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 <casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>
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: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010241252140.377-100000@gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
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 <jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
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: <vqcsnpl432b.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
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 <jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
* 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." <vqcsnpl432b.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 04:32:03 -0700
Message-ID: <43989.972473523@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
From: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
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 <qa@freebsd.org>; 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 <qa@freebsd.org>; 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 <mcgovern@spoon.beta.com>
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 <qa@FreeBSD.org>; 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: <XFMail.001025113445.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
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 <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To: Brian McGovern <mcgovern@spoon.beta.com>
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 <jhb@FreeBSD.org> -- 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 <casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
Cc: kris@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG,
taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp
Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default
References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010241252140.377-100000@gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
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: <vqcvgugkkee.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
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 <casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
* 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 <casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>
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: <vqcvgugkkee.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010261039420.411-100000@gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
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 <casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>
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: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010261039420.411-100000@gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010261058390.411-100000@gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
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 <marko@kinetic.ki.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de>
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 <sprice@hiwaay.net>
To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@freebsd.org>
Cc: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com>, 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> <vqcsnpl432b.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i
In-Reply-To: <vqcsnpl432b.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>; 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 <jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
#
# * 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 <kris@citusc.usc.edu>
To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc: Carlos A M dos Santos <casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>,
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: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010241252140.377-100000@gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br> <vqcvgugkkee.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <vqcvgugkkee.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>; 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 <casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
To: Kris Kennaway <kris@citusc.usc.edu>
Cc: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>,
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: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010271012550.394-100000@gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
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 <kris@citusc.usc.edu>
To: Carlos A M dos Santos <casantos@cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@citusc.usc.edu>,
Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>, 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> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010271012550.394-100000@gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010271012550.394-100000@gate.cpmet.ufpel.tche.br>; 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