From owner-freebsd-qa Tue Oct 24 5:20: 7 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net (tisch.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.157]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A777C37B4C5; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 05:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca7-180.ix.netcom.com [209.109.235.180]) by tisch.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA30589; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 08:19:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.11.1/8.11.0) id e9OCIUa05307; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 05:18:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami@cs.berkeley.edu) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 05:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200010241218.e9OCIUa05307@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: silvia.hip.berkeley.edu: asami set sender to asami@cs.berkeley.edu using -f To: kris@FreeBSD.org Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, qa@FreeBSD.org, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp In-reply-to: <20000909155557.B40986@freefall.freebsd.org> (message from Kris Kennaway on Sat, 9 Sep 2000 15:55:57 -0700) Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default From: asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) References: <200009091343.e89Dhg411508@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000909155557.B40986@freefall.freebsd.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Does anyone know the status of PAM support in XFree86-4? Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Tue Oct 24 5:50:51 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br (unknown [200.248.148.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98B8637B479; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 05:50:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (casantos@localhost) by gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA01696; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 12:52:45 GMT (envelope-from casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br) X-Authentication-Warning: gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br: casantos owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 12:52:45 +0000 (GMT) From: Carlos A M dos Santos To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami Cc: kris@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default In-Reply-To: <200010241218.e9OCIUa05307@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > Does anyone know the status of PAM support in XFree86-4? > > Satoshi Try this: --- Original/xc/config/cf/FreeBSD.cf Mon Sep 4 13:33:26 2000 +++ xc/config/cf/FreeBSD.cf Tue Oct 24 12:44:59 2000 @@ -358,6 +408,9 @@ #else #define ServerOSDefines XFree86ServerOSDefines -DDDXTIME -DXNO_SYSCONF #define XawI18nDefines -DUSE_XWCHAR_STRING -DUSE_XMBTOWC +#endif +#ifndef HasPam +#define HasPam YES #endif /* The GCC strength-reduce bug is fixed for FreeBSD 2.1.5 and later */ --- Original/xc/programs/xdm/Imakefile Tue Oct 24 12:53:55 2000 +++ xc/programs/xdm/Imakefile Tue Oct 24 12:52:46 2000 @@ -75,11 +75,6 @@ PWD_DEFINES = -DUSESHADOW -DSHADOWSUITE #endif -#if HasPam -PAM_LIBRARIES = -lpam DlLibrary -PAM_DEFINES = -DUSE_PAM -#endif - #if !defined(i386IscArchitecture) && !defined(i386ScoArchitecture) && !defined(LinuxArchitecture) && !defined(NTOArchitecture) && !defined(SGIArchitecture) SYS_LIBRARIES3 = -lresolv #endif @@ -89,6 +84,11 @@ #if defined(LinuxArchitecture) && (!UseElfFormat || LinuxShadowSuite) SYS_LIBRARIES1 = -lshadow #endif +#endif + +#if HasPam +PAM_LIBRARIES = -lpam DlLibrary +PAM_DEFINES = -DUSE_PAM #endif #if defined(UltrixArchitecture) -- Carlos A. M. dos Santos Federal University of Pelotas Meteorological Research Center Av. Ildefonso Simoes Lopes 2791 Pelotas, RS, Brasil, CEP 96060-290 WWW: http://www.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br RENPAC (X.25): 153231641 Phone: +55 53 277-6767 FAX: +55 53 277-6722 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Wed Oct 25 3:46: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net [207.69.200.246]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2C2537B479; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 03:46:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca7-180.ix.netcom.com [209.109.235.180]) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA06124; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 06:44:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.11.1/8.11.0) id e9PAeqI07419; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 03:40:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami) To: Jordan Hubbard Cc: qa@freebsd.org, steve@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reminder: Just 7 days till 4.2 code freeze! References: <21563.972426133@winston.osd.bsdi.com> From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 25 Oct 2000 03:39:56 -0700 In-Reply-To: Jordan Hubbard's message of "Tue, 24 Oct 2000 15:22:13 -0700" Message-ID: Lines: 10 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * From: Jordan Hubbard * The final build and "split" of packages for 4.2 will also be due on * November 7th, after which time no new packages will be accepted for * inclusion with the release. I'm calling this one early because So you want the split packages on 11/7, right? Steve, when do you need the i386 package set? Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Wed Oct 25 4:32:10 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from winston.osd.bsdi.com (winston.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.27.229]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADDE237B4C5; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 04:32:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from winston.osd.bsdi.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by winston.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e9PBW3443992; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 04:32:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com) To: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Cc: qa@freebsd.org, steve@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reminder: Just 7 days till 4.2 code freeze! In-Reply-To: Message from asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) of "25 Oct 2000 03:39:56 PDT." Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 04:32:03 -0700 Message-ID: <43989.972473523@winston.osd.bsdi.com> From: Jordan Hubbard Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > So you want the split packages on 11/7, right? Steve, when do you > need the i386 package set? Right. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Wed Oct 25 6:20:39 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from spoon.beta.com (064-184-210-067.inaddr.vitts.com [64.184.210.67]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC9CE37B4C5 for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 06:20:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spoon.beta.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spoon.beta.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9PDKau24427 for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:20:37 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mcgovern@spoon.beta.com) Message-Id: <200010251320.e9PDKau24427@spoon.beta.com> To: qa@freebsd.org Subject: 4.2 Freeze 11/7... Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:20:36 -0400 From: Brian McGovern Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I haven't seen much traffic on this list since I've seen word of the code freeze, so I guess I'll do my standard "project kickoff" to try to get some time on 4.2 before it ships. Now that I have an operating work space again, I can be a little more active... Based on the fact my personal preference is to take build 3-4 days apart to give developers a chance to fix anything we find before we have to do another download and test cycle, I suggest (and I will look at) the following -CURRENT snapshots as test candidates: 10/27 10/31 11/3 11/6 Code freezes on 11/7. We should therefore also grab the 11/8, and treat it as a release candidate. Can I get a roll call from people who will be able to work this plan, so I can tell how many eyes will be on it? -Brian To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Wed Oct 25 11:34:43 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from pike.osd.bsdi.com (pike.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.28.222]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CF1E37B479 for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 11:34:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (ether.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.28.196]) by pike.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e9PIY4f07609; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 11:34:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <200010251320.e9PDKau24427@spoon.beta.com> Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 11:34:45 -0700 (PDT) From: John Baldwin To: Brian McGovern Subject: RE: 4.2 Freeze 11/7... Cc: qa@FreeBSD.org Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 25-Oct-00 Brian McGovern wrote: > I haven't seen much traffic on this list since I've seen word of the > code freeze, so I guess I'll do my standard "project kickoff" to try to > get some time on 4.2 before it ships. Now that I have an operating work > space again, I can be a little more active... > > Based on the fact my personal preference is to take build 3-4 days > apart to give developers a chance to fix anything we find before we have > to do another download and test cycle, I suggest (and I will look at) the > following -CURRENT snapshots as test candidates: ^^^^^^^ I really hope you mean 4.1.1-STABLE snapshots. :) > 10/27 > 10/31 > 11/3 > 11/6 > > Code freezes on 11/7. We should therefore also grab the 11/8, and treat it > as a release candidate. > > Can I get a roll call from people who will be able to work this plan, so I > can > tell how many eyes will be on it? > > -Brian -- John Baldwin -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Thu Oct 26 2:44:45 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17A8F37B479; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 02:44:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net [207.69.200.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6345E6E322C; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 02:44:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca7-180.ix.netcom.com [209.109.235.180]) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id FAA16421; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 05:43:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.11.1/8.11.0) id e9Q9hNv22694; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 02:43:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami) To: Carlos A M dos Santos Cc: kris@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default References: From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 26 Oct 2000 02:43:21 -0700 In-Reply-To: Carlos A M dos Santos's message of "Tue, 24 Oct 2000 12:52:45 +0000 (GMT)" Message-ID: Lines: 24 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * From: Carlos A M dos Santos * Try this: Thanks, committed. Are there any other outstanding issues re throwing the big switch and making XFree86-4 the default now? (As it says in the subject line...you guys thought I replied to an old mail by mistake? :) In case someone missed the previous discussion, "the XFree86-4 server doesn't support my card" is not a valid reason. We already have a whole bunch of xtt-* servers, which are based on 3.3.6 and should work just fine on such machines. The question is whether we want to have people who have cards that are supported by both 3.3.6 and 4.0 use the new server, and also have people use the 4.0 libraries etc. instead of 3.3.6 counterparts. I've been compiling the mid-week (non-ftp) packages with 4.0 for a while, and other than the HTML manpage stuff (which should not be hard to fix), most ports seem to compile just fine. Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Thu Oct 26 3:52:19 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br (gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br [200.248.148.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B88C037B479; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 03:52:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (casantos@localhost) by gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA00539; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:55:31 GMT (envelope-from casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br) X-Authentication-Warning: gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br: casantos owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:55:30 +0000 (GMT) From: Carlos A M dos Santos To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami Cc: kris@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 26 Oct 2000, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > Are there any other outstanding issues re throwing the big switch and > making XFree86-4 the default now? (As it says in the subject > line...you guys thought I replied to an old mail by mistake? :) There was a recent modification in Xt that prevents some Xaw and Motif programs from running correctly. This may be a problem. > In case someone missed the previous discussion, "the XFree86-4 server > doesn't support my card" is not a valid reason. We already have a > whole bunch of xtt-* servers, which are based on 3.3.6 and should work > just fine on such machines. Provided that the servers can run without problems, I agree with you. I'm currently using the XFree86-4 "userland" :-) with a XFree86-3 server at home because my S3 Trio64V+ card is not supported yet. One advantage is that I can use the new Lucidux fonts, that look great. > The question is whether we want to have people who have cards that are > supported by both 3.3.6 and 4.0 use the new server, and also have > people use the 4.0 libraries etc. instead of 3.3.6 counterparts. Server configuration may be a problem, since the it changed very much from XFree86-3 to XFree86-4. One possible solution would be to install both versions of XF86Setup and xf{86,98}config and let the user choose between them. > I've been compiling the mid-week (non-ftp) packages with 4.0 for a > while, and other than the HTML manpage stuff (which should not be hard > to fix), most ports seem to compile just fine. > > Satoshi The HTML manpage stuff works more-or-less well for me, but the cut-down version of rman used in XFree86 has problems with some pages (eg. it does not recognizes mdoc). I had big problems with the Motif manual pages, possibly because they were generated from SGML source. I submited a patch to OpenMotif (available in MotifZone) that fixes the manpage installation. -- Carlos A. M. dos Santos Federal University of Pelotas Meteorological Research Center Av. Ildefonso Simoes Lopes 2791 Pelotas, RS, Brasil, CEP 96060-290 WWW: http://www.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br RENPAC (X.25): 153231641 Phone: +55 53 277-6767 FAX: +55 53 277-6722 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Thu Oct 26 3:55:59 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br (gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br [200.248.148.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1349937B4C5; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 03:55:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (casantos@localhost) by gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA00550; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:59:12 GMT (envelope-from casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br) X-Authentication-Warning: gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br: casantos owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:59:12 +0000 (GMT) From: Carlos A M dos Santos To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami Cc: kris@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Carlos A M dos Santos wrote: > I had big problems with the Motif manual pages, possibly because they were > generated from SGML source. I submited a patch to OpenMotif (available in > MotifZone) that fixes the manpage installation. But the HTML manuals still look ugly :-(. -- Carlos A. M. dos Santos Federal University of Pelotas Meteorological Research Center Av. Ildefonso Simoes Lopes 2791 Pelotas, RS, Brasil, CEP 96060-290 WWW: http://www.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br RENPAC (X.25): 153231641 Phone: +55 53 277-6767 FAX: +55 53 277-6722 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Thu Oct 26 5: 3:43 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from kinetic.ki.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de (r1629.str.dial.surf-callino.de [213.21.16.105]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC81037B479; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 05:03:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kinetic.ki.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA00672; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 14:00:02 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from marko@kinetic.ki.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de) To: asami@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com, qa@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Package conflicts Reply-To: marko@ki.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de X-Mailer: Mew version 1.92.4 on Emacs 19.34 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; boundary="--Next_Part(Thu_Oct_26_13:59:55_2000_809)--" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20001026140002T.marko@kinetic.ki.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de> Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 14:00:02 +0200 From: Marko Schuetz X-Dispatcher: imput version 971024 Lines: 109 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG ----Next_Part(Thu_Oct_26_13:59:55_2000_809)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I recently noticed an annoying package conflict between libxml-1.8.9 and libxml2-2.1.1. Package siag-3.3.8 depends on libxml2-2.1.1 and gnofin-0.8.0 depends on libxml-1.8.9. Unfortunately, both libxml are incompatible: if libxml-1.8.9 overwrites libxml2-2.1.1 then siag will cease to work and if libxml2-2.1.1 overwrites libxml-1.8.9 then gnofin ceases to work. There are two sides to the "package interplay coin": one is requirement the other is conflict. There would be several possibilities to address the situation. 1. Each package could have another file stating the packages with which it conflicts. Pkg_add could refuse to install a package that conflicts with an already installed package or at least give a warning. 2. Pkg_add could test for files present before the install that the package to be installed would overwrite and move them out of the way. I think this is what NetBSD does, but have not checked. 3. If packages A and B require some other package C, make them require the same version of C. I know that this means more work for the maintainers of package A and B, but IMO this effort is well spent. I think 2. and 3. should be used. Then files that aren't installed via the package system would not accidentally be overwritten and the installation of a package would not affect the functionality of other packages by overwriting files of required packages. I checked for conflicts in 4.1-RELEASE using the attached scripts. Of course, one could check for equal MD5 fingerprints and not list files that have the same fingerprint as conflicts, but I have not done that yet. Marko ----Next_Part(Thu_Oct_26_13:59:55_2000_809)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit #!/bin/sh TMP=/tmp PLISTS=${TMP}/PLISTS PKGS=/var/db/pkg HERE=`pwd` [ -d ${PLISTS} ] || mkdir -p ${PLISTS} if [ "x$1" = "xcd" ] ; then { cdmount PKGS=/cdrom/packages/All } fi cd ${PKGS} for i in * ; do pkg_info -L ${i} | tail +4 | uniq >${PLISTS}/${i} done cd ${HERE} if [ "x$1" = "xcd" ] ; then cdumount fi ----Next_Part(Thu_Oct_26_13:59:55_2000_809)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit #!/bin/sh PLISTS=. TMP=/tmp cd ${PLISTS} ls >${TMP}/Packages conflict () { TEST=`cat $1 $2 | sort | uniq -d` if [ "x${TEST}" != "x" ] ; then { echo "Packages $1 and $2 conflict" echo "----" echo ${TEST} echo "----" } fi } while [ -s ${TMP}/Packages ] ; do { CURRENT=`head -n 1 ${TMP}/Packages` tail -n +2 ${TMP}/Packages >${TMP}/__Packages mv ${TMP}/__Packages ${TMP}/Packages cat ${TMP}/Packages | (while read i ; do conflict ${CURRENT} ${i} ; done) } done ----Next_Part(Thu_Oct_26_13:59:55_2000_809)---- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Thu Oct 26 8:34:47 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from mail.hiwaay.net (fly.HiWAAY.net [208.147.154.56]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E3E337B479; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 08:34:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bonsai.knology.net (user-24-214-88-8.knology.net [24.214.88.8]) by mail.hiwaay.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9QFYd709049; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:34:39 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from steve@localhost) by bonsai.knology.net (8.11.0/8.9.3) id e9QFYYD14900; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:34:34 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from steve) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:34:15 -0500 From: Steve Price To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami Cc: Jordan Hubbard , qa@freebsd.org, steve@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reminder: Just 7 days till 4.2 code freeze! Message-ID: <20001026103415.A9291@bonsai.knology.net> References: <21563.972426133@winston.osd.bsdi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from asami@freebsd.org on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 03:39:56AM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 03:39:56AM -0700, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: # * From: Jordan Hubbard # # * The final build and "split" of packages for 4.2 will also be due on # * November 7th, after which time no new packages will be accepted for # * inclusion with the release. I'm calling this one early because # # So you want the split packages on 11/7, right? Steve, when do you # need the i386 package set? I would be great if I can get them on 11/3. I'll be leaving for New York on business 11/4 and won't be back until the afternoon of 11/6. -steve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Thu Oct 26 18:30: 0 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from citusc17.usc.edu (citusc17.usc.edu [128.125.38.177]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97AF637B479; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 18:29:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from kris@localhost) by citusc17.usc.edu (8.11.1/8.11.1) id e9R1W8K71640; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 18:32:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 18:32:07 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami Cc: Carlos A M dos Santos , kris@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default Message-ID: <20001026183207.A71629@citusc17.usc.edu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from asami@FreeBSD.ORG on Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 02:43:21AM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 02:43:21AM -0700, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > Are there any other outstanding issues re throwing the big switch and > making XFree86-4 the default now? (As it says in the subject > line...you guys thought I replied to an old mail by mistake? :) Does the PAM stuff actually work? I thought I heard someone say that it doesnt actually do anything. Do we depend on the xwrapper by default yet, and not install the servers setuid root? Those are the outstanding things on my list. Kris To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Fri Oct 27 3:19:55 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br (gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br [200.248.148.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62A6837B4C5; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 03:19:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (casantos@localhost) by gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA00509; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:20:24 GMT (envelope-from casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br) X-Authentication-Warning: gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br: casantos owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:20:24 +0000 (GMT) From: Carlos A M dos Santos To: Kris Kennaway Cc: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami , kris@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default In-Reply-To: <20001026183207.A71629@citusc17.usc.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 02:43:21AM -0700, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > > > Are there any other outstanding issues re throwing the big switch and > > making XFree86-4 the default now? (As it says in the subject > > line...you guys thought I replied to an old mail by mistake? :) > > Does the PAM stuff actually work? I thought I heard someone say that > it doesnt actually do anything. Well, in 4.1-RELEASE with XFree 3.3.6 it *is* doing something. Look at /etc/pam.conf. > Do we depend on the xwrapper by default yet, and not install the > servers setuid root? The X server needs to be installed suid root only if you want it to be started by ordinary users with "startx". XDM already starts the server as root. The server doesn't use any authentication, PAM or whatever else, XDM does. -- Carlos A. M. dos Santos Federal University of Pelotas Meteorological Research Center Av. Ildefonso Simoes Lopes 2791 Pelotas, RS, Brasil, CEP 96060-290 WWW: http://www.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br RENPAC (X.25): 153231641 Phone: +55 53 277-6767 FAX: +55 53 277-6722 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Fri Oct 27 15:41:37 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from citusc17.usc.edu (citusc17.usc.edu [128.125.38.177]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74A2837B479; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:41:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from kris@localhost) by citusc17.usc.edu (8.11.1/8.11.1) id e9RMhbb08627; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:43:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:43:37 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Carlos A M dos Santos Cc: Kris Kennaway , Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami , kris@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default Message-ID: <20001027154337.A8619@citusc17.usc.edu> References: <20001026183207.A71629@citusc17.usc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br on Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 10:20:24AM +0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 10:20:24AM +0000, Carlos A M dos Santos wrote: > Well, in 4.1-RELEASE with XFree 3.3.6 it *is* doing something. Look at > /etc/pam.conf. Yes, it does in 3.3.6, we are talking about 4.0.x. > > Do we depend on the xwrapper by default yet, and not install the > > servers setuid root? > > The X server needs to be installed suid root only if you want it to be > started by ordinary users with "startx". XDM already starts the server as > root. The server doesn't use any authentication, PAM or whatever else, XDM > does. Again, I'm talking about the behaviour of the 4.0.x server. 3.3.6 was not installed setuid root, but had a setuid root wrapper which performed some amount of input validation, and was responsible for catching at least one server buffer overflow. 4.0.x removed that, although we now have an xwrapper port which should be used by default. Kris To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message