvx3LnDhFSHo8f-Xnbd-vCMQL0Zr@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1300125867-sup-7462@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Mar 14 13:51:26 -0400 2011:

> >> If you're being strictly consistent, seems like you should Either make
> >> a more generic
> >> "readline_dev"

This is what I'd reach for first too, fwiw.

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


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 14 19:05:54 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:05:54 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libhistory4, libhistory5,
	libhistory6(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinT7sCZumzLRvx3LnDhFSHo8f-Xnbd-vCMQL0Zr@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103101438.p2AEc3YQ022969@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim32vqZ_U+jzs_c4WC=pnuaa7cACQ8FL_7KwEsc@mail.gmail.com>
	<F3D6D4A9-0ED3-4532-B242-8986783E36C1@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinT7sCZumzLRvx3LnDhFSHo8f-Xnbd-vCMQL0Zr@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1300125906-sup-3204@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Mar 14 13:51:26 -0400 2011:

> Can we standardize on this style for naming the dev package, in the
> cases of multi-library, single-dev collections?

This makes sense to me.

Thanks
-Ben

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


From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 14 19:09:01 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 19:09:01 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libhistory4, libhistory5,
	libhistory6(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinT7sCZumzLRvx3LnDhFSHo8f-Xnbd-vCMQL0Zr@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103101438.p2AEc3YQ022969@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim32vqZ_U+jzs_c4WC=pnuaa7cACQ8FL_7KwEsc@mail.gmail.com>
	<F3D6D4A9-0ED3-4532-B242-8986783E36C1@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinT7sCZumzLRvx3LnDhFSHo8f-Xnbd-vCMQL0Zr@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <351D3DED-3236-402D-8C4E-6DB042526D87@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 14.03.2011 um 18:51 schrieb Philip Brown:
> If there is "only one" library (which is most commonly the case), then
> it can make sense to have the _dev name follow from "the library".
> 
> but I dont think this is so good  in the case where there are multiple
> libraries belonging to "one" package.
> 
> I think that, if there is only going to be one _dev package that
> covers all the libraries for a software group, then it makes the most
> sense to name the _dev package, after the core name.
> 
> And, interestingly, although I havent made a study of all the
> multi-lib splits that we have
> (I suspect we have very few...)
> in at least one case, you yourself have followed this methodology :)
> 
> libpcre0-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> libpcrecpp0-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> libpcreposix0-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> pcre-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> pcre_devel-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> 
> Can we standardize on this style for naming the dev package, in the
> cases of multi-library, single-dev collections?

What I find problematic here is that we have CSWlibfoo-utils for
binaries related to libfoo. I find it consistent to have a
similar CSWlibfoo-dev then.

Or as alternative use CSWfoo for binaries, CSWlibfoo0 for library
and CSWfoo-dev for development files. However, I like the consistent
CSWlibfoo* prefix better. And we even have it in this example where
libpcre* is the common prefix and CSWlibpcre-dev is the development
package for all of these.


Best regards

  -- Dago


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 14 19:18:16 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:18:16 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libhistory4, libhistory5,
	libhistory6(...)
In-Reply-To: <351D3DED-3236-402D-8C4E-6DB042526D87@opencsw.org>
References: <201103101438.p2AEc3YQ022969@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim32vqZ_U+jzs_c4WC=pnuaa7cACQ8FL_7KwEsc@mail.gmail.com>
	<F3D6D4A9-0ED3-4532-B242-8986783E36C1@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinT7sCZumzLRvx3LnDhFSHo8f-Xnbd-vCMQL0Zr@mail.gmail.com>
	<351D3DED-3236-402D-8C4E-6DB042526D87@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <1300126197-sup-4758@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Dagobert Michelsen's message of Mon Mar 14 14:09:01 -0400 2011:

Hi Dago,

> What I find problematic here is that we have CSWlibfoo-utils for
> binaries related to libfoo. I find it consistent to have a similar
> CSWlibfoo-dev then.

As someone going to install this stuff though, I think I'd still be
looking for CSWfoo-utils (at least in the case of readline, anyway).
I'm looking at a debian box though and I see the same split you're
describing for -dev...I don't see the -utils package at all though.

(Also, they do lump libhistory and libreadline together for each
version.  I still think independent is better on that front
personally.)

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar 15 00:01:25 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 16:01:25 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libhistory4, libhistory5,
	libhistory6(...)
In-Reply-To: <351D3DED-3236-402D-8C4E-6DB042526D87@opencsw.org>
References: <201103101438.p2AEc3YQ022969@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTim32vqZ_U+jzs_c4WC=pnuaa7cACQ8FL_7KwEsc@mail.gmail.com>
	<F3D6D4A9-0ED3-4532-B242-8986783E36C1@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinT7sCZumzLRvx3LnDhFSHo8f-Xnbd-vCMQL0Zr@mail.gmail.com>
	<351D3DED-3236-402D-8C4E-6DB042526D87@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinFLvv6q-wOuMG1=tyvx1Dpok+qemz8z+k_HRZ3@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,

*wave*


> Am 14.03.2011 um 18:51 schrieb Philip Brown:
>...
>> libpcre0-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> libpcrecpp0-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> libpcreposix0-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> pcre-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> pcre_devel-8.12,REV=2011.01.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> Can we standardize on this style for naming the dev package, in the
>> cases of multi-library, single-dev collections?
>
> What I find problematic here is that we have CSWlibfoo-utils for
> binaries related to libfoo. I find it consistent to have a
> similar CSWlibfoo-dev then.

I'm not sure where you're getting this example from. there is no
_utils, for either pcre, or your newer readline package.
If you are referring to your recent "libaudiofile", and
"libaudiofile_utils", I would say that that is not in the case set I
described; it is not a "multi-library" set.

I will also point out that just recently, we had

bind-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
bind_chroot-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
bind_dev-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
bind_utils-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
libbind-9.8.0,REV=2011.03.13-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz

which is another pre-existing example conforming to the style I am
proposing to be official.



> Or as alternative use CSWfoo for binaries, CSWlibfoo0 for library
> and CSWfoo-dev for development files. However, I like the consistent
> CSWlibfoo* prefix better. And we even have it in this example where
> libpcre* is the common prefix and CSWlibpcre-dev is the development
> package for all of these.
>

Errr...? looking at existing released packages, we do not have
CSWlibpcre-dev(el).
We have
NAME=pcre_devel
PKG=CSWpcre-devel

From rupert at opencsw.org  Tue Mar 15 00:09:40 2011
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:09:40 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_modwsgi
Message-ID: <201103142309.p2EN9esU013171@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* ap2_modwsgi: minor version upgrade
  - from: 3.2,REV=2010.04.01
  -   to: 3.3,REV=2011.03.14
  + ap2_modwsgi-3.3,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ap2_modwsgi-3.3,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Mar 16 11:06:52 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:06:52 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_devel_nytprof, pm_json_any
Message-ID: <201103161006.p2GA6qI5012087@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* pm_json_any: new package
  + pm_json_any-1.25,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_devel_nytprof: new package
  + pm_devel_nytprof-4.06,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_devel_nytprof-4.06,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Mar 17 03:12:06 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:12:06 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_modwsgi
In-Reply-To: <201103142309.p2EN9esU013171@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103142309.p2EN9esU013171@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimo_f5K_n1YAQ4Vt00G1a1bbonfh-JGVLLnOBWo@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 4:09 PM, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * ap2_modwsgi: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 3.2,REV=2010.04.01
> ?- ? to: 3.3,REV=2011.03.14
> ?+ ap2_modwsgi-3.3,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ap2_modwsgi-3.3,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Mar 17 03:16:32 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:16:32 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_devel_nytprof, pm_json_any
In-Reply-To: <201103161006.p2GA6qI5012087@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103161006.p2GA6qI5012087@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim1BMEm4fVa8D3V6s0=NM3PMENBkhgttv2MDNC7@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 3:06 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * pm_json_any: new package
> ?+ pm_json_any-1.25,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_devel_nytprof: new package
> ?+ pm_devel_nytprof-4.06,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_devel_nytprof-4.06,REV=2011.03.14-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 01:31:27 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 01:31:27 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
Message-ID: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This batch represents the target for the dublin ruby packages.  It moves to
a versioned package name while at the same time standardizing the package
names according to the newer conventions. 

Thanks
-Ben

* ruby: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04
  -   to: 1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16
  + ruby-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubydev-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubydoc-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubymode-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubytk-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* ruby: new package
  + libruby18_1-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libruby18_1-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_dev-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_dev-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_doc-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_gcc4-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_gcc4-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_mode-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_mode_el-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_tk-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_tk-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubymodeel-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 07:29:43 2011
From: rupert at opencsw.org (THURNER Rupert)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 01:29:43 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
Message-ID: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>

emergency fix, http://subversion.apache.org/security/CVE-2011-0715-advisory.txt.

* svn: new package
  + pmsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + svn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz

* various packages: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.6.15,REV=2011.01.16
  -   to: 1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17
  + ap2_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + javasvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pythonsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rbsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + subversion_contrib-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + subversion_tools-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* svn: new package
  + pmsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + svn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + svn_devel-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* various packages: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.6.15,REV=2011.01.16
  -   to: 1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16
  + ap2_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + javasvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pythonsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rbsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + subversion_devel-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From rupert at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 07:39:56 2011
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 07:39:56 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinY0ZZn1+XznenMM0XDn+vmBwhPDDi8XGE26BJs@mail.gmail.com>

how could i convince gar to get packages with the same date stamp?
e.g. to spin sparc today and x86 tomorrow could / should give an
acceptable result, same date in the name. the same would be valid for
build times which surpass midnight.

rupert.

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 07:29, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> emergency fix, http://subversion.apache.org/security/CVE-2011-0715-advisory.txt.
>
> * svn: new package
> ?+ pmsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ svn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * various packages: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 1.6.15,REV=2011.01.16
> ?- ? to: 1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17
> ?+ ap2_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ javasvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pythonsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rbsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ subversion_contrib-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ subversion_tools-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * svn: new package
> ?+ pmsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ svn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ svn_devel-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * various packages: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 1.6.15,REV=2011.01.16
> ?- ? to: 1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16
> ?+ ap2_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ javasvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pythonsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rbsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ subversion_devel-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 09:59:45 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 09:59:45 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinY0ZZn1+XznenMM0XDn+vmBwhPDDi8XGE26BJs@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinY0ZZn1+XznenMM0XDn+vmBwhPDDi8XGE26BJs@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinxcFUpC9-tW0e8iEF1MovT7Hz9yDMQGwOdZE5P@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 7:39 AM, rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> how could i convince gar to get packages with the same date stamp?
> e.g. to spin sparc today and x86 tomorrow could / should give an
> acceptable result, same date in the name. the same would be valid for
> build times which surpass midnight.

I've also been caught by that. Maybe GAR could pick up the date when
the build starts instead of on demand?

/peter

From skayser at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 09:43:17 2011
From: skayser at opencsw.org (Sebastian Kayser)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 09:43:17 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinxcFUpC9-tW0e8iEF1MovT7Hz9yDMQGwOdZE5P@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinY0ZZn1+XznenMM0XDn+vmBwhPDDi8XGE26BJs@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinxcFUpC9-tW0e8iEF1MovT7Hz9yDMQGwOdZE5P@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110318084317.GR24305@sebastiankayser.de>

* Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 7:39 AM, rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> > how could i convince gar to get packages with the same date stamp?
> > e.g. to spin sparc today and x86 tomorrow could / should give an
> > acceptable result, same date in the name. the same would be valid for
> > build times which surpass midnight.
> 
> I've also been caught by that. Maybe GAR could pick up the date when
> the build starts instead of on demand?

+1

Sebastian

From markp at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 16:09:36 2011
From: markp at opencsw.org (Mark Phillips)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:09:36 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ruby_augeas
Message-ID: <201103181509.p2IF9akU018666@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Ruby bindings for Augeas - new package; next release of Puppet will have this
as a dependancy. Tested on testing9s (see test.pp in root's home) and on an x86
machine of my own.

* ruby_augeas: new package
  + ruby_augeas-0.3.0,REV=2011.03.18-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby_augeas-0.3.0,REV=2011.03.18-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 16:12:40 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:12:40 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ruby_augeas
In-Reply-To: <201103181509.p2IF9akU018666@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103181509.p2IF9akU018666@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <1300461121-sup-2527@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Mark Phillips's message of Fri Mar 18 11:09:36 -0400 2011:

> Ruby bindings for Augeas - new package; next release of Puppet will
> have this as a dependancy. Tested on testing9s (see test.pp in
> root's home) and on an x86 machine of my own.

This should likely be delayed until the updated ruby/dublin packages
are out.  Then it can depend on the CSWlibruby18-1 instead of the soon
deprecated CSWlibruby1, etc...

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


From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 16:30:37 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:30:37 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinY0ZZn1+XznenMM0XDn+vmBwhPDDi8XGE26BJs@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinY0ZZn1+XznenMM0XDn+vmBwhPDDi8XGE26BJs@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <256A1F7C-ABA4-47C0-B88C-8965DA1B92C7@opencsw.org>

Hi Rupert,

Am 18.03.2011 um 07:39 schrieb rupert THURNER:
> how could i convince gar to get packages with the same date stamp?
> e.g. to spin sparc today and x86 tomorrow could / should give an
> acceptable result, same date in the name. the same would be valid for
> build times which surpass midnight.

The simplest thing is to do a
  gmake plataforms-repackage
which will just redo the packaging with the current date. But I will
have a look.


Best regards

  -- Dago

> 
> rupert.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 07:29, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> emergency fix, http://subversion.apache.org/security/CVE-2011-0715-advisory.txt.
>> 
>> * svn: new package
>>  + pmsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + svn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> 
>> * various packages: patchlevel upgrade
>>  - from: 1.6.15,REV=2011.01.16
>>  -   to: 1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17
>>  + ap2_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + javasvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + pythonsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + rbsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + subversion_contrib-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + subversion_tools-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> 
>> * svn: new package
>>  + pmsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + svn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + svn_devel-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> 
>> * various packages: patchlevel upgrade
>>  - from: 1.6.15,REV=2011.01.16
>>  -   to: 1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16
>>  + ap2_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + javasvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + pm_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + pm_subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + pythonsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + rbsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + subversion_devel-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> 
>> --
>> Generated by submitpkg
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkgsubmissions mailing list
>> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
>> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions


From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 16:40:42 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:40:42 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librrd4, librrd_th4, pm_rrdtool,
	py_r(...)
Message-ID: <201103181540.p2IFefuP029228@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Revision bump, package split, after user request and check.

* rrd: new package
  + librrd4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + librrd4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + librrd_th4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + librrd_th4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rb_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rb_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rrd-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rrdtool_dev-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rrdtool_dev-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* rrdtool: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.07.05
  -   to: 1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16
  + rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From ihsan at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 17:57:31 2011
From: ihsan at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?B?xLBoc2FuwqBEb8SfYW4=?=)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:57:31 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tomcat6
In-Reply-To: <201102191503.p1JF3I7o000907@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201102191503.p1JF3I7o000907@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <4D838EFB.4050901@opencsw.org>

Why is this package has still not been released?



Ihsan

Am 19.02.2011 16:03, schrieb Ihsan Dogan:
> This takeover has been already discussed with William Bonnet.
> 
> * tomcat6: patchlevel upgrade
>   - from: 6.0.18,REV=2008.11.29
>   -   to: 6.0.32,REV=2011.02.19
>   + tomcat6-6.0.32,REV=2011.02.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> 

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

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 18 19:03:03 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:03:03 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tomcat6
In-Reply-To: <4D838EFB.4050901@opencsw.org>
References: <201102191503.p1JF3I7o000907@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<4D838EFB.4050901@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=z961J2ijgBmCBFrYPDhLRE-RXutecK88A+kV5@mail.gmail.com>

2011/3/18 ?hsan?Do?an <ihsan at opencsw.org>:
> Why is this package has still not been released?
>

Didnt I send an email out before? reguarding wierd file in package?
Here it is again:


1 f none /var/opt/csw/tomcat6/temp/safeToDelete.tmp 0644 tomcat tomcat
0 0 1298127565

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 18 19:08:27 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:08:27 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librrd4, librrd_th4, pm_rrdtool,
	py_r(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103181540.p2IFefuP029228@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103181540.p2IFefuP029228@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik_P7+xWYVo1qgb_q1dNS8L+BYRexh09gwyq61y@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Revision bump, package split, after user request and check.
>
> * rrd: new package
> ?+ librrd4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ librrd4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ librrd_th4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ librrd_th4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ py_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ py_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rb_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rb_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz


> ?+ rrd-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

This would seem to be a transition package, for rrdtool/CSWrrd ->rrd/CSWrrd

As done with prior perl package recently... would you please rename
this to have catalog name of "rrd_stub"?

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 18 19:09:41 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:09:41 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ruby_augeas
In-Reply-To: <1300461121-sup-2527@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103181509.p2IF9akU018666@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1300461121-sup-2527@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinA78SFxWZEkGZWSraf1YLHPgKVn=rtYi1tDZzW@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Mark Phillips's message of Fri Mar 18 11:09:36 -0400 2011:
>
>> Ruby bindings for Augeas - new package; next release of Puppet will
>> have this as a dependancy. Tested on testing9s (see test.pp in
>> root's home) and on an x86 machine of my own.
>
> This should likely be delayed until the updated ruby/dublin packages
> are out. ?Then it can depend on the CSWlibruby18-1 instead of the soon
> deprecated CSWlibruby1, etc...
>

it used to be that puppet was not so happy with ruby18.

Has this now changed?

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 18 19:14:43 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:14:43 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikruQNSst0xiMh9N_678RJDfaUUAPmO3N7tdwGC@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:29 PM, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> emergency fix, http://subversion.apache.org/security/CVE-2011-0715-advisory.txt.
>


Errr.. emergency security fixes, should have *zero* layout changes.
Otherwise, they often have issues at release evaluation. Such as now.


> * svn: new package
> ?+ pmsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ svn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> ?+ subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz


Why do we now have both a "svn" package, and a "subversion" package?
and with the exact same name writeup, no less?

NAME=svn - Version control rethought

NAME=subversion - Version control rethought

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 18 19:17:47 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:17:47 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ruby_augeas
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinA78SFxWZEkGZWSraf1YLHPgKVn=rtYi1tDZzW@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103181509.p2IF9akU018666@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1300461121-sup-2527@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinA78SFxWZEkGZWSraf1YLHPgKVn=rtYi1tDZzW@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=mExOgw1R7NLRm=qO1=JGuBrtA9HDEyqPnLhwM@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Excerpts from Mark Phillips's message of Fri Mar 18 11:09:36 -0400 2011:
>>
>>> Ruby bindings for Augeas - new package; next release of Puppet will
>>> have this as a dependancy. Tested on testing9s (see test.pp in
>>> root's home) and on an x86 machine of my own.
>>
>> This should likely be delayed until the updated ruby/dublin packages
>> are out. ?Then it can depend on the CSWlibruby18-1 instead of the soon
>> deprecated CSWlibruby1, etc...
>>
>
> it used to be that puppet was not so happy with ruby18.
>
> Has this now changed?
>

oh, oops.. I see that we only ship ruby1.8 already.  I withdraw my question :-}

(I guess I was thinking of ruby 1.9. sorry.)

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 19:18:49 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:18:49 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ruby_augeas
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinA78SFxWZEkGZWSraf1YLHPgKVn=rtYi1tDZzW@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103181509.p2IF9akU018666@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1300461121-sup-2527@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinA78SFxWZEkGZWSraf1YLHPgKVn=rtYi1tDZzW@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1300472292-sup-3697@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Fri Mar 18 14:09:41 -0400 2011:

> it used to be that puppet was not so happy with ruby18.

Really?  When?  It's been running solely on 1.8 for a long time now as
far as I'm aware.

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


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 19:27:28 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:27:28 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ruby_augeas
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=mExOgw1R7NLRm=qO1=JGuBrtA9HDEyqPnLhwM@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103181509.p2IF9akU018666@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1300461121-sup-2527@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTinA78SFxWZEkGZWSraf1YLHPgKVn=rtYi1tDZzW@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=mExOgw1R7NLRm=qO1=JGuBrtA9HDEyqPnLhwM@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1300472820-sup-8850@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Fri Mar 18 14:17:47 -0400 2011:

> oh, oops.. I see that we only ship ruby1.8 already.  I withdraw my
> question :-}

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 18 20:35:14 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:35:14 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=CEeTgAp91gX4nMn7+rNY6EgRq7AjHAHMqnfmx@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Ben,
Overall, packages look good. But there's an outstanding issue
reguarding gcc support.
Its unfortunate you did not choose to reply further to the thread on
the maintainers list, and chose instead to just push the package. So
now I have to address it here :(
Feel free to redirect to maintainers if you wish.

(up front note: If you would like "the rest of the packages" pushed
through, and we just hold
ruby18_gcc4* for discussion purposes, I'm willing to do that)

So... looking at how you have implemented ruby18_gcc4, it seems that
all it does, is run alternatives on a *single* config file.
And the diffs between the two alternatives, are just 11 lines.

It is pretty short work, to make that config file auto-configuring,
since the file is itself ruby code.
In fact, I attach a diff for exactly how to do it, for the sparc
version. Took me about 5 mins.
(disclaimer: I'm no ruby programer, but seems like it should work)
If it doesnt come through mailing list, a copy is in my experimental
dir as rbconfig.patch.sparc
Converting it for x86 use should be trivial.

So now, there are no more barriers of "how to autoswitch", or "how
much work is it", but
"should we do it or not?"

Some consideration points:


* Doing it via alternatives, means more work for the site admin, and
less choice for the end user.  The admin MUST choose one or the other.
and then the end user is stuck with their choice. (or, perhaps, they
then have to file an official "change request",and justification, red
tape, blah blah yuck)
In large site installations, where some users may use Sun CC, and
others use gcc, this is fatal; either for one set of users, or for
that site using our packages. Most likely in toto; they would reject
ALL our packages, if we are not large-site considerate.

* So, the contrapositive of the above is worth mentioning: If we
autoswitch on $CC, then it allows large sites to make both camps of
users happy... and the site admins do not have to lift a finger to
make it happen. More people happy, and less work for them to do so.
Sounds like win/win ?

* If we autoselect on CC... site admins desiring to globally default
to gcc, could still theoretically globally set "CC=gcc" in
environments, which would have other benefits to their site as well.

* The existing configs, make two bad presumptions: They presume sun cc
is definitely in /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc, and that gcc is in
/opt/csw/gcc4

For the record, both assumptions are wrong, in my $DayJob
I've tried to improve rbconfig.rb to be more accomodating of that, in
addition to the auto-selecting patch.


Please let me know what you think about it, given the above discussion points.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rbconfig.patch.sparc
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 4808 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/pkgsubmissions/attachments/20110318/b70bcd5a/attachment-0001.obj>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 18 21:14:48 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:14:48 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=CEeTgAp91gX4nMn7+rNY6EgRq7AjHAHMqnfmx@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=CEeTgAp91gX4nMn7+rNY6EgRq7AjHAHMqnfmx@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1300479136-sup-5549@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Fri Mar 18 15:35:14 -0400 2011:

> Its unfortunate you did not choose to reply further to the thread on
> the maintainers list, and chose instead to just push the package. So
> now I have to address it here :(

I had nothing more to say on the matter at that time.  I find it
unfortunate that you use the release manager position as a tool to
force your viewpoint on this.  Discussion is fine, but sitting on
packages is not.

> (up front note: If you would like "the rest of the packages" pushed
> through, and we just hold
> ruby18_gcc4* for discussion purposes, I'm willing to do that)

Nope.  All or none, since not pushing this would be reducing existing
functionality.  I'm sticking with this approach (at least for now) as
it mimicks the existing behaviour.  The only change from previous
packages is that I'm now using a standard tool to implement the
switching behaviour.  I expect you not to sit on these for days while
you push your viewpoint.

> So... looking at how you have implemented ruby18_gcc4, it seems that
> all it does, is run alternatives on a *single* config file.  And the
> diffs between the two alternatives, are just 11 lines.

Yes, that's correct.

> It is pretty short work, to make that config file auto-configuring,
> since the file is itself ruby code.

And yet it's fragile in the face of change.  That makes maintenance
aggravating.  And since I've yet to see a use case, it's not time well
spent.

> So now, there are no more barriers of "how to autoswitch", or "how
> much work is it", but "should we do it or not?"

Well, I still see it as a pita on the backend...For no benefit that
any user has come forward about.  I implemented the switch in the
first place as there was a request to build with gcc4.  Thus, I am
responsive to real world requests.

> * Doing it via alternatives, means more work for the site admin, and
> less choice for the end user.  The admin MUST choose one or the other.
> and then the end user is stuck with their choice. (or, perhaps, they
> then have to file an official "change request",and justification, red
> tape, blah blah yuck)

The end user is the sysadmin from our perspective.  If the user wants
to circumvent these options, against the desire of the sysadmin, they
can overload their library search path and implement their own
rbconfig.rb.

> In large site installations, where some users may use Sun CC, and
> others use gcc, this is fatal; either for one set of users, or for
> that site using our packages. Most likely in toto; they would reject
> ALL our packages, if we are not large-site considerate.

When I see a bug filed (not by you to make a point), I'll entertain
it.  Until then it's speculation.

> * The existing configs, make two bad presumptions: They presume sun
> cc is definitely in /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc, and that gcc is in
> /opt/csw/gcc4

The configs don't make assumptions.  They record facts.  Those facts
are the values that were passed by the build system to the be
recorded.  As we install sun cc at /opt/SUNWspro, that is the correct
value for rbconfig.rb to record.  Same with gcc.

> Please let me know what you think about it, given the above
> discussion points.

When I see bug reports, I'll reconsider.  Until then, it's more work
than it's worth.

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 18 22:10:17 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:10:17 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <1300479136-sup-5549@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=CEeTgAp91gX4nMn7+rNY6EgRq7AjHAHMqnfmx@mail.gmail.com>
	<1300479136-sup-5549@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=4J+VAaTEQGROG+7nD8FU_Buyz2mmATnHq3ccZ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Fri Mar 18 15:35:14 -0400 2011:
>
>> Its unfortunate you did not choose to reply further to the thread on
>> the maintainers list, and chose instead to just push the package. So
>> now I have to address it here :(
>
> I had nothing more to say on the matter at that time. ?I find it
> unfortunate that you use the release manager position as a tool to
> force your viewpoint on this. ?Discussion is fine, but sitting on
> packages is not.

I am not forcing my viewpoint. I am forcing *discussion* on an
important issue, since the issue does not have explicit policy.


>> (up front note: If you would like "the rest of the packages" pushed
>> through, and we just hold
>> ruby18_gcc4* for discussion purposes, I'm willing to do that)
>
> Nope. ?All or none, since not pushing this would be reducing existing
> functionality.

Ah. I was initially pondering how you were saying that, since current
packages do not use alternatives. Some explaination would have been
useful here. After doing my own poking, it would seem that current
ruby package supports gcc only. I was not aware(or at least, have
forgotten)  that the current package was in violation of our usual
standards.
As such, are you changing the default behaviour, if a person does only
"pkgxxxx upgrade ruby".
Is that correct?

Maybe that's not such a good thing if so.



> ?I'm sticking with this approach (at least for now) as
> it mimicks the existing behaviour. ?The only change from previous
> packages is that I'm now using a standard tool to implement the
> switching behaviour.

how was it done previously?
If it really matches what you've put there, then this is no longer a
gating factor.
However, unfortunately, there's another issue which I realized over lunch.
Given that this email is now rather long, I will make a separate email
to maintainers, about it.



>> It is pretty short work, to make that config file auto-configuring,
>> since the file is itself ruby code.
>
> And yet it's fragile in the face of change. ?That makes maintenance
> aggravating.

you are only guessing at that. you havent tried future builds. For all
you know, the patch may translate well.
There are also ways to make it more "robust".

>?And since I've yet to see a use case, it's not time well
> spent.

I would be willing to give you a more "robust" autopatcher, if you are
willing to commit to using it.


> The end user is the sysadmin from our perspective.

This is probably something that we need to clarify in a vote, for our
official policy.

Sysadmins.. professional ones at least.. do not install packages
merely for their own benefit. They install them because they need to
serve THEIR users.
If our packages fail their users, we then also by inheritance, fail
the sysadmins as well.


>> In large site installations, where some users may use Sun CC, and
>> others use gcc, this is fatal; either for one set of users, or for
>> that site using our packages. Most likely in toto; they would reject
>> ALL our packages, if we are not large-site considerate.
>
> When I see a bug filed (not by you to make a point), I'll entertain
> it. ?Until then it's speculation.

1. It's not a common occurence
2. large sites already come in with the presumption that "free"
projects are not likely to accomodate large-site installation needs
3. If the user did a google search on opencsw, ruby in the future, and
probably running into your unwillingness to patch, even when the work
is handed to you, just how likely do you think it is that they will
bother to file a patch?



>> Please let me know what you think about it, given the above
>> discussion points.
>
> When I see bug reports, I'll reconsider. ?Until then, it's more work
> than it's worth.

This is a really really user-hostile attitude.
Most users, even ones who run into problems, DO NOT FILE BUGS. They
just look elsewhere.

It's also a maintainer-hostile attitude.
maintainers are supposed to pay MORE attention to use cases of other
maintainers.
I have just told you that your package will not function properly, in
my real-life large site installation. This is not a hypothetical. This
is REAL WORLD USE.
 And you have told me that you are going to ignore that fact, simply
because it is *my*
site?
Really insulting, Ben
(and for what it's worth; no, I did NOT set up the layout at my site;
I inherited it. It's been this way for 20 years)

And  as I have just mentioned, I have volunteered to do the work for
you. So the "more work than it is worth", is rather hollow.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Mar 19 01:37:25 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 20:37:25 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=4J+VAaTEQGROG+7nD8FU_Buyz2mmATnHq3ccZ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=CEeTgAp91gX4nMn7+rNY6EgRq7AjHAHMqnfmx@mail.gmail.com>
	<1300479136-sup-5549@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=4J+VAaTEQGROG+7nD8FU_Buyz2mmATnHq3ccZ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1300494338-sup-182@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Fri Mar 18 17:10:17 -0400 2011:

> Ah. I was initially pondering how you were saying that, since
> current packages do not use alternatives. Some explaination would
> have been useful here. After doing my own poking, it would seem that
> current ruby package supports gcc only. I was not aware(or at least,
> have forgotten) that the current package was in violation of our
> usual standards.

The current package ships with rbconfig.rb.SUN and rbconfig.rb.GCC4
and a symlink pointing (by default) at the SUN version.  There is the
a tool called cswrbconfig that toggles between them...a ruby specific
alternatives setup.

> As such, are you changing the default behaviour, if a person does only
> "pkgxxxx upgrade ruby".

Nope.  It will behave the same by default as the old package.  The
only thing they'll need to do is install the -gcc4 package if they
want the extra file and symlink toggle...a notice about this change
was already sent to users at .

> how was it done previously?

See above.

> I have just told you that your package will not function properly, in
> my real-life large site installation. This is not a hypothetical. This
> is REAL WORLD USE.

And I sketched out a solution to this that lets every single users on
the system use different values if they want to.

> And you have told me that you are going to ignore that fact, simply
> because it is *my* site?

No, it has nothing to do with what site you're at, Phil.  It's the
fact that you've taken an issue that wasn't even on the radar until
three days ago when I raised a question on the list to now block a
package because it's not done in the way you prefer it to be.

My issue is with your methods, not your site.

...And, if I really thought it was the best way a to do it, I'd simply
go change it and come back.  I'm not convinced that it's completely
sane.  I'm not done thinking about it; It's worth further
consideration.  I am, however, done this package for now and therefore
pushed it to release.  If it _needs_ changes in the future, it'll get
them.  In the meantime, I need to figure out how to shoehorn an apache
update down pkg-get's throat...that is worth more of my time currently
than this non-issue.

Thanks
-Ben

[1] If you look for ENV['CC'] and expect an unqualified binary to make
    the choice, you're opening the issue to wider problems.  You're
    then going to assume that cc is sun pro when it need not be.  Same
    for gcc.  Do you assume it's version 4?  The options in the other
    variables currently assume that's the case, but what if this
    changes.  The current mechanisms are using known working
    combinations of settings.
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sat Mar 19 17:08:31 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 17:08:31 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tig
Message-ID: <201103191608.p2JG8Ve0021134@login.bo.opencsw.org>

A version bump to address Mantis id 4728

* tig: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.14.1,REV=2010.01.14_rev=1e69632
  -   to: 0.17,REV=2011.03.17
  + tig-0.17,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + tig-0.17,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Sat Mar 19 20:32:54 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 20:32:54 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librrd4, librrd_th4, pm_rrdtool,
	py_r(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik_P7+xWYVo1qgb_q1dNS8L+BYRexh09gwyq61y@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103181540.p2IFefuP029228@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTik_P7+xWYVo1qgb_q1dNS8L+BYRexh09gwyq61y@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8CD742FD-3FEF-4F55-BBA8-0E48F1C83B9E@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 18.03.2011 um 19:08 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Revision bump, package split, after user request and check.
>> 
>> * rrd: new package
>>  + librrd4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + librrd4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + librrd_th4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + librrd_th4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + pm_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + pm_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + py_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + py_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + rb_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + rb_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> 
> 
>>  + rrd-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> 
> This would seem to be a transition package, for rrdtool/CSWrrd ->rrd/CSWrrd
> 
> As done with prior perl package recently... would you please rename
> this to have catalog name of "rrd_stub"?

As I understood it that was a special case for Perl modules where the old
  pm_foo/CSWpmfoo
was renamed to
  pm_foo/CSWpm-foo
and the old and new catalog names clashed, so the old one needed to be renamed.
This is not the case here as the existing catalog name stays valid and the
package name for the stub is adjusted to fit the old catalog name.


Best regards

  -- Dago



From bwalton at opencsw.org  Sun Mar 20 13:49:47 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:49:47 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <1300494338-sup-182@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=CEeTgAp91gX4nMn7+rNY6EgRq7AjHAHMqnfmx@mail.gmail.com>
	<1300479136-sup-5549@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=4J+VAaTEQGROG+7nD8FU_Buyz2mmATnHq3ccZ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1300494338-sup-182@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <1300625105-sup-2697@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Fri Mar 18 20:37:25 -0400 2011:

> [1] If you look for ENV['CC'] and expect an unqualified binary to make
>     the choice, you're opening the issue to wider problems.  You're
>     then going to assume that cc is sun pro when it need not be.  Same
>     for gcc.  Do you assume it's version 4?  The options in the other
>     variables currently assume that's the case, but what if this
>     changes.  The current mechanisms are using known working
>     combinations of settings.

If this were to be implemented, your proposed solution is incorrect
for maintainability reasons.  It should rather be:

The rbconfig.rb file contains _nothing_ but a toggle based on
ENV['CC'].

If rbconfig.ENV['CC'].rb exists, require it.  If ENV['CC'] is nil or
rbconfig.ENV['CC'].rb doesn't exist, require rbconfig.default.rb.
Alternatives should then be used to toggle rbconfig.default.rb between
the available options.

This makes it much more sane to maintain from the packaging
perspective while offering the same 'flexibility.'  I still don't
think it stands up very well in an environment where you may want to
use gcc3, gcc4, sun cc and some other cc though.  You'd need unique
binary names for each different compiler or do some sort of runtime
version detection, etc...none of those are good options, imo.

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


From phil at bolthole.com  Sun Mar 20 23:01:10 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:01:10 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tig
In-Reply-To: <201103191608.p2JG8Ve0021134@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103191608.p2JG8Ve0021134@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik58c7crh8uW4m78pRD8DS9_Gp6JcH1giVH1ri1@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> A version bump to address Mantis id 4728
>
> * tig: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 0.14.1,REV=2010.01.14_rev=1e69632
> ?- ? to: 0.17,REV=2011.03.17
> ?+ tig-0.17,REV=2011.03.17-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ tig-0.17,REV=2011.03.17-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  Sun Mar 20 23:05:10 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:05:10 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librrd4, librrd_th4, pm_rrdtool,
	py_r(...)
In-Reply-To: <8CD742FD-3FEF-4F55-BBA8-0E48F1C83B9E@opencsw.org>
References: <201103181540.p2IFefuP029228@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTik_P7+xWYVo1qgb_q1dNS8L+BYRexh09gwyq61y@mail.gmail.com>
	<8CD742FD-3FEF-4F55-BBA8-0E48F1C83B9E@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=LaAFhYagVkDiwy_EPsv_D6RfF3kBgFaNDnFMX@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 18.03.2011 um 19:08 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>> ?+ rrd-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> This would seem to be a transition package, for rrdtool/CSWrrd ->rrd/CSWrrd
>>
>> As done with prior perl package recently... would you please rename
>> this to have catalog name of "rrd_stub"?
>
> As I understood it that was a special case for Perl modules where the old
> ?pm_foo/CSWpmfoo
> was renamed to
> ?pm_foo/CSWpm-foo
> and the old and new catalog names clashed, so the old one needed to be renamed.
> This is not the case here as the existing catalog name stays valid and the
> package name for the stub is adjusted to fit the old catalog name.

Err.. but its not staying valid.
The description of your "rrd/CSWrrdtool" package quite clearly says
that it is a "transitional package".
As such, it should be removed when nothing depends on it, right?
This seems to be a good reason to have its catalog name be called "rrd_stub" ?
Particularly since there is no catalog entry named "rrd" at the moment.
We dont want people doing "pkg-get install rrd" deliberately.
Naming it rrd_stub, avoids that, I think
(or if you prefer, rrd_transitional. I dont care in that reguard)

Hmm?

From phil at bolthole.com  Sun Mar 20 23:18:48 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:18:48 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <1300494338-sup-182@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=CEeTgAp91gX4nMn7+rNY6EgRq7AjHAHMqnfmx@mail.gmail.com>
	<1300479136-sup-5549@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
	<AANLkTi=4J+VAaTEQGROG+7nD8FU_Buyz2mmATnHq3ccZ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1300494338-sup-182@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim89BePjLRR-w3nnA5sj6f-B6-Y+zCE9Y9EMGzW@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
>> And you have told me that you are going to ignore that fact, simply
>> because it is *my* site?
>
> No, it has nothing to do with what site you're at, Phil. ?It's the
> fact that you've taken an issue that wasn't even on the radar until
> three days ago when I raised a question on the list to now block a
> package because it's not done in the way you prefer it to be.

Yes, its true that if you didnt raise the question on the list, I
probably would not have noticed this issue.
I dont notice EVERYTHING about ALL packages.. I'm not omniscient. But
when my attention *is* drawn to an issue, at least I care enough to
look at it. That should be a good thing?

and I will repeat what I have said previously: My concern is not that
it is done *my* way; my concern is that it is done in the way that is
*best for our users*.
If it is shown that your way is best for our users, I will heartily
add my endorsement to it and send the package on its way, even though
"my way" lost.

So, I'm still waiting on some feedback from someone outside the two of us.
Hopefully we'll see some after the weekend.


> [1] If you look for ENV['CC'] and expect an unqualified binary to make
> ? ?the choice, you're opening the issue to wider problems. ?You're
> ? ?then going to assume that cc is sun pro when it need not be.

I think assuming "cc = sun cc" is a reasonable assumption on a Solaris machine.
it is, after all, the same assumption that pretty much every single
autoconf makes on a solaris machine these days.

> Same
> ? ?for gcc. ?Do you assume it's version 4? ?The options in the other
> ? ?variables currently assume that's the case, but what if this
> ? ?changes. ?The current mechanisms are using known working
> ? ?combinations of settings.

sure, there is room for a bit of vagueness.. but it's durn tootin
sure, that if CC=gcc, then passing in gcc flags, is going to be a
whole lot better than passing in Sun cc ones.

Appending a reply to your follow-on email:

>The rbconfig.rb file contains _nothing_ but a toggle based on
>ENV['CC'].
>
>If rbconfig.ENV['CC'].rb exists, require it.  If ENV['CC'] is nil or
>rbconfig.ENV['CC'].rb doesn't exist, require rbconfig.default.rb.
>Alternatives should then be used to toggle rbconfig.default.rb between
>the available options.

Thats a very forward thinking idea, that has some merit to it. If you
want to take what I have suggested as a patch, "own" it, and add in
your own suggestion above, please do so.
It is, unfortunately, beyond my own level of ruby skills to maintain
such a thing.



PS: I think it is reasonable to put in a limit for your package, that
says somewhere, "If you plan to use gcc with our ruby packages, we
only currently support gcc v4"

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 21 04:02:16 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 23:02:16 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <1300676500-sup-1824@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Thu Mar 17 20:31:27 -0400 2011:

> This batch represents the target for the dublin ruby packages.  It
> moves to a versioned package name while at the same time
> standardizing the package names according to the newer conventions.

Regardless of the other discussions, please hold these packages
anyway.  I think I've found a problem with ruby itself and want to
investigate before they're pushed.

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


From rupert at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 21 08:12:18 2011
From: rupert at opencsw.org (rupert THURNER)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 08:12:18 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikruQNSst0xiMh9N_678RJDfaUUAPmO3N7tdwGC@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikruQNSst0xiMh9N_678RJDfaUUAPmO3N7tdwGC@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikF_RKhiyoES_6SbVmKgEAQKAD8M6D7+NAWkpyn@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 19:14, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:29 PM, THURNER Rupert <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> emergency fix, http://subversion.apache.org/security/CVE-2011-0715-advisory.txt.
>>
>
>
> Errr.. emergency security fixes, should have *zero* layout changes.
> Otherwise, they often have issues at release evaluation. Such as now.
>
>
>> * svn: new package
>> ?+ pmsvn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ svn-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> ?+ subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ subversion-1.6.16,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
>
> Why do we now have both a "svn" package, and a "subversion" package?
> and with the exact same name writeup, no less?
>
> NAME=svn - Version control rethought
>
> NAME=subversion - Version control rethought

because checkpackage suggested to do so ... but maybe i misread the
error message. could you have a look maciej what is the intention
behind suggesting such a rename?

rupert.

From maciej at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 21 08:38:02 2011
From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Blizi=C5=84ski?=)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 07:38:02 +0000
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikF_RKhiyoES_6SbVmKgEAQKAD8M6D7+NAWkpyn@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikruQNSst0xiMh9N_678RJDfaUUAPmO3N7tdwGC@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikF_RKhiyoES_6SbVmKgEAQKAD8M6D7+NAWkpyn@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikr7TAHydhHbkhjhpiGiofZAr2pyPdBvaB9=MrR@mail.gmail.com>

2011/3/21 rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org>:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 19:14, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>> Why do we now have both a "svn" package, and a "subversion" package?
>> and with the exact same name writeup, no less?
>>
>> NAME=svn - Version control rethought
>>
>> NAME=subversion - Version control rethought
>
> because checkpackage suggested to do so ... but maybe i misread the
> error message. could you have a look maciej what is the intention
> behind suggesting such a rename?

The check is there to help people know when pkgname doesn't match
catalogname, which is what most of maintainers want.  In the case of
subversion, the pkgname historically did not match the catalogname.  I
think we probably want to eventually normalize all the package names,
but if this is a security fix, then other changes can be left for
later.

There was a discussion about the check on the maintainers mailing
list[1] [2] some time ago.

By the way, Rupert, do you know about the new mechanism in GAR used to
rename packages and mark obsoleted ones?

Maciej

[1] http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/2011-February/014111.html
[2] http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/2011-February/014124.html

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 21 10:45:16 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:45:16 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librrd4, librrd_th4, pm_rrdtool,
	py_r(...)
Message-ID: <201103210945.p2L9jGKf008548@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* rrdtool: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.07.05
  -   to: 1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21
  + rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* rrd: new package
  + librrd4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + librrd4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + librrd_th4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + librrd_th4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rb_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rb_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rrd_stub-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rrdtool_dev-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rrdtool_dev-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 21 18:13:05 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:13:05 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs librrd4, librrd_th4, pm_rrdtool,
	py_r(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103210945.p2L9jGKf008548@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103210945.p2L9jGKf008548@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim4rt_wMtvUnkQ2C4grJFzycLwF=TQs_hQ=SX+s@mail.gmail.com>

thank you. Batching now



On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * rrdtool: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 1.4.3,REV=2010.07.05
> ?- ? to: 1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21
> ?+ rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * rrd: new package
> ?+ librrd4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ librrd4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ librrd_th4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ librrd_th4-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ py_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ py_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rb_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rb_rrdtool-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rrd_stub-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rrdtool_dev-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rrdtool_dev-1.4.5,REV=2011.03.21-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 Mar 21 18:15:58 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:15:58 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_subversion, javasvn,
	pm_subversio(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikF_RKhiyoES_6SbVmKgEAQKAD8M6D7+NAWkpyn@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103180629.p2I6ThYq018549@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikruQNSst0xiMh9N_678RJDfaUUAPmO3N7tdwGC@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikF_RKhiyoES_6SbVmKgEAQKAD8M6D7+NAWkpyn@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinGLn+6B0SswyR8LF3pWqkqrqEDm2QPbM2KUB1X@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:12 AM, rupert THURNER <rupert at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 19:14, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why do we now have both a "svn" package, and a "subversion" package?
>> and with the exact same name writeup, no less?
>>
>> NAME=svn - Version control rethought
>>
>> NAME=subversion - Version control rethought
>
> because checkpackage suggested to do so ... but maybe i misread the
> error message. could you have a look maciej what is the intention
> behind suggesting such a rename?
>

Side note: renames are one thing... but please remember to update the
NAME/DESC field appropriately when you do so.
Having two packages with exactly the same description is something to
be avoided.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 21 19:50:43 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 19:50:43 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ggettext, ggettext_data,
	ggettext_dev(...)
Message-ID: <201103211850.p2LIoh5t022883@login.bo.opencsw.org>

A update to provide gnulinks for the gettext stuff. Mantis id 4455.

Thanks
-Ben

* lib: revision upgrade
  - from: 2011.02.12
  -   to: 2011.03.15
  + ggettext_data-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ggettext_dev-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ggettext_dev-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ggettextdoc-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ggettextrt-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libasprintf0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libasprintf0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextlib0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextlib0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextpo0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextpo0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextsrc0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libgettextsrc0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libintl8-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libintl8-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* gnulinks: revision upgrade
  - from: 2011.01.11
  -   to: 2011.03.15
  + gnulinks-1.4,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* ggettext: revision upgrade
  - from: 2011.03.09
  -   to: 2011.03.15
  + ggettext-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ggettext-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 21 20:34:02 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:34:02 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ggettext, ggettext_data,
	ggettext_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103211850.p2LIoh5t022883@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103211850.p2LIoh5t022883@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTiksfzD+sZB4AP-Gvu6VGtb=NYg9JFNHYwo-DMjd@mail.gmail.com>

I will point out that even debian, does not split up gettext libraries
like this.
not debian. not redhat. not SUSE.
We get no benefit in splitting up the gettext libraries;

But I'm too tired to care. So, batching this mess.


On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> A update to provide gnulinks for the gettext stuff. Mantis id 4455.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * lib: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2011.02.12
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.15
> ?+ ggettext_data-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ggettext_dev-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ggettext_dev-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ggettextdoc-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ggettextrt-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libasprintf0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libasprintf0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libgettextlib0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libgettextlib0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libgettextpo0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libgettextpo0-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libgettextsrc0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libgettextsrc0_18_1-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libintl8-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libintl8-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * gnulinks: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2011.01.11
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.15
> ?+ gnulinks-1.4,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * ggettext: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2011.03.09
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.15
> ?+ ggettext-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ggettext-0.18.1.1,p,REV=2011.03.15-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 21 20:41:59 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 15:41:59 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ggettext, ggettext_data,
	ggettext_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTiksfzD+sZB4AP-Gvu6VGtb=NYg9JFNHYwo-DMjd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103211850.p2LIoh5t022883@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTiksfzD+sZB4AP-Gvu6VGtb=NYg9JFNHYwo-DMjd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1300736420-sup-1050@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Mar 21 15:34:02 -0400 2011:

> We get no benefit in splitting up the gettext libraries;

But there is no detriment either.  Too much granularity isn't a
problem.  Too little is.

> But I'm too tired to care. So, batching this mess.

Feel free to take it over if you wish. :)  (And if you had an issue,
the initial release was the time to raise it...)

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


From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Mar 22 11:12:20 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:12:20 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs par
Message-ID: <201103221012.p2MACKIM017412@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Takeover from retired maintainer Jefferey Small.

* par: revision number added upgrade
  - from: 
  -   to: 2011.03.22
  + par-1.52,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + par-1.52,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Tue Mar 22 14:41:06 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:41:06 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs geoip, geoip_dev
Message-ID: <201103221341.p2MDf65l006612@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Development package renamed.

* geoip: revision upgrade
  - from: 2009.10.01
  -   to: 2011.03.22
  + geoip-1.4.6,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + geoip-1.4.6,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* geoip_dev: new package
  + geoip_dev-1.4.6,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + geoip_dev-1.4.6,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From william at wbonnet.net  Tue Mar 22 21:59:02 2011
From: william at wbonnet.net (William Bonnet)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 21:59:02 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tomcat6
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=z961J2ijgBmCBFrYPDhLRE-RXutecK88A+kV5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201102191503.p1JF3I7o000907@login.bo.opencsw.org>	<4D838EFB.4050901@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=z961J2ijgBmCBFrYPDhLRE-RXutecK88A+kV5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D890D96.8040404@wbonnet.net>

Hi

> Didnt I send an email out before? reguarding wierd file in package?
Looks like not :)

> 1 f none /var/opt/csw/tomcat6/temp/safeToDelete.tmp 0644 tomcat tomcat
> 0 0 1298127565

It's weird but provided by the tomcat tarball... Anyways it is not 
installed by current version. It should be removed by the install-tomcat 
target in the GAR Makefile

cheers
W.

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar 22 22:35:28 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:35:28 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tomcat6
In-Reply-To: <4D890D96.8040404@wbonnet.net>
References: <201102191503.p1JF3I7o000907@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<4D838EFB.4050901@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTi=z961J2ijgBmCBFrYPDhLRE-RXutecK88A+kV5@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D890D96.8040404@wbonnet.net>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimtfDuO1nnSpdNBDsre-7uJn25=odZ_7Ckxjmyn@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 1:59 PM, William Bonnet <william at wbonnet.net> wrote:
> Hi
>
>> Didnt I send an email out before? reguarding wierd file in package?
>
> Looks like not :)
>
>> 1 f none /var/opt/csw/tomcat6/temp/safeToDelete.tmp 0644 tomcat tomcat
>> 0 0 1298127565
>
> It's weird but provided by the tomcat tarball... Anyways it is not installed
> by current version. It should be removed by the install-tomcat target in the
> GAR Makefile
>

erm... dunno what you're saying about all that, William, but it needs
to not be In The Package :-}

bender$ ls tomcat*
tomcat6-6.0.32,REV=2011.02.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

bender$ gzgrep safeToDelete tomcat*
1 f none /var/opt/csw/tomcat6/temp/safeToDelete.tmp 0644 tomcat tomcat
0 0 1298127565


So please remake, without that file

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar 22 22:36:21 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:36:21 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs par
In-Reply-To: <201103221012.p2MACKIM017412@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103221012.p2MACKIM017412@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinT9ctE5AX3AK9uGiZ4k=Pg=5eozPtq38SUWXBH@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Takeover from retired maintainer Jefferey Small.
>
> * par: revision number added upgrade
> ?- from:
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.22
> ?+ par-1.52,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ par-1.52,REV=2011.03.22-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 Mar 22 22:39:45 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:39:45 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs geoip, geoip_dev
In-Reply-To: <201103221341.p2MDf65l006612@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103221341.p2MDf65l006612@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTiky81j4XyoZvkg=wjmmDBf2h0HPKUbfZ3YgSpJm@mail.gmail.com>

batched


On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Development package renamed.
>
> * geoip: revision upgrade
> ?- from: 2009.10.01
> ?- ? to: 2011.03.22
> ?+ geoip-1.4.6,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ geoip-1.4.6,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * geoip_dev: new package
> ?+ geoip_dev-1.4.6,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ geoip_dev-1.4.6,REV=2011.03.22-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar 23 01:20:46 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:20:46 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <1300676500-sup-1824@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<1300676500-sup-1824@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <1300839630-sup-2571@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Sun Mar 20 23:02:16 -0400 2011:

> Regardless of the other discussions, please hold these packages
> anyway.  I think I've found a problem with ruby itself and want to
> investigate before they're pushed.

Cancel this.  They're fine to be pushed.

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


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar 23 01:58:55 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 01:58:55 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
Message-ID: <201103230058.p2N0wtI7001308@login.bo.opencsw.org>

A version bump and some renaming for consistency.

Thanks
-Ben

* git: new package
  + git_dev-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_dev-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gitcompletion-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gitcvs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gitdevel-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gitdoc-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gitemacs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gitgui-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gitsvn-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* git: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28
  -   to: 1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19
  + git-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_completion-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_cvs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_doc-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_emacs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_gui-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + git_svn-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gitk-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar 23 02:13:13 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 02:13:13 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxml2, libxml2_2, libxml2_dev,
	libx(...)
Message-ID: <201103230113.p2N1DDUs010667@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This is a version bump with a few name changes for standardization.

Thanks
-Ben

* libxml2: new package
  + libxml2_2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libxml2_2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libxml2_dev-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libxml2_dev-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libxml2devel-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pylibxml2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* libxml2: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 2.7.7,REV=2010.04.10
  -   to: 2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21
  + libxml2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar 23 02:34:06 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 02:34:06 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gar_dev, gardevel
Message-ID: <201103230134.p2N1Y6wU025926@login.bo.opencsw.org>

An update to match -dev standard, legacy obsolete provided to make
upgrades work.

* gar: new package
  + gar_dev-1.0,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gardevel-1.0,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar 23 17:20:13 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:20:13 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikhq_tXsUuTP5coQNEfLRvdeHyn6zpxWt8yqSc6@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This batch represents the target for the dublin ruby packages. ?It moves to
> a versioned package name while at the same time standardizing the package
> names according to the newer conventions.

Attempting to batch this, but running into headaches at the release
database level.
Specifically, the ruby*mode*el stuff

You seem to have made a "newer convention" package,
ruby18_mode_el
but you have also kept the old package, previously named
rubymode_el/CSWrubymodeel

yet at the same time, you have renamed THAT one as well? ! ?
to
rubymodeel/CSWrubymodeel
?

If the thing is meant to be really removed, would you please change
the catalog name to
rubymodeel_stub? It's too confusing otherwise.
(If you just had kept exactly the same catalog name *and* PKG name, it
wouldnt have been so much of a headache for me.)

Similarly with any other packages in this set that you have renamed
for transition purposes, please.

> * ruby: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 1.8.7p302,REV=2010.12.04
> ?- ? to: 1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16
> ?+ ruby-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rubydev-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rubydoc-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rubymode-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rubytk-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * ruby: new package
> ?+ libruby18_1-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libruby18_1-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18_dev-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18_dev-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18_doc-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18_gcc4-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18_gcc4-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18_mode-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18_mode_el-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18_tk-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ruby18_tk-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ rubymodeel-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.16-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar 23 17:21:47 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:21:47 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103230058.p2N0wtI7001308@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103230058.p2N0wtI7001308@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikOxq4n2ojdx1SW7sb8vpShXBH+WogxVPFJJ0o2@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> A version bump and some renaming for consistency.

in the future, please call out every rename explicitly.
renames are ugly enough without me having to go through myself and
spend more time reverse engineer which ones you have renamed, and how
specifically they have been renamed

> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * git: new package
> ?+ git_dev-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ git_dev-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gitcompletion-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gitcvs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gitdevel-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gitdoc-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gitemacs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gitgui-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gitsvn-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * git: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28
> ?- ? to: 1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19
> ?+ git-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ git-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ git_completion-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ git_cvs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ git_doc-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ git_emacs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ git_gui-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ git_svn-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gitk-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-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  Wed Mar 23 17:27:02 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:27:02 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs git, git_completion, git_cvs,
	git_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikOxq4n2ojdx1SW7sb8vpShXBH+WogxVPFJJ0o2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103230058.p2N0wtI7001308@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikOxq4n2ojdx1SW7sb8vpShXBH+WogxVPFJJ0o2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimkdR7+AXmuEtuzKnnCQq6ONxcsyFmmDZgnUnBT@mail.gmail.com>

Additionally, as with the ruby package.. please fully rename, the renames.
If we dont want people to accidentally install stuff when they are
doing NEW installs, lets make it clear to them that they shouldnt
choose to install something.

specific example:

OLD:
git_cvs / CSWgitcvs

CURRENT RENAME:
  gitcvs/CWSgitcvs, pulls in   new git_cvs/CSWgit-cvs

Would be clearer to users, if it was
  gitcvs_stub/CWSgitcvs, pulls in   new git_cvs/CSWgit-cvs

(or feel free to replace _stub with _transitional or something.
  _removeme? _dontinstall?  :)





On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> A version bump and some renaming for consistency.
>
> in the future, please call out every rename explicitly.
> renames are ugly enough without me having to go through myself and
> spend more time reverse engineer which ones you have renamed, and how
> specifically they have been renamed
>
>> Thanks
>> -Ben
>>
>> * git: new package
>> ?+ git_dev-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ git_dev-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ gitcompletion-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ gitcvs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ gitdevel-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ gitdoc-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ gitemacs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ gitgui-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ gitsvn-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> * git: patchlevel upgrade
>> ?- from: 1.7.3.2,REV=2010.11.28
>> ?- ? to: 1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19
>> ?+ git-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ git-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ git_completion-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ git_cvs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ git_doc-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ git_emacs-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ git_gui-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ git_svn-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>> ?+ gitk-1.7.4.1,REV=2011.03.19-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  Wed Mar 23 17:28:06 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:28:06 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxml2, libxml2_2, libxml2_dev,
	libx(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103230113.p2N1DDUs010667@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103230113.p2N1DDUs010667@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=6FR8qdy2Ts+K5823dzJ+YjSp1WV1iNvmRzdkh@mail.gmail.com>

Please see comments for other packages, reguarding _stub


On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This is a version bump with a few name changes for standardization.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * libxml2: new package
> ?+ libxml2_2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxml2_2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxml2_dev-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxml2_dev-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxml2devel-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pylibxml2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libxml2: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 2.7.7,REV=2010.04.10
> ?- ? to: 2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21
> ?+ libxml2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.21-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 bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Mar 23 17:27:56 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 17:27:56 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_netaddr_ip, pm_netaddrip
Message-ID: <201103231627.p2NGRuQQ000972@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Updated, renamed and obsoleted.

* pm_netaddr_ip: new package
  + pm_netaddr_ip-4.040,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pm_netaddr_ip-4.040,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* pm_netaddrip: minor version upgrade
  - from: 4.028,REV=2010.06.30
  -   to: 4.040,REV=2011.03.23
  + pm_netaddrip-4.040,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar 23 17:34:08 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:34:08 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_netaddr_ip, pm_netaddrip
In-Reply-To: <201103231627.p2NGRuQQ000972@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103231627.p2NGRuQQ000972@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimE4soBY5J+AWpVwbyum9Hb90hCuHaeEhmzAMJx@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Updated, renamed and obsoleted.
>
> * pm_netaddr_ip: new package
> ?+ pm_netaddr_ip-4.040,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pm_netaddr_ip-4.040,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * pm_netaddrip: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 4.028,REV=2010.06.30
> ?- ? to: 4.040,REV=2011.03.23
> ?+ pm_netaddrip-4.040,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>

please rename catalog name from  pm_netaddrip to  pm_netaddrip_stub to
avoid accidental user use.

From bonivart at opencsw.org  Wed Mar 23 17:41:52 2011
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 17:41:52 +0100
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_netaddr_ip, pm_netaddrip
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimE4soBY5J+AWpVwbyum9Hb90hCuHaeEhmzAMJx@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103231627.p2NGRuQQ000972@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimE4soBY5J+AWpVwbyum9Hb90hCuHaeEhmzAMJx@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimG0mkNagkogo_aag-nShThCz2yAE=YvrHeyCJm@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> please rename catalog name from ?pm_netaddrip to ?pm_netaddrip_stub to
> avoid accidental user use.

It doesn't matter, it will work anyway and it will be removed as soon
as everything depending on it has been adjusted. We can't know if
people use the catalog name anyway and the package name can't be
changed.

/peter

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar 23 17:51:52 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:51:52 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_netaddr_ip, pm_netaddrip
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimG0mkNagkogo_aag-nShThCz2yAE=YvrHeyCJm@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103231627.p2NGRuQQ000972@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimE4soBY5J+AWpVwbyum9Hb90hCuHaeEhmzAMJx@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimG0mkNagkogo_aag-nShThCz2yAE=YvrHeyCJm@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinfkwXbCkN6+Wq9bC9suwo8DQ8aK3dNUGT2S4z2@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>> please rename catalog name from ?pm_netaddrip to ?pm_netaddrip_stub to
>> avoid accidental user use.
>
> It doesn't matter, it will work anyway and it will be removed as soon
> as everything depending on it has been adjusted.

how? what triggers this, and how often does it trigger?

>We can't know if
> people use the catalog name anyway and

In the case of perl modules, it is considerably less likely than with
other packages. But I'm trying to be consistent here, since people
complain when I'm not.

>the package name can't be changed.

right, but I'm not suggesting the package name be changed, just the
catalog name.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar 23 18:00:01 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:00:01 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pm_netaddr_ip, pm_netaddrip
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinfkwXbCkN6+Wq9bC9suwo8DQ8aK3dNUGT2S4z2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103231627.p2NGRuQQ000972@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimE4soBY5J+AWpVwbyum9Hb90hCuHaeEhmzAMJx@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimG0mkNagkogo_aag-nShThCz2yAE=YvrHeyCJm@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinfkwXbCkN6+Wq9bC9suwo8DQ8aK3dNUGT2S4z2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1300899408-sup-3863@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 23 12:51:52 -0400 2011:

> right, but I'm not suggesting the package name be changed, just the
> catalog name.

The current mechanism for generating these obsolete packages is this:

1. Do the renaming you want to the packages in GAR.
2. Add OBSOLETES_CSWnew-name = CSWold-name

That line triggers the generation of a the package old_name.  To
generate a 'stub' with an alternate catalog name would also require:
CATALOGNAME_CSWold-name = old_name_stub
CHECKPKG_OVERRIDES_CSWold-name = catalogname-does-not-match-packagename...

We can certainly standardize on _stub or something (maybe _obs for
obsolete?), but it requires alteration to GAR and checkpkg to be both
easy and not annoying when building them.  Both of these can be done,
and I'm not opposed...I'm just pointing out why you're getting them in
the current form.

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


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 24 01:15:04 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:15:04 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikhq_tXsUuTP5coQNEfLRvdeHyn6zpxWt8yqSc6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikhq_tXsUuTP5coQNEfLRvdeHyn6zpxWt8yqSc6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1300925632-sup-3428@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 23 12:20:13 -0400 2011:

> If the thing is meant to be really removed, would you please change
> the catalog name to rubymodeel_stub? It's too confusing otherwise.
> (If you just had kept exactly the same catalog name *and* PKG name,
> it wouldnt have been so much of a headache for me.)

Do you want _stub of $oldname?  I'm leaning to _stub if that's the
'standard' we're going to target.  If you let me know tonight, I can
have them ready tonight or first thing tomorrow morning.

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


From bwalton at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 24 01:29:08 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 01:29:08 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnulinks
Message-ID: <201103240029.p2O0T82o015278@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This just re-adds CSWfindutils to the list of packages we provide links for.
When Gordon pushes the new CSWfindutils, this can be updated again.  I've
been hit enough with the missing links...

Thanks
-Ben

* gnulinks: revision upgrade
  - from: 2011.03.15
  -   to: 2011.03.24
  + gnulinks-1.4,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From ihsan at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 24 11:24:03 2011
From: ihsan at opencsw.org (Ihsan Dogan)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 11:24:03 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tomcat6
Message-ID: <201103241024.p2OAO3lo012365@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* tomcat6: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 6.0.18,REV=2008.11.29
  -   to: 6.0.32,REV=2011.03.23
  + tomcat6-6.0.32,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Mar 24 17:10:24 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:10:24 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby, ruby18,
	ruby18_dev(...)
In-Reply-To: <1300925632-sup-3428@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103180031.p2I0VRBV029856@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikhq_tXsUuTP5coQNEfLRvdeHyn6zpxWt8yqSc6@mail.gmail.com>
	<1300925632-sup-3428@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim5xoGwEfRH_RPSGdpF6nEcVf55a1VKW+vZ2g9h@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed Mar 23 12:20:13 -0400 2011:
>
>> If the thing is meant to be really removed, would you please change
>> the catalog name to rubymodeel_stub? It's too confusing otherwise.
>> (If you just had kept exactly the same catalog name *and* PKG name,
>> it wouldnt have been so much of a headache for me.)
>
> Do you want _stub of $oldname? ?I'm leaning to _stub if that's the
> 'standard' we're going to target. ?If you let me know tonight, I can
> have them ready tonight or first thing tomorrow morning.
>

That sounds good to me, thanks

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Mar 24 17:11:50 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:11:50 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tomcat6
In-Reply-To: <201103241024.p2OAO3lo012365@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103241024.p2OAO3lo012365@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikU3deWhERU-z1ha7KVK4Yq18hOmxqkPLCVDWqi@mail.gmail.com>

William will no longer be supporting tomcat?



On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 3:24 AM, Ihsan Dogan <ihsan at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * tomcat6: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 6.0.18,REV=2008.11.29
> ?- ? to: 6.0.32,REV=2011.03.23
> ?+ tomcat6-6.0.32,REV=2011.03.23-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  Thu Mar 24 17:13:55 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:13:55 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gar_dev, gardevel
In-Reply-To: <201103230134.p2N1Y6wU025926@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103230134.p2N1Y6wU025926@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim+6P390iN0R5cahL3V7S3Si9tD53yfrZ2Cv6C7@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> An update to match -dev standard, legacy obsolete provided to make
> upgrades work.
>
> * gar: new package
> ?+ gar_dev-1.0,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ gardevel-1.0,REV=2011.03.23-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz


waiting for stub respin

From phil at bolthole.com  Thu Mar 24 17:11:09 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:11:09 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gnulinks
In-Reply-To: <201103240029.p2O0T82o015278@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103240029.p2O0T82o015278@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=cn=UcYbCxsaJL4fSJfQ0Mi=bpeoMus-zscETu@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This just re-adds CSWfindutils to the list of packages we provide links for.
> When Gordon pushes the new CSWfindutils, this can be updated again. ?I've
> been hit enough with the missing links...
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 24 23:12:53 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:12:53 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs gar_dev, gardevel_stub
Message-ID: <201103242212.p2OMCrPE011169@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Respins with _stub.  Old packages already removed.

-Ben

* gar: new package
  + gar_dev-1.0,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + gardevel_stub-1.0,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 25 00:51:51 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:51:51 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby18, ruby18_dev,
	ruby(...)
Message-ID: <201103242351.p2ONppUl011931@login.bo.opencsw.org>

The respins with _stub...

Thanks
-Ben

  + libruby18_1-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libruby18_1-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_dev-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_dev-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_doc-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_gcc4-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_gcc4-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_mode-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_mode_el-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_tk-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby18_tk-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ruby_stub-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubydev_stub-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubydoc_stub-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubymode_stub-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubymodeel_stub-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + rubytk_stub-1.8.7p334,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 25 01:00:33 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 01:00:33 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxml2_2, libxml2_dev, libxml2_stub,
	(...)
Message-ID: <201103250000.p2P00Xqr014973@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Respins with _stub.

Thanks
-Ben

* py_libxml2: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 2.7.7,REV=2010.04.10
  -   to: 2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24
  + py_libxml2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + py_libxml2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libxml2: new package
  + libxml2_2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libxml2_2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libxml2_dev-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libxml2_dev-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libxml2_stub-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libxml2devel_stub-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pylibxml2_stub-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 25 11:25:27 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:25:27 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libao, libao2, libao4, libao_dev
Message-ID: <201103251025.p2PAPRrW026768@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This fixes #4717.

* libao: new package
  + libao4-1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libao4-1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libao_dev-1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libao_dev-1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libao2: new package
  + libao2-0.8.8,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libao2-0.8.8,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* libao: minor version upgrade
  - from: 1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26
  -   to: 1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25
  + libao-1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 25 17:03:25 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:25 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libao, libao2, libao4, libao_dev
In-Reply-To: <201103251025.p2PAPRrW026768@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103251025.p2PAPRrW026768@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikBrYazxQQOuXeq6u6wH-jGH+m+EuGhK8+9_sON@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 3:25 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This fixes #4717.
>
> * libao: new package
> ?+ libao4-1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libao4-1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libao_dev-1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libao_dev-1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libao2: new package
> ?+ libao2-0.8.8,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libao2-0.8.8,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libao: minor version upgrade
> ?- from: 1.0.0,REV=2010.03.26
> ?- ? to: 1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25
> ?+ libao-1.1.0,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --

From phil at bolthole.com  Fri Mar 25 17:05:40 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:05:40 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] note about _stub packages
Message-ID: <AANLkTimha_RJH+zG=zoXLjyHUautqjQzXCTfBebG1PPR@mail.gmail.com>

Please note: groups with _stub will be delayed for just a little bit
longer... I need to have some quiet time to take advantage of the
official new naming, in the package registration scripts. Tweaking
them is something best done in my "happy place" :-}

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Fri Mar 25 21:53:45 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 21:53:45 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
Message-ID: <201103252053.p2PKrjiU016656@login.bo.opencsw.org>

This update should address open bugs filed against the last update.

Specifically, pkg-get can handle it and it doesn't ship it's own class
action scripts now.

Thanks
-Ben

* ap: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 2.2.16,REV=2010.10.09
  -   to: 2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25
  + ap2_prefork-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ap2_suexec-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ap2_suexec-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ap2_worker-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ap2_worker-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2_manual-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2rt-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* apache2c: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 2.2.13,REV=2009.08.22
  -   to: 2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25
  + apache2c-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* apache2_dev: new package
  + apache2_dev-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + apache2_dev-2.2.17,REV=2011.03.25-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 28 12:44:34 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 12:44:34 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ascii
Message-ID: <201103281044.p2SAiYuB028272@login.bo.opencsw.org>

A new tiny, but useful package

* ascii: new package
  + ascii-3.11,REV=2011.03.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ascii-3.11,REV=2011.03.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 28 12:45:50 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 12:45:50 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs parallel
Message-ID: <201103281045.p2SAjoiu029405@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* parallel: major version upgrade
  - from: 20110205,REV=2011.03.02
  -   to: 20110322,REV=2011.03.28
  + parallel-20110322,REV=2011.03.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 28 20:07:34 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:07:34 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs parallel
In-Reply-To: <201103281045.p2SAjoiu029405@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103281045.p2SAjoiu029405@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimgsVamc4rsaA5XZu4n0VXCYqj6R2CkTf1C0YGj@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 3:45 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * parallel: major version upgrade
> ?- from: 20110205,REV=2011.03.02
> ?- ? to: 20110322,REV=2011.03.28
> ?+ parallel-20110322,REV=2011.03.28-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 28 20:09:22 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:09:22 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ascii
In-Reply-To: <201103281044.p2SAiYuB028272@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103281044.p2SAiYuB028272@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinqrv0FTWbudSzYHtZFjNA9cbugwjzbgeZ7S9iH@mail.gmail.com>

Erm... isnt this already pretty much covered by "od" ?



On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> A new tiny, but useful package
>
> * ascii: new package
> ?+ ascii-3.11,REV=2011.03.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ascii-3.11,REV=2011.03.28-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 28 20:23:57 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:23:57 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ascii
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinqrv0FTWbudSzYHtZFjNA9cbugwjzbgeZ7S9iH@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103281044.p2SAiYuB028272@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinqrv0FTWbudSzYHtZFjNA9cbugwjzbgeZ7S9iH@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1301336611-sup-8196@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon Mar 28 14:09:22 -0400 2011:

> Erm... isnt this already pretty much covered by "od" ?

And if it is...?  No reason not to package and release it, right?

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


From ihsan at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 28 21:38:06 2011
From: ihsan at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?B?xLBoc2FuwqBEb8SfYW4=?=)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 21:38:06 +0200
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tomcat6
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikU3deWhERU-z1ha7KVK4Yq18hOmxqkPLCVDWqi@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103241024.p2OAO3lo012365@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikU3deWhERU-z1ha7KVK4Yq18hOmxqkPLCVDWqi@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D90E39E.1080605@opencsw.org>

Am 24.03.2011 17:11, schrieb Philip Brown:

> William will no longer be supporting tomcat?

Only tomcat6. He agreed that I would takeover the tomcat6 package.




Ihsan

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

From dam at opencsw.org  Mon Mar 28 21:39:01 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 21:39:01 +0200
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ascii
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinqrv0FTWbudSzYHtZFjNA9cbugwjzbgeZ7S9iH@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103281044.p2SAiYuB028272@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinqrv0FTWbudSzYHtZFjNA9cbugwjzbgeZ7S9iH@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <076B9CD7-2E5F-44E6-839B-73F5F7D105B2@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 28.03.2011 um 20:09 schrieb Philip Brown:
> Erm... isnt this already pretty much covered by "od" ?

Nope, "od" is a dumper in various formats whereas "ascii" prints the ascii table
with different number formats. It is written by Eric Raymond btw.


Best regards

  -- Dago

> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> A new tiny, but useful package
>> 
>> * ascii: new package
>>  + ascii-3.11,REV=2011.03.28-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
>>  + ascii-3.11,REV=2011.03.28-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 phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 28 21:59:20 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 12:59:20 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ascii
In-Reply-To: <076B9CD7-2E5F-44E6-839B-73F5F7D105B2@opencsw.org>
References: <201103281044.p2SAiYuB028272@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinqrv0FTWbudSzYHtZFjNA9cbugwjzbgeZ7S9iH@mail.gmail.com>
	<076B9CD7-2E5F-44E6-839B-73F5F7D105B2@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinEkQVgqNa57vmnEh3Gdb+OPC+0TEsQxe93zR7+@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 28.03.2011 um 20:09 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> Erm... isnt this already pretty much covered by "od" ?
>
> Nope, "od" is a dumper in various formats whereas "ascii" prints the ascii table
> with different number formats. It is written by Eric Raymond btw.
>

Aha. good to know.
how about improving the description then? it isnt very clear.

I think what you just wrote, above, would be a better one. with
perhaps a minor improvement:

"prints out the full ascii table in different number formats"

?


as a side comment to answer Ben's one:
Yes, there is a reason to not package and release redundant software.
We already have more packages than are properly maintained and updated.
Adding yet Another package, and one we dont even need, would be
counter  productive.
For the record, I was going to just ask Dagobert to think about it
himself and consider if it was really a useful package over what we
have already. But given his clarification, I can see the use for it
myself.
So... onward...

From phil at bolthole.com  Mon Mar 28 22:11:40 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:11:40 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs tomcat6
In-Reply-To: <4D90E39E.1080605@opencsw.org>
References: <201103241024.p2OAO3lo012365@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTikU3deWhERU-z1ha7KVK4Yq18hOmxqkPLCVDWqi@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D90E39E.1080605@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=qaZLWzd2RbowUtx_Qvw2caaa5ZVRfT2chxcuy@mail.gmail.com>

2011/3/28 ?hsan?Do?an <ihsan at opencsw.org>:
> Am 24.03.2011 17:11, schrieb Philip Brown:
>
>> William will no longer be supporting tomcat?
>
> Only tomcat6. He agreed that I would takeover the tomcat6 package.


Ookay. batching.


For future reference, I'm not sure it's really useful to include docs
that may be only relevant if you are making the package.
"BUILDING.txt" may only be relevant to "building" tomcat itself? If
so, may as well skip it from package? but I could be wrong, I havent
read the whole thing.

onward....

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Mar 29 09:50:33 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 09:50:33 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pbzip2
Message-ID: <201103290750.p2T7oXOG024551@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* pbzip2: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.1.1,REV=2010.05.26
  -   to: 1.1.3,REV=2011.03.29
  + pbzip2-1.1.3,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + pbzip2-1.1.3,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Mar 29 09:54:59 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 09:54:59 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca
Message-ID: <201103290754.p2T7sxqP026404@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* pca: major version upgrade
  - from: 20101221.01,REV=2010.12.27
  -   to: 20110329.01,REV=2011.03.29
  + pca-20110329.01,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Mar 29 10:01:21 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:01:21 +0200
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ascii
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinEkQVgqNa57vmnEh3Gdb+OPC+0TEsQxe93zR7+@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103281044.p2SAiYuB028272@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinqrv0FTWbudSzYHtZFjNA9cbugwjzbgeZ7S9iH@mail.gmail.com>
	<076B9CD7-2E5F-44E6-839B-73F5F7D105B2@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinEkQVgqNa57vmnEh3Gdb+OPC+0TEsQxe93zR7+@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A058C8D6-5638-4369-A980-75612F324623@opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

Am 28.03.2011 um 21:59 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Am 28.03.2011 um 20:09 schrieb Philip Brown:
>>> Erm... isnt this already pretty much covered by "od" ?
>> 
>> Nope, "od" is a dumper in various formats whereas "ascii" prints the ascii table
>> with different number formats. It is written by Eric Raymond btw.
> 
> Aha. good to know.
> how about improving the description then? it isnt very clear.

It is not?
  "Provides easy conversion between various byte representations and ASCII"

You can also do things besides table printing like

> dam at login [login]:/home/dam/mgar/pkg/ascii/trunk/work/solaris9-sparc/pkgroot/opt/csw/bin > ./ascii SOH
> ASCII 0/1 is decimal 001, hex 01, octal 001, bits 00000001: called ^A, SOH
> Official name: Start Of Heading


> I think what you just wrote, above, would be a better one. with
> perhaps a minor improvement:
> 
> "prints out the full ascii table in different number formats"
> 
> ?
> 
> 
> as a side comment to answer Ben's one:
> Yes, there is a reason to not package and release redundant software.
> We already have more packages than are properly maintained and updated.
> Adding yet Another package, and one we dont even need, would be
> counter  productive.

I see this differently. If there is a new common software that does the
same as an old one the new one should be packages and the old one
dropped. We have to see that we keep par with a casual Linux distro.
Otherwise some user may look at "I know software foo, where is it?
Not there? Sucks." while providing just the new one or both would have
worked. If it is useful it will be updated.


Best regards

  -- Dago

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar 29 20:53:16 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 11:53:16 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ascii
In-Reply-To: <A058C8D6-5638-4369-A980-75612F324623@opencsw.org>
References: <201103281044.p2SAiYuB028272@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinqrv0FTWbudSzYHtZFjNA9cbugwjzbgeZ7S9iH@mail.gmail.com>
	<076B9CD7-2E5F-44E6-839B-73F5F7D105B2@opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinEkQVgqNa57vmnEh3Gdb+OPC+0TEsQxe93zR7+@mail.gmail.com>
	<A058C8D6-5638-4369-A980-75612F324623@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikFURhaGcDuKNg64WXdwsLCNju2BA=X4B6pOvBF@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 1:01 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 28.03.2011 um 21:59 schrieb Philip Brown:
>
>> Aha. good to know.
>> how about improving the description then? it isnt very clear.
>
> It is not?
> ?"Provides easy conversion between various byte representations and ASCII"
>

well, that sounds too close to what "od" does, hence my initial confusion :-/


> You can also do things besides table printing like
>
>> dam at login [login]:/home/dam/mgar/pkg/ascii/trunk/work/solaris9-sparc/pkgroot/opt/csw/bin > ./ascii SOH
>> ASCII 0/1 is decimal 001, hex 01, octal 001, bits 00000001: called ^A, SOH
>> Official name: Start Of Heading

So, it recognizes "nicknames" for ascii chars as well.Nice


Hmmm..

I was going to attempt to "improve" my old summary, but why not just
take the debian description:

http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=ascii

"interactive ASCII name and synonym chart "





>> as a side comment to answer Ben's one:
>> Yes, there is a reason to not package and release redundant software.
>> We already have more packages than are properly maintained and updated.
>> Adding yet Another package, and one we dont even need, would be
>> counter ?productive.
>
> I see this differently. If there is a new common software that does the
> same as an old one the new one should be packages and the old one
> dropped.

Well, that is not "the same as an old one".
That is "better than an old one". In which case, I very much am in
favor of "new one should be packaged and the old one dropped"

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar 29 20:54:17 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 11:54:17 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca
In-Reply-To: <201103290754.p2T7sxqP026404@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103290754.p2T7sxqP026404@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinWH+aCYzApXZTxAuqkixNH0exT0ekAXQbKBkX4@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * pca: major version upgrade
> ?- from: 20101221.01,REV=2010.12.27
> ?- ? to: 20110329.01,REV=2011.03.29
> ?+ pca-20110329.01,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-UNCOMMITTED.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 Mar 29 20:55:23 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 11:55:23 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pbzip2
In-Reply-To: <201103290750.p2T7oXOG024551@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103290750.p2T7oXOG024551@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik3ZRgfYsPVRWt-SgwAETaTDg+=LKNc6mrz9T-f@mail.gmail.com>

batched

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * pbzip2: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 1.1.1,REV=2010.05.26
> ?- ? to: 1.1.3,REV=2011.03.29
> ?+ pbzip2-1.1.3,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pbzip2-1.1.3,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> --
> Generated by submitpkg
> _______________________________________________
> pkgsubmissions mailing list
> pkgsubmissions at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/pkgsubmissions
>

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Mar 29 21:16:05 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 21:16:05 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ascii
Message-ID: <201103291916.p2TJG5kU003419@login.bo.opencsw.org>

* ascii: new package
  + ascii-3.11,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + ascii-3.11,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar 29 23:22:48 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:22:48 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxml2_2, libxml2_dev,
 libxml2_stub, (...)
In-Reply-To: <201103250000.p2P00Xqr014973@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103250000.p2P00Xqr014973@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik63SmbAU8psBqSwgJos_BaCgSBBJ-BzxTyBsvq@mail.gmail.com>

i THINK I have these batched.
I had to tweak some of my code to make it happen more cleanly.
Might be advisable  if you poked around the display pages and mantis
to see if things looks appropriate.

I probably wont get to the other _stub packages until tomorrow.
Something still doesnt feel right to me, and I'm out of "quiet time"
to investigate.



On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Respins with _stub.
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
>
> * py_libxml2: patchlevel upgrade
> ?- from: 2.7.7,REV=2010.04.10
> ?- ? to: 2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24
> ?+ py_libxml2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ py_libxml2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>
> * libxml2: new package
> ?+ libxml2_2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxml2_2-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxml2_dev-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxml2_dev-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxml2_stub-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ libxml2devel_stub-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ pylibxml2_stub-2.7.8,REV=2011.03.24-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 Mar 29 23:23:46 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:23:46 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ascii
In-Reply-To: <201103291916.p2TJG5kU003419@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103291916.p2TJG5kU003419@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikvKg2UNVQU9nifxq416FrVXe5yWmwDQW2k4uux@mail.gmail.com>

thanks. batched.



On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> * ascii: new package
> ?+ ascii-3.11,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
> ?+ ascii-3.11,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
>

From phil at bolthole.com  Tue Mar 29 23:32:50 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:32:50 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103252053.p2PKrjiU016656@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103252053.p2PKrjiU016656@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimLa93o+0CbequQehQB_WS6xyPTg49foCstSmFS@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> This update should address open bugs filed against the last update.
>
> Specifically, pkg-get can handle it and it doesn't ship it's own class
> action scripts now.
>

Great, thanks.

since there is no stub stuff for me to worry over, and since this has
been waiting a Very Long Time, I'll batch this out and do today's
push.

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Tue Mar 29 23:38:12 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 17:38:12 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ap2_prefork, ap2_suexec, ap2_worker,
	(...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimLa93o+0CbequQehQB_WS6xyPTg49foCstSmFS@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103252053.p2PKrjiU016656@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTimLa93o+0CbequQehQB_WS6xyPTg49foCstSmFS@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c664b03a-4b5f-454b-9557-b7a7b0ab8c46@email.android.com>

There should be a for the dev/devel set. If not, let me know.

Thanks
-Ben

Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote: > This update should address open bugs filed against the last update. > > Specifically, pkg-get can handle it and it doesn't ship it's own class > action scripts now. > Great, thanks. since there is no stub stuff for me to worry over, and since this has been waiting a Very Long Time, I'll batch this out and do today's push._____________________________________________
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/20110329/13e7dca0/attachment.html>

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar 30 00:02:54 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:02:54 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinWH+aCYzApXZTxAuqkixNH0exT0ekAXQbKBkX4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103290754.p2T7sxqP026404@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTinWH+aCYzApXZTxAuqkixNH0exT0ekAXQbKBkX4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinLU0Gj6Y8vwVQ9WYYz=hGnnftG_Es9n9Gdqjb5@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> batched
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> * pca: major version upgrade
>> ?- from: 20101221.01,REV=2010.12.27
>> ?- ? to: 20110329.01,REV=2011.03.29
>> ?+ pca-20110329.01,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-UNCOMMITTED.pkg.gz
>>
>> --

GAAAAHHHH not batched.

Dago.

UNCOMMITTED

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Wed Mar 30 04:48:32 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 22:48:32 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxml2_2, libxml2_dev,
	libxml2_stub, (...)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik63SmbAU8psBqSwgJos_BaCgSBBJ-BzxTyBsvq@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201103250000.p2P00Xqr014973@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTik63SmbAU8psBqSwgJos_BaCgSBBJ-BzxTyBsvq@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1301453220-sup-6184@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Tue Mar 29 17:22:48 -0400 2011:

> I had to tweak some of my code to make it happen more cleanly.
> Might be advisable if you poked around the display pages and mantis
> to see if things looks appropriate.

I still see libxml2_devel on the packages/ list of the website and the
mantis list.

Everything else looks ok though.

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


From dam at opencsw.org  Wed Mar 30 09:08:38 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:08:38 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca
Message-ID: <201103300708.p2U78cYM023617@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Hi Phil,

it looks like I copyied over both the real and the UNCOMMITTED package.
Anyway, just the new one now.

Best regards

  -- Dago

* pca: major version upgrade
  - from: 20101221.01,REV=2010.12.27
  -   to: 20110329.01,REV=2011.03.29
  + pca-20110329.01,REV=2011.03.29-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From phil at bolthole.com  Wed Mar 30 18:20:15 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:20:15 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs pca
In-Reply-To: <201103300708.p2U78cYM023617@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103300708.p2U78cYM023617@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinBAgYrN0qAc3Y5c8=pcwzxmnzw=cadgMeRUdpm@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks. batched.


On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> it looks like I copyied over both the real and the UNCOMMITTED package.
> Anyway, just the new one now.
>
> Best regards
>
> ?-- Dago
>
> * pca: major version upgrade
> ?- from: 20101221.01,REV=2010.12.27
> ?- ? to: 20110329.01,REV=2011.03.29
> ?+ pca-20110329.01,REV=2011.03.29-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  Wed Mar 30 18:25:43 2011
From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown)
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:25:43 -0700
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libxml2_2, libxml2_dev,
 libxml2_stub, (...)
In-Reply-To: <1301453220-sup-6184@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <201103250000.p2P00Xqr014973@login.bo.opencsw.org>
	<AANLkTik63SmbAU8psBqSwgJos_BaCgSBBJ-BzxTyBsvq@mail.gmail.com>
	<1301453220-sup-6184@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=Z-PJjQAm9i1Jc7bX+UxuQEM=Dn7+CK5hFPAPY@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Tue Mar 29 17:22:48 -0400 2011:
>
>> I had to tweak some of my code to make it happen more cleanly.
>> Might be advisable if you poked around the display pages and mantis
>> to see if things looks appropriate.
>
> I still see libxml2_devel on the packages/ list of the website and the
> mantis list.

oh yeah.
On top of everything, I have to deregister the **original** package,
and also manually remove the older package, rather than the nice
automatic replace-older-version stuff I have going on.
These renames are  Such A Pain.
And you guys have stuck me with 120 of them. Grrrrrrr.

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 31 12:31:36 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 12:31:36 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libcares2, libcares_dev,
	libcares_stu(...)
Message-ID: <201103311031.p2VAVaVe023460@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Package split, new names and version bump.

* libcares: new package
  + libcares2-1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcares2-1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcares_dev-1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcares_dev-1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcares_stub-1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
  + libcaresdevel_stub-1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 31 15:25:46 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 15:25:46 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs doxygen, doxygen_doc, doxygendoc_stub
Message-ID: <201103311325.p2VDPkQq022984@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Bump and name sanitize.

* doxygen: patchlevel upgrade
  - from: 1.7.3,REV=2011.01.04
  -   to: 1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31
  + doxygen-1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + doxygen-1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
  + doxygen_doc-1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

* doxygendoc_stub: new package
  + doxygendoc_stub-1.7.4,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From dam at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 31 16:17:45 2011
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:17:45 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs plzip, zutils
Message-ID: <201103311417.p2VEHjIB026940@login.bo.opencsw.org>

Version bumps.

* zutils: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.8,REV=2011.01.05
  -   to: 0.9,REV=2011.03.31
  + zutils-0.9,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + zutils-0.9,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

* plzip: minor version upgrade
  - from: 0.6,REV=2010.07.22
  -   to: 0.7,REV=2011.03.31
  + plzip-0.7,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
  + plzip-0.7,REV=2011.03.31-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

-- 
Generated by submitpkg

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Thu Mar 31 19:19:20 2011
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 13:19:20 -0400
Subject: [csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs libruby18_1, ruby18, ruby18_dev,
	ruby(...)
In-Reply-To: <201103242351.p2ONppUl011931@login.bo.opencsw.org>
References: <201103242351.p2ONppUl011931@login.bo.opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <1301591939-sup-1300@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of Thu Mar 24 19:51:51 -0400 2011:

> The respins with _stub...

Bump.  Mark is waiting on these to respin augeas...

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