From bwalton at opencsw.org Thu Jan 8 16:36:41 2009 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:36:41 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] git in testing Message-ID: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Hi All, I've placed git packages in testing. I think they're pretty solid, but if you're interested in testing them, I'm interested in any feedback you've got. Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 GPG Key Id: 8E89F6D2; Key Server: pgp.mit.edu Contact me to arrange for a CAcert assurance meeting. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20090108/99e8ccc9/attachment.asc From res at colnet.cmhnet.org Thu Jan 22 04:36:13 2009 From: res at colnet.cmhnet.org (Rob Stampfli) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:36:13 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> Just a head's up: The latest clamav build (0.94.2,REV=2008.12.18) is built for the SPARC32PLUS / V8+, and will not run on the older Sparc V7 architecture. Beware of this gotcha if you are planning to upgrade from the 0.92.1,REV=2008.02.11 load on an older Sparc. And as long as I have your attention, I notice that the most recent version of libtool and libtool_rt is older than the prior version: The version I am running is 2.2.4,REV=2008.05.16, whereas the version currently being offered is 1.5.26,REV=2008.12.22. What is recommended? Backing back to 1.5.26 or waiting to see what happens? Thanks, Rob From res at colnet.cmhnet.org Thu Jan 22 06:09:44 2009 From: res at colnet.cmhnet.org (Rob Stampfli) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:09:44 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> Message-ID: <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:36:13PM -0500, Rob Stampfli wrote: > Just a head's up: The latest clamav build (0.94.2,REV=2008.12.18) > is built for the SPARC32PLUS / V8+, and will not run on the older > Sparc V7 architecture. Beware of this gotcha if you are planning > to upgrade from the 0.92.1,REV=2008.02.11 load on an older Sparc. > > And as long as I have your attention, I notice that the most recent > version of libtool and libtool_rt is older than the prior version: > The version I am running is 2.2.4,REV=2008.05.16, whereas the version > currently being offered is 1.5.26,REV=2008.12.22. What is recommended? > Backing back to 1.5.26 or waiting to see what happens? I see the new Python load is also V8+ now, so apparently there has been a change. I realize there has been some sort of split between Blastwave CSW and Opencsw, probably revolving around this very issue from what I've been able to discern. I suppose this means I need to go over to Opencsw for my old systems. Sorry to bother you all. Rob From dam at opencsw.org Thu Jan 22 17:06:02 2009 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:06:02 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> Message-ID: <10EA7A01-0050-4F27-8C7A-D9703EA4E146@opencsw.org> Hi Rob, Am 22.01.2009 um 06:09 schrieb Rob Stampfli: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:36:13PM -0500, Rob Stampfli wrote: >> Just a head's up: The latest clamav build (0.94.2,REV=2008.12.18) >> is built for the SPARC32PLUS / V8+, and will not run on the older >> Sparc V7 architecture. Beware of this gotcha if you are planning >> to upgrade from the 0.92.1,REV=2008.02.11 load on an older Sparc. >> >> And as long as I have your attention, I notice that the most recent >> version of libtool and libtool_rt is older than the prior version: >> The version I am running is 2.2.4,REV=2008.05.16, whereas the version >> currently being offered is 1.5.26,REV=2008.12.22. What is >> recommended? >> Backing back to 1.5.26 or waiting to see what happens? There is a current 2.2.4 version in testing at http://mirror.opencsw.org/testing.html which should be fully functional. I haven't released it yet due to lack of feedback. Please test it and let me know if you encounter any strange things and it will be pushed ASAP. Personally I would like a closer dialog with the user base, so if you are willing to test new packages and give feedback about what you need we can all profit from it :-) > I see the new Python load is also V8+ now, so apparently there has > been a change. I realize there has been some sort of split between > Blastwave CSW and Opencsw, probably revolving around this very issue > from what I've been able to discern. I suppose this means I need > to go over to Opencsw for my old systems. Sorry to bother you all. I just checked that this is also the case on OpenCSW and it is considered a bug. The maintainer (Peter Bonivart) is already aware of the problem. Best regards and sorry for the inconvenience -- Dago From bonivart at opencsw.org Thu Jan 22 18:29:42 2009 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:29:42 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> Message-ID: <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Rob Stampfli wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:36:13PM -0500, Rob Stampfli wrote: >> Just a head's up: The latest clamav build (0.94.2,REV=2008.12.18) >> is built for the SPARC32PLUS / V8+, and will not run on the older >> Sparc V7 architecture. Beware of this gotcha if you are planning >> to upgrade from the 0.92.1,REV=2008.02.11 load on an older Sparc. >> >> And as long as I have your attention, I notice that the most recent >> version of libtool and libtool_rt is older than the prior version: >> The version I am running is 2.2.4,REV=2008.05.16, whereas the version >> currently being offered is 1.5.26,REV=2008.12.22. What is recommended? >> Backing back to 1.5.26 or waiting to see what happens? > > I see the new Python load is also V8+ now, so apparently there has > been a change. I realize there has been some sort of split between > Blastwave CSW and Opencsw, probably revolving around this very issue > from what I've been able to discern. I suppose this means I need > to go over to Opencsw for my old systems. Sorry to bother you all. Sorry about you not being able to run ClamAV. I was experimenting with compiler options to make ClamAV build with Sun Studio and accidentally dropped some other compiler mods when I found a working optimization. I have now rebuilt the Sparc packages so you can test them. You can find them here: http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing.html Please confirm if those are ok. -- /peter From res at colnet.cmhnet.org Thu Jan 22 23:35:03 2009 From: res at colnet.cmhnet.org (Rob Stampfli) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:35:03 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 06:29:42PM +0100, Peter Bonivart wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Rob Stampfli wrote: > >> Just a head's up: The latest clamav build (0.94.2,REV=2008.12.18) > >> is built for the SPARC32PLUS / V8+, and will not run on the older > >> Sparc V7 architecture. ... > Sorry about you not being able to run ClamAV. I was experimenting with > compiler options to make ClamAV build with Sun Studio and accidentally > dropped some other compiler mods when I found a working optimization. > I have now rebuilt the Sparc packages so you can test them. > > You can find them here: http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing.html > > Please confirm if those are ok. First, thanks to everyone who responded. I want to make it clear that my post was in no way an attempt to make a politcal statement. I was simply trying to pass along a problem I observed in the hopes that others who might be similarly affected would see it before getting bitten themselves. Peter, I downloaded your rebuilt clamav packages from the opencsw testing area, and did get it to run. However, it was not without a few issues. Here's what I had to do to get it running on my LX: 1. I did the usual: pkgrm'ed the existing packages and downloaded and installed the new ones (including the cswclassutils dependency). 2. The "/etc/init.d/clamav-milter" script errored out on the first line: . /lib/svc/share/smf_include.sh The smf_include.sh file was not present; I resolved the problem by commenting this line out. 3. Apparently, the format of the /opt/csw/var/clamav directory has changed because the data files from the previous version didn't work. I had to remove them and run freshclam manually to repopulate them. After that, I was able to get clamav-milter to come up, and both sendmail and it appear to be happy, although I haven't thrown a lot at it yet. One nice observation is that it appears to come up much faster than the 0.92.1 load I had been running. Note that I've been told I run this package in an unusual configuration -- I don't run clamav at all, just clamav-milter. So, thanks Peter for genning out a new load. We users really do appreciate everything the opencsw and blastwave crew does for us. Rob From bonivart at opencsw.org Fri Jan 23 00:34:48 2009 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:34:48 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> Message-ID: <625385e30901221534i2a94218dw7d146e42b04f9db2@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Rob Stampfli wrote: > 2. The "/etc/init.d/clamav-milter" script errored out on the first line: > . /lib/svc/share/smf_include.sh > The smf_include.sh file was not present; I resolved the problem by > commenting this line out. Ok, I didn't test the milter part myself so it's just unchanged from the last package (not made by me). Your feedback is greatly appreciated since I didn't get any other reports about the milter part during testing. I will simply do what you did and release the package tomorrow with your change. If you or someone else has ideas on how to improve the milter script please contact me. > 3. Apparently, the format of the /opt/csw/var/clamav directory has changed > because the data files from the previous version didn't work. I had > to remove them and run freshclam manually to repopulate them. It's common that they change/add to the format so that's pretty normal. Did you notice that the package now installs the database files in /var/opt/csw/clamav/db? You're of course free to use any dir you want by setting it in the config files. > After that, I was able to get clamav-milter to come up, and both sendmail > and it appear to be happy, although I haven't thrown a lot at it yet. It's great to know that the milter works. :-) > So, thanks Peter for genning out a new load. We users really do appreciate > everything the opencsw and blastwave crew does for us. Thank you for reporting bugs. Expect an official release tomorrow. -- /peter From ggunselm at emporia.edu Fri Jan 23 04:17:56 2009 From: ggunselm at emporia.edu (Glen Gunselman) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:17:56 -0600 Subject: [csw-users] lsof In-Reply-To: <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> Message-ID: <4978E284.CC54.005D.3@emporia.edu> Are there any plans to update lsof? It looks like an update has been requested several times in the past. Thanks, Glen Gunselman Systems Software Specialist TCS Emporia State University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20090122/a53aa822/attachment.htm From dam at opencsw.org Fri Jan 23 16:18:11 2009 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 16:18:11 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] lsof In-Reply-To: <4978E284.CC54.005D.3@emporia.edu> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> <4978E284.CC54.005D.3@emporia.edu> Message-ID: <93485876-6935-4C77-AEDD-11B8929706AB@opencsw.org> Hi Glen, Am 23.01.2009 um 04:17 schrieb Glen Gunselman: > Are there any plans to update lsof? > > It looks like an update has been requested several times in the past. Plans, yes. We don't currently have Solaris 9 build machines in the farm. I look into it. BTW: If I recall correctly you offered to help in november. We are desperately needing testers who try out stuff in testing at and give feedback. It would be a great help if you used the new packages on some of your machines. Best regards -- Dago -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20090123/bab3cfa8/attachment.htm From ggunselm at emporia.edu Sat Jan 24 02:46:36 2009 From: ggunselm at emporia.edu (Glen Gunselman) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:46:36 -0600 Subject: [csw-users] lsof In-Reply-To: <93485876-6935-4C77-AEDD-11B8929706AB@opencsw.org> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> <4978E284.CC54.005D.3@emporia.edu> <93485876-6935-4C77-AEDD-11B8929706AB@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <497A1E9C.CC54.005D.3@emporia.edu> I looked over the current stuff available for testing and I'm not currently using any of it in a Solaris environment. I'm looking for a current lsof for a Solaris 10 system (update 5). Thanks and have a good weekend, Glen Gunselman Systems Software Specialist TCS Emporia State University >>> Dagobert Michelsen 1/23/2009 9:18 AM >>> Hi Glen, Am 23.01.2009 um 04:17 schrieb Glen Gunselman: Are there any plans to update lsof? It looks like an update has been requested several times in the past. Plans, yes. We don't currently have Solaris 9 build machines in the farm. I look into it. BTW: If I recall correctly you offered to help in november. We are desperately needing testers who try out stuff in testing at and give feedback. It would be a great help if you used the new packages on some of your machines. Best regards -- Dago -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20090123/1dbebb9d/attachment-0001.htm From mats.larsson at ericsson.com Wed Jan 28 13:41:57 2009 From: mats.larsson at ericsson.com (Mats Larsson) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:41:57 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] HELP - non functioning openssl Message-ID: <49805295.6030602@ericsson.com> Hi all, Latest 'pkg-get -uU' gave me a amongst others a non functioning openssl. I'm not even able to do a 'pkg-get -uU' any more: # pg -uU Getting catalog... ld.so.1: wget: fatal: libssl.so.0.9.8: open failed: No such file or directory /usr/bin/pkg-get[34]: 20393 Killed So I went to http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/packages/solaris/opencsw/unstable/sparc/5.8/ and downloaded openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz since libssl.so.0.9.8 live there and did try to pkgadd it instead pkgadd -d ~/downloads/openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg # pkgadd -d openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg ... ## Executing checkinstall script. /var/tmp/dstreAAAIpaW1N/CSWosslrt/install/checkinstall: test: argument expected pkgadd: ERROR: checkinstall script did not complete successfully Installation of failed. No changes were made to the system. I'm lost. Any help appreciated. BR MOL From yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org Wed Jan 28 14:47:59 2009 From: yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org (Yann Rouillard) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 14:47:59 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] HELP - non functioning openssl In-Reply-To: <49805295.6030602@ericsson.com> References: <49805295.6030602@ericsson.com> Message-ID: <4980620F.8090506@pleiades.fr.eu.org> Hi, A fixed package will be pushed in the mirror very soon. Meanwhile you can retrieve the new package on the following page: http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing.html For you arch, it will be: http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing/openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.28_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Yann Mats Larsson a ?crit : > Hi all, > > Latest 'pkg-get -uU' gave me a amongst others a non functioning openssl. > I'm not even able to do a 'pkg-get -uU' any more: > > # pg -uU > Getting catalog... > ld.so.1: wget: fatal: libssl.so.0.9.8: open failed: No such file or > directory > /usr/bin/pkg-get[34]: 20393 Killed > > So I went to > http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/packages/solaris/opencsw/unstable/sparc/5.8/ > and downloaded > openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz since > libssl.so.0.9.8 live there and did try to pkgadd it instead > > pkgadd -d > ~/downloads/openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg > > # pkgadd -d openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg > ... > > ## Executing checkinstall script. > /var/tmp/dstreAAAIpaW1N/CSWosslrt/install/checkinstall: test: argument > expected > pkgadd: ERROR: checkinstall script did not complete successfully > > Installation of failed. > No changes were made to the system. > > I'm lost. Any help appreciated. > > BR MOL > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > users at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/users From mats.larsson at ericsson.com Wed Jan 28 15:03:59 2009 From: mats.larsson at ericsson.com (Mats Larsson) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:03:59 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] HELP - non functioning openssl In-Reply-To: <4980620F.8090506@pleiades.fr.eu.org> References: <49805295.6030602@ericsson.com> <4980620F.8090506@pleiades.fr.eu.org> Message-ID: <498065CF.5070001@ericsson.com> On 2009-01-28 14:47, Yann Rouillard wrote: > Hi, > > A fixed package will be pushed in the mirror very soon. > Meanwhile you can retrieve the new package on the following page: > http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing.html > > For you arch, it will be: > http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing/openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.28_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Thank you for a very quick and accurate response. The fixed pkg works! BR MOL From bonivart at opencsw.org Fri Jan 30 17:47:22 2009 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:47:22 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] /testing dhcp 4.1.0 In-Reply-To: <625385e30901280047j5823f0dfkc289fe0997ce3310@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e30901280047j5823f0dfkc289fe0997ce3310@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <625385e30901300847t541a4baeof04e8bd2f4fe9fe7@mail.gmail.com> I would like some help testing the new ISC DHCP 4.1.0 packages before releasing them. They use cswclassutils for configuration file handling and SMF support. http://mirror.opencsw.org/testing.html dhcp-4.1.0,REV=2009.01.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz dhcp-4.1.0,REV=2009.01.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz dhcp_devel-4.1.0,REV=2009.01.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz dhcp_devel-4.1.0,REV=2009.01.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz -- /peter From mgerdts at gmail.com Fri Jan 30 20:46:06 2009 From: mgerdts at gmail.com (Mike Gerdts) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:46:06 -0600 Subject: [csw-users] Matching up binary package to source + build recipe Message-ID: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> Does OpenCSW provide a way associate a particular source release + patches + build recipe with a particular binary package? I'm thinking of either something similar to the relation between .rpm and .srpm in the Red Hat world or well-known tag names in gar. In other words, if there is a problem with a package (maybe affects only me) is there a generalized way that I would go about getting the source and rebuilding it with only the changes I need. I've read what I can find on how maintainers are supposed to maintain packages, but I don't see anything that would create such a tie-in. Perhaps I'm missing something... Thanks in advance, Mike -- Mike Gerdts http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/ From bwalton at opencsw.org Fri Jan 30 21:09:27 2009 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:09:27 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] Matching up binary package to source + build recipe In-Reply-To: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> References: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1233345938-sup-6856@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Excerpts from Mike Gerdts's message of Fri Jan 30 14:46:06 -0500 2009: Hi Mike, > I've read what I can find on how maintainers are supposed to maintain > packages, but I don't see anything that would create such a tie-in. > Perhaps I'm missing something... For anything built recently, there is a subversion revision id in the PSTAMP field of the pkginfo file. For example, on a box here, I can do: $ pkgparam CSWgit PSTAMP bwalton at build8x-r2758-20090108031723 That gives you a who, what box, subversion id and a timestamp to work with. Older packages won't have this info, but anything new built with GAR will. Does that help? Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 GPG Key Id: 8E89F6D2; Key Server: pgp.mit.edu Contact me to arrange for a CAcert assurance meeting. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20090130/a4efb233/attachment.asc From mgerdts at gmail.com Fri Jan 30 21:20:06 2009 From: mgerdts at gmail.com (Mike Gerdts) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 14:20:06 -0600 Subject: [csw-users] Matching up binary package to source + build recipe In-Reply-To: <1233345938-sup-6856@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> References: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> <1233345938-sup-6856@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <65f8f3ad0901301220u51ad5fe8la228e2667c5fe4bb@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > Excerpts from Mike Gerdts's message of Fri Jan 30 14:46:06 -0500 2009: > > Hi Mike, > >> I've read what I can find on how maintainers are supposed to maintain >> packages, but I don't see anything that would create such a tie-in. >> Perhaps I'm missing something... > > For anything built recently, there is a subversion revision id in the > PSTAMP field of the pkginfo file. For example, on a box here, I can > do: > > $ pkgparam CSWgit PSTAMP > bwalton at build8x-r2758-20090108031723 > > That gives you a who, what box, subversion id and a timestamp to work > with. Older packages won't have this info, but anything new built > with GAR will. > > Does that help? Yep - that is what I was looking for. Do all new packages have to be built with GAR, or is that a decision left to the maintainer? -- Mike Gerdts http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/ From bwalton at opencsw.org Fri Jan 30 21:25:23 2009 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:25:23 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] Matching up binary package to source + build recipe In-Reply-To: <65f8f3ad0901301220u51ad5fe8la228e2667c5fe4bb@mail.gmail.com> References: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> <1233345938-sup-6856@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <65f8f3ad0901301220u51ad5fe8la228e2667c5fe4bb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1233347038-sup-2214@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Excerpts from Mike Gerdts's message of Fri Jan 30 15:20:06 -0500 2009: > Yep - that is what I was looking for. Do all new packages have to be > built with GAR, or is that a decision left to the maintainer? There is no hard/fast rule on this. I couldn't even give you numbers as to how many packages are built with GAR vs those rolled in some other way. I do see more and more imports of older packages into GAR each day though. Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 GPG Key Id: 8E89F6D2; Key Server: pgp.mit.edu Contact me to arrange for a CAcert assurance meeting. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20090130/bc115b1e/attachment.asc From dam at opencsw.org Fri Jan 30 21:37:25 2009 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 21:37:25 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] Matching up binary package to source + build recipe In-Reply-To: <65f8f3ad0901301220u51ad5fe8la228e2667c5fe4bb@mail.gmail.com> References: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> <1233345938-sup-6856@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <65f8f3ad0901301220u51ad5fe8la228e2667c5fe4bb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0ECF2C0A-41FA-4783-9EA3-B67FE18D9602@opencsw.org> Hi Mike, Am 30.01.2009 um 21:20 schrieb Mike Gerdts: > Yep - that is what I was looking for. Do all new packages have to be > built with GAR, or is that a decision left to the maintainer? The usage of GAR is not mandatory, but strongly encouraged. More and more existing packages are moved into GAR and new packages are almost always build with GAR. I guess you already found http://gar.opencsw.org where you can also browse the build recipes. Let me know if you need anything else. Best regards -- Dago From bwalton at opencsw.org Thu Jan 8 16:36:41 2009 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:36:41 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] git in testing Message-ID: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Hi All, I've placed git packages in testing. I think they're pretty solid, but if you're interested in testing them, I'm interested in any feedback you've got. Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 GPG Key Id: 8E89F6D2; Key Server: pgp.mit.edu Contact me to arrange for a CAcert assurance meeting. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From res at colnet.cmhnet.org Thu Jan 22 04:36:13 2009 From: res at colnet.cmhnet.org (Rob Stampfli) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:36:13 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> Just a head's up: The latest clamav build (0.94.2,REV=2008.12.18) is built for the SPARC32PLUS / V8+, and will not run on the older Sparc V7 architecture. Beware of this gotcha if you are planning to upgrade from the 0.92.1,REV=2008.02.11 load on an older Sparc. And as long as I have your attention, I notice that the most recent version of libtool and libtool_rt is older than the prior version: The version I am running is 2.2.4,REV=2008.05.16, whereas the version currently being offered is 1.5.26,REV=2008.12.22. What is recommended? Backing back to 1.5.26 or waiting to see what happens? Thanks, Rob From res at colnet.cmhnet.org Thu Jan 22 06:09:44 2009 From: res at colnet.cmhnet.org (Rob Stampfli) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:09:44 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> Message-ID: <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:36:13PM -0500, Rob Stampfli wrote: > Just a head's up: The latest clamav build (0.94.2,REV=2008.12.18) > is built for the SPARC32PLUS / V8+, and will not run on the older > Sparc V7 architecture. Beware of this gotcha if you are planning > to upgrade from the 0.92.1,REV=2008.02.11 load on an older Sparc. > > And as long as I have your attention, I notice that the most recent > version of libtool and libtool_rt is older than the prior version: > The version I am running is 2.2.4,REV=2008.05.16, whereas the version > currently being offered is 1.5.26,REV=2008.12.22. What is recommended? > Backing back to 1.5.26 or waiting to see what happens? I see the new Python load is also V8+ now, so apparently there has been a change. I realize there has been some sort of split between Blastwave CSW and Opencsw, probably revolving around this very issue from what I've been able to discern. I suppose this means I need to go over to Opencsw for my old systems. Sorry to bother you all. Rob From dam at opencsw.org Thu Jan 22 17:06:02 2009 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:06:02 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> Message-ID: <10EA7A01-0050-4F27-8C7A-D9703EA4E146@opencsw.org> Hi Rob, Am 22.01.2009 um 06:09 schrieb Rob Stampfli: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:36:13PM -0500, Rob Stampfli wrote: >> Just a head's up: The latest clamav build (0.94.2,REV=2008.12.18) >> is built for the SPARC32PLUS / V8+, and will not run on the older >> Sparc V7 architecture. Beware of this gotcha if you are planning >> to upgrade from the 0.92.1,REV=2008.02.11 load on an older Sparc. >> >> And as long as I have your attention, I notice that the most recent >> version of libtool and libtool_rt is older than the prior version: >> The version I am running is 2.2.4,REV=2008.05.16, whereas the version >> currently being offered is 1.5.26,REV=2008.12.22. What is >> recommended? >> Backing back to 1.5.26 or waiting to see what happens? There is a current 2.2.4 version in testing at http://mirror.opencsw.org/testing.html which should be fully functional. I haven't released it yet due to lack of feedback. Please test it and let me know if you encounter any strange things and it will be pushed ASAP. Personally I would like a closer dialog with the user base, so if you are willing to test new packages and give feedback about what you need we can all profit from it :-) > I see the new Python load is also V8+ now, so apparently there has > been a change. I realize there has been some sort of split between > Blastwave CSW and Opencsw, probably revolving around this very issue > from what I've been able to discern. I suppose this means I need > to go over to Opencsw for my old systems. Sorry to bother you all. I just checked that this is also the case on OpenCSW and it is considered a bug. The maintainer (Peter Bonivart) is already aware of the problem. Best regards and sorry for the inconvenience -- Dago From bonivart at opencsw.org Thu Jan 22 18:29:42 2009 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:29:42 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> Message-ID: <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Rob Stampfli wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:36:13PM -0500, Rob Stampfli wrote: >> Just a head's up: The latest clamav build (0.94.2,REV=2008.12.18) >> is built for the SPARC32PLUS / V8+, and will not run on the older >> Sparc V7 architecture. Beware of this gotcha if you are planning >> to upgrade from the 0.92.1,REV=2008.02.11 load on an older Sparc. >> >> And as long as I have your attention, I notice that the most recent >> version of libtool and libtool_rt is older than the prior version: >> The version I am running is 2.2.4,REV=2008.05.16, whereas the version >> currently being offered is 1.5.26,REV=2008.12.22. What is recommended? >> Backing back to 1.5.26 or waiting to see what happens? > > I see the new Python load is also V8+ now, so apparently there has > been a change. I realize there has been some sort of split between > Blastwave CSW and Opencsw, probably revolving around this very issue > from what I've been able to discern. I suppose this means I need > to go over to Opencsw for my old systems. Sorry to bother you all. Sorry about you not being able to run ClamAV. I was experimenting with compiler options to make ClamAV build with Sun Studio and accidentally dropped some other compiler mods when I found a working optimization. I have now rebuilt the Sparc packages so you can test them. You can find them here: http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing.html Please confirm if those are ok. -- /peter From res at colnet.cmhnet.org Thu Jan 22 23:35:03 2009 From: res at colnet.cmhnet.org (Rob Stampfli) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:35:03 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 06:29:42PM +0100, Peter Bonivart wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Rob Stampfli wrote: > >> Just a head's up: The latest clamav build (0.94.2,REV=2008.12.18) > >> is built for the SPARC32PLUS / V8+, and will not run on the older > >> Sparc V7 architecture. ... > Sorry about you not being able to run ClamAV. I was experimenting with > compiler options to make ClamAV build with Sun Studio and accidentally > dropped some other compiler mods when I found a working optimization. > I have now rebuilt the Sparc packages so you can test them. > > You can find them here: http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing.html > > Please confirm if those are ok. First, thanks to everyone who responded. I want to make it clear that my post was in no way an attempt to make a politcal statement. I was simply trying to pass along a problem I observed in the hopes that others who might be similarly affected would see it before getting bitten themselves. Peter, I downloaded your rebuilt clamav packages from the opencsw testing area, and did get it to run. However, it was not without a few issues. Here's what I had to do to get it running on my LX: 1. I did the usual: pkgrm'ed the existing packages and downloaded and installed the new ones (including the cswclassutils dependency). 2. The "/etc/init.d/clamav-milter" script errored out on the first line: . /lib/svc/share/smf_include.sh The smf_include.sh file was not present; I resolved the problem by commenting this line out. 3. Apparently, the format of the /opt/csw/var/clamav directory has changed because the data files from the previous version didn't work. I had to remove them and run freshclam manually to repopulate them. After that, I was able to get clamav-milter to come up, and both sendmail and it appear to be happy, although I haven't thrown a lot at it yet. One nice observation is that it appears to come up much faster than the 0.92.1 load I had been running. Note that I've been told I run this package in an unusual configuration -- I don't run clamav at all, just clamav-milter. So, thanks Peter for genning out a new load. We users really do appreciate everything the opencsw and blastwave crew does for us. Rob From bonivart at opencsw.org Fri Jan 23 00:34:48 2009 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:34:48 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] Warning: Latest Clamav does not work on old Sparcs In-Reply-To: <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> Message-ID: <625385e30901221534i2a94218dw7d146e42b04f9db2@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Rob Stampfli wrote: > 2. The "/etc/init.d/clamav-milter" script errored out on the first line: > . /lib/svc/share/smf_include.sh > The smf_include.sh file was not present; I resolved the problem by > commenting this line out. Ok, I didn't test the milter part myself so it's just unchanged from the last package (not made by me). Your feedback is greatly appreciated since I didn't get any other reports about the milter part during testing. I will simply do what you did and release the package tomorrow with your change. If you or someone else has ideas on how to improve the milter script please contact me. > 3. Apparently, the format of the /opt/csw/var/clamav directory has changed > because the data files from the previous version didn't work. I had > to remove them and run freshclam manually to repopulate them. It's common that they change/add to the format so that's pretty normal. Did you notice that the package now installs the database files in /var/opt/csw/clamav/db? You're of course free to use any dir you want by setting it in the config files. > After that, I was able to get clamav-milter to come up, and both sendmail > and it appear to be happy, although I haven't thrown a lot at it yet. It's great to know that the milter works. :-) > So, thanks Peter for genning out a new load. We users really do appreciate > everything the opencsw and blastwave crew does for us. Thank you for reporting bugs. Expect an official release tomorrow. -- /peter From ggunselm at emporia.edu Fri Jan 23 04:17:56 2009 From: ggunselm at emporia.edu (Glen Gunselman) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:17:56 -0600 Subject: [csw-users] lsof In-Reply-To: <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> Message-ID: <4978E284.CC54.005D.3@emporia.edu> Are there any plans to update lsof? It looks like an update has been requested several times in the past. Thanks, Glen Gunselman Systems Software Specialist TCS Emporia State University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dam at opencsw.org Fri Jan 23 16:18:11 2009 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 16:18:11 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] lsof In-Reply-To: <4978E284.CC54.005D.3@emporia.edu> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> <4978E284.CC54.005D.3@emporia.edu> Message-ID: <93485876-6935-4C77-AEDD-11B8929706AB@opencsw.org> Hi Glen, Am 23.01.2009 um 04:17 schrieb Glen Gunselman: > Are there any plans to update lsof? > > It looks like an update has been requested several times in the past. Plans, yes. We don't currently have Solaris 9 build machines in the farm. I look into it. BTW: If I recall correctly you offered to help in november. We are desperately needing testers who try out stuff in testing at and give feedback. It would be a great help if you used the new packages on some of your machines. Best regards -- Dago -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ggunselm at emporia.edu Sat Jan 24 02:46:36 2009 From: ggunselm at emporia.edu (Glen Gunselman) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:46:36 -0600 Subject: [csw-users] lsof In-Reply-To: <93485876-6935-4C77-AEDD-11B8929706AB@opencsw.org> References: <1231428990-sup-1369@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <20090122033613.GA31064@keevey> <20090122050944.GA31372@keevey> <625385e30901220929q3251d481ye4cf0ddbe57314e8@mail.gmail.com> <20090122223502.GA2836@keevey> <4978E284.CC54.005D.3@emporia.edu> <93485876-6935-4C77-AEDD-11B8929706AB@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <497A1E9C.CC54.005D.3@emporia.edu> I looked over the current stuff available for testing and I'm not currently using any of it in a Solaris environment. I'm looking for a current lsof for a Solaris 10 system (update 5). Thanks and have a good weekend, Glen Gunselman Systems Software Specialist TCS Emporia State University >>> Dagobert Michelsen 1/23/2009 9:18 AM >>> Hi Glen, Am 23.01.2009 um 04:17 schrieb Glen Gunselman: Are there any plans to update lsof? It looks like an update has been requested several times in the past. Plans, yes. We don't currently have Solaris 9 build machines in the farm. I look into it. BTW: If I recall correctly you offered to help in november. We are desperately needing testers who try out stuff in testing at and give feedback. It would be a great help if you used the new packages on some of your machines. Best regards -- Dago -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mats.larsson at ericsson.com Wed Jan 28 13:41:57 2009 From: mats.larsson at ericsson.com (Mats Larsson) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:41:57 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] HELP - non functioning openssl Message-ID: <49805295.6030602@ericsson.com> Hi all, Latest 'pkg-get -uU' gave me a amongst others a non functioning openssl. I'm not even able to do a 'pkg-get -uU' any more: # pg -uU Getting catalog... ld.so.1: wget: fatal: libssl.so.0.9.8: open failed: No such file or directory /usr/bin/pkg-get[34]: 20393 Killed So I went to http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/packages/solaris/opencsw/unstable/sparc/5.8/ and downloaded openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz since libssl.so.0.9.8 live there and did try to pkgadd it instead pkgadd -d ~/downloads/openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg # pkgadd -d openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg ... ## Executing checkinstall script. /var/tmp/dstreAAAIpaW1N/CSWosslrt/install/checkinstall: test: argument expected pkgadd: ERROR: checkinstall script did not complete successfully Installation of failed. No changes were made to the system. I'm lost. Any help appreciated. BR MOL From yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org Wed Jan 28 14:47:59 2009 From: yann at pleiades.fr.eu.org (Yann Rouillard) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 14:47:59 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] HELP - non functioning openssl In-Reply-To: <49805295.6030602@ericsson.com> References: <49805295.6030602@ericsson.com> Message-ID: <4980620F.8090506@pleiades.fr.eu.org> Hi, A fixed package will be pushed in the mirror very soon. Meanwhile you can retrieve the new package on the following page: http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing.html For you arch, it will be: http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing/openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.28_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Yann Mats Larsson a ?crit : > Hi all, > > Latest 'pkg-get -uU' gave me a amongst others a non functioning openssl. > I'm not even able to do a 'pkg-get -uU' any more: > > # pg -uU > Getting catalog... > ld.so.1: wget: fatal: libssl.so.0.9.8: open failed: No such file or > directory > /usr/bin/pkg-get[34]: 20393 Killed > > So I went to > http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/packages/solaris/opencsw/unstable/sparc/5.8/ > and downloaded > openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz since > libssl.so.0.9.8 live there and did try to pkgadd it instead > > pkgadd -d > ~/downloads/openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg > > # pkgadd -d openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.25_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg > ... > > ## Executing checkinstall script. > /var/tmp/dstreAAAIpaW1N/CSWosslrt/install/checkinstall: test: argument > expected > pkgadd: ERROR: checkinstall script did not complete successfully > > Installation of failed. > No changes were made to the system. > > I'm lost. Any help appreciated. > > BR MOL > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > users at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/users From mats.larsson at ericsson.com Wed Jan 28 15:03:59 2009 From: mats.larsson at ericsson.com (Mats Larsson) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:03:59 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] HELP - non functioning openssl In-Reply-To: <4980620F.8090506@pleiades.fr.eu.org> References: <49805295.6030602@ericsson.com> <4980620F.8090506@pleiades.fr.eu.org> Message-ID: <498065CF.5070001@ericsson.com> On 2009-01-28 14:47, Yann Rouillard wrote: > Hi, > > A fixed package will be pushed in the mirror very soon. > Meanwhile you can retrieve the new package on the following page: > http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing.html > > For you arch, it will be: > http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/testing/openssl_rt-0.9.8,REV=2009.01.28_rev=j-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz Thank you for a very quick and accurate response. The fixed pkg works! BR MOL From bonivart at opencsw.org Fri Jan 30 17:47:22 2009 From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:47:22 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] /testing dhcp 4.1.0 In-Reply-To: <625385e30901280047j5823f0dfkc289fe0997ce3310@mail.gmail.com> References: <625385e30901280047j5823f0dfkc289fe0997ce3310@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <625385e30901300847t541a4baeof04e8bd2f4fe9fe7@mail.gmail.com> I would like some help testing the new ISC DHCP 4.1.0 packages before releasing them. They use cswclassutils for configuration file handling and SMF support. http://mirror.opencsw.org/testing.html dhcp-4.1.0,REV=2009.01.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz dhcp-4.1.0,REV=2009.01.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz dhcp_devel-4.1.0,REV=2009.01.27-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz dhcp_devel-4.1.0,REV=2009.01.27-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz -- /peter From mgerdts at gmail.com Fri Jan 30 20:46:06 2009 From: mgerdts at gmail.com (Mike Gerdts) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:46:06 -0600 Subject: [csw-users] Matching up binary package to source + build recipe Message-ID: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> Does OpenCSW provide a way associate a particular source release + patches + build recipe with a particular binary package? I'm thinking of either something similar to the relation between .rpm and .srpm in the Red Hat world or well-known tag names in gar. In other words, if there is a problem with a package (maybe affects only me) is there a generalized way that I would go about getting the source and rebuilding it with only the changes I need. I've read what I can find on how maintainers are supposed to maintain packages, but I don't see anything that would create such a tie-in. Perhaps I'm missing something... Thanks in advance, Mike -- Mike Gerdts http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/ From bwalton at opencsw.org Fri Jan 30 21:09:27 2009 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:09:27 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] Matching up binary package to source + build recipe In-Reply-To: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> References: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1233345938-sup-6856@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Excerpts from Mike Gerdts's message of Fri Jan 30 14:46:06 -0500 2009: Hi Mike, > I've read what I can find on how maintainers are supposed to maintain > packages, but I don't see anything that would create such a tie-in. > Perhaps I'm missing something... For anything built recently, there is a subversion revision id in the PSTAMP field of the pkginfo file. For example, on a box here, I can do: $ pkgparam CSWgit PSTAMP bwalton at build8x-r2758-20090108031723 That gives you a who, what box, subversion id and a timestamp to work with. Older packages won't have this info, but anything new built with GAR will. Does that help? Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 GPG Key Id: 8E89F6D2; Key Server: pgp.mit.edu Contact me to arrange for a CAcert assurance meeting. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mgerdts at gmail.com Fri Jan 30 21:20:06 2009 From: mgerdts at gmail.com (Mike Gerdts) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 14:20:06 -0600 Subject: [csw-users] Matching up binary package to source + build recipe In-Reply-To: <1233345938-sup-6856@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> References: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> <1233345938-sup-6856@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: <65f8f3ad0901301220u51ad5fe8la228e2667c5fe4bb@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Ben Walton wrote: > Excerpts from Mike Gerdts's message of Fri Jan 30 14:46:06 -0500 2009: > > Hi Mike, > >> I've read what I can find on how maintainers are supposed to maintain >> packages, but I don't see anything that would create such a tie-in. >> Perhaps I'm missing something... > > For anything built recently, there is a subversion revision id in the > PSTAMP field of the pkginfo file. For example, on a box here, I can > do: > > $ pkgparam CSWgit PSTAMP > bwalton at build8x-r2758-20090108031723 > > That gives you a who, what box, subversion id and a timestamp to work > with. Older packages won't have this info, but anything new built > with GAR will. > > Does that help? Yep - that is what I was looking for. Do all new packages have to be built with GAR, or is that a decision left to the maintainer? -- Mike Gerdts http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/ From bwalton at opencsw.org Fri Jan 30 21:25:23 2009 From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:25:23 -0500 Subject: [csw-users] Matching up binary package to source + build recipe In-Reply-To: <65f8f3ad0901301220u51ad5fe8la228e2667c5fe4bb@mail.gmail.com> References: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> <1233345938-sup-6856@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <65f8f3ad0901301220u51ad5fe8la228e2667c5fe4bb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1233347038-sup-2214@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> Excerpts from Mike Gerdts's message of Fri Jan 30 15:20:06 -0500 2009: > Yep - that is what I was looking for. Do all new packages have to be > built with GAR, or is that a decision left to the maintainer? There is no hard/fast rule on this. I couldn't even give you numbers as to how many packages are built with GAR vs those rolled in some other way. I do see more and more imports of older packages into GAR each day though. Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 GPG Key Id: 8E89F6D2; Key Server: pgp.mit.edu Contact me to arrange for a CAcert assurance meeting. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dam at opencsw.org Fri Jan 30 21:37:25 2009 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 21:37:25 +0100 Subject: [csw-users] Matching up binary package to source + build recipe In-Reply-To: <65f8f3ad0901301220u51ad5fe8la228e2667c5fe4bb@mail.gmail.com> References: <65f8f3ad0901301146n70d20450y5f0fa75ad122658a@mail.gmail.com> <1233345938-sup-6856@ntdws12.chass.utoronto.ca> <65f8f3ad0901301220u51ad5fe8la228e2667c5fe4bb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0ECF2C0A-41FA-4783-9EA3-B67FE18D9602@opencsw.org> Hi Mike, Am 30.01.2009 um 21:20 schrieb Mike Gerdts: > Yep - that is what I was looking for. Do all new packages have to be > built with GAR, or is that a decision left to the maintainer? The usage of GAR is not mandatory, but strongly encouraged. More and more existing packages are moved into GAR and new packages are almost always build with GAR. I guess you already found http://gar.opencsw.org where you can also browse the build recipes. Let me know if you need anything else. Best regards -- Dago