From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sun Oct 6 13:09:16 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D2FFAAD5 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 13:09:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46mP8D4zTdz4Hm4 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 13:09:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id A8FE8FAAD4; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 13:09:16 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C0CFAAD3 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 13:09:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [96.47.72.132]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46mP8D3zD0z4Hm3 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 13:09:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1354) id 67E26B2A3; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 13:09:16 +0000 (UTC) From: Jan Beich To: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: USES=cargo vs. workspaces Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2019 15:09:11 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2019 13:09:16 -0000 Some projects (e.g., Servo, Veloren) bundle several packages together. When dependencies also bundle packages it confuses "git" override. Any tips/workarounds that scale beyond 1 port? For example, $ cat Makefile PORTNAME= veloren DISTVERSIONSUFFIX= v DISTVERSION= 0.3.0 CATEGORIES= games USES= cargo USE_GITLAB= yes GL_COMMIT= ef049607e008223d6f9d8a021dd00e1eeef44b5e .sinclude "${.CURDIR}/Makefile.crates" .include $ make clean patch NO_CHECKSUM= $ make cargo-crates >Makefile.crates $ make makesum $ make clean all [...] ===> Configuring for veloren-0.3.0 error: failed to load source for a dependency on `conrod_core` Caused by: Unable to update WRKDIR/conrod-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4 Caused by: found a virtual manifest at `WRKDIR/conrod-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4/Cargo.toml` instead of a package manifest *** Error code 101 Stop. After the override `conrod_core` package path points to a directory with multiple packages defined via workspaces. If the path is refined to point to a subdirectory (where [package] is defined) then build moves on to the next error. $ rg -t toml conrod_core $(make -V WRKSRC) WRKSRC/Cargo.lock 421:name = "conrod_core" 2962: "conrod_core 0.63.0 (git+https://gitlab.com/veloren/conrod.git)", 3245:"checksum conrod_core 0.63.0 (git+https://gitlab.com/veloren/conrod.git)" = "" WRKSRC/voxygen/Cargo.toml 25:conrod_core = { path = "WRKDIR/conrod-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4/conrod_core" } $ cat $(make -V WRKDIR)/conrod-*/Cargo.toml [workspace] members = [ "conrod_core", "conrod_derive", "backends/conrod_example_shared", "backends/conrod_winit", "backends/conrod_gfx", "backends/conrod_glium", "backends/conrod_piston", "backends/conrod_vulkano", ] $ sed -i.bak '/conrod_core/s,"\(.*\)","\1/conrod_core",' $(make -V WRKSRC)/voxygen/Cargo.toml $ diff $(make -V WRKSRC)/voxygen/Cargo.toml.bak $(make -V WRKSRC)/voxygen/Cargo.toml --- WRKSRC/voxygen/Cargo.toml.bak +++ WRKSRC/voxygen/Cargo.toml @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ gfx_device_gl = { version = "0.16.1", optional = true gfx_window_glutin = "0.31.0" glutin = "0.21.0" winit = { version = "0.19.1", features = ["serde"] } -conrod_core = { path = "WRKDIR/conrod-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4" } +conrod_core = { path = "WRKDIR/conrod-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4/conrod_core" } conrod_winit = { path = "WRKDIR/conrod-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4" } euc = "0.3.0" $ make ===> Configuring for veloren-0.3.0 error: failed to load source for a dependency on `conrod_winit` Caused by: Unable to update WRKDIR/conrod-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4 Caused by: found a virtual manifest at `WRKDIR/conrod-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4/Cargo.toml` instead of a package manifest *** Error code 101 Stop. Note, before and after the override the location of `conrod_core` was ambiguous i.e., neither "package" nor subdirectory was specified. $ diff $(make -V WRKSRC)/voxygen/Cargo.toml{.dist,} [...] @@ -22,8 +22,8 @@ gfx_device_gl = { version = "0.16.1", optional = true gfx_window_glutin = "0.31.0" glutin = "0.21.0" winit = { version = "0.19.1", features = ["serde"] } -conrod_core = { git = "https://gitlab.com/veloren/conrod.git" } -conrod_winit = { git = "https://gitlab.com/veloren/conrod.git" } +conrod_core = { path = "WRKDIR/conrod-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4" } +conrod_winit = { path = "WRKDIR/conrod-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4-d603363488870eae9df91ba45ba795509c8a6ab4" } euc = "0.3.0" # ECS From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sun Oct 6 21:10:02 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9EAA134D54 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 21:10:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46mbpy4XqSz3M7G for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 21:10:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 9A3BD134D53; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 21:10:02 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99FAE134D52 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 21:10:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46mbpy3NDgz3M7F for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 21:10:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::16:115c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 530AE4395 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 21:10:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.8]) by portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x96LA2fQ039986 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 21:10:02 GMT (envelope-from indexbuild@portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org) Received: (from indexbuild@localhost) by portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x96LA2Av039985 for ports@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 21:10:02 GMT (envelope-from indexbuild) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2019 21:10:02 GMT From: Ports Index build Message-Id: <201910062110.x96LA2Av039985@portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org> To: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: INDEX build failed for 11.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2019 21:10:02 -0000 INDEX build failed with errors: Generating INDEX-11 - please wait..--- describe.accessibility --- --- describe.arabic --- --- describe.archivers --- --- describe.astro --- --- describe.audio --- --- describe.benchmarks --- --- describe.biology --- --- describe.cad --- --- describe.chinese --- --- describe.comms --- --- describe.converters --- --- describe.databases --- --- describe.deskutils --- --- describe.devel --- --- describe.dns --- --- describe.editors --- --- describe.emulators --- --- describe.finance --- --- describe.french --- --- describe.ftp --- [...] --- describe.security --- --- describe.shells --- --- describe.sysutils --- --- describe.textproc --- --- describe.sysutils --- sh: freebsd-version: not found make[5]: "/home/indexbuild/tindex/ports/sysutils/etc_os-release/Makefile" line 18: warning: "freebsd-version -u" returned non-zero status --- describe.ukrainian --- --- describe.vietnamese --- --- describe.www --- --- describe.x11 --- --- describe.x11-clocks --- --- describe.x11-drivers --- --- describe.x11-fm --- --- describe.x11-fonts --- --- describe.x11-servers --- --- describe.x11-themes --- --- describe.x11-toolkits --- --- describe.x11-wm --- Done. make_index: /home/indexbuild/tindex/ports/databases/jasperreports: no entry for /home/indexbuild/tindex/ports/textproc/jakarta-commons-digester Committers on the hook: antoine dinoex ehaupt farrokhi pfg yuri Most recent SVN update was: Updating '.': D textproc/jakarta-commons-digester U textproc/libxml++26-reference/Makefile U textproc/Makefile A textproc/apache-commons-digester A textproc/apache-commons-digester/Makefile A textproc/apache-commons-digester/jakarta-commons-digester A textproc/apache-commons-digester/jakarta-commons-digester/Makefile A textproc/apache-commons-digester/jakarta-commons-digester/distinfo A textproc/apache-commons-digester/jakarta-commons-digester/pkg-descr A textproc/apache-commons-digester/distinfo A textproc/apache-commons-digester/pkg-descr D databases/jakarta-commons-dbutils U databases/pg_repack/Makefile U databases/Makefile A databases/apache-commons-dbutils A databases/apache-commons-dbutils/Makefile A databases/apache-commons-dbutils/distinfo A databases/apache-commons-dbutils/pkg-descr U graphics/graphviz/Makefile U MOVED U security/py-mnemonic/Makefile UU security/py-mnemonic/distinfo U security/xml-security/Makefile A math/darknet A math/darknet/Makefile A math/darknet/distinfo A math/darknet/pkg-descr U math/scilab/Makefile U math/Makefile U math/tvm/Makefile U math/tvm/distinfo U math/tvm/pkg-plist D devel/jakarta-commons-modeler D devel/jakarta-commons-io D devel/jakarta-commons-configuration D devel/jakarta-commons-jxpath U devel/Makefile A devel/apache-commons-configuration A devel/apache-commons-configuration/Makefile A devel/apache-commons-configuration/pkg-descr A devel/apache-commons-configuration/distinfo A devel/apache-commons-io A devel/apache-commons-io/Makefile A devel/apache-commons-io/distinfo A devel/apache-commons-io/pkg-descr A devel/apache-commons-jxpath A devel/apache-commons-jxpath/Makefile A devel/apache-commons-jxpath/pkg-descr A devel/apache-commons-jxpath/distinfo A devel/apache-commons-modeler A devel/apache-commons-modeler/Makefile A devel/apache-commons-modeler/pkg-descr A devel/apache-commons-modeler/distinfo U devel/charva/Makefile U editors/openoffice-devel/Makefile D java/jakarta-commons-logging D java/jakarta-commons-collections D java/jakarta-commons-primitives D java/jakarta-commons-lang D java/jakarta-commons-cli U java/Makefile A java/apache-commons-cli A java/apache-commons-cli/Makefile A java/apache-commons-cli/pkg-descr A java/apache-commons-cli/distinfo A java/apache-commons-collections A java/apache-commons-collections/Makefile A java/apache-commons-collections/distinfo A java/apache-commons-collections/files A java/apache-commons-collections/files/patch-jdk8 A java/apache-commons-collections/pkg-descr A java/apache-commons-lang A java/apache-commons-lang/Makefile A java/apache-commons-lang/pkg-descr A java/apache-commons-lang/distinfo A java/apache-commons-logging A java/apache-commons-logging/Makefile A java/apache-commons-logging/distinfo A java/apache-commons-logging/pkg-descr A java/apache-commons-primitives A java/apache-commons-primitives/Makefile A java/apache-commons-primitives/pkg-descr A java/apache-commons-primitives/distinfo U java/jakarta-commons-beanutils/Makefile U java/jakarta-commons-httpclient/Makefile U java/jakarta-oro/pkg-descr U java/jakarta-regexp/pkg-descr D lang/jakarta-commons-jelly U lang/Makefile A lang/apache-commons-jelly A lang/apache-commons-jelly/Makefile A lang/apache-commons-jelly/distinfo A lang/apache-commons-jelly/pkg-descr A lang/apache-commons-jelly/files A lang/apache-commons-jelly/files/jelly.sh.in U mail/mime4j/Makefile D net/jakarta-commons-net U net/Makefile A net/apache-commons-net A net/apache-commons-net/Makefile A net/apache-commons-net/pkg-descr A net/apache-commons-net/distinfo U print/pdfbox/Makefile U www/httpclient/Makefile U www/jmeter/Makefile Updated to revision 513906. From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sun Oct 6 22:54:40 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A18F137045 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 22:54:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from starikarp@dismail.de) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46mf7h1sJwz3xgS for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 22:54:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from starikarp@dismail.de) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 3FCED137044; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 22:54:40 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F916137042 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 22:54:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from starikarp@dismail.de) Received: from mx1.dismail.de (mx1.dismail.de [78.46.223.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx1.dismail.de", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46mf7f5Dsvz3xgR for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 22:54:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from starikarp@dismail.de) Received: from dismail.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 3abb7e3b for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:54:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1.dismail.de (10.240.26.11 [10.240.26.11]) by mx1.dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id f2dcf3b2 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:54:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1.dismail.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id a4e3fe25 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:54:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: by dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 6c54d899 (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO) for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:54:34 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2019 18:54:31 -0400 From: To: FreeBSD Ports Subject: jakarta-commons Message-ID: <20191006185431.01e1b048@dismail.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.4 (GTK+ 2.24.32; amd64-portbld-freebsd12.0) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46mf7f5Dsvz3xgR X-Spamd-Bar: ------ X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.74 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[dismail.de:s=20190914]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:78.46.223.134]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[ports@freebsd.org]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[dismail.de.dwl.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; IP_SCORE(-2.64)[ip: (-9.91), ipnet: 78.46.0.0/15(-1.50), asn: 24940(-1.80), country: DE(-0.01)]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[dismail.de:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[dismail.de,reject]; FROM_NO_DN(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[134.223.46.78.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:24940, ipnet:78.46.0.0/15, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2019 22:54:40 -0000 Hi! I did try to update ports but there are problems. I do not know how to handle jakarta-commons-?? - apache-commons-?? because LibreOffice failed - it looked to jakarta (I have java on). I cancel everything and wait for other updates, IMO, should be something in /usr/ports/UPDATING. Thank you. --=20 =E2=80=9CHungry man, reach for the book: it is a weapon.=E2=80=9D=20 =E2=80=95 Bertolt Brecht From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mon Oct 7 00:05:58 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 716371384DF for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:05:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46mgjy1jMHz41ps for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:05:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 385E71384DE; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:05:58 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3827E1384DC for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:05:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46mgjx6yfxz41pq for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:05:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::16:115c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B63A76385 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:05:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.8]) by portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x9705vPw093792 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:05:57 GMT (envelope-from indexbuild@portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org) Received: (from indexbuild@localhost) by portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x9705viB093790 for ports@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:05:57 GMT (envelope-from indexbuild) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 00:05:57 GMT From: Ports Index build Message-Id: <201910070005.x9705viB093790@portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org> To: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: INDEX now builds successfully on 11.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 00:05:58 -0000 From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mon Oct 7 06:19:53 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4D3A13FB79 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 06:19:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yasu@utahime.org) Received: from gate.utahime.jp (gate.utahime.jp [183.180.29.210]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46mr1M2zLHz4KW9 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 06:19:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yasu@utahime.org) Received: from eastasia.home.utahime.org (eastasia.home.utahime.org [192.168.174.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by gate.utahime.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4DAE10965 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 15:19:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (rolling.home.utahime.org [192.168.174.11]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by eastasia.home.utahime.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1608E331D7; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 15:19:39 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.0-rc at eastasia.home.utahime.org Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 15:18:41 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Is IPV6 option still necessary? From: Yasuhiro KIMURA X-Mailer: Mew version 6.8 on Emacs 26.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46mr1M2zLHz4KW9 X-Spamd-Bar: ++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of yasu@utahime.org designates 183.180.29.210 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=yasu@utahime.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [2.15 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.26)[-0.265,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+a:spf-authorized.utahime.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.13)[-0.130,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[utahime.org]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MID_CONTAINS_FROM(1.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.34)[ip: (0.23), ipnet: 183.180.0.0/16(0.12), asn: 2519(1.37), country: JP(-0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:2519, ipnet:183.180.0.0/16, country:JP]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 06:19:53 -0000 On October 10, 2012 IPV6 option of all ports was enabled by default. Commit message said "We are in 2012, it is time to activate IPV6 options by default everywhere". And now we are in 2019. IPv6 is more widely used than 2012. So I wonder if IPV6 option is still necessary. If you use official packages then you always use IPv6-enabled binaries. And even if you build packages by yourself you still use IPv6-enabled ones unless you disable IPV6 option. So I think at most only a few people uses IPv6-disabled packages. Are there anybody who still disables IPV6 option for some serious reason such as working around IPv6-related problem? If there aren't then I think it's time to remove IPV6 option from ports framework. Best Regards. --- Yasuhiro KIMURA From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mon Oct 7 07:41:14 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F18E4F9ABE for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 07:41:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ale@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46msqG69SQz4NyW for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 07:41:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ale@FreeBSD.org) Received: from ale.bitgold.com (151-0-207-195.ip282.fastwebnet.it [151.0.207.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: ale) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 830B51CE03 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 07:41:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ale@FreeBSD.org) Subject: Re: USES=cargo vs. workspaces To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: From: Alex Dupre Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Autocrypt: addr=ale@FreeBSD.org; keydata= mQGiBDd2Z60RBADHdQ8600NP2/sBbuIW87WqWXZyzDX0Q6AA/czBlV2PKiEhCgTJwZCWJMs/ iR0GgfS3LKYd/eWW48LYj2V/0YjafV/A2B6+1QsVGltXunvtYxC4GnCStzPqsI624jgtwZ5s b8oowOv5ykEVw6lxneRuluymOq3YFxhRfjJ3koNYUwCg/9ouKUPZ3hPNklVoLPAnN+dF3gsE AIxacljfmb3KQ2bnngkhvASu7g0Ipjql2k1AiBwC1oWnsMIYX5qNBLA+6FtAGFYqrT8hV5qR OJyNPVeVKj3p+wt23Co/t/w0gaLccu2JlI6QBFerCNFcqNMgzEAbQ8ARxSrLW/THpOJ8i32z 0AKEtx/1LdYlcFB+l+8FLuKgEgXMA/9RmwjhPmZ/V5xUXW6mrkSfRDtxRsEegaixqUI6Smsk gGgsQybjSc0fxWtlMCKZ4sIqtykPAlf5fGeX+FjYyR6iFnjfJwRFxilLGokqaDEZeE9myB2M ue9YnFoSGB12c6U8HRf4R86uk4tWwzMO70Gyt3bSp2GTXeMiuy7dibKIRrQcQWxleCBEdXBy ZSA8YWxlQEZyZWVCU0Qub3JnPoheBBMRAgAeBQI/7U77AhsDBgsJCAcDAgMVAgMDFgIBAh4B AheAAAoJEIEV6djOX1VNK0oAoPp14QWuw+emoL7+q0L9RCAtw+15AJ45PiXh1GNC7HPj7xEz LdU0FqNM6LkCDQQ3dmeuEAgA9kJXtwh/CBdyorrWqULzBej5UxE5T7bxbrlLOCDaAadWoxTp j0BV89AHxstDqZSt90xkhkn4DIO9ZekX1KHTUPj1WV/cdlJPPT2N286Z4VeSWc39uK50T8X8 dryDxUcwYc58yWb/Ffm7/ZFexwGq01uejaClcjrUGvC/RgBYK+X0iP1YTknbzSC0neSRBzZr M2w4DUUdD3yIsxx8Wy2O9vPJI8BD8KVbGI2Ou1WMuF040zT9fBdXQ6MdGGzeMyEstSr/POGx KUAYEY18hKcKctaGxAMZyAcpesqVDNmWn6vQClCbAkbTCD1mpF1Bn5x8vYlLIhkmuquiXsNV 6TILOwACAgf+IjkEUyz2oppjS4ov4FOGYfLuIgE7Q55DGPZXSJ0NEE+Kqyvf20Xv456R05a0 5minePAfsAwaFI1NfRGxZdBTdXtmbptqDgSnxMK/FKerZgWPb7MQrKmOuXz+N9j97CC6y4f5 PNcKlV4bhL1MaZG2TLRHjyywpd/RukVw9jPKnuS7CIIxR/mvLgkcHVFoBQ7/0eB6cCjZOVOr uSZod11ofzqBz7IVldQH21BQlUsLrrtq+4Nlc1YQW1qnZU3y7Ar3/CQW5lsAUDo9PRdSEDfY Wc18WufiuQ3WkrhV1EYJU6UZzjU8G5D8DN++duof7VQH94EigRLYNYz73i1XSsaBiohOBBgR AgAGBQI3dmeuABIJEIEV6djOX1VNB2VHUEcAAQHvzQCcCC/qqMn8MWKJ0CbiXiTSu7dpojYA njslrpODNzSntRQ5rK0SawJXsWWk Message-ID: <72cc189f-178d-008c-f2de-9a32b72fcd9e@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 09:41:12 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 07:41:15 -0000 On 06/10/19 15:09, Jan Beich wrote: > Some projects (e.g., Servo, Veloren) bundle several packages together. > When dependencies also bundle packages it confuses "git" override. > Any tips/workarounds that scale beyond 1 port? I haven't a solution, I can just say that I have the same issue with the parity ethereum client (that in fact it's not in the ports tree yet). -- Alex Dupre From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mon Oct 7 21:26:54 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC6AC139C89 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 21:26:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from hz.grosbein.net (hz.grosbein.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:c2c:26d8::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hz.grosbein.net", Issuer "hz.grosbein.net" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46nD7x3rP0z4bNX for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 21:26:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (eg.sd.rdtc.ru [IPv6:2a03:3100:c:13:0:0:0:5]) by hz.grosbein.net (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x97LQgn8068864 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 7 Oct 2019 21:26:43 GMT (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) X-Envelope-From: eugen@grosbein.net X-Envelope-To: yasu@utahime.org Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (eugen@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eg.sd.rdtc.ru (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x97LQgLp024029; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 04:26:42 +0700 (+07) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? To: Yasuhiro KIMURA , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> From: Eugene Grosbein Message-ID: <5D9BAD92.4090909@grosbein.net> Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 04:26:42 +0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_Q, LOCAL_FROM, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Report: * -2.3 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record * 2.7 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_Q Date: is 4 days to 4 months after Received: * date * 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record * 2.6 LOCAL_FROM From my domains X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on hz.grosbein.net X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46nD7x3rP0z4bNX X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=permerror (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of eugen@grosbein.net uses mechanism not recognized by this client) smtp.mailfrom=eugen@grosbein.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.62 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.98)[-0.977,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[grosbein.net]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_PERMFAIL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:24940, ipnet:2a01:4f8::/29, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-1.54)[ip: (-3.86), ipnet: 2a01:4f8::/29(-2.05), asn: 24940(-1.80), country: DE(-0.01)] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 21:26:54 -0000 On 07.10.2019 13:18, Yasuhiro KIMURA wrote: > On October 10, 2012 IPV6 option of all ports was enabled by > default. Commit message said "We are in 2012, it is time to activate > IPV6 options by default everywhere". > > And now we are in 2019. IPv6 is more widely used than 2012. So I > wonder if IPV6 option is still necessary. > > If you use official packages then you always use IPv6-enabled > binaries. And even if you build packages by yourself you still use > IPv6-enabled ones unless you disable IPV6 option. So I think at most > only a few people uses IPv6-disabled packages. > > Are there anybody who still disables IPV6 option for some serious > reason such as working around IPv6-related problem? If there aren't > then I think it's time to remove IPV6 option from ports framework. Think about embedded systems designed for internal use mostly/only (limited or no global connectivity) with very constrained space for a code. Ability to reduce code bloat is good thing. From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Tue Oct 8 19:18:35 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9F1E13410D for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 19:18:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from abi@abinet.ru) Received: from mail.abinet.ru (mail.abinet.ru [109.167.172.107]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46nnFQ4pjQz4PYw for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 19:18:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from abi@abinet.ru) Received: from sphinx.abinet.ru (unknown [10.0.2.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.abinet.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8298315B04 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 19:18:26 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> From: abi Message-ID: <9b8c9b1b-0d26-d9d7-018a-cafa8ec98c1e@abinet.ru> Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 22:16:08 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46nnFQ4pjQz4PYw X-Spamd-Bar: -- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.19 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[abinet.ru:s=dkim]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.99)[-0.994,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:109.167.172.107/32]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; IP_SCORE(-0.29)[asn: 25408(-1.47), country: RU(0.01)]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[abinet.ru:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[abinet.ru,reject]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:25408, ipnet:109.167.128.0/18, country:RU]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2019 19:18:35 -0000 07.10.2019 09:18, Yasuhiro KIMURA пишет: > On October 10, 2012 IPV6 option of all ports was enabled by > default. Commit message said "We are in 2012, it is time to activate > IPV6 options by default everywhere". > > And now we are in 2019. IPv6 is more widely used than 2012. So I > wonder if IPV6 option is still necessary. > > If you use official packages then you always use IPv6-enabled > binaries. And even if you build packages by yourself you still use > IPv6-enabled ones unless you disable IPV6 option. So I think at most > only a few people uses IPv6-disabled packages. > > Are there anybody who still disables IPV6 option for some serious > reason such as working around IPv6-related problem? If there aren't > then I think it's time to remove IPV6 option from ports framework. > I'm writing from 2019 and I build kernel and ports without IPv6. For all this years I fail to understand why I need it. My home devices fit 10.0.0.0/16 nicely, I have faith in NAT and I encountered no IPv6-only sites. But I saw CVEs in IPv6 stack. From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 00:21:34 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 683E113B7FD for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 00:21:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org) Received: from saturn.lyxys.ka.sub.org (saturn.lyxys.ka.sub.org [217.29.35.151]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46nvz10j1wz3DbN for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 00:21:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org) Received: from juno.lyxys.ka.sub.org (juno.lyx [IPv6:fd2a:89ca:7d54:0:240:caff:fe92:4f47]) by saturn.lyxys.ka.sub.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x990F8Wm031950 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 02:15:10 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org) Received: from juno.lyxys.ka.sub.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by juno.lyxys.ka.sub.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x990F80t074105 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 02:15:08 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org) Received: (from wolfgang@localhost) by juno.lyxys.ka.sub.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x990EmcD073769 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 02:14:48 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org) X-Authentication-Warning: juno.lyx: wolfgang set sender to wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org using -f Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 02:14:47 +0200 From: Wolfgang Zenker To: abi via freebsd-ports Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-ID: <20191009001447.GA73623@lyxys.ka.sub.org> References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <9b8c9b1b-0d26-d9d7-018a-cafa8ec98c1e@abinet.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <9b8c9b1b-0d26-d9d7-018a-cafa8ec98c1e@abinet.ru> Organization: private site User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (saturn.lyxys.ka.sub.org [IPv6:fd2a:89ca:7d54:1:200:24ff:feca:b4cc]); Wed, 09 Oct 2019 02:15:10 +0200 (CEST) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46nvz10j1wz3DbN X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org designates 217.29.35.151 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.34 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[sub.org]; IP_SCORE(-2.04)[ip: (-8.42), ipnet: 217.29.32.0/20(-1.00), asn: 16188(-0.78), country: DE(-0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16188, ipnet:217.29.32.0/20, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 00:21:34 -0000 Hi, * abi via freebsd-ports [191008 21:16]: > 07.10.2019 09:18, Yasuhiro KIMURA пишет: >> On October 10, 2012 IPV6 option of all ports was enabled by >> default. Commit message said "We are in 2012, it is time to activate >> IPV6 options by default everywhere". >> And now we are in 2019. IPv6 is more widely used than 2012. So I >> wonder if IPV6 option is still necessary. >> If you use official packages then you always use IPv6-enabled >> binaries. And even if you build packages by yourself you still use >> IPv6-enabled ones unless you disable IPV6 option. So I think at most >> only a few people uses IPv6-disabled packages. >> Are there anybody who still disables IPV6 option for some serious >> reason such as working around IPv6-related problem? If there aren't >> then I think it's time to remove IPV6 option from ports framework. > I'm writing from 2019 and I build kernel and ports without IPv6. For all > this years I fail to understand why I need it. > My home devices fit 10.0.0.0/16 nicely, I have faith in NAT and I > encountered no IPv6-only sites. > But I saw CVEs in IPv6 stack. If you connect from a typical end user site to a website on my company, if you go via IPv4 your packets will go through NAT at your CPE, quite possibly NATted to IPv6, going through another NAT at the exit routers of your provider and arrive at an reverse proxy at my site being proxied to IPv6 finally reaching the website which is running on a IPv6 only jail. Thats because neither your typical DSL or mobile provider nor my webhosting company has enough IPv4 addresses to hand out a globally routable address to all nodes. An IPv6 connection would be end-to-end. So, you don't *need* IPv6. But you might *want* to have it anyway. Wolfgang From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 00:58:28 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87D0713C47A for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 00:58:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) Received: from viclamta29p.bpe.bigpond.com (viclamta29p.bpe.bigpond.com [203.38.21.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "", Issuer "Openwave Messaging Inc." (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46nwnX0yqFz3FsY for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 00:58:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) Received: from smtp.telstra.com ([10.10.26.4]) by viclafep29p-svc.bpe.nexus.telstra.com.au with ESMTP id <20191009005811.DGHB28950.viclafep29p-svc.bpe.nexus.telstra.com.au@smtp.telstra.com> for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 11:58:11 +1100 X-RG-Spam: Unknown X-RazorGate-Vade: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedriedtgdeflecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfupfevtfgpvffgnffuvffttedpqfgfvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecugedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhepfffhvffujgfkfhgfgggtsehttddttddtredvnecuhfhrohhmpeffrghvvgcujfhorhhsfhgrlhhluceouggrvhgvsehhohhrshhfrghllhdrohhrgheqnecukfhppeduuddtrddugedurdduleefrddvfeefnecurfgrrhgrmhephhgvlhhopegrnhgvuhhrihhnrdhhohhrshhfrghllhdrohhrghdpihhnvghtpeduuddtrddugedurdduleefrddvfeefpdhmrghilhhfrhhomhepoegurghvvgeshhhorhhsfhgrlhhlrdhorhhgqedprhgtphhtthhopeeofhhrvggvsghsugdqphhorhhtshesfhhrvggvsghsugdrohhrgheqnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-RazorGate-Vade-Verdict: clean 0 X-RazorGate-Vade-Classification: clean X-RG-VS-CLASS: clean Received: from aneurin.horsfall.org (110.141.193.233) by smtp.telstra.com (5.8.418) id 5D8A7DF9023FEBA2 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 11:58:10 +1100 Received: from aneurin.horsfall.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aneurin.horsfall.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x990w9NO071899 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 11:58:09 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) Received: from localhost (dave@localhost) by aneurin.horsfall.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) with ESMTP id x990w8dZ071896 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 11:58:09 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) X-Authentication-Warning: aneurin.horsfall.org: dave owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 11:58:08 +1100 (EST) From: Dave Horsfall To: FreeBSD Ports Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? In-Reply-To: <20191009001447.GA73623@lyxys.ka.sub.org> Message-ID: References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <9b8c9b1b-0d26-d9d7-018a-cafa8ec98c1e@abinet.ru> <20191009001447.GA73623@lyxys.ka.sub.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21.9999 (BSF 287 2018-06-16) X-GPG-Public-Key: http://www.horsfall.org/gpgkey.pub X-GPG-Fingerprint: 05B4 FFBC 0218 B438 66E0 587B EF46 7357 EF5E F58B X-Home-Page: http://www.horsfall.org/ X-Witty-Saying: "chmod 666 the_mode_of_the_beast" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46nwnX0yqFz3FsY X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of dave@horsfall.org has no SPF policy when checking 203.38.21.93) smtp.mailfrom=dave@horsfall.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.15 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.97)[-0.970,0]; RCVD_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.998,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[horsfall.org]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[93.21.38.203.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:1221, ipnet:203.36.0.0/14, country:AU]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; IP_SCORE(-0.98)[ipnet: 203.36.0.0/14(-2.99), asn: 1221(-1.91), country: AU(0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 00:58:28 -0000 On Wed, 9 Oct 2019, Wolfgang Zenker wrote: > So, you don't *need* IPv6. But you might *want* to have it anyway. In my 40+ years career I've only encountered one (1) client that ran IPv6 internally (oddly enough, a law firm) and that was by management decree, not the tehchies' (come to think of it, I don't think they *had* a techie department). Roll the lawyer jokes... My router tries IPv6 first, but inevitably falls back to IPv4; IPv6 is a camel i.e. a horse designed by a committee. If you've ever tried to grok the IPv6 spec, your brain will explode... -- Dave From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 01:54:21 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7E113D74D for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 01:54:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org) Received: from saturn.lyxys.ka.sub.org (saturn.lyxys.ka.sub.org [217.29.35.151]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46ny2452LMz3JGv for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 01:54:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org) Received: from juno.lyxys.ka.sub.org (juno.lyx [IPv6:fd2a:89ca:7d54:0:240:caff:fe92:4f47]) by saturn.lyxys.ka.sub.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x991qoSv032586 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 03:52:57 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org) Received: from juno.lyxys.ka.sub.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by juno.lyxys.ka.sub.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x991qoUc075991 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 03:52:50 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org) Received: (from wolfgang@localhost) by juno.lyxys.ka.sub.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x991qjYq075988 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 03:52:45 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org) X-Authentication-Warning: juno.lyx: wolfgang set sender to wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org using -f Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 03:52:45 +0200 From: Wolfgang Zenker To: FreeBSD Ports Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-ID: <20191009015245.GB75640@lyxys.ka.sub.org> References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <9b8c9b1b-0d26-d9d7-018a-cafa8ec98c1e@abinet.ru> <20191009001447.GA73623@lyxys.ka.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: private site User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (saturn.lyxys.ka.sub.org [IPv6:fd2a:89ca:7d54:1:200:24ff:feca:b4cc]); Wed, 09 Oct 2019 03:52:57 +0200 (CEST) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46ny2452LMz3JGv X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org designates 217.29.35.151 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.28 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx:c]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[sub.org]; IP_SCORE(-1.98)[ip: (-8.12), ipnet: 217.29.32.0/20(-0.98), asn: 16188(-0.77), country: DE(-0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16188, ipnet:217.29.32.0/20, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 01:54:21 -0000 * Dave Horsfall [191009 02:58]: > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019, Wolfgang Zenker wrote: >> So, you don't *need* IPv6. But you might *want* to have it anyway. > In my 40+ years career I've only encountered one (1) client that ran IPv6 > internally (oddly enough, a law firm) and that was by management decree, > not the tehchies' (come to think of it, I don't think they *had* a techie > department). Roll the lawyer jokes... It's a big and diverse planet out there. In my 40+ years career I've used, implemented and deployed many different networking systems. Most of them are gone now, just IP (v4 and v6) remains. And use is slowly shifting from IPv4 to IPv6 now. > [..] > If you've ever tried to grok the IPv6 spec, your brain will explode... Must have happened to me some 20 years ago then. Probably the reason why I rarely get a head ache :-) Wolfgang From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 06:08:48 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A43FC141E2F for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:08:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46p3gh3sMZz3ydf for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:08:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 847C0141E2D; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:08:48 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833C9141E2C for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:08:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46p3gh2zMqz3ydY for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:08:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Received: from portscout.nyi.freebsd.org (portscout.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4236AC36D for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:08:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from portscout@localhost) by portscout.nyi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x9968mrW078279; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:08:48 GMT (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <201910090608.x9968mrW078279@portscout.nyi.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: portscout.nyi.freebsd.org: portscout set sender to portscout@FreeBSD.org using -f Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:08:48 +0000 From: portscout@FreeBSD.org To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date X-Mailer: portscout/0.8.1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 06:08:48 -0000 Dear port maintainer, The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more of your ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity to check each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate, submit/commit an update. If any ports have already been updated, you can safely ignore the entry. You will not be e-mailed again for any of the port/version combinations below. Full details can be found at the following URL: http://portscout.freebsd.org/ports@freebsd.org.html Port | Current version | New version ------------------------------------------------+-----------------+------------ lang/opencoarrays | 2.7.1 | 2.8.0 ------------------------------------------------+-----------------+------------ science/psychopy | 1.90.3 | 3.2.4 ------------------------------------------------+-----------------+------------ If any of the above results are invalid, please check the following page for details on how to improve portscout's detection and selection of distfiles on a per-port basis: http://portscout.freebsd.org/info/portscout-portconfig.txt Reported by: portscout! From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 06:15:40 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45E3014210C for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:15:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46p3qc0sGXz40P0; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:15:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (etoilebsd.net [178.32.217.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: bapt) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE028111D9; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 06:15:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: by ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id AC080C31A1; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 08:15:38 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 08:15:38 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: abi Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-ID: <20191009061538.re66hcii2z73ry6p@ivaldir.net> References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <9b8c9b1b-0d26-d9d7-018a-cafa8ec98c1e@abinet.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="25k3q7h7np4rfcbo" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9b8c9b1b-0d26-d9d7-018a-cafa8ec98c1e@abinet.ru> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 06:15:40 -0000 --25k3q7h7np4rfcbo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:16:08PM +0300, abi via freebsd-ports wrote: > 07.10.2019 09:18, Yasuhiro KIMURA =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: > > On October 10, 2012 IPV6 option of all ports was enabled by > > default. Commit message said "We are in 2012, it is time to activate > > IPV6 options by default everywhere". > >=20 > > And now we are in 2019. IPv6 is more widely used than 2012. So I > > wonder if IPV6 option is still necessary. > >=20 > > If you use official packages then you always use IPv6-enabled > > binaries. And even if you build packages by yourself you still use > > IPv6-enabled ones unless you disable IPV6 option. So I think at most > > only a few people uses IPv6-disabled packages. > >=20 > > Are there anybody who still disables IPV6 option for some serious > > reason such as working around IPv6-related problem? If there aren't > > then I think it's time to remove IPV6 option from ports framework. > >=20 > I'm writing from 2019 and I build kernel and ports without IPv6. For all > this years I fail to understand why I need it. >=20 > My home devices fit 10.0.0.0/16 nicely, I have faith in NAT and I > encountered no IPv6-only sites. >=20 > But I saw CVEs in IPv6 stack. Plenty of FreeBSD things are ipv6 only in the FreeBSD cluster. In particula= r if you do look at the build machines in the cluster, no ipv6 will mean no acce= ss to the build log in case of failures. I agree I don't see the reason why we should keep that ipv6 option. When off this option does not bring much value to the users as the code for apps to support ipv6 mostly reside in the libc. Actually that was my intent in 2012= to first turn it on by default everywhere and then drop the option entirely. Best regards, Bapt --25k3q7h7np4rfcbo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEgOTj3suS2urGXVU3Y4mL3PG3PloFAl2dewEACgkQY4mL3PG3 Plr9Dw/9ENkBDhoPZfd2MHbfA2DewigMMYltctq83ogHXXBfLW5fTuDZOB5RkqHb 6RcuYIYwZEvxPX5+8qb5ThSPFR+ZSguiWSyYoR+oz8472PgZbc6o//dIX5dA+vKW MT4Qct1sFa1p3GTN8gqxcHGK0sru82JOKt4MnTPeGIdE1r6sFXfkc+pwpBKYJ15t Ziwz+kz4P6YOMgEgVbLCrMABMW4/ZRPoeg5HR5S3+EHW4e2GxZLQ3rt/VV5tLNcv ++b8HUO3k3O5cbOnR7JYDHdQqn5ymlgd7Y1/YbNcydDY3G26iZSciXbSmohN434m JN/zvnO8hA9MisBcnvXLdZnnLPhy/xXQMaLnvASxMyrunT2mhqHfbLvDZ8Kt8Xzx x9LTiVWXsGEFNaWCKOlbq4EFrMreorRzHq7aErecMFtL2Wp10gGOCWEUo9ltWK0Y dsQtW4aNWE1cwzr1DdmxRX5Vht/8XrgXIUZNFDnYFfa5B0goEHBTEj/oeBa+Wva0 fyUyhJNTRBNwCkmk/tw5a1vtEg6oZEbm98pE2r8I7fkKSwPtX6MPsxD6nATqHI/1 g7JERWoCPAfTcTdnp7W29nG+fauYOTq+32ewkcCv3P5s2Q6W1K5yibM2ZzvNvcZS lD53WJOQLzfHJkBcOF08dijzEgEP8luBo+uty+3xiYGuF4ZvmEo= =mGKZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --25k3q7h7np4rfcbo-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 08:28:39 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133C41454CE for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 08:28:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@ifdnrg.com) Received: from esmtp.launchsite.co.uk (esmtp.launchsite.co.uk [193.200.98.84]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "*.launchsite.co.uk", Issuer "Sectigo RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46p6n2048Jz477x for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 08:28:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@ifdnrg.com) Received: from [192.168.0.77] (b0fc5128.bb.sky.com [176.252.81.40] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by esmtp.launchsite.co.uk (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x998SRTW079282 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 08:28:28 GMT (envelope-from paul@ifdnrg.com) X-Authentication-Warning: esmtp.launchsite.co.uk: Host b0fc5128.bb.sky.com [176.252.81.40] (may be forged) claimed to be [192.168.0.77] To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org From: Paul Macdonald Subject: dovecot-2.3.8 not building (lua error) Message-ID: <4078faf5-604e-8248-acb6-83953b78a017@ifdnrg.com> Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 09:28:29 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46p6n2048Jz477x X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.96 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[40.81.252.176.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.11]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:193.200.98.0/23]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[ifdnrg.com,quarantine]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; IP_SCORE(-1.16)[ipnet: 193.200.98.0/23(-4.78), asn: 20860(-0.96), country: GB(-0.08)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:20860, ipnet:193.200.98.0/23, country:GB]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 08:28:39 -0000 Hi, dovecot is not building on FreeBSD 12.0-REL if lua support is not selected, but does build if it is. ===>   Registering installation for dovecot-2.3.8 pkg-static: Unable to access file /var/ports/basejail/usr/ports/mail/dovecot/work/stage/usr/local/%%LUA_LIBDIR%%exec/dovecot/health-check.sh:No such file or directory Paul. -- ------------------------- Paul Macdonald IFDNRG Ltd Web and video hosting ------------------------- t: 0131 5548070 m: 07970339546 e: paul@ifdnrg.com w: http://www.ifdnrg.com ------------------------- IFDNRG 40 Maritime Street Edinburgh EH6 6SA ---------------------------------------------------- High Specification Dedicated Servers from £100.00pm ---------------------------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 10:05:52 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A610A147596 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 10:05:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [96.47.72.132]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46p8xD30S4z4Ckw; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 10:05:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1354) id 58F57FB2E; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 10:05:52 +0000 (UTC) From: Jan Beich To: Yasuhiro KIMURA Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 12:05:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> (Yasuhiro KIMURA's message of "Mon, 07 Oct 2019 15:18:41 +0900 (JST)") Message-ID: <8spu-p72a-wny@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 10:05:52 -0000 Yasuhiro KIMURA writes: > On October 10, 2012 IPV6 option of all ports was enabled by > default. Commit message said "We are in 2012, it is time to activate > IPV6 options by default everywhere". > > And now we are in 2019. IPv6 is more widely used than 2012. So I > wonder if IPV6 option is still necessary. ipv6 in CATEGORIES is also of dubious value nowadays. For one, www/firefox has "ipv6" while www/chromium does not. From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 10:14:15 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 738711479EC for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 10:14:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46p96v2Bjgz4DC4; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 10:14:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (etoilebsd.net [178.32.217.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: bapt) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1627A12D2F; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 10:14:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: by ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D27653329B; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:14:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:14:13 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Jan Beich Cc: Yasuhiro KIMURA , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-ID: <20191009101412.lwxyqcdaqtsvq2ym@ivaldir.net> References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <8spu-p72a-wny@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="w77b3rggzg4kmuoo" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8spu-p72a-wny@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 10:14:15 -0000 --w77b3rggzg4kmuoo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:05:49PM +0200, Jan Beich wrote: > Yasuhiro KIMURA writes: >=20 > > On October 10, 2012 IPV6 option of all ports was enabled by > > default. Commit message said "We are in 2012, it is time to activate > > IPV6 options by default everywhere". > > > > And now we are in 2019. IPv6 is more widely used than 2012. So I > > wonder if IPV6 option is still necessary. >=20 > ipv6 in CATEGORIES is also of dubious value nowadays. For one, > www/firefox has "ipv6" while www/chromium does not. This one is even easier to fix ;) Best regards, Bapt --w77b3rggzg4kmuoo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEgOTj3suS2urGXVU3Y4mL3PG3PloFAl2dsuAACgkQY4mL3PG3 PlrX0Q//WH3XljwMKcxo0wTGdTuA8wWVTW06u4/DeWizIXvBFtIRs4/f1ICaIIzh JH8ZfTClGOFqj/W53+I0RrYY19kxECdH+cfdXXMVnfR+Cetja1sqM07LqqJzSHyt iZ6P6Y0S1VfgqmyEo+KJkyU9jIVjyRAIb0+ymee1/dn7SibE45kahgNHGhmUDTGG cVkUm+tnoWkMHhZ75Lavd00Xu1PE+3JnXZ35lkEvmFcgTZwQPYECRvmmT+G51eEZ Axi8gLHJyPRCORughlKa9Vs8QxTWFQS1ySxRjfoSxAyaidIdobZAqEn33B/RBsJ9 qbqpBjnWRWZdtvjEGpoNXhik0nhBSAuWDqS9wUpEyIDrLaY9E92sKW90eKmeQuN2 eE2cHCPh6DwGfd041o0hwk0ceP4n093wt3h/C6pW9ot6BSrCLvm3ykfgCPZnNh+L ZGyCMRGw3Zuu36/CFnkY+TVM/GAYOjPf8lZrVIdcWezMb+x0f2ck/I0LhSez3oYJ HiPqKnrJLRbzMSVKu/0WEVPlTFP5mgqHrpC5zG44a8PC3gHFKxn6dQ4n0Gfdv56U yw0OAZg5e8jtPbuaQpmTJMgjZ8xXv3iG++GijQTg8XAWtWRUVJQSg9rKieuruX7V AHqVd86HKQh+xN/Hha3kk+PgOv2M/nqPO8BUvgZO437+4473sfw= =tpl9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --w77b3rggzg4kmuoo-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 14:12:56 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EF7514D0D4 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 14:12:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from george+freebsd@m5p.com) Received: from mailhost.m5p.com (mailhost.m5p.com [74.104.188.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "m5p.com", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pGQH2Q09z4Tby for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 14:12:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from george+freebsd@m5p.com) Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:15ff::26] (court.m5p.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:15ff:0:0:0:26]) (authenticated bits=0) by mailhost.m5p.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x99ECd0N010841 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 10:12:47 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from george+freebsd@m5p.com) To: freebsd ports From: George Mitchell Subject: Can't update qt5-gui on 11.2-RELEASE-p13 Autocrypt: addr=george+freebsd@m5p.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQINBFgnLnwBEADAJDiBKQX77LFRz9wZW8mz3KvaQol2nIremcws0F1mz/zgFlk6uhQVtwnL wb4XL5LdFwcNE1+QZzPLcbYWoWQlz0lBw1bMuKAgr0S6V2e0+I0DqhKeslVFctcTwtvT6pnK VLZXO/7ZGAaLzG4K5vSPzgoevU+YI/pxNsVCH2UO/c3jQW63uEt25mIZbCF1Pu4jgp4RhIgF ujn877r/j6OwBwjzRUu3E6ADp+U825d+5YCuQMEH0wIPnn9GTpXvfdKdbwOIl2akqXqs4cnk iATWfK3r6D4mvDEj1OPHlTvJYcfic7aOIiAwmx1C1v78GjXOdOOA0SGffNix3C2/8oZUO1+V Aet4MKpUKkduWSvULhIkHNZ5Nu8SIJOqge8pmtHxuNXAMfMrAjMdjPwwBFLsYg3Xa2E2oJwg ehTauwd/EDJFcVCyDCyCAYOi/BH/+XQyxzgDlY9N9qj9tHqhVPI6XK7t8UVffGiZUq4rHp5J RdOToqiTNC6eCJBczhMIW+DuFvWU9e6W708T1dz0Accn6Lrgk4eRIn3GFPBG+TxnpjAqHsbW 607dcnD3YKAqY4e+khczL4EObhe7dC1v2fmZiAC6Ds3WHR11IfqoUgCkIwJ590Ej+ElygJFF XxI82wtEz9hkeLLvItpyEJNVjppViRW+Dgl/U7ypHB3qDgYjgwARAQABtChHZW9yZ2UgTWl0 Y2hlbGwgPGdlb3JnZStmcmVlYnNkQG01cC5jb20+iQJUBBMBCAA+FiEENdM4ZHktsJW5kKZX wRES3m+p4fkFAlhZcR0CGyMFCQlmAYAFCwkIBwIGFQgJCgsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQwRES 3m+p4flqmw/9Emr/ydTG2n9o/IX1yVCNcHVFenVrcOY0L+DGQYZRO/XpLvsGYcuSIQId1w7h l4HZKI89ri2fF2ks6upMqBajLf8s7a8PnYrbw5bPaoOFyNTjv57GLZVsYw95kmMUpK6siuAA fXvHfKUpC/sThbwSv/1CLryVG74+5vdI8j7cQeDM436FThxlVfHKrILIiL34D4WThFB3hV/Y 2A+mQwXmdLcuQXXeAazqsFJL8sgEKSC7GMcExDkVpGc5Rh2hu97a4Sa7qWX9G/YdZOrcDacJ XxfvePn3m3WfRtXN/r0lUfiVXiqkFfbvqSaZQ0I4UvZXNGd/gH4jKHtX9RTH9G96UZeHNoMo tPw9U0fx8Ceh72nUL9qzqnmok/ryWm+6gt4Q1eRP7QAosOa1g/RgUdS1Z9IuCmbXMDp5kbNw L4ZoDMF5U3mmh8/IOKkhGopNLbNv0mwUgC59pnCptiOVx8DyckXWC4L2r6PKbWGrcGIzsUER 9smfL10gpp5H5agjwwPZI6/kzJ0R5nBzQWAlwqI73YAy6JI0HTD6lvxW7yWm2fGjEfmyaBOU 8OLUin7auoFSn+QmD5yNCUn5Ls77qHARkT1ZGocAnQkvZBGTwXpvyJixygXsm+vSUFDYBOSn cR54vdXOEMqrJk6SGau5YI9V7EhQVveE1BUp8ofWf2oo4RG5Ag0EWCcufAEQALuTOxmqMFE+ ieev/rcL3wVJrcuKS+pBbKCY9IIL0OwVf98HQJJcgdOsdDhruVd19nJNlwZ3Fc34wLw7y2GO 9WrpZiYKnI4n9urhLE5r1ydBInlI/1UKZWgM3/dPjJtcXMsC3vnqR9DmOxW4/SbqJDjP3XzO FleT4yip3AaNhPGwEPTZrubVp5hp/JojaZn690TLRwOFXg8NcjpOEs0Bq9M+OLpmsF0flrgs yDfS7y+SQ17R4Iq9T7RxZvZVAh510yGGIZIETYO/4Dh417VVm+gaksOVh2egetpUUvYYc0Ub KaP+5F/WGNrmRb1F6SKypvLlKkYAHCsUUSzsAGl9gbQhEEpuOMbUKp1979HoRMkW+8046kIo 8BZ6ph8izG/g4dZOaEqKGEhqdhYIB7UwMtFFuPtSs5Nl6JrZYni/nzFtTmtVCgcj9PNqrzqt fNFYhNznD6St6wxp3TOm9D3TQF0dzwBM1jZpb8WvmK3k6oy8hbpjiBzxn3kyRA9Vzy+PdbN/ G5a1k0rpZu/ivpBuLCDVGljUmgQigXg6xkk5UxBoHp7MPvG9prZ5jqdEa2r1KgnGjaq+VJsu Uqrw10dVgeG1NulDU1+sQl+/mwtflbkimhjDDjxsVgfrv7uvV/9be+gGm1KATuqdgCboSb1s QAo5ARfwFfChrnh+fTfPpPKHABEBAAGJAiQEGAEIAA8FAlgnLnwCGwwFCQlmAYAACgkQwRES 3m+p4fno9w/4m+swztkzxSWdutjgSv2mw+PdrKWVGFAUD2HoY1Qpi5LNLE6s9pP3qzwpQYwK viOufVJYWZ540ss6BImZBGJwyHouacqrpZjpRo5+ftj07rY1SNd8QjcHDggPfpgJ1D4Il3Xi vRg5/gzkXnRu8dXeVvMP1Ndk/F5wcoLZlQwFtPfu2xyRYIsveXMoyypAvAFSaAGXU0hRzuDJ fGI3LFvpI9UXU2C4MMzjfyZyD2NJEDKOACTo85QQzxgheTDQaDocXW00wknXFMwEItiXp8dO 2zEml/3Kj4efDfjqGpjNefjK0cnj02Byt7y6GozWXyIylrXu0SN9qWRzUVZH3+q+ijA4q3Gm 9uWzLdpjN4QWAiiaEvMhLPohp9DdLsy3kAWWrA3+pAfHSTZXrobMMbSeBkE9E4/WxdKl0nM7 TNslAWcxkTd/7Ly9cxwT8wFdHuQB1hgCmIQxDNXHL1N1ANTeUYum1w9nUg6e1M0UWu+nk3Cw qL7oL2KZe13mQnU/CFwlhbf+i//j3SXrQLlIVQv9Fn805bxIcVo9yqUZyoiV7EUpvOsxDCZh ej3mNYF5nRCf6trEJQVk0aLC26zJAYExykdUlRqc4I13XPhlt+aFSMMkoL/thYO6e9oNFK6Q aJEKXomzxxqpceJVmPH6zvqJbOboAdE/mOD0PoS1M6saIQ== Message-ID: <86831899-6a69-1529-e889-6bdac81772cb@m5p.com> Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 10:12:39 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jr2lvsSss8KJ8mfoyPWJ09SXCWcjnAd51" X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=10.0 tests=HELO_MISC_IP autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on mattapan.m5p.com X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pGQH2Q09z4Tby X-Spamd-Bar: ------- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of george@m5p.com designates 74.104.188.4 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=george@m5p.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-7.21 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+a:c]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; HAS_ATTACHMENT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.20)[multipart/signed,multipart/mixed,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[m5p.com]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-2.81)[ip: (-9.84), ipnet: 74.104.0.0/16(-4.92), asn: 701(0.77), country: US(-0.05)]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; SIGNED_PGP(-2.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:+,3:~]; ASN(0.00)[asn:701, ipnet:74.104.0.0/16, country:US]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[freebsd]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 14:12:56 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --jr2lvsSss8KJ8mfoyPWJ09SXCWcjnAd51 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="jWL0l0ieYSULou5h8oZFIrsVnWv5wHaom"; protected-headers="v1" From: George Mitchell To: freebsd ports Message-ID: <86831899-6a69-1529-e889-6bdac81772cb@m5p.com> Subject: Can't update qt5-gui on 11.2-RELEASE-p13 --jWL0l0ieYSULou5h8oZFIrsVnWv5wHaom Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Apparently the definitions of various structures found in /usr/local/include/mtdev.h from libmtdev-1.1.5_2 conflict with the definitions /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h from base. This is in the middle of a portmaster qt5 upgrade, trying to reinstall qt5-gui-5.12.2_1. I didn't see anything in UPDATING that seemed relevant. My ports tree is at 514153. -- George =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:27:8: error: redefinition of 'input_even= t' struct input_event { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:41:8: note: previous definition is here struct input_event { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:53:8: error: redefinition of 'input_id' struct input_id { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:50:8: note: previous definition is here struct input_id { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:84:8: error: redefinition of 'input_absinfo' struct input_absinfo { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:57:8: note: previous definition is here struct input_absinfo { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:108:8: error: redefinition of 'input_keymap_entry' struct input_keymap_entry { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:68:8: note: previous definition is here struct input_keymap_entry { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:300:8: error: redefinition of 'ff_replay= ' struct ff_replay { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:158:8: note: previous definition is here struct ff_replay { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:310:8: error: redefinition of 'ff_trigge= r' struct ff_trigger { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:164:8: note: previous definition is here struct ff_trigger { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:327:8: error: redefinition of 'ff_envelo= pe' struct ff_envelope { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:170:8: note: previous definition is here struct ff_envelope { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:339:8: error: redefinition of 'ff_constant_effect' struct ff_constant_effect { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:177:8: note: previous definition is here struct ff_constant_effect { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:350:8: error: redefinition of 'ff_ramp_effect' struct ff_ramp_effect { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:182:8: note: previous definition is here struct ff_ramp_effect { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:366:8: error: redefinition of 'ff_condition_effect' struct ff_condition_effect { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:188:8: note: previous definition is here struct ff_condition_effect { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:395:8: error: redefinition of 'ff_periodic_effect' struct ff_periodic_effect { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:215:8: note: previous definition is here struct ff_periodic_effect { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:416:8: error: redefinition of 'ff_rumble_effect' struct ff_rumble_effect { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:226:8: note: previous definition is here struct ff_rumble_effect { ^ In file included from evdevtouch/qevdevtouchhandler.cpp:62: In file included from /usr/local/include/mtdev.h:36: /usr/local/include/linux/input.h:444:8: error: redefinition of 'ff_effect= ' struct ff_effect { ^ /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h:247:8: note: previous definition is here struct ff_effect { ^ 13 errors generated. *** [.obj/qevdevtouchhandler.o] Error code 1 make[3]: stopped in /usr/ports/x11-toolkits/qt5-gui/work/qtbase-everywhere-src-5.13.0/src/pla= tformsupport/input 1 error make[3]: stopped in /usr/ports/x11-toolkits/qt5-gui/work/qtbase-everywhere-src-5.13.0/src/pla= tformsupport/input *** [sub-input-support-pro-all-ordered] Error code 2 make[2]: stopped in /usr/ports/x11-toolkits/qt5-gui/work/qtbase-everywhere-src-5.13.0/src/pla= tformsupport/input 1 error make[2]: stopped in /usr/ports/x11-toolkits/qt5-gui/work/qtbase-everywhere-src-5.13.0/src/pla= tformsupport/input *** [sub-input-all] Error code 2 make[1]: stopped in /usr/ports/x11-toolkits/qt5-gui/work/qtbase-everywhere-src-5.13.0/src/pla= tformsupport 1 error make[1]: stopped in /usr/ports/x11-toolkits/qt5-gui/work/qtbase-everywhere-src-5.13.0/src/pla= tformsupport *** Error code 2 Stop. make: stopped in /usr/ports/x11-toolkits/qt5-gui =3D=3D=3D>>> make build failed for x11-toolkits/qt5-gui =3D=3D=3D>>> Aborting update =3D=3D=3D>>> Update for qt5-gui-5.12.2_1 failed =3D=3D=3D>>> Aborting update =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D --jWL0l0ieYSULou5h8oZFIrsVnWv5wHaom-- --jr2lvsSss8KJ8mfoyPWJ09SXCWcjnAd51 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEENdM4ZHktsJW5kKZXwRES3m+p4fkFAl2d6tcACgkQwRES3m+p 4fkd7A//RaFq0XxK3Kw5H7/IuIzd5miu1hMDFdbdrqdplT02d7Jf4dULYYawJTXB t3PRsXQl99dnoDxH5F7tOOKGTHUt1o5iiN2fJp/cMQHqCPoEx5xVR3O0mNY47TTu nQJ+DdplfFESRO9yVn5ABo83pZyEHFlXFRLBH3YxuquQIvKDDAbNpoTDDjDQMl6i smpi+rg84U/0vb6TP/XfPKt8Hi14BLM84k8zaWMJ3+Fzk4yFiIEMmeoPsbFlGKDl GddIu4/eG983rnDbIG9bNfNopAYPYUxobpkg+pyKzigxPghogmdbdV6H6kls65iu p1vR7V+/MZC3Lp5mG9NbGLBS4Kno4qL7NquO6czs1jkZPuo4WtXuNitY189gIY3U ikUlvQEQMAi2jjAqFRQmF/8rTgapTxDIJIXTkxHZZiPqEw0jGtH9Kfku8LUuD15v 62/noTsqwRkZrkomuJoe0xRM3AHGsr5ZblF4Z4lSaetpvOEvIQDcEQLhIxanTvdu pxSoWb7odwXdWNIJERIwLhBUPv8fzphifnWcjomMHh7bjbNc3186GLf/JaCKmw8b sBsh87vWcTqyi395oY9S9Pb3YWUKuJRLuFYLWs+Il/Mtw2zbAYH9qhLrVib/7GLB hAHQ0APCmxzijrACt41jx58jN2Md0jaSUKdEGofWmalsXHQTKPU= =rS3g -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jr2lvsSss8KJ8mfoyPWJ09SXCWcjnAd51-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 14:25:28 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2708514D5AC for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 14:25:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from mailgate.Leidinger.net (bastille.leidinger.net [89.238.82.207]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pGhk6wG0z4VJR for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 14:25:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (p5B16540E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [91.22.84.14]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mailgate.Leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D8FD322C37; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:25:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.Leidinger.net [IPv6:fd73:10c7:2053:1::3:102]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FC2ACDD9; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:25:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.15.2/8.14.4/Submit) id x99EPFH9068348; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:25:15 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Alexander@leidinger.net) X-Authentication-Warning: webmail.leidinger.net: www set sender to Alexander@leidinger.net using -f Received: from [::ffff:31.3.144.27] ([::ffff:31.3.144.27]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde Framework) with HTTPS; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 16:25:15 +0200 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 16:25:15 +0200 Message-ID: <20191009162515.Horde.169O7YV_OJCmtMtOPzibtkX@webmail.leidinger.net> From: Alexander Leidinger To: George Mitchell Cc: freebsd ports Subject: Re: Can't update qt5-gui on 11.2-RELEASE-p13 In-Reply-To: <86831899-6a69-1529-e889-6bdac81772cb@m5p.com> User-Agent: Horde Application Framework 5 Accept-Language: de,en Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_-85tSyVScB64Kf25PNh_5Qm"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=leidinger.net; s=outgoing-alex; t=1570631119; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to; bh=ST4jed+mhBMumgWAuKNQuFJFP5x9Hxum9/IM+jP0po8=; b=vi52BzEKBtXolJ43zQ9o4K3GPZofHDXJfogmnncljjg1UOvXpBSWFxrBgBHwo+cvDwSem7 nQ0erHckLhrgcDXlDWhrepQqFMeYF1MGWelIoLlicKwPuS4XN+jFWAzfCRciE+J3zlP7Ep GedTFDm8xa1GS2GjdasmeuDOMfAlTxQVqdZ07VSEIok8cnnjKvrmlmblvRayQzkEtk7IyI HRxQW20x2RdMmoRL4kGafUd3mInRca25vUGXtJppqlWm7XWXwYdmUQzRPF7Ak2nLdKKASd 8EvDcChVuqDS+yn8SSKhCdTpFgqdw/IfD8fgwo0cJSFjhUvDJAouU9TvENyopw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=outgoing-alex; d=leidinger.net; t=1570631119; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=fZVblKu194OaLoG2TJIs688ZTE8rkFAR/XFF3kY6kOxqFkTVDwe5mztDKCaDzAvscjRF8T uIBB7XuRRszUECn2ScSfOAy4m5qM6MuiNuJMbK3D494N4C1seEzQ9fLbl9d0V0PXGe/gBs 5tQ/MplySDZI0NbpLNqBGysBCHOSukllz/4SYVD5ZOJu2jqJkJ5CvrsWtWGdrGdz3XC5ub 8/0F/dCFzJO5kXKNH74Qc7/U8EkvMPfXsIQvcpIatb0ksla1OpynWmUxq5ZTkT1qq2aYrn 6m182ZjjqjUTRsuq0dROzHvcYwtBKypUSZ8tqbHxnMaonqvm0wV5ZKYxwW4Yqg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mailgate.Leidinger.net; auth=pass smtp.auth=netchild@leidinger.net smtp.mailfrom=Alexander@leidinger.net X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pGhk6wG0z4VJR X-Spamd-Bar: -------- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-8.79 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[leidinger.net:s=outgoing-alex]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; IP_SCORE(-3.69)[ip: (-9.69), ipnet: 89.238.64.0/18(-4.84), asn: 34240(-3.89), country: DE(-0.01)]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[freebsd]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.20)[multipart/signed,text/plain]; XAW_SERVICE_ACCT(1.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[leidinger.net:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[leidinger.net,quarantine]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; SIGNED_PGP(-2.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[14.84.22.91.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.10]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; ASN(0.00)[asn:34240, ipnet:89.238.64.0/18, country:DE]; ARC_ALLOW(-1.00)[i=1]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 14:25:28 -0000 This message is in MIME format and has been PGP signed. --=_-85tSyVScB64Kf25PNh_5Qm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Quoting George Mitchell (from Wed, 9 Oct 2019=20= =20 10:12:39=20-0400): > Apparently the definitions of various structures found in > /usr/local/include/mtdev.h from libmtdev-1.1.5_2 conflict with > the definitions /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h from base. > This is in the middle of a portmaster qt5 upgrade, trying to > reinstall qt5-gui-5.12.2_1. I didn't see anything in UPDATING > that seemed relevant. My ports tree is at 514153. -- George I've run into the same error just yesterday. As a workaround,=20=20 deinstall=20the devel/evdev-proto port (it's not the libmtdev port which=20= =20 is=20the problem) and it will use the base-system evdev includes. Bye, Alexander. --=20 http://www.Leidinger.net=20Alexander@Leidinger.net: PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild@FreeBSD.org : PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF --=_-85tSyVScB64Kf25PNh_5Qm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: Digitale PGP-Signatur Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAABAgAGBQJdne3LAAoJEBINsJsD+NiG9cIP/jI83c6eKHDXTIEa4ja/OEUT 4XYB/BpfxEQMhZMZ4hhXBX8qA7/xCL+huBog+ZQcaemwzc4v6up9Zl+f5/gDlBBV qa7ybJ894np2Jijjm7gJktZ672ItexXtlMo/Y1Tl8sp/Yxtb1a9CJTsZ2cmAF0+p 6VM3a+nleIhSMK/pFVLx6ZCt2g+rI0W80wi5A0q7x2EfVO5VLeOwZ79dSPLsJ6A2 pYm/dk5DNRuOeDUzIct6ThQH2zj3ASqHk1zdAuUEVi32JkHEvkUfWhfG5/HsIUB4 91xcg0/itV7/BFcm1QFdMRiOrKrvQe8f5WbjJIBmoyj4grjNrqvcnapDDbEltfmG OgiFJw+aQd3VrhHDJE2NtRrNWuxfYdcwOHZZ0iwpndrgXRUROlaSIjQcBRw04mBm DHQDHDe5KgkUoHWpYyiQsd7nm2SogMZ7FSLNSEfF5T0MOpWLFk4xplL+sZkUTuUN L7XdGPgTI2AMBgigrQ/IbxH3yjNUnc3EtqcXaKAHnzo0C7tH3bwqcPXmQeOY/yDA 2PEqCmHcZmokWzXzQlimnMu1anATW9+soQfZEB9jAJn9SJNg8Catt0rMWdaVSNrN KCnBi305Dg15vtMh6tBpyWl1J0a1HsbJCzGEgz7MFV4k2Nn2CLZ8QYIe7p1+I5m8 cqTBIS/xacaXa/RwK3CX =vnMe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=_-85tSyVScB64Kf25PNh_5Qm-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 14:30:50 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4093914D75A for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 14:30:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pGpy0zvfz4Vfb; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 14:30:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (etoilebsd.net [178.32.217.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: bapt) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E62A814AD7; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 14:30:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: by ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 794F0333E2; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:30:48 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:30:48 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Jan Beich Cc: Yasuhiro KIMURA , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: [HEADSUP] Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-ID: <20191009143048.zliwcrjx7ahe67a7@ivaldir.net> References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <8spu-p72a-wny@FreeBSD.org> <20191009101412.lwxyqcdaqtsvq2ym@ivaldir.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="dmniuyyougrrt5nl" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191009101412.lwxyqcdaqtsvq2ym@ivaldir.net> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 14:30:50 -0000 --dmniuyyougrrt5nl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:14:13PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:05:49PM +0200, Jan Beich wrote: > > Yasuhiro KIMURA writes: > >=20 > > > On October 10, 2012 IPV6 option of all ports was enabled by > > > default. Commit message said "We are in 2012, it is time to activate > > > IPV6 options by default everywhere". > > > > > > And now we are in 2019. IPv6 is more widely used than 2012. So I > > > wonder if IPV6 option is still necessary. > >=20 > > ipv6 in CATEGORIES is also of dubious value nowadays. For one, > > www/firefox has "ipv6" while www/chromium does not. >=20 > This one is even easier to fix ;) >=20 Done. Now we can get back on the ipv6 option. so if we want to proceed further in removing the option to build with or wi= thout ipv6 for the ports side. Please speak up in reply to this email, if you are building without ipv6, why are you doing so, what are the real benefit for = it. How bad it will impact you if we do remove that option? Best regards, Bapt --dmniuyyougrrt5nl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEgOTj3suS2urGXVU3Y4mL3PG3PloFAl2d7xQACgkQY4mL3PG3 PloZWhAAtL0iAAkARG2/H6nlqL52J4WsR/g6MdtHuG97yd7cS6fSp15odY7o1u+b xWIObStVOiiRfroqLnm4JwhY6ZbGOLWHHNvcqSyG//B/Af0WEq8gLfQiiULmVwuz SVBJmCQSPxDmAqiyWq9iLQsUZK7pMfRmz8NTDG/UD2oUeY7yz1hTJACqmEOhtcDq 37I7qHzmp1vs0PnG2gMlQuHPgq+yyQItnZVOzE+Niazw7a3k0j+bo2uAUDLHpqTp eEGjQc5r7s7PGM1YvzBCXYVrHFCWaNAE6paB2G4vny1eDTi/d8hyuhXFv3t6nwx6 jQOS+IKaSKxqz/d3Y8LF59bTd3PFoJk0ZjXikQUsD1NOoUA3w/0wt4kv9yFMS6il PRvTZ5TtumSMR0qeEepbU2yBDmHON2SpP+FW5gU7pf4Om8msg/6Q1Rgq5GAxJQeu w02H4ginsISl7EN3O7KbCvSYqiRA+Lnrv80ojPYng+KDX5+4T93kcE5PRpy4x1RF x2giTjpB4NssQac0i4DRG3a14boAfle37khSJSLHarvF7SnUB/+hbmxcQO5WcC1b s6CTK/n1hTw+s5EIqY3jzH00ezmCBre2YUfHdBZ2c9DmhLpxSimqjyScqzQuhwDS TeofqdM/ak9e4mDU6m6EHYY6dJVO7qkaiiK5YVOpvo27hmBP1Jc= =ktxL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --dmniuyyougrrt5nl-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 16:59:37 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FB2F12840E; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:59:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ler@lerctr.org) Received: from thebighonker.lerctr.org (ns-b.lerctr.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f0f:3ad::53:2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "*.lerctr.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pL6c0krGz4fWk; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:59:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ler@lerctr.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lerctr.org; s=ler2019; h=Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=nkzqy2vuG/NMXxJsfDePrwkYV3JmEJRVy5ZCtiBtQRo=; b=cAm7RsRxU33Pt8Uvk7Fq1578Hq rxI/mUe3ULNSDTpNVTi3PWVRqkITDZ+T2rQ54weIkyDUtLxAJrjlJrkZR4Wepq0LHTnacv1gK6Ss+ NnXYPtDKuS/KKhiTLgiHkZCu61BsDDF1N2RHIrMWYkDeeXt0G2iETYhiLEbLXEIUo75nn9FR0W32j 2WPoVh4K/c21kFexkPUwWojGQxg8Ts/QmPksUSS10VpDlR8QbCKmJGC/ZqHTW2MEbGeDIY5BrJ25b /0/bo+ah2go2tD+5vRVYq3OFBi8RUq+9vi9klQ6kKQHAcrAgUTLZVZD9jH8VZlNbSqLmanhwB0gsc 77DV5POw==; Received: from thebighonker.lerctr.org ([2001:470:1f0f:3ad:bb:dcff:fe50:d900]:11719 helo=webmail.lerctr.org) by thebighonker.lerctr.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1iIFJE-000MN7-Gn; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 11:59:32 -0500 Received: from 2600:1700:210:b180:79d0:d2fa:d50d:ad3f by webmail.lerctr.org with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Wed, 09 Oct 2019 11:59:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 11:59:32 -0500 From: Larry Rosenman To: Paul Macdonald Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dovecot-2.3.8 not building (lua error) In-Reply-To: <4078faf5-604e-8248-acb6-83953b78a017@ifdnrg.com> References: <4078faf5-604e-8248-acb6-83953b78a017@ifdnrg.com> Message-ID: <12625cbfa74ae66122c0dea801d6340b@lerctr.org> X-Sender: ler@lerctr.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.9 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pL6c0krGz4fWk X-Spamd-Bar: --------- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=lerctr.org header.s=ler2019 header.b=cAm7RsRx; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=lerctr.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of ler@lerctr.org designates 2001:470:1f0f:3ad::53:2 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ler@lerctr.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-9.38 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[lerctr.org:s=ler2019]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DWL_DNSWL_HI(-3.50)[lerctr.org.dwl.dnswl.org : 127.0.6.3]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[lerctr.org:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[lerctr.org,none]; IP_SCORE(-2.88)[ip: (-6.40), ipnet: 2001:470::/32(-4.57), asn: 6939(-3.40), country: US(-0.05)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:6939, ipnet:2001:470::/32, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 16:59:37 -0000 On 10/09/2019 3:28 am, Paul Macdonald via freebsd-ports wrote: > Hi, > > dovecot is not building on FreeBSD 12.0-REL if lua support is not > selected, but does build if it is. > > ===>   Registering installation for dovecot-2.3.8 > pkg-static: Unable to access file > /var/ports/basejail/usr/ports/mail/dovecot/work/stage/usr/local/%%LUA_LIBDIR%%exec/dovecot/health-check.sh:No > such file or directory > > fixed with 2.3.8_2. Sorry for the breakage. -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 214-642-9640 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org US Mail: 5708 Sabbia Dr, Round Rock, TX 78665-2106 From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 18:06:14 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FA6412A34C for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46pMbV3L6Yz3Gty for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 7280712A34B; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:14 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724A012A34A for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pMbV2Qddz3Gtx for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::16:115c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3687C1C4D7 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.8]) by portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x99I6Ef3098328 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:14 GMT (envelope-from indexbuild@portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org) Received: (from indexbuild@localhost) by portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x99I6E6s098327 for ports@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:14 GMT (envelope-from indexbuild) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:14 GMT From: Ports Index build Message-Id: <201910091806.x99I6E6s098327@portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org> To: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: INDEX build failed for 11.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 18:06:14 -0000 INDEX build failed with errors: Generating INDEX-11 - please wait..--- describe.accessibility --- --- describe.arabic --- --- describe.archivers --- --- describe.astro --- --- describe.audio --- --- describe.benchmarks --- --- describe.biology --- --- describe.cad --- --- describe.chinese --- --- describe.comms --- --- describe.converters --- --- describe.databases --- --- describe.deskutils --- --- describe.devel --- --- describe.dns --- --- describe.editors --- --- describe.emulators --- --- describe.finance --- --- describe.french --- --- describe.ftp --- --- describe.games --- --- describe.german --- --- describe.graphics --- --- describe.devel --- make[5]: "/home/indexbuild/tindex/ports/devel/llvm70/Makefile" line 213: Need an operator make[5]: "/home/indexbuild/tindex/ports/devel/llvm70/Makefile" line 215: if-less endif make[5]: Fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue===> devel/llvm70 failed *** [describe.devel] Error code 1 make[2]: stopped in /home/indexbuild/tindex/ports make[2]: stopped in /home/indexbuild/tindex/ports *** Error code 1 Stop. make[1]: stopped in /home/indexbuild/tindex/ports *** Error code 1 Stop. make: stopped in /home/indexbuild/tindex/ports 1 error Committers on the hook: amdmi3 brooks dmgk jrm ler mandree Most recent SVN update was: Updating '.': U devel/llvm70/Makefile U astro/mkgmap/Makefile U astro/mkgmap/distinfo U mail/fetchmail/Makefile A mail/fetchmail/files/patch-fetchmail.man A mail/fetchmail/files/patch-t.smoke U mail/dovecot/Makefile U mail/dovecot/pkg-plist U security/Makefile A security/aws-vault A security/aws-vault/Makefile A security/aws-vault/distinfo A security/aws-vault/pkg-descr U security/lego/Makefile U security/lego/distinfo U databases/pspg/Makefile U databases/pspg/distinfo U .gitauthors Updated to revision 514178. From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 18:22:58 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 076EA12ADB7 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:22:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from george+freebsd@m5p.com) Received: from mailhost.m5p.com (mailhost.m5p.com [74.104.188.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "m5p.com", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pMym6SJvz3J0f for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:22:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from george+freebsd@m5p.com) Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:15ff::26] (court.m5p.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:15ff:0:0:0:26]) (authenticated bits=0) by mailhost.m5p.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x99IMkSn012921 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 14:22:55 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from george+freebsd@m5p.com) Subject: Re: Can't update qt5-gui on 11.2-RELEASE-p13 To: Alexander Leidinger Cc: freebsd ports References: <20191009162515.Horde.169O7YV_OJCmtMtOPzibtkX@webmail.leidinger.net> From: George Mitchell Autocrypt: addr=george+freebsd@m5p.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQINBFgnLnwBEADAJDiBKQX77LFRz9wZW8mz3KvaQol2nIremcws0F1mz/zgFlk6uhQVtwnL wb4XL5LdFwcNE1+QZzPLcbYWoWQlz0lBw1bMuKAgr0S6V2e0+I0DqhKeslVFctcTwtvT6pnK VLZXO/7ZGAaLzG4K5vSPzgoevU+YI/pxNsVCH2UO/c3jQW63uEt25mIZbCF1Pu4jgp4RhIgF ujn877r/j6OwBwjzRUu3E6ADp+U825d+5YCuQMEH0wIPnn9GTpXvfdKdbwOIl2akqXqs4cnk iATWfK3r6D4mvDEj1OPHlTvJYcfic7aOIiAwmx1C1v78GjXOdOOA0SGffNix3C2/8oZUO1+V Aet4MKpUKkduWSvULhIkHNZ5Nu8SIJOqge8pmtHxuNXAMfMrAjMdjPwwBFLsYg3Xa2E2oJwg ehTauwd/EDJFcVCyDCyCAYOi/BH/+XQyxzgDlY9N9qj9tHqhVPI6XK7t8UVffGiZUq4rHp5J RdOToqiTNC6eCJBczhMIW+DuFvWU9e6W708T1dz0Accn6Lrgk4eRIn3GFPBG+TxnpjAqHsbW 607dcnD3YKAqY4e+khczL4EObhe7dC1v2fmZiAC6Ds3WHR11IfqoUgCkIwJ590Ej+ElygJFF XxI82wtEz9hkeLLvItpyEJNVjppViRW+Dgl/U7ypHB3qDgYjgwARAQABtChHZW9yZ2UgTWl0 Y2hlbGwgPGdlb3JnZStmcmVlYnNkQG01cC5jb20+iQJUBBMBCAA+FiEENdM4ZHktsJW5kKZX wRES3m+p4fkFAlhZcR0CGyMFCQlmAYAFCwkIBwIGFQgJCgsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQwRES 3m+p4flqmw/9Emr/ydTG2n9o/IX1yVCNcHVFenVrcOY0L+DGQYZRO/XpLvsGYcuSIQId1w7h l4HZKI89ri2fF2ks6upMqBajLf8s7a8PnYrbw5bPaoOFyNTjv57GLZVsYw95kmMUpK6siuAA fXvHfKUpC/sThbwSv/1CLryVG74+5vdI8j7cQeDM436FThxlVfHKrILIiL34D4WThFB3hV/Y 2A+mQwXmdLcuQXXeAazqsFJL8sgEKSC7GMcExDkVpGc5Rh2hu97a4Sa7qWX9G/YdZOrcDacJ XxfvePn3m3WfRtXN/r0lUfiVXiqkFfbvqSaZQ0I4UvZXNGd/gH4jKHtX9RTH9G96UZeHNoMo tPw9U0fx8Ceh72nUL9qzqnmok/ryWm+6gt4Q1eRP7QAosOa1g/RgUdS1Z9IuCmbXMDp5kbNw L4ZoDMF5U3mmh8/IOKkhGopNLbNv0mwUgC59pnCptiOVx8DyckXWC4L2r6PKbWGrcGIzsUER 9smfL10gpp5H5agjwwPZI6/kzJ0R5nBzQWAlwqI73YAy6JI0HTD6lvxW7yWm2fGjEfmyaBOU 8OLUin7auoFSn+QmD5yNCUn5Ls77qHARkT1ZGocAnQkvZBGTwXpvyJixygXsm+vSUFDYBOSn cR54vdXOEMqrJk6SGau5YI9V7EhQVveE1BUp8ofWf2oo4RG5Ag0EWCcufAEQALuTOxmqMFE+ ieev/rcL3wVJrcuKS+pBbKCY9IIL0OwVf98HQJJcgdOsdDhruVd19nJNlwZ3Fc34wLw7y2GO 9WrpZiYKnI4n9urhLE5r1ydBInlI/1UKZWgM3/dPjJtcXMsC3vnqR9DmOxW4/SbqJDjP3XzO FleT4yip3AaNhPGwEPTZrubVp5hp/JojaZn690TLRwOFXg8NcjpOEs0Bq9M+OLpmsF0flrgs yDfS7y+SQ17R4Iq9T7RxZvZVAh510yGGIZIETYO/4Dh417VVm+gaksOVh2egetpUUvYYc0Ub KaP+5F/WGNrmRb1F6SKypvLlKkYAHCsUUSzsAGl9gbQhEEpuOMbUKp1979HoRMkW+8046kIo 8BZ6ph8izG/g4dZOaEqKGEhqdhYIB7UwMtFFuPtSs5Nl6JrZYni/nzFtTmtVCgcj9PNqrzqt fNFYhNznD6St6wxp3TOm9D3TQF0dzwBM1jZpb8WvmK3k6oy8hbpjiBzxn3kyRA9Vzy+PdbN/ G5a1k0rpZu/ivpBuLCDVGljUmgQigXg6xkk5UxBoHp7MPvG9prZ5jqdEa2r1KgnGjaq+VJsu Uqrw10dVgeG1NulDU1+sQl+/mwtflbkimhjDDjxsVgfrv7uvV/9be+gGm1KATuqdgCboSb1s QAo5ARfwFfChrnh+fTfPpPKHABEBAAGJAiQEGAEIAA8FAlgnLnwCGwwFCQlmAYAACgkQwRES 3m+p4fno9w/4m+swztkzxSWdutjgSv2mw+PdrKWVGFAUD2HoY1Qpi5LNLE6s9pP3qzwpQYwK viOufVJYWZ540ss6BImZBGJwyHouacqrpZjpRo5+ftj07rY1SNd8QjcHDggPfpgJ1D4Il3Xi vRg5/gzkXnRu8dXeVvMP1Ndk/F5wcoLZlQwFtPfu2xyRYIsveXMoyypAvAFSaAGXU0hRzuDJ fGI3LFvpI9UXU2C4MMzjfyZyD2NJEDKOACTo85QQzxgheTDQaDocXW00wknXFMwEItiXp8dO 2zEml/3Kj4efDfjqGpjNefjK0cnj02Byt7y6GozWXyIylrXu0SN9qWRzUVZH3+q+ijA4q3Gm 9uWzLdpjN4QWAiiaEvMhLPohp9DdLsy3kAWWrA3+pAfHSTZXrobMMbSeBkE9E4/WxdKl0nM7 TNslAWcxkTd/7Ly9cxwT8wFdHuQB1hgCmIQxDNXHL1N1ANTeUYum1w9nUg6e1M0UWu+nk3Cw qL7oL2KZe13mQnU/CFwlhbf+i//j3SXrQLlIVQv9Fn805bxIcVo9yqUZyoiV7EUpvOsxDCZh ej3mNYF5nRCf6trEJQVk0aLC26zJAYExykdUlRqc4I13XPhlt+aFSMMkoL/thYO6e9oNFK6Q aJEKXomzxxqpceJVmPH6zvqJbOboAdE/mOD0PoS1M6saIQ== Message-ID: Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 14:22:40 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191009162515.Horde.169O7YV_OJCmtMtOPzibtkX@webmail.leidinger.net> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cLjqIvg3JfbLqNjYcJdrLb669bghMAljf" X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=10.0 tests=HELO_MISC_IP autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on mattapan.m5p.com X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pMym6SJvz3J0f X-Spamd-Bar: ------- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of george@m5p.com designates 74.104.188.4 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=george@m5p.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-7.21 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+a:c]; IP_SCORE(-2.81)[ip: (-9.85), ipnet: 74.104.0.0/16(-4.92), asn: 701(0.76), country: US(-0.05)]; HAS_ATTACHMENT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.20)[multipart/signed,multipart/mixed,text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[m5p.com]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; SIGNED_PGP(-2.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:+,3:~]; ASN(0.00)[asn:701, ipnet:74.104.0.0/16, country:US]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[freebsd]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 18:22:58 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --cLjqIvg3JfbLqNjYcJdrLb669bghMAljf Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="SW7LVWyMnusLkqZkEwaIaXLrRSWU1HKEH"; protected-headers="v1" From: George Mitchell To: Alexander Leidinger Cc: freebsd ports Message-ID: Subject: Re: Can't update qt5-gui on 11.2-RELEASE-p13 References: <20191009162515.Horde.169O7YV_OJCmtMtOPzibtkX@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20191009162515.Horde.169O7YV_OJCmtMtOPzibtkX@webmail.leidinger.net> --SW7LVWyMnusLkqZkEwaIaXLrRSWU1HKEH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2019-10-09 10:25, Alexander Leidinger via freebsd-ports wrote: > Quoting George Mitchell (from Wed, 9 Oct 2019 > 10:12:39 -0400): >=20 >> Apparently the definitions of various structures found in >> /usr/local/include/mtdev.h from libmtdev-1.1.5_2 conflict with >> the definitions /usr/include/dev/evdev/input.h from base. >> This is in the middle of a portmaster qt5 upgrade, trying to >> reinstall qt5-gui-5.12.2_1.=C2=A0 I didn't see anything in UPDATING >> that seemed relevant.=C2=A0 My ports tree is at 514153.=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0 -- George >=20 > I've run into the same error just yesterday. As a workaround, deinstall= > the devel/evdev-proto port (it's not the libmtdev port which is the > problem) and it will use the base-system evdev includes. >=20 > Bye, > Alexander. >=20 Problem solved! Thanks for your help. -- George --SW7LVWyMnusLkqZkEwaIaXLrRSWU1HKEH-- --cLjqIvg3JfbLqNjYcJdrLb669bghMAljf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEENdM4ZHktsJW5kKZXwRES3m+p4fkFAl2eJXAACgkQwRES3m+p 4fk/axAAuHX9Q9J0dXu+xlXj1OaiuAe0gLLOPTiVzEl6B0w1giVkxCUx6FfEGN2l rrvrDeE/SLyV0cRcNCaxN0QhCmC2TpDiFpw4yZYs/ZR3ZBQ19LyHb8rM89YsaeSm w/uxkmSbCuQLReC1BMJQR24dhCAacVT726vV6NkXiELD3uYpi/zT5eb9+U/PoTVL xGox/AmaiJpfBfvDPoccc8HxpM8m0FunKgeY7bj6rwJMoEhrhHq38XTALlCq+DaN 52ZQA1ZPdamCN2iCAxGlJRJ3y1DjNJhCcAwosVpRrHmVawn0pd7qxh9QLLfXZXsw hfk42Sy/sgysBVyLsSn14qxAtpPNYewfdW1en7K4VP098M6Tcw7fUp1ReK36SN6M hTECNqzVP+MHefXUXtQtUy9Jt4zOSi1GxMKJoNdl1K4WpkamreEoeBgHAFbtfK4z bGIEwVOt9aMWFcs6bKvhyFrcEcq+cRFom4XBlgqKXko7v3A0k1djWed/xTjOYGOW otZyaWYGhUIMvdK6AhpwL0G1Vz6qfDHLCl5J1hG4vsnGTiMUTQtZRI6ZeEws8dRK vqdDH57McllrJWxImkz4u2EZLFShvNgqgEy9LFahaE/HBnUByOgTZ0mSf7GCgdda uc4+nEVoA3pEeGN+5JS5CfijB7PxMFmsS0UIkp/C4BnCdVeMqec= =5d2d -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --cLjqIvg3JfbLqNjYcJdrLb669bghMAljf-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 19:18:04 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0E0312C38C for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 19:18:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ronald-lists@klop.ws) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pPBM3GbMz3NhC for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 19:18:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ronald-lists@klop.ws) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iIHTE-0005zM-AC for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 21:18:01 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 21:18:05 +0200 Subject: looking for a committer for databases/mongodb* (security) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Ronald Klop" Message-ID: User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.16 (FreeBSD) X-Authenticated-As-Hash: 398f5522cb258ce43cb679602f8cfe8b62a256d1 X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Spam-Level: -- X-Spam-Score: -2.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, BAYES_00 autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2 X-Scan-Signature: 74b82c602e180a6a7275945acf229479 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pPBM3GbMz3NhC X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of ronald-lists@klop.ws designates 195.190.28.88 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ronald-lists@klop.ws X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.60 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:195.190.28.64/27]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[klop.ws]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; IP_SCORE(-0.80)[ip: (-1.03), ipnet: 195.190.28.0/24(-0.36), asn: 47172(-2.64), country: NL(0.02)]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[88.28.190.195.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:47172, ipnet:195.190.28.0/24, country:NL]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 19:18:04 -0000 Hello, I'm looking for a committer for these PRs. First (containing vuxml entries also): https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239717 (mongodb34 security update) And then these two dependencies: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240126 (mongodb36 security update) https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241078 (mongodb34 followup update) I've fixed all suggestions in the PRs and verified on #freebsd-ports (irc) that the PRs are in good enough shape now. Regards, Ronald. From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 9 21:07:16 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC3B12F5FC for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 21:07:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46pRcN5yMnz41s1 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 21:07:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id CAD0412F5FB; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 21:07:16 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA95812F5FA for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 21:07:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pRcN52Lcz41ry for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 21:07:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::16:115c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73FB31E683 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 21:07:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indexbuild@FreeBSD.org) Received: from portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.8]) by portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x99L7Ghw068735 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 21:07:16 GMT (envelope-from indexbuild@portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org) Received: (from indexbuild@localhost) by portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x99L7GxP068733 for ports@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 21:07:16 GMT (envelope-from indexbuild) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 21:07:16 GMT From: Ports Index build Message-Id: <201910092107.x99L7GxP068733@portsindexbuild.nyi.freebsd.org> To: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: INDEX now builds successfully on 11.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 21:07:17 -0000 From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 02:19:10 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 656CC1376EF for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 02:19:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pZXG287Pz4KB2 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 02:19:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1354) id 413D8322; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 02:19:10 +0000 (UTC) From: Jan Beich To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: [HEADS UP] Binary packages for FreeBSD 11 to require 11.3 soon Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 04:19:07 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 02:19:10 -0000 FreeBSD 11.3 was released on 2019-07-09. After adding 3 months support overlap it'd be 2019-10-09 (yesterday). Given 11.2 is EOL the package cluster will upgrade from 11.2 to 11.3 [*] while the ports tree would adjust ALLOW_UNSUPPORTED_SYSTEM knob and drop 11.2-specific workarouds. Once packages for 11.3 are built (from 2 to 4 days + few hours to mirror) /quarterly and /latest won't be usable on 11.2 anymore. /release_2 from 2018-06-05 should still work. So, upgrade to FreeBSD 11.3 or backup 11.2 packages. If you're on FreeBSD 11.3 already beware some packages may disappear due to broken build e.g., from base Clang/libc++ 8 upgrade. -- [*] Look for 113amd64 and 113i386 jails on https://pkg-status.freebsd.org/ May not be visible until build starts e.g., on Tue/Thu/Sat at 01:00 UTC. From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 11:38:53 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDC9B1305D8 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 11:38:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46ppy54019z3JR7; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 11:38:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1354) id 620769EC1; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 11:38:53 +0000 (UTC) From: Jan Beich To: =?utf-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9?= Ladan Cc: freebsd ports Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] Binary packages for FreeBSD 11 to require 11.3 soon References: Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:38:50 +0200 In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?Q?=22Ren=C3=A9?= Ladan"'s message of "Thu, 10 Oct 2019 10:18:40 +0200") Message-ID: <1rvk-bzjp-wny@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 11:38:53 -0000 Ren=C3=A9 Ladan writes: > Op do 10 okt. 2019 04:19 schreef Jan Beich : > >> FreeBSD 11.3 was released on 2019-07-09. After adding 3 months support >> overlap it'd be 2019-10-09 (yesterday). > > Not so fast... > > The three month overlap period has indeed expiree, but is traditionally > rounded up to the end of the month, so 2019-10-31. See > https://www.freebsd.org/security/#sup Looking at previous EOL on 11.* branch it seems you're right. However, 11.0 EOL was extended by 1 month while 11.1 EOL was already close to the end of the month. Hardly enough to establish the tradition. > An official announcement from secteam should be out soon. Why did secteam@ wait 3 months to establish exact EOL date? Such unpredictability hurts planning. For one, port maintainers need plannig when to remove their 11.2 jails because pre-commit QA doesn't exist outside of private resources of maintainers/committers. From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 05:22:54 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 068C3145E0D for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 05:22:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@freebsd.org) Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pfcF4Hmbz4Zjp; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 05:22:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@freebsd.org) Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.92.3 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1iIQuR-000E37-8D; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 07:22:43 +0200 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 07:22:43 +0200 From: Kurt Jaeger To: Jan Beich Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] Binary packages for FreeBSD 11 to require 11.3 soon Message-ID: <20191010052243.GA37504@home.opsec.eu> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pfcF4Hmbz4Zjp X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.00 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.996,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 05:22:54 -0000 Hi! > FreeBSD 11.3 was released on 2019-07-09. After adding 3 months support > overlap it'd be 2019-10-09 (yesterday). https://www.freebsd.org/security/security.html#sup says that 11.2 is supported until 31.10.2019. -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 One year to go ! From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 06:18:28 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A4DB148AC1 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 06:18:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from soth.netfence.it (net-2-44-121-52.cust.vodafonedsl.it [2.44.121.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mailserver.netfence.it", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pgrN2Mltz4djS; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 06:18:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from alamar.ventu (alamar.local.netfence.it [10.1.2.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by soth.netfence.it (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x9A6IBRa075923 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:18:13 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) X-Authentication-Warning: soth.netfence.it: Host alamar.local.netfence.it [10.1.2.18] claimed to be alamar.ventu Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? To: Baptiste Daroussin , Jan Beich Cc: Yasuhiro KIMURA , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <8spu-p72a-wny@FreeBSD.org> <20191009101412.lwxyqcdaqtsvq2ym@ivaldir.net> <20191009143048.zliwcrjx7ahe67a7@ivaldir.net> From: Andrea Venturoli Message-ID: Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:18:11 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191009143048.zliwcrjx7ahe67a7@ivaldir.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pgrN2Mltz4djS X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.00 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.998,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 06:18:28 -0000 On 2019-10-09 16:30, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: Hello. > Please speak up in reply to this email, if you are > building without ipv6, why are you doing so, what are the real benefit for it. I'm building without IPv6, just because it's one (currently useless) less thing to worry about (settings, security, etc...). > How bad it will impact you if we do remove that option? I'll end up building and running ports/packages on systems with IPv6 disabled in the kernel. If there's no problem with that, I think I won't be impacted at all. bye & Thanks av. From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 08:47:14 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4321514ED2B for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:47:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pl8212mdz4pZl; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:47:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (etoilebsd.net [178.32.217.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: bapt) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E2FF71CC65; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:47:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: by ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id DE683945E1; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 10:47:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 10:47:12 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Peter Jeremy Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-ID: <20191010084712.grtcj2xgkgotzhea@ivaldir.net> References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <8spu-p72a-wny@FreeBSD.org> <20191009101412.lwxyqcdaqtsvq2ym@ivaldir.net> <20191009143048.zliwcrjx7ahe67a7@ivaldir.net> <20191010084455.GC24576@server.rulingia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="326ivgdojpgwcfr2" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191010084455.GC24576@server.rulingia.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:47:14 -0000 --326ivgdojpgwcfr2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 07:44:55PM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2019-Oct-09 16:30:48 +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrot= e: > >so if we want to proceed further in removing the option to build with or= without > >ipv6 for the ports side. >=20 > Last time I checked, XDMCP differs enough between IPv4 and IPv6 that xdm > used a compile-time option to pick which to support. For cases like that we should have flavors, exactly like we have for bird f= or example. Best regards, Bapt --326ivgdojpgwcfr2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEgOTj3suS2urGXVU3Y4mL3PG3PloFAl2e8A0ACgkQY4mL3PG3 PlpHoA//SrGblg4j/aZvGVQfb7bVd3HejBXLzbBpW1aflWtcuMAQXdGKOMjhe1xy kmn+qYAzNX3uM+QEuYpAOP25a+N56nf/VKHgGzoljzFpTzcWT7F3plcBC/COqFL0 uKID7UDvGokLG486uPsYGBunOJn8iB3TQzOpXVtMuXIJDwl6pCDa6jmshpnLORxF 1h2QeUEWGP8OFXSbqzR5gWY/E78LHxb3LyyNA72FKyTltcaI0o1VVTPec5TpOgiM OBel6faMkyoJVQn5XjjO5dTVPWO0vcIgnM4o75HHzx/iqweuaTvrvRRQFez3Kn3M MmdhDf6M3HMb09pdDIDxqAJFIwh7FbBqkGpK5hdwCUrqrHUHeFu7cCeAZWVRIOgr bAn92/qPjhaQIIOBk7b8et/XihuI1IOOB6zblCl22TsP4wvV3nkUUFFFtDObdqRu x13oI6QJzYubEiMBojUTJ1RLI2sFAzvZ6aT1bgRewVAb9jWZaPSzmYwgU59xm2Q3 TImXSKEEjFplpMn3mqG8hxnsuDslqQLBTkxaP4e3QLOiEx7OGS9+wht8AsT5T7G/ vbQDSkEEYS9ungN0u+XCCuPpItjV7x49vLFX8HjWC/gvm+8tU9cT+ohuipHuo3Ah 5OGwcJ+GYP9UdBdkZNO2MEqV+duH4D6ul1KdafFqGwWZ91HxiJs= =6noh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --326ivgdojpgwcfr2-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 11:15:30 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8A6F12F202 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 11:15:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46ppR65BmHz3GYB; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 11:15:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1354) id AB43B9205; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 11:15:30 +0000 (UTC) From: Jan Beich To: Kurt Jaeger Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] Binary packages for FreeBSD 11 to require 11.3 soon References: <20191010052243.GA37504@home.opsec.eu> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:15:27 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20191010052243.GA37504@home.opsec.eu> (Kurt Jaeger's message of "Thu, 10 Oct 2019 07:22:43 +0200") Message-ID: <8sps-etrk-wny@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 11:15:30 -0000 Kurt Jaeger writes: > Hi! > >> FreeBSD 11.3 was released on 2019-07-09. After adding 3 months support >> overlap it'd be 2019-10-09 (yesterday). > > https://www.freebsd.org/security/security.html#sup > > says that 11.2 is supported until 31.10.2019. Indeed. A few weeks ago it didn't have the exact date. https://web.archive.org/web/20190926111817/https://www.freebsd.org/security/ From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 13:58:52 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40FD2139466 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:58:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tech-lists@zyxst.net) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pt3Z4dykz41cv for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:58:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tech-lists@zyxst.net) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 472F47D2 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:58:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:58:48 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zyxst.net; h= date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s= fm3; bh=V6TorEH0Xt0EM98Sa48x9NpLCiKPyG8hgm8B3IJRlAQ=; b=f786CfvQ KCRcdBfMLQVkZ56wDMi1iW7nzLug2PjthFt6oiN/rCUXmHCC2z6OvNScAXvyredw OUNqxnpzVpCHfRIGz58yZxUdYexrjSmdZFB+2xYbsYxMsc4o5JckcUg7HBn6vRUL x0L95V1eqUcDk5UrP/Y/J2HQ4ufonxJxp6nf0MZSm0QsggMONuTnMNKZ1a2yIrps LZ3MeyHjUFbnrzivk3UK9biv5nJi8MIJJ/6ZGpfqFB6zZf+gvWs4zMjdmKK2aDXv TeioXTLrWOnfHegIa2C8UfaXddNitKEsTIUGaqCvpmIKZOaJheXhiry0ayxgwNT4 mC27hD37dPXlJQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=V6TorEH0Xt0EM98Sa48x9NpLCiKPy G8hgm8B3IJRlAQ=; b=XsNYeArPIIl6gu3+qWdvGfQLO5yrrb8GY3LcrIXCGPlk+ 52wGr2oVYoYJAAWYL+OaNqODe3TaMzn8ync3wbAqaCV1M+eqZKDP4A75mEZaxvyt LwANlrJUTTwVf6bOj7M+7qOSXcyIaVTOfmEU7nljmvznVnbwXKEgnf9Ljrxrs5I7 anpKwRqYebQFdACi0/OZV4bqoBnE74sx9V1tP820eZk0WlNonHbrBHySW2u6lLkx c4CGSwJStSYx4ynC4WyTaSHOAMElwj360Lad+5/vbqjw4sXQr2s7SBDzdtWhYLOZ vDSg7MsLtyfZ3HJDnZ0rw5Ip3mZUSJ00JRJ93E8dw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrieefgdejfecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepfffhvffukfggtggufgesghdtreertd ervdenucfhrhhomhepthgvtghhqdhlihhsthhsuceothgvtghhqdhlihhsthhsseiihiig shhtrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinhepfhhrvggvsghsugdrohhrghenucfkphepkedvrd ejtddrledurdelleenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthgvtghhqdhlihhsthhs seiihiigshhtrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from bastion.zyxst.net (bastion.zyxst.net [82.70.91.99]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3481BD6005F for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:58:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:58:17 +0100 From: tech-lists To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: poudriere build: graphics/rawtherapee fails to find ccache Message-ID: <20191010135817.GD24947@bastion.zyxst.net> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="zbGR4y+acU1DwHSi" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pt3Z4dykz41cv X-Spamd-Bar: -------- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=zyxst.net header.s=fm3 header.b=f786CfvQ; dkim=pass header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm1 header.b=XsNYeArP; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of tech-lists@zyxst.net designates 64.147.123.21 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=tech-lists@zyxst.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-8.19 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[zyxst.net:s=fm3,messagingengine.com:s=fm1]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:64.147.123.21]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.20)[multipart/signed,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[zyxst.net]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[zyxst.net:+,messagingengine.com:+]; SIGNED_PGP(-2.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[21.123.147.64.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; ASN(0.00)[asn:11403, ipnet:64.147.123.0/24, country:US]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-3.49)[ip: (-9.82), ipnet: 64.147.123.0/24(-4.90), asn: 11403(-2.68), country: US(-0.05)] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:58:52 -0000 --zbGR4y+acU1DwHSi Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D241179 It does, however, build when the build is run the traditional way via ports= - i.e: cd /usr/ports/graphics/rawtherapee && make && make install --=20 J. --zbGR4y+acU1DwHSi Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEE8n3tWhxW11Ccvv9/s8o7QhFzNAUFAl2fOQsACgkQs8o7QhFz NAV7xg/8DrLhiQ7Hun9DAGrYQG8mPaI3bPRKUz4EmQJ6jyGkTfLDUyhia4d3HGgy IvZeoDqBuT6sRtLDdaQVFlvAt4GgiWjHuRrVKDOXYBwo/ycqJvJETOvEJ0NrgHY7 mZdPJFVH1vmNdouSEL8Jcy/PJDXrBBJLF2pUHb+kUdnns22zIWTNQQqgnFrKOurf SHPWfr9iixqcUZDat4VBFQBR9l6H8ee7/fN9F1eATO3n9NQL4bG/M0BREc/qy+ly VfnHdOoh4IkwjHwKhT5Tfqn4pJgtXywhBqIaUz6mSqaA+9jWEDjK1z3/iBozX/3R yvl4MkeEV4R/N5o0dpoSV3x9fhiCMGHHqNmRvVnqytXlNUgbly5WFYI8nv5HWP/B ybvOkYg9xtYj08FO628paUXos7m6AJ0r/WhG2UXc7E0H949D2vvazFfmUZLMvV2+ phhL67o56rlVusMKGrCbYW4CGnVM3PDCSaxadK7tQI0Gr4KIgfYH5byDs0CbaCFa /EaC10JvC0+8Lqh6iBrlONF+MM4tLKY1rQ6gS+RL/nHR+LIx5rcajpCuAl8MI2AR nEqPS9Prwsk7+ibz2+SUK6M1NZygj4veU3Xzd3RSlJLI3VlQn8AW4UHUXe8e/VqN cs51sNx8yXfRdR6YnPxkz9YzryrodA0SHO0W8HbNvWBOfBmax10= =neYk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --zbGR4y+acU1DwHSi-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 14:58:53 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B90013DF67; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:58:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adridg@freebsd.org) Received: from lb2-smtp-cloud7.xs4all.net (lb2-smtp-cloud7.xs4all.net [194.109.24.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.xs4all.net", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pvNr3zZqz48dR; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:58:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adridg@freebsd.org) Received: from beastie.bionicmutton.org ([62.251.92.29]) by smtp-cloud7.xs4all.net with ESMTP id IZtxirKhWjZ8vIZtyiNolo; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:58:50 +0200 From: Adriaan de Groot To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Can't update qt5-gui on 11.2-RELEASE-p13 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:58:39 +0200 Message-ID: <2991359.bT80LyP3VS@beastie.bionicmutton.org> Organization: FreeBSD In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart15596097.vxEf1mJfsr"; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfNX5j7viEK1TR5SIEnEnlMQx4LKF6nXfnyv5PP/W4wfNHskCRNVAe1YqAMJ/tlgjvI0+QwhwhzEMv0FHF9KofGfXg+0sV8qxJONxedisXAUfdTQRywHE 68sFCyQdYSVaTcAPzgpCqT+8+7lTs78grwaCkmQCcdAmJRpGkxubXj7crq/oLZ2+ZUMpvM3lbdAKP3kvRTOqgZOIXj5eiF1zcjZhYA9KE9tSCAbKkR2Md0S1 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pvNr3zZqz48dR X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.85 / 15.00]; local_wl_from(0.00)[freebsd.org]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.85)[-0.852,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.994,0]; ASN(0.00)[asn:3265, ipnet:194.109.0.0/16, country:NL] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:58:53 -0000 --nextPart15596097.vxEf1mJfsr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Thursday, 10 October 2019 14:05:56 CEST freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org wrote: > > I've run into the same error just yesterday. As a workaround, deinstall > > the devel/evdev-proto port (it's not the libmtdev port which is the > > problem) and it will use the base-system evdev includes. > > > > Bye, > > Alexander. > > Problem solved! Thanks for your help. -- George See https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240964 Basically, Qt is using internal headers that it shouldn't .. but that means we need to make Qt depend on evdev-proto. There is a fix in the works. [ade] --nextPart15596097.vxEf1mJfsr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEUq+pvuD+N8/vVW++WoDe9T7W/7IFAl2fRx8ACgkQWoDe9T7W /7JaFhAAqdLaubx0nrrr5ZA6HPH5P962FigBnEqxc8olPxi+bvUIjIIpfBLnkUCC 55hf82LuCXN4MXQqTV2eqv47dWN+Vl5Awu+jrPqyG5btDOLmm7IBNYab4F9WVHgb eJMMtw7+6XQ8WUyMThq1DTq6htTjMUOU2LaW5tfBMxOupLWVYKspM9d0D1FY6cF+ wZcdOR9SPh0Mhd3BrTO9id+pbwAkNrN1964MBlI2xsrbSUBdq+y7OiEYi39CqhVb XpIfBgS49vnQBetzoKb4/4oItfmrH+6jvVZXMpdaS0kXTGFVfEGPadxL8CxDVcsM YqkZNQAroGv+kiCdYkMPg/Rm93Zrj2Oi+a+F/MniQKiTOWboZmL680ChQRluiY/Z 8X6hTDrYez+7Pyw5DM2GgEJ62FmKZa8yphywTUWghM7gX244Ob49RAE/8JC5DzVl i+EL8A4VhaA+pvOxqCK26+q8NFxVfEYcZacH7FV8EcIr1Fv0nxILSZOzoqLKFk92 VKv15YYuWXnuoPO/wfHqWpnF1ITVz78AN4Z6Q0q1oRTBpWjJPKpQiZN9uZQ3SRY+ dEgengr+9CXIqMhiuoPdZk/9d+2A5CXV+AVd+VNei7q4SY9O8d6Qb21kgIZXISuF ZZ4AZHt6xu4GUz7azHRECphyEs6ecWLLMNxNq6AGtZy9bqQ3kNA= =MNBO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart15596097.vxEf1mJfsr-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 08:45:23 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 499F114EBD9 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:45:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@rulingia.com) Received: from vtr.rulingia.com (vtr.rulingia.com [IPv6:2001:19f0:5801:ebe:5400:1ff:fe53:30fd]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "vtr.rulingia.com", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pl5s4XX7z4pNr; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:45:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@rulingia.com) Received: from server.rulingia.com (ppp239-208.static.internode.on.net [59.167.239.208]) by vtr.rulingia.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x9A8j0LG058079 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:45:06 +1100 (AEDT) (envelope-from peter@rulingia.com) X-Bogosity: Ham, spamicity=0.000000 Received: from server.rulingia.com (localhost.rulingia.com [127.0.0.1]) by server.rulingia.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x9A8itQ3044581 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:44:55 +1100 (AEDT) (envelope-from peter@server.rulingia.com) Received: (from peter@localhost) by server.rulingia.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x9A8ithi044580; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:44:55 +1100 (AEDT) (envelope-from peter) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:44:55 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy To: Baptiste Daroussin Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-ID: <20191010084455.GC24576@server.rulingia.com> References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <8spu-p72a-wny@FreeBSD.org> <20191009101412.lwxyqcdaqtsvq2ym@ivaldir.net> <20191009143048.zliwcrjx7ahe67a7@ivaldir.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="JYK4vJDZwFMowpUq" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191009143048.zliwcrjx7ahe67a7@ivaldir.net> X-PGP-Key: http://www.rulingia.com/keys/peter.pgp User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pl5s4XX7z4pNr X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of peter@rulingia.com designates 2001:19f0:5801:ebe:5400:1ff:fe53:30fd as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=peter@rulingia.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.64 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.20)[multipart/signed,text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[rulingia.com]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; IP_SCORE(-3.24)[ip: (-9.91), ipnet: 2001:19f0:5800::/38(-4.95), asn: 20473(-1.31), country: US(-0.05)]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; SIGNED_PGP(-2.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:20473, ipnet:2001:19f0:5800::/38, country:US]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:45:23 -0000 --JYK4vJDZwFMowpUq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2019-Oct-09 16:30:48 +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >so if we want to proceed further in removing the option to build with or w= ithout >ipv6 for the ports side. Last time I checked, XDMCP differs enough between IPv4 and IPv6 that xdm used a compile-time option to pick which to support. --=20 Peter Jeremy --JYK4vJDZwFMowpUq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKTBAEBCgB9FiEE7rKYbDBnHnTmXCJ+FqWXoOSiCzQFAl2e74FfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEVF QjI5ODZDMzA2NzFFNzRFNjVDMjI3RTE2QTU5N0EwRTRBMjBCMzQACgkQFqWXoOSi CzTAeA//dAe2ZfCEP3GB8U9VZg7erGybAsDZzPN1hsKniaCYp9P0psuVj7DPgG9E kkwHe6x6cPo8Ohz89pY0EVKpYGrbNRNnXwxNF9yfaKgn5j2kOeXeJVcNgO0jLmzi k3v5yU7+YZAe5fkmDOUp4sI3yg2GFYi23BWc0h/3xNiOtsXUI6l/PeA1oVMd4zLP g4q2i1inRXjY6fgRJ0VfdexeiXxOA8vSlbA87bnKxjfo30DZUfTlFq8sqASXw/R7 f0plrzLkphSDuhOyFTQgdYim8LSxgXrWhC21RauIz+KSFoau75Z1U60a0ub7vUpo stYS028Wi8c7bpxq9yTBIu5RtP7ImIjY+/l3Tw1x/ihe7KxYpmclOC3hFjr+g9hc tAXgQR/rwbtoK43pDkRI6D8sHxd+ONsbnYGXlCZb+AnL/bDWGu6t0bmp05DYPA++ oKXJk8cz4hUo30hcWZ/GYko+ptn4Iyy3Emw++C42wF7x66N9EdM7V1BaSTrF5kdi nKBaEvjIAmoykCS5BxBiMSl5194+18t5KLt36C3kNHyVrOxD+L0Q1cHXSR1bZIuN DGeMllHX/OyCUlm7e+wIsVhQs3Ue2EntLi3SqoN79g0uNAORbOHa57BtRu4fV005 V9hcD4KXx0i1hDb4ziSHnWfSREPOiujwrull7KSJy17YiiPMG+0= =kM9N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --JYK4vJDZwFMowpUq-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 15:17:13 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5892140E01 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:17:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kremels@kreme.com) Received: from mail.covisp.net (mail.covisp.net [65.121.55.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pvp05V9sz4Clx for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:17:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kremels@kreme.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: LuKreme Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:17:10 -0600 Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-Id: <00A8CB48-BEEC-432C-8600-4AC333443131@kreme.com> References: <20191009061538.re66hcii2z73ry6p@ivaldir.net> In-Reply-To: <20191009061538.re66hcii2z73ry6p@ivaldir.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailer: iPad Mail (17A860) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pvp05V9sz4Clx X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of kremels@kreme.com designates 65.121.55.42 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kremels@kreme.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.41 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.99)[-0.991,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MISSING_MIME_VERSION(2.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.98)[-0.977,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kreme.com]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.22)[ip: (-0.77), ipnet: 65.112.0.0/12(-0.21), asn: 209(-0.07), country: US(-0.05)]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[42.55.121.65.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:209, ipnet:65.112.0.0/12, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:17:13 -0000 On Oct 9, 2019, at 00:15, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >=20 > I agree I don't see the reason why we should keep that ipv6 option. When o= ff > this option does not bring much value to the users as the code for apps to= > support ipv6 mostly reside in the libc. Actually that was my intent in 201= 2 to > first turn it on by default everywhere and then drop the option entirely. My isp does not support ipv6, so my services are not set to use it. I did ha= ve to specifically disable it in configuration for something, I forget what,= but I have never felt the need to disable it in builds. --=20 Sent from my iPad= From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 16:01:08 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD7CB14269C for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:01:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from liedtke@punkt.de) Received: from kagate.punkt.de (kagate.punkt.de [217.29.33.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pwmg5L1Mz4Gt3 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:01:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from liedtke@punkt.de) Received: from hugo10.ka.punkt.de (hugo10.ka.punkt.de [217.29.44.10]) by gate2.intern.punkt.de with ESMTP id x9AFetIC002871 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:40:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.29.44.194] ([217.29.44.194]) by hugo10.ka.punkt.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id x9AFetDG012702 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:40:55 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from liedtke@punkt.de) Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <20191009061538.re66hcii2z73ry6p@ivaldir.net> <00A8CB48-BEEC-432C-8600-4AC333443131@kreme.com> From: Lars Liedtke Openpgp: id=874309C0D7DAE723E56F50F6DD6D744EC1628062 Autocrypt: addr=liedtke@punkt.de; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQINBFqZsngBEAC2qgHHKyTYnOxr/giErojNdDHd4x+8snzW0F6cInzagVySiM6+htoBmUsX uIUCrbsdS4jkADo9fIs0DHfmNWs1Fgp5BWlgNIYV3+P6K756YMFlr/Q2p3ddsJ/YZ5rnkWE5 bNMOQgY9Hdl0kPB1leWy0gRyVjbwU0mv6JimA+Y4e43TG8qKGd4n26h6dUirDjjrc4esMUjz cPMobbcStYR79D2llJWdSVeYgg40E5MeExATTC7sNL9RJPcEOKHCYI1Kn85nvJw98iFyMYlh lcSKqUJhpJ20D7U0DOFJKzY/Ox0+nmmcUchspvSGgAeuBV+fvSJYH1yQnCzz+T2uBcO8JVPO aNKuZ25ruN4ILN5b3dhCTS/aR/A35QyGb9N2SR9Hb0o1L7FEu33JDT+kUeH+4sOSbuNFtadF GyfS+eCfpQvw4/Xua4nGwKkKe35ht3eeuQvzFaxNac1lvMIaHRcq93Sh3k9emVCYP7s4MhA1 OR0THAM5VHgfYIg17m1gvKnqFtgA0AmCDBn8PhYFEEUZWQ5dKQCcfylv8RTrv5qK5iiHBNjJ Mo83ZRb/o+OPzq3Rzt7VM0zZL0jdIGJ2Gn3mD2IybHv+TfcdGtF7RE0/TVacv1TdCn8F2L8q nVkTP22rdyqicydS2qUGxFTfoRAaO29fWGrW77HFyycROP4TbQARAQABtB9MYXJzIExpZWR0 a2UgPGxpZWR0a2VAcHVua3QuZGU+iQI9BBMBCAAnBQJambJ4AhsjBQkJZgGABQsJCAcCBhUI CQoLAgQWAgMBAh4BAheAAAoJEN1tdE7BYoBiVX8QALOtAPS1Nf9qOkn4Mox7CfM7QYcu4XTg SSpYrfr3p27k09NG8M3a+70PShZeK57J4occkHPu7oRAFgOcLSZkZ1bN0Ir4D/6+bh2fMh0F lYNgzYmdukn/7IUlD+NkgPafny1MOFOD3RREKVbVrvnMID0gx4tzEJZq7B2VbhJ7Njdh3PFj IzigzJEH9fHKDv2Taz6Q/qN5TwJffTF+awGdueIPEzBS/V0P83g0M+5tfRAsI4nV+Jxwi6gb rp24rTe9cuctFJpRswzrmR+kCHvhzhC6XGZJBvpGTuQQoMunAKV5edlpAsuD2RV1YBEHGZKr rOP2weoZZdvJiU5QP+Re714p5atgg1ANuWEF3X1gU1op37zy3XH/1/Fi6MYiOovai5e/SqjP 7R2hoHBxoA9kHhEe8V5MaVcKE8cxRPzckRoBf11asyBy4QON4QTW4B9bxVeSkTaYZXp14OlF rK00yoOUJa6t3NKET68wDCvpwjNiDc4Sw5Uz1QHsMpcPVfC1nbVILO12bwlGd39qmDWi5wH3 NVgsJ3E09SobCqdrx1F6/pzHbq2I5uTa5kD9AUeIOkURwPK0ipWHvggxZlFf3b33zXwlFRYh JOYJN9zSMA1tvufpzh0ASvHrwjJWTALSUaoX9AHrw/R0PhsKuxX1XG5hsQkCUfKRrQzaJC3v 2jJkuQINBFqZsngBEAC4XuIGjNznjGatJX6HeJKtRXibysYTyvLM3Uql9I22dPLOLvATgpo2 msxRWVmPgfQGyxiurDm0LZVxtC1OLNG/BtKOSXyAZ36N0uin8aF0dB6vwYUNj2tkFfho6WQY kzhcxP3YX65UrbkU7I3ACTHUskQEGGX4M7rBPml89zBeFatEMEh0eLfzzzwecYFSiJM5nxGf SDMAqtkLe0H1aWsc0KuIPP5Y1wUaRWqDMk5qEoj02sY/sL6kMACJKxruDtZq61GAWVq6XpmV 8LyDXCXJgDh+mXuXLFTONt9HbJqMZ4iJjkHFaFoBcXkEAQEN5ZaQbKdFXpPRfu0YacHWfDRi huXr/PAPLrF01dKpu74Qih8QC6xmctbMhAPFq90jUoP2xUJ7/nYj4D8k6tA84ZPjReGmYzWQ mr8HPbUuWbLMsEpCFb+EeHPLGc6ItPw1sRCI6utzxLdpB3HONimjDjLfmvPS/mm5sClu76RM WVxw5uy6dmHiAJpycMUgnyOcAjLrQVlenObpAe5EVQmcazpWkpmuhnEl1bZQpaBftkzs5kKP 30s8dLlraBYyzxYytjUW+47pOWdYYvlF4yjp5cNyegXUQGnKgJH0p+UoMBAFplY3eNxP3mlA KT8oVY9w23+m8ZOsOPAlH1bhOvcsb9lkh1KOIUuUQxkk0NSOs5IpxQARAQABiQIlBBgBCAAP BQJambJ4AhsMBQkJZgGAAAoJEN1tdE7BYoBiZHQP/3q9o8ENdGo4K7daesUmiBuedP05uLDa TXxck+7K1IsX6GpTnUMyiYm7cu/IyrhlkZBe9TaLPaOo0HEN1W7jr8PLxKtbOwQ0dIHOIi60 4DrkqvFQKH1fARaq7YJJS7DRUin5n4/hcIpoSn273kEqby8BZpsL+kB8gtIbTtVpSwJfhobh dxHBi+NlMas7KYZ8aTuNOKJTS27PjQMfeEzf8u6Hb4JSsNYuQoyoSTyBkKksx3UbjXUvESKY I3uyTF7mVXJ0hvhX4QK3XOqwTfkT8NMzc/Xkdm9iaWrap74v9vfG1Vn8KhCRSQkyjbuDuocF PEtcIEJjU1WJmIdK60X03BJUYlH3CRthJOateCZWDTOSzBIZV+JV3cnV2kx9j9+nmnTQ1yQe bpnL7OtxSONH9t+gWHuGaIX5k/Bf2Ea7cSHLm8cvza25aIQRxfqmkBrR48U1lUSZTLULxzO3 OeJacjXWGewZzJl7ecobpgs4MM7yollhKzr+1sq2SMNcVL3s+8WfeZeCorm6GJLUiABHLlr/ ISWVpM730Jc0V9PyPFAsMPQRa24FsZl8goHvp/5khoM4cvNtplh64ny83ieRjCUnQgSdhkW9 fdYhqFgfJNCacLCGxZdGrEs3F5UAtUS2nplIbODUtYQcy3Qdd+rblY8A9UTPAUCxXVLi9K6i Gk7o Message-ID: <566f28fc-8c6b-0d43-8455-0524e1965896@punkt.de> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:40:55 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <00A8CB48-BEEC-432C-8600-4AC333443131@kreme.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pwmg5L1Mz4Gt3 X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of liedtke@punkt.de designates 217.29.33.131 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=liedtke@punkt.de X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.58 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.99)[-0.991,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:217.29.32.0/20]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; HAS_ATTACHMENT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/mixed,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.998,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.39)[ip: (-0.20), ipnet: 217.29.32.0/20(-0.97), asn: 16188(-0.76), country: DE(-0.01)]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[punkt.de]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16188, ipnet:217.29.32.0/20, country:DE]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; MIME_UNKNOWN(0.10)[application/pgp-keys] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:01:08 -0000 Am 10.10.19 um 17:17 schrieb LuKreme: > On Oct 9, 2019, at 00:15, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> I agree I don't see the reason why we should keep that ipv6 option. When off >> this option does not bring much value to the users as the code for apps to >> support ipv6 mostly reside in the libc. Actually that was my intent in 2012 to >> first turn it on by default everywhere and then drop the option entirely. > My isp does not support ipv6, so my services are not set to use it. I did have to specifically disable it in configuration for something, I forget what, but I have never felt the need to disable it in builds. > Why not just make building in IPv6 support the default, and introduce a flag if someone really needs or wants to build without that support? Best regards Lars -- punkt.de GmbH * Kaiserallee 13a * 76133 Karlsruhe Tel. 0721 9109 0 * Fax 0721 9109 100 info@punkt.de https://www.punkt.de Gf: Jürgen Egeling AG Mannheim 108285 From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 16:57:45 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BE23143C10 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:57:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46py212LGNz4Kjg; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:57:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (etoilebsd.net [178.32.217.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: bapt) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 10DBC7EC; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:57:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: by ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 94E9295098; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 18:57:42 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 18:57:42 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Lars Liedtke Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-ID: <20191010165742.5pmobr34dkjoowd6@ivaldir.net> References: <20191009061538.re66hcii2z73ry6p@ivaldir.net> <00A8CB48-BEEC-432C-8600-4AC333443131@kreme.com> <566f28fc-8c6b-0d43-8455-0524e1965896@punkt.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xqbhdihf7klyezhr" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <566f28fc-8c6b-0d43-8455-0524e1965896@punkt.de> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:57:45 -0000 --xqbhdihf7klyezhr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 05:40:55PM +0200, Lars Liedtke wrote: >=20 > Am 10.10.19 um 17:17 schrieb LuKreme: > > On Oct 9, 2019, at 00:15, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >> I agree I don't see the reason why we should keep that ipv6 option. Wh= en off > >> this option does not bring much value to the users as the code for app= s to > >> support ipv6 mostly reside in the libc. Actually that was my intent in= 2012 to > >> first turn it on by default everywhere and then drop the option entire= ly. > > My isp does not support ipv6, so my services are not set to use it. I d= id have to specifically disable it in configuration for something, I forget= what, but I have never felt the need to disable it in builds. > > > Why not just make building in IPv6 support the default, and introduce a > flag if someone really needs or wants to build without that support? >=20 > Best regards >=20 Which is the current situation ;) Except the ipv6 options is inconsistently spread accross the ports, most of= the ports do not even support building without ipv6 etc. Which is why came the question about why not removing that option totally, because the current situation is clearly inconsistent. Best regards, Bapt --xqbhdihf7klyezhr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEgOTj3suS2urGXVU3Y4mL3PG3PloFAl2fYwQACgkQY4mL3PG3 PlrV7g/+O75xVtM6I8hyS33hyTTuN8ttwg5OU9AZBnp9unkjMqvoFZhFhR6OxXpU oLZdISUGdjCIC6zbQerODG0daOpjww4nXo1adVGsBt0c5SO7CWGleI/+T4UeX5hO Xkc+8z5AOAud2ueDmjj+CXFEQ2dJ65ukpiu9rZ69kMSsDn5k3FJzteW0cBNaKJd+ xIBdLxGj6Pp2xOzpumuJlItr/8uaF59fx4QxNh06MXuvupSb40GS0O7ZXtiTljs7 1IA0HBCTh9Il9yqhs05EPLPiclWBWg1+PGn56rxRoA5lg6S0zFonnmcdICOKowE3 5dZnmfGkUZVYKYehRieB/tL2bicxD0lzT/mRs0vnvmiibwjjgSJlEIOYpx6b2xd1 mK7AbIK3n6RE7BrZQZMI6v+LgBMZ5igbM6ul+JZ2n5K9M5bgaoUnylUlxr2X7QSI Th9gIJdNIBd6biHOYuDbJ+qrOws4XYb3ZlPL/vMo+aQs5xxFSXJmWdAdDxk0/lfZ kAEVjEGYWeHiPHI5gVQrV8yochPAfIy+d0HmanWNqv72rIlgQ2LWBaw6jXiFwIbd jmTwtx/rRvgv/fe7cVJNXHMSsLSh717m+VlheMtsRytl0dH2fvNOe/t00pTKcjlL aqe4W4DkWcEeXv/BueCr/89fde5S+ET+0VunK8td/0WvE0hocE0= =I3Xa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --xqbhdihf7klyezhr-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 17:21:36 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9226D1443C1 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:21:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yasu@utahime.org) Received: from gate.utahime.jp (gate.utahime.jp [183.180.29.210]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46pyYV5JVwz4Lqs for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:21:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yasu@utahime.org) Received: from eastasia.home.utahime.org (eastasia.home.utahime.org [192.168.174.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by gate.utahime.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43039121AF for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 02:21:19 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (rolling.home.utahime.org [192.168.174.11]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by eastasia.home.utahime.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 07B6935AFD; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 02:21:17 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.0-rc at eastasia.home.utahime.org Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 02:20:56 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20191011.022056.604915953639995735.yasu@utahime.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Strange build error of java/openjdk12 with poudriere and 13-CURRENT jail From: Yasuhiro KIMURA X-Mailer: Mew version 6.8 on Emacs 26.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pyYV5JVwz4Lqs X-Spamd-Bar: + Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of yasu@utahime.org designates 183.180.29.210 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=yasu@utahime.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.04 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+a:spf-authorized.utahime.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.23)[0.227,0]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.73)[-0.728,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[utahime.org]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MID_CONTAINS_FROM(1.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.34)[ip: (0.23), ipnet: 183.180.0.0/16(0.11), asn: 2519(1.36), country: JP(-0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:2519, ipnet:183.180.0.0/16, country:JP]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:21:36 -0000 Hello, While building java/openjdk12 with poudriere and 13-CURRENT jail, I experienced strange build error, If I build it with 'poudriere testport' then it is built successfully. https://www.utahime.org/FreeBSD/poudriere/data/logs/bulk/curamd64-local/2019-10-10_00h38m18s/logs/openjdk12-12.0.2+10.3.log But I build it with 'poudriere bulk' then it fails to build. https://www.utahime.org/FreeBSD/poudriere/data/logs/bulk/curamd64-local/2019-10-09_17h51m57s/logs/openjdk12-12.0.2+10.3.log With 12.0-RELEASE jail build succeeds with both 'poudriere testport' and 'poudriere bulk'. What is wrong? Environments are, * Host - Guest VM of VirtualBox on 64bit Windows 10 ver. 1903 - 4 CPUs, 8GB Memory, 100GB Disk - 13-CURRENT amd64 r353107 GENERIC, WITHOUT_LIB32=yes * Poudriere 3.3.2_1 * Jail 13-CURRENT amd64 r353107 GENERIC * Ports tree Head r513940 Best Regards. --- Yasuhiro KIMURA From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 17:53:12 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D353414536B for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:53:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xavier@groumpf.org) Received: from aragorn.amdh.fr (aragorn.groumpf.org [176.31.180.205]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46pzFz6KrTz4Nb1 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:53:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xavier@groumpf.org) Received: from numenor.groumpf.org (unknown [78.251.129.10]) by aragorn.amdh.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E91CA61F95 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:53:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from numenor.groumpf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by numenor.groumpf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DC6C31835 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:53:08 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at groumpf.org Received: from numenor.groumpf.org ([127.0.0.1]) by numenor.groumpf.org (ns3.groumpf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id A0srl89-Knts for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:52:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.100.20] (feanor.groumpf.org [192.168.100.20]) by numenor.groumpf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9717531832 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:52:56 +0200 (CEST) To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org From: Xavier Subject: Problem with awstats since update to apache 2.4 Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Message-ID: Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:52:52 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="QnyxWU4cEF7yeS1iC9cmIuvUL9UncncHR" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46pzFz6KrTz4Nb1 X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of xavier@groumpf.org has no SPF policy when checking 176.31.180.205) smtp.mailfrom=xavier@groumpf.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.95 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; RCVD_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; HAS_ATTACHMENT(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.20)[multipart/signed,multipart/mixed,text/plain]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[groumpf.org]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[205.180.31.176.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; SIGNED_PGP(-2.00)[]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:+,3:~]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16276, ipnet:176.31.0.0/16, country:FR]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.85)[ip: (-7.47), ipnet: 176.31.0.0/16(1.66), asn: 16276(1.55), country: FR(-0.00)]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[10.129.251.78.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.11] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:53:12 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --QnyxWU4cEF7yeS1iC9cmIuvUL9UncncHR Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="hI9IoJfhuJr1MviO4656Jxy9GS8AqBi83"; protected-headers="v1" From: Xavier To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: Subject: Problem with awstats since update to apache 2.4 --hI9IoJfhuJr1MviO4656Jxy9GS8AqBi83 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: fr-classic Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello folks, I know, I should have this fixed a long time ago, but I procrastinated. Now that I have a couple of hours free, I try to make it work again. Basically since upgrade from apache 22 to 24 Awstats insists for downloading the page (perl source) instead of displaying it. My configuration : > > ServerAdmin root > ServerName awstats.groumpf.org > ServerAdmin root >=20 > CustomLog /var/log/stats.groumpf.org_accesslog combined > ErrorLog /var/log/stats.groumpf.org_errorlog > =20 > Alias /awstatsclasses "/usr/local/ww/awstats/classes/" > Alias /awstatscss "/usr/local/www/awstats/css/" > Alias /awstatsicons "/usr/local/www/awstats/icon/" > ScriptAlias /awstats/ "/usr/local/www/awstats/cgi-bin/awstats.pl" > AddHandler cgi-script .cgi >=20 > > AllowOverride None > Require ip 192.168.100.0/24 > > =09 > > DirectoryIndex awstats.pl > Options +ExecCGI > Require ip 192.168.100.0/24 > >=20 > Apache modules loaded : > [root@numenor modules.d]# apachectl -M > Loaded Modules: > core_module (static) > so_module (static) > http_module (static) > authn_file_module (shared) > authn_core_module (shared) > authz_host_module (shared) > authz_groupfile_module (shared) > authz_user_module (shared) > authz_core_module (shared) > access_compat_module (shared) > auth_basic_module (shared) > reqtimeout_module (shared) > filter_module (shared) > mime_module (shared) > log_config_module (shared) > env_module (shared) > headers_module (shared) > setenvif_module (shared) > version_module (shared) > mpm_prefork_module (shared) > unixd_module (shared) > status_module (shared) > autoindex_module (shared) > dir_module (shared) > alias_module (shared) > maxminddb_module (shared) > php7_module (shared) > ssl_module (shared) > socache_shmcb_module (shared) > perl_module (shared) > cgid_module (shared) > cgi_module (shared) > rewrite_module (shared) Where is my mistake ? Thanks in advance Regards, Xavier --=20 Xavier Humbert - sysadmin & network engineer --hI9IoJfhuJr1MviO4656Jxy9GS8AqBi83-- --QnyxWU4cEF7yeS1iC9cmIuvUL9UncncHR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEESAZA8WgF/u/6AMGYgbW6+oca/hUFAl2fb/gACgkQgbW6+oca /hWfug//R+xKJQaSxYvVQMjtJXDGheWcg1zrRiOtu8rl4WnDMnF9hwKDJLqq2KOH qtKaQzwzw4WazZPnSiCVBnCbVPQwXaD8q6bWFRcvobXbAK/dXqlULV8x+mlWKOw4 ElD+wgIYZixBX5u0URBvhtw+L1Ns1OO8R20iq1YJkm0JSa9EEG8+uo3vu90qQGbY MumUM5jvJgH4pr+BvKP7SQac9W314zRfXQL5fAi62R3jI2hDhRsxTOKJ5HXdRFFu 8MWzN4PnDtPEynl2c5oG1uNy9VXVj7s24VxIE2PFyH8yPQQb05pVNGgaaZquaNiu e1DW1/fauv3UFF/BJ8wew7FZ6rLvoMwYW1Oy1EWkSh8nWAuZu3xo0EyqKHO+TXVz VGg8jZbBLjqTNrE/EiP8lXA3BzchOhTCuStcXrxJBlAWrFHFCIJtgzuRVnVEoP6W CLrig/v3YJQY35vdCFrQJ120kjKeZPFraj/RkjWshQU3MsYWmUHOgSIVw/1ZgY0w qCC0btn3ZOFdbBYIGUxQmUCdiBwStYaPVukD4oaGYWNHzzXZgtehF8LnkLrv64os VgSolwYQ4R8rwg6a0Vk3of2q09zceergtwvoVCA+j08y/EPhbFx6IsORasT8q/Ru abPcKeDbPtMHqSbJLzeSImp+OU8TRRMXpcTBPTc7iT487kO2e8Q= =cGBF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --QnyxWU4cEF7yeS1iC9cmIuvUL9UncncHR-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 19:46:03 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECA7A147CB2 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:46:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) Received: from smtp.rcn.com (smtp.rcn.com [69.168.97.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46q1mC5FXYz4VL6 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:46:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; d=rcn.com; s=20180516; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@rcn.com; t=1570736761; h=From:Subject:Date:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=C9DltCOqONu7R8c93Rmj8YI4jmY=; b=LiVCYx2FcPLh7/ptqx3gzSbTJ2pGBr5WqDIlA61+EzOwfGoCbf+z/dclQPRKPqGq C4E0f7VWd9yp0p8Y7q//wSxKZG7XK7AWsu/OXyGZwfhUXX1RzpsDqjDc5wxGpRyY fiMsx0OIYwy74FpRWtbvcdhnqXU0sf95FBC9SWj5EgBjhUD98rrhZ3Fr0I4bxoKs KX6e3dWVjc24IFQaXMoGX8zkHq7iqSj21XzawoTykbHfB1p9iIMhum2cGWFjAg7V VFse2WlDtrsbLS+KBSnmSLiApwcAzxPXp7A8DVxYmIYTAvm/XaTXws/K/bD5uVFE gEYMgf/y0Pc78fC6BHtWDA==; X_CMAE_Category: , , X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=euyhMbhX c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=9TgA2UwI6Wy+6BV4wQM/cQ==:117 a=9TgA2UwI6Wy+6BV4wQM/cQ==:17 a=jpOVt7BSZ2e4Z31A5e1TngXxSK0=:19 a=KGjhK52YXX0A:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=XRQyMpdBKAEA:10 a=XobE76Q3jBoA:10 a=48faUk6PgeAA:10 a=7kNOGLaCORUldLGkLfgA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 X-CM-Score: 0 X-Scanned-by: Cloudmark Authority Engine X-Authed-Username: cm9iZXJ0aHVmZkByY24uY29t Received: from [209.6.230.48] ([209.6.230.48:29895] helo=jerusalem.litteratus.org.litteratus.org) by smtp.rcn.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 3.6.25.56547 r(Core:3.6.25.0)) with ESMTPSA (cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384) id F5/59-10272-97A8F9D5; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:46:01 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <23967.35448.298270.104353@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:46:00 -0400 From: Robert Huff To: Adriaan de Groot Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Can't update qt5-gui on 11.2-RELEASE-p13 In-Reply-To: <2991359.bT80LyP3VS@beastie.bionicmutton.org> References: <2991359.bT80LyP3VS@beastie.bionicmutton.org> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 26.3 (amd64-portbld-freebsd13.0) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46q1mC5FXYz4VL6 X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=rcn.com header.s=20180516 header.b=LiVCYx2F; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=rcn.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of roberthuff@rcn.com designates 69.168.97.78 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=roberthuff@rcn.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.90 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[rcn.com:s=20180516]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:69.168.97.0/24:c]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[rcn.com.dwl.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[rcn.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[rcn.com,none]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; IP_SCORE(-1.80)[ip: (-9.45), ipnet: 69.168.97.0/24(0.03), asn: 36271(0.49), country: US(-0.05)]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36271, ipnet:69.168.97.0/24, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[78.97.168.69.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:46:04 -0000 Adriaan de Groot writes: > Basically, Qt is using internal headers that it shouldn't .. but > that means we need to make Qt depend on evdev-proto. There is a fix > in the works. _Please_ announce this in UPDATING. Respectfully, Robert Huff From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 19:48:51 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A27D9147E20 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:48:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) Received: from smtp.rcn.com (smtp.rcn.com [69.168.97.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46q1qR0W7Tz4VVC for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:48:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; d=rcn.com; s=20180516; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@rcn.com; t=1570736930; h=From:Subject:Date:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=ztenMQy9n8Xv/vUxZFYrAeJ5v/c=; b=WtL1wCnYkkgROM9Y96zegjhqLzwBaPR/gquty4DfN7A98embfO3KOpKU+VWIa933 Kz77vz2WNwGqslgFT35cH1JXeopBEygB9Z+OHj6cwAB1W/4cZvwAsT98rvAt091Q v08e4/2FGIebKSUSql5O9fx5EiBhQmQ6yOQKb0fAVraeE7YHa2pQVf6rmXbBlyb7 2f2D6gKEsTtHR8LjjWRPhghTqxn3Q79ZSIS1BGXzpSPTAcoI1i7B9Uk+YnkH2tzg Lr78D/MBN1PAW8B+ppxyx+Y72rFT7kxyrHsa4kpnUW57Of8XdU27aO8cszK1yGs0 vb5yFF+9JUlAIiLzsAtWjg==; X_CMAE_Category: , , X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=EOJ4LGRC c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=9TgA2UwI6Wy+6BV4wQM/cQ==:117 a=9TgA2UwI6Wy+6BV4wQM/cQ==:17 a=jpOVt7BSZ2e4Z31A5e1TngXxSK0=:19 a=KGjhK52YXX0A:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=XRQyMpdBKAEA:10 a=XobE76Q3jBoA:10 a=48faUk6PgeAA:10 a=0vHLZ4ERTf5LQAVlvDkA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 X-CM-Score: 0 X-Scanned-by: Cloudmark Authority Engine X-Authed-Username: cm9iZXJ0aHVmZkByY24uY29t Received: from [209.6.230.48] ([209.6.230.48:45563] helo=jerusalem.litteratus.org.litteratus.org) by smtp.rcn.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 3.6.25.56547 r(Core:3.6.25.0)) with ESMTPSA (cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384) id 5F/5C-24678-12B8F9D5; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:48:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <23967.35617.571449.908018@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:48:49 -0400 From: Robert Huff To: Andrea Venturoli Cc: Baptiste Daroussin , Jan Beich , Yasuhiro KIMURA , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? In-Reply-To: References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <8spu-p72a-wny@FreeBSD.org> <20191009101412.lwxyqcdaqtsvq2ym@ivaldir.net> <20191009143048.zliwcrjx7ahe67a7@ivaldir.net> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 26.3 (amd64-portbld-freebsd13.0) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46q1qR0W7Tz4VVC X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=rcn.com header.s=20180516 header.b=WtL1wCnY; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=rcn.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of roberthuff@rcn.com designates 69.168.97.78 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=roberthuff@rcn.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.90 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[rcn.com:s=20180516]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:69.168.97.0/24]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; IP_SCORE(-1.80)[ip: (-9.45), ipnet: 69.168.97.0/24(0.01), asn: 36271(0.49), country: US(-0.05)]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[rcn.com.dwl.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[rcn.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[rcn.com,none]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[78.97.168.69.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36271, ipnet:69.168.97.0/24, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:48:51 -0000 Andrea Venturoli writes: > I'm building without IPv6, just because it's one (currently > useless) less thing to worry about (settings, security, etc...). Phrased differently: one less possible failure mode. Respectfully, Robert Huff From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 20:06:06 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9EB11307AD for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 20:06:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-ports-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from be-well.ilk.org (be-well.ilk.org [23.30.133.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46q2CK2FdQz4WVy for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 20:06:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-ports-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from lowell-desk.be-well.ilk.org (router.lan [172.30.250.2]) by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 739F433C1E for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:05:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: by lowell-desk.be-well.ilk.org (Postfix, from userid 1147) id 565A415D03CC; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:05:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Lowell Gilbert To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <8spu-p72a-wny@FreeBSD.org> <20191009101412.lwxyqcdaqtsvq2ym@ivaldir.net> <20191009143048.zliwcrjx7ahe67a7@ivaldir.net> <23967.35617.571449.908018@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:05:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <23967.35617.571449.908018@jerusalem.litteratus.org> (Robert Huff's message of "Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:48:49 -0400") Message-ID: <444l0gl61q.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46q2CK2FdQz4WVy X-Spamd-Bar: + Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of freebsd-ports-local@be-well.ilk.org has no SPF policy when checking 23.30.133.173) smtp.mailfrom=freebsd-ports-local@be-well.ilk.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.91 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.17)[-0.172,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.13)[0.132,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[ilk.org]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:7922, ipnet:23.30.0.0/15, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.05)[ip: (0.15), ipnet: 23.30.0.0/15(0.81), asn: 7922(-1.15), country: US(-0.05)]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 20:06:06 -0000 Robert Huff writes: > Andrea Venturoli writes: > >> I'm building without IPv6, just because it's one (currently >> useless) less thing to worry about (settings, security, etc...). > > Phrased differently: one less possible failure mode. At the cost of one less possible success mode... From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Oct 10 22:23:32 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0F0E133CCF for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 22:23:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kremels@kreme.com) Received: from mail.covisp.net (mail.covisp.net [65.121.55.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46q5Fv2xbBz4fHN for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 22:23:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kremels@kreme.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: LuKreme Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:23:29 -0600 Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-Id: References: <566f28fc-8c6b-0d43-8455-0524e1965896@punkt.de> In-Reply-To: <566f28fc-8c6b-0d43-8455-0524e1965896@punkt.de> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailer: iPad Mail (17A860) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46q5Fv2xbBz4fHN X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of kremels@kreme.com designates 65.121.55.42 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kremels@kreme.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.41 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.99)[-0.995,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MISSING_MIME_VERSION(2.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.98)[-0.978,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kreme.com]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.22)[ip: (-0.76), ipnet: 65.112.0.0/12(-0.21), asn: 209(-0.07), country: US(-0.05)]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[42.55.121.65.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:209, ipnet:65.112.0.0/12, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 22:23:32 -0000 On Oct 10, 2019, at 10:01, Lars Liedtke wrote: >=20 > Why not just make building in IPv6 support the default, and introduce a > flag if someone really needs or wants to build without that support? Because it adds to the load of testing. If you really need it, build from so= urce. --=20 My main job is trying to come up with new and innovative and effective ways t= o reject even more mail. I'm up to about 97% now.= From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 11 01:02:27 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 219E41376A5 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 01:02:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@koitsu.org) Received: from mambo.koitsu.org (mambo.koitsu.org [172.81.177.231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46q8nF31kJz3K6R for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 01:02:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@koitsu.org) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 18:02:23 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-ID: <20191011010223.GA88878@koitsu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46q8nF31kJz3K6R X-Spamd-Bar: ++++++++++ X-Spamd-Result: default: False [10.80 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FAKE_REPLY(1.00)[]; FAKE_REPLY_C(6.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:172.81.177.231]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.93)[0.931,0]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; IP_SCORE(1.82)[ip: (5.05), ipnet: 172.81.176.0/21(2.53), asn: 174(1.58), country: US(-0.05)]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[koitsu.org,quarantine]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.85)[0.845,0]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:174, ipnet:172.81.176.0/21, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; GREYLIST(0.00)[pass,body] X-Spam: Yes X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 01:02:27 -0000 > Now we can get back on the ipv6 option. > > so if we want to proceed further in removing the option to build with or without > ipv6 for the ports side. Please speak up in reply to this email, if you are > building without ipv6, why are you doing so, what are the real benefit for it. > How bad it will impact you if we do remove that option? Whenever I use ports over FreeBSD-provided packages (or to use ports to build my own packages), I often disable IPV6 support. The lengthy response below should explain why. In short: the IPV6 option is useful and important. Please keep it. In length: I think anyone operating in the Real World knows quite well that IPv6 is still treated as a third-class citizen when it comes to both general connectivity/reliability* and general use cases code-wise**. It's still very much in utero; or a toddler, if you will. When you encounter IPv6 vs. IPv4 prioritisation issues, they are painful and annoying. No user or administrator is going to sit for hours fiddling with it all to restore things to a working state when simply removing IPv6 relieves the problem permanently. Time and time again I see companies advertising AAAA records and webservers listening on IPv6 yet IPv6 transit fails but their A/IPv4 endpoint works fine. It's the dual-stack nature that makes a lot of this worse than it should be. (I do think this subject should be re-visited once the world as a whole starts to seriously decommission IPv4, though. Yes I'm serious.) I've worked for several companies that are IPv4-only, where the belief (and one I share) is that IPv6-only clients have some 6-to-4-ish gateway/NAT somewhere upstream, otherwise they wouldn't be able to reach most of the Internet. IPv4 NAT still works for the majority of use cases still as of 2019. Furthermore, faux-political statements like "IPv6 is more widely used than 2012" should be ignored and facts reiterated: IPv6 adoption is around 25% as of mid-2019. And it's taken over 10 years to reach that. IPv4 is also well-understood, and not, as Dave Horsfall accurately described, "a horse designed by a committee"; people are still trying to wrap their head around IPv6 NDP/RA, SLAAC, and a myriad of other things (dare I mention syntax?). It's this which explains the sluggish adoption rate. And yes, I am well-aware of how important IPv6 is in other regions, particularly Asia. I am not belittling that need at all. But not everyone globally has the same needs. What should really be asked for is the opposite: for the FreeBSD ports folks to justify its removal. How is this hurting you on a daily basis? Is there a large percentage of Mk/ framework bits causing you pain? Are the bulk of per-port patches inducing maintainer grief? At what scale is this impacting you? In 7 years (since the OP picked 2012), how much time has been spent by maintainers ensuring IPV6=true works for their port(s)? Are you truly OK throwing away the integration work done by many, many people (not just Project members!) over the past N years (see: per-port patches), and forcing people who still need the option to make their own ports tree to retain it? Here's some harsh advice for the FreeBSD Project: quit changing shit for sake of change, often masked by lies like "XXX is stagnant/old" or similarly fallacious and loaded statements. The project (both src and ports, but especially ports) have lost many very good people in the past 10+ years (and I'm not talking about me) *because* of that change for sake of change mindset -- the same mindset driving this request! It's changes like this that drive people away from FreeBSD. Really. It's the same mindset that provoked people to stop using Linux distros due to systemd integration. I will not be replying to this thread past this point. I have said all that I care to say / spent enough time on it. Just please stop hurting administrators and end users with proposals/actions like this. * - Real-world IPv6 failures impacting end users tend to be higher than IPv4; this is anecdotal on my part, but I have a myriad of peers who have had to disable IPv6 for similar reasons. The IPv4 fallback in software (both userland apps and network stacks) does not always work "correctly". Just go see how often IPv6 failures/issues are reported on both NANOG and the outages@ mailing list. And yes I am quite aware that a good portion of the Internet backbone at this point is IPv6 (that's nice, and not what we're talking about here). ** - I still continue to see open-source software committing major fixes to AF_INET6 related code bits. Major pieces of software include curl, wget, Busybox, DNS servers (pick one!), and ntp... just for starters. -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@koitsu.org | | UNIX Systems Administrator PGP 0x2A389531 | | Making life hard for others since 1977. | From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 11 06:16:42 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E10B13E7F4 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:16:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46qHlt1Kcrz4321 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:16:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 2BD7D13E7EF; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:16:42 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BA8313E7EE for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:16:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46qHlt0TFfz431q for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:16:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Received: from portscout.nyi.freebsd.org (portscout.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8541E012 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:16:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from portscout@localhost) by portscout.nyi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x9B6GfwI034423; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:16:41 GMT (envelope-from portscout@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <201910110616.x9B6GfwI034423@portscout.nyi.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: portscout.nyi.freebsd.org: portscout set sender to portscout@FreeBSD.org using -f Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:16:41 +0000 From: portscout@FreeBSD.org To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date X-Mailer: portscout/0.8.1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:16:42 -0000 Dear port maintainer, The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more of your ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity to check each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate, submit/commit an update. If any ports have already been updated, you can safely ignore the entry. You will not be e-mailed again for any of the port/version combinations below. Full details can be found at the following URL: http://portscout.freebsd.org/ports@freebsd.org.html Port | Current version | New version ------------------------------------------------+-----------------+------------ games/golly | 3.2 | 3.3 ------------------------------------------------+-----------------+------------ If any of the above results are invalid, please check the following page for details on how to improve portscout's detection and selection of distfiles on a per-port basis: http://portscout.freebsd.org/info/portscout-portconfig.txt Reported by: portscout! From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 11 06:46:03 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A7D013F7C1 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:46:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com) Received: from mx18-out13.antispamcloud.com (mx18-out13.antispamcloud.com [207.244.64.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46qJPk3lVmz44Lt for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:46:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com) Received: from srv31.niagahoster.com ([153.92.8.106]) by mx62.antispamcloud.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iIo9g-0007Db-8n for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 08:12:03 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sumeritec.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=j6ZWDMbTQgF6WubK6T5RmNbJiYWJ/T5pxlkGp1OsveI=; b=A2pIuv+Ko+kqE471EUBYVr3Lag /YvNWihHgnZN5fhjCWXi7AzLgiTf1kp/3AJRGBQfp695GgTROe1Cn4WWauLl7YCJFfL5b+pKLtta1 YdsxWWCV2fDtAD6dwZSVo4gKq2Z5GCVJTFNgN8M6JIB/xfgU+l59pfD0Z6Qwn/mprYUvkmb8j0siy +qeRvT3no3x3DuSJCaKsfJUOjtC6y9PmlhJpov0WTFjMvZm7ZpuTxc56W2rGtzjBdNQiccSXUHRSG PWnawa20uaRDfrRnRPRxoL+ImSCbZTpbBiHeVKK7a5xrNcKO/iGCF/D8r8K5gXIu2HItudopflsfj 904mrmOA==; Received: from subs12-223-255-228-105.three.co.id ([223.255.228.105]:61925 helo=Ryzen1.sumeritec.com) by srv31.niagahoster.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1iIo8g-0001cH-MR for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 13:11:00 +0700 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 14:10:57 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Installing packaged firefox wants to install tesseract Message-ID: <20191011141057.6b7cf073.freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 X-AuthUser: freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com X-Originating-IP: 153.92.8.106 X-Spampanel-Domain: out.niagahoster.com X-Spampanel-Username: niaga X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Class: unsure X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.11) X-Recommended-Action: accept X-Filter-ID: Mvzo4OR0dZXEDF/gcnlw0ezqdolHG91LK5q2HN6uCHCpSDasLI4SayDByyq9LIhVcys+LlrbRpFV 8qqeZtKHBUTNWdUk1Ol2OGx3IfrIJKywOmJyM1qr8uRnWBrbSAGDpVxoJs2S7DyqLbV7exZKwoZT E2RuCRrqMK5xd9bLYy9WRDgDqyR8DFsuqi4FZHc+DC2x0UfC3kDLHZZ45vLkn3XpGCeulZALlD2V AvpAcEc8KL/IMB74SOHJHH5NeiaL55jeC/HswypaivzfzXdk4UqtrMHKnZjjLb34axJAGxs5GkV/ bWxrVPwuELDU8G19u0biw9HDuO4B9hyZQXIaC4zwOdQrnBnwsHxO3AlvKSjJ2dhGgwNT5kKKb+0g mFn4Ffuioi+ZqQpdwSt7VNckr37niLJQJzxpqSdmGj2doliDRuiUzsH+sEW6XTJyNgcbQ18PG1yr OcflUFS53w7gtXQmZupE66h/n5scs0KBvjbXs2KsRjKrCowEavDwQuKo0Z9IYZHHLpvscm95OHjW pepPyApn+JsirWTdtMW7fMCeKBLhW+/eldf55d2G6sFP1T2+medQFkAFLwFEG1d6KhGjI345l2ga JNiMgBKa3IetI4g+l6rCWbY0MZcgnbHsJowQfRSvFkdz5hWrK6yspaAaXVo/EC2K+bDeFIM9LXuV XFvsa941VwSxiq95i0aYWVYM2yUVEtnBB27eO94ZOLgbhIjFDhSjHjVkMDx/0Ps9Y1+B5NAl+UiK W8CuUu+cHaOOSrBXEQWhLgtUWtMkSAgh32wBeEWxzwosqcPj/QzBouUDWw4hnq/C7UENlm8jd9nm 7m98lEW9LtnbQ2wBE3LYM3A6BXfvel8OEFDbU52gQad9WXdn3Fj6MIVp28e2vSfj3/hiIyMA4Ytv 1o9eriO8WCi35nq8U8rF1Q4lv1wYl2KZhkai6KglYqQxpUcaZjMv6PN41V03H2/ZNJy1m5Scu7sV encPI85bGjWXuocpzCXI8Q8ncbCRI7u+gO19qsV65ImRv0L8A4xGSAdZyd5hso0p2qEK9vLLH6Iw Xw96giDSqpQHYfnjwHBMA7P/ X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine10.antispamcloud.com X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46qJPk3lVmz44Lt X-Spamd-Bar: ++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=sumeritec.com header.s=default header.b=A2pIuv+K; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com has no SPF policy when checking 207.244.64.182) smtp.mailfrom=freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [2.46 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; HAS_XOIP(0.00)[]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[sumeritec.com:+]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-1.52)[ipnet: 207.244.64.0/18(-4.41), asn: 30633(-3.12), country: US(-0.05)]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[182.64.244.207.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.3.1]; ASN(0.00)[asn:30633, ipnet:207.244.64.0/18, country:US]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[105.228.255.223.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.11]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_XBL(5.00)[105.228.255.223.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.4]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(0.00)[sumeritec.com:s=default]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.99)[-0.991,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.93)[-0.929,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[sumeritec.com]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; BAD_REP_POLICIES(0.10)[]; MID_CONTAINS_FROM(1.00)[]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; GREYLIST(0.00)[pass,body] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:46:03 -0000 Hi, I just was wondering what this game has to do with the browser: pkg install firefox says: New packages to be INSTALLED: firefox: 69.0.2_1,1 kf5-kholidays: 5.62.0 opencv: 3.4.1_24 tesseract: 4.1.0_3 tesseract-data: 4.0.0 aom: 1.0.0.2474 Is this game really required to run a browser? Erich From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 11 07:08:39 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C9EA140018 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:08:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from soth.netfence.it (net-2-44-121-52.cust.vodafonedsl.it [2.44.121.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mailserver.netfence.it", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46qJvp2L0mz459w for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:08:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from alamar.ventu (alamar.local.netfence.it [10.1.2.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by soth.netfence.it (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x9B78RJd013121 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 11 Oct 2019 09:08:29 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netfence.it; s=201910; t=1570777709; bh=YhoFeRl0GNpVPK6OLxpSTsvxi4eCj/9HHao3rouNvLQ=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=PE0OLsPCN04er4yIsFzqxWce4tQd3NDw1tpuo0mjDD3A+2VA7ou34Nwf6e3Ts7XO+ Y2dFK+r056PunVtOC0c+o00MuL/msYoyKPtAFCB+ON+ow6PHAeVBzUClirbRTWyekq KHura/jj/livxF5nEpJhG+p6Px44OV9mQ3apvarM= X-Authentication-Warning: soth.netfence.it: Host alamar.local.netfence.it [10.1.2.18] claimed to be alamar.ventu Subject: Re: Installing packaged firefox wants to install tesseract To: Erich Dollansky , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <20191011141057.6b7cf073.freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com> From: Andrea Venturoli Message-ID: Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 09:08:27 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191011141057.6b7cf073.freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46qJvp2L0mz459w X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=netfence.it header.s=201910 header.b=PE0OLsPC; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of ml@netfence.it designates 2.44.121.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ml@netfence.it X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.23 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[netfence.it:s=201910]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:2.44.121.52]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[netfence.it]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[netfence.it:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; IP_SCORE(-1.73)[ip: (-5.71), ipnet: 2.44.0.0/16(-2.86), asn: 30722(-0.13), country: IT(0.03)]; ASN(0.00)[asn:30722, ipnet:2.44.0.0/16, country:IT]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:08:39 -0000 On 2019-10-11 08:10, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi, > > I just was wondering what this game has to do with the browser: > > pkg install firefox says: > > New packages to be INSTALLED: > firefox: 69.0.2_1,1 > kf5-kholidays: 5.62.0 > opencv: 3.4.1_24 > tesseract: 4.1.0_3 > tesseract-data: 4.0.0 > aom: 1.0.0.2474 > > Is this game really required to run a browser? I don't have this, but I build my packages... In any case, I think you are misunderstanding games/tesseract for graphics/tesseract. bye av. From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 11 08:09:46 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB48714227C for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 08:09:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com) Received: from out1-25.antispamcloud.com (out1-25.antispamcloud.com [185.201.16.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46qLGK5hh3z48Zt for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 08:09:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com) Received: from srv31.niagahoster.com ([153.92.8.106]) by mx61.antispamcloud.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iIpf8-0001WK-0o; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 09:48:35 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sumeritec.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=is72NqooizTvyrV5xxmnDpbE1RUzsUj35mdjzGzc7L4=; b=qLPqs9ZaNfiHFQfEaX3wgeXL7a 0QdQo6RYY3/DSeBCjuV7pr/VA0SjNx0Z+6xg/O5BirZkjNAmO3TvkAlU4MewPP1J35QYoU+MD6xcl R0DauC+201gGd6X56VtwIoCAWJ815uRfB4hm4HkyB1FzzB8IOzmosC1ExgwWmz9iIuzQQemPJZ1TM NKwVSDY6c/0mzcNXrwWucOfZY4u5FMe8Yfel9C0pTFIbtp8u9yzpCoig4FNZ2JgPtLH8qTVR7EO52 ij4w2LAQ0Eda2zUv0t8HApdVKLPrS7dDMHMBbvyLybZHzZGZC8VUgkhIWai0PQrprd892f+MKxRDY d2edYz8w==; Received: from subs12-223-255-228-105.three.co.id ([223.255.228.105]:62169 helo=Ryzen1.sumeritec.com) by srv31.niagahoster.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1iIpeF-0005KN-NL; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 14:47:41 +0700 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 15:47:37 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky To: Andrea Venturoli Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Installing packaged firefox wants to install tesseract Message-ID: <20191011154737.4e3429a2.freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20191011141057.6b7cf073.freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 X-AuthUser: freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com X-Originating-IP: 153.92.8.106 X-Spampanel-Domain: out.niagahoster.com X-Spampanel-Username: niaga X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Class: ham X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.06) X-Recommended-Action: accept X-Filter-ID: Mvzo4OR0dZXEDF/gcnlw0ezqdolHG91LK5q2HN6uCHCpSDasLI4SayDByyq9LIhV2sA7mv1Ekb2Q UlgFWMWKaETNWdUk1Ol2OGx3IfrIJKyP9eGNFz9TW9u+Jt8z2T3KByDHA1WxvEXSfiI4U2+75DnR WfGXKFbiqiu9i31vmC/8Dg7yvL/fV6FDkXibNIvV58fMnqZUTt7CyKlJUh+zhveE820elNmaoaXO DdXQJtTloW5O8nKi+aEgzCvYcGcNKllOmIVrrQyduipaxv6MUD3ez4CdtXaPw7D+FGO9tGkuzGtQ 7/htPxq7WclTkwnPIUjciUkIn/0DoVfPNvVi81YFvf25LVONYbYifH5OzZCu1WaiZswnh7amfkLT IEwd6LkGFt94dBx3TpAokA4Umaw46HraoB5jFS/j4R6hpi7iMUiI1oe/4lwLKLXPixKwAAn0bQYy 8xI4CGTS1oSPzB4k0j4LS8wIxW2YYRduJoLdgRj6yrQAuxbFOPSpYqPfmLF0wqTcEF+RrgN98ekF atSe/DltLzcel6bmdqqlg3hCkyxnPuOCUX7hoyMSpvZrWkTxbSTULz0dWAkcLKBdlCSxWVdlbFqx F8WMzybyHsghJ1UrIDz/zIKkhjMfdql/vyG/94A9cXb+Do2HsRTe4qw4iu4J6ehVyrUIcpJWw7dG V5mk4G/dzz0i/NbNal9CRabj9xFN/C2N1PEoOIjngTR3/dBKWFqTnsQptJfraZPD3GfK7JtlRgR6 F0RK5R1LsV+DkDiP1EOo5xXzAYM8DiKxIZH81+EyUmOcctASFXVUuaf0T6HSYd5otAWSzJS5VKBS Lw97CHD9X4STzOgf/BLVT5KOvj+coWVplUjwxpjFKm5wowfYZrOp0hycw9HUd//K7QRISrzrk0b8 Y5Gn0mDREPupIC7WODfAi2WjnrSl7mJaw/iwwebBuk5LV2jMnNE8DyASZ54Bz/PcBwSU62A8MWHO KnLcvBzb8uH33wVcdtWIt60ZoYBSNAboWuvjmdySlZou9qHIGOZDEEo7OxXhzfc7VH8oZoor1GNo qgN4g5WMAN0lb/WuhMjbMNC7V9shs4rTQxHfrjGTMZbMXA== X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine10.antispamcloud.com X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46qLGK5hh3z48Zt X-Spamd-Bar: ++++++++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=sumeritec.com header.s=default header.b=qLPqs9Za; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com has no SPF policy when checking 185.201.16.25) smtp.mailfrom=freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [8.72 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; HAS_XOIP(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[sumeritec.com:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; IP_SCORE(0.75)[ipnet: 185.201.16.0/24(1.64), asn: 8972(2.15), country: DE(-0.01)]; ASN(0.00)[asn:8972, ipnet:185.201.16.0/24, country:DE]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[105.228.255.223.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.11]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_XBL(5.00)[105.228.255.223.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.4]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(0.00)[sumeritec.com:s=default]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[sumeritec.com]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.96)[0.961,0]; BAD_REP_POLICIES(0.10)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(1.00)[1.000,0]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[25.16.201.185.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.3.0]; MID_CONTAINS_FROM(1.00)[]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; GREYLIST(0.00)[pass,body] X-Spam: Yes X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 08:09:46 -0000 Hi, On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 09:08:27 +0200 Andrea Venturoli wrote: > On 2019-10-11 08:10, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I just was wondering what this game has to do with the browser: > > > > pkg install firefox says: > > > > New packages to be INSTALLED: > > firefox: 69.0.2_1,1 > > kf5-kholidays: 5.62.0 > > opencv: 3.4.1_24 > > tesseract: 4.1.0_3 > > tesseract-data: 4.0.0 > > aom: 1.0.0.2474 > > > > Is this game really required to run a browser? > > I don't have this, but I build my packages... > > In any case, I think you are misunderstanding > games/tesseract for graphics/tesseract. > thanks! Whereis told me only about the games. Erich From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 11 10:36:04 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 099A814739A for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:36:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46qPW76S1pz4L2P; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:36:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (etoilebsd.net [178.32.217.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: bapt) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AAD40830B; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:36:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: by ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id C458395435; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:36:02 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:36:02 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Erich Dollansky Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Installing packaged firefox wants to install tesseract Message-ID: <20191011103602.ljo3ywh5oruqqz2z@ivaldir.net> References: <20191011141057.6b7cf073.freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vsycp4kboztgq2gn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191011141057.6b7cf073.freebsd.ed.lists@sumeritec.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:36:04 -0000 --vsycp4kboztgq2gn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 02:10:57PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I just was wondering what this game has to do with the browser: >=20 > pkg install firefox says: >=20 > New packages to be INSTALLED: > firefox: 69.0.2_1,1 > kf5-kholidays: 5.62.0 > opencv: 3.4.1_24 > tesseract: 4.1.0_3 > tesseract-data: 4.0.0 > aom: 1.0.0.2474 >=20 > Is this game really required to run a browser? >=20 Run pkg upgrade first. You probably end up with this because an installed package requires somethi= ng =66rom new kde (kf5*) which ends up requiring tesseract (which is an OCR, n= ot a game ;)) pkg tries to be clever (and is not here) and try to fix a missing dependency somewhere. so first pkg upgrade, then pkg install, maybe also a pkg check -d if you st= ill have the issue. Best regards, Bapt --vsycp4kboztgq2gn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEgOTj3suS2urGXVU3Y4mL3PG3PloFAl2gWxAACgkQY4mL3PG3 Plr8Rg//QQK42rq9opFTWdmCmEc47PHfDPUtZ0/bxB5sblGZThSxxfztOhZQHWPP u5jAf6WIcFlF+iMiYdlw/COceTUgM9P0fCgVVzlRIWGeQtmFmWL33WJoaZAlgQdk qxoECKI4CSl8PNzBMlHmdK5/mD/Qog2bBVEd1i3kPqzpQuxC9nz5IcDs+XTuDfS/ 3l7aEjJ//Z+N6COZDjhdMlgKxoHfNyGnG/mFe28L8ikHLxgk82RN8phmywjaFsAS c0iS5vI8Ir204q9PdLsLGocCksg32jKaQSAIq10dgQh3aSz3oCkzfTSnECduMEE2 wxKiUXIL/oj+Z1sfJ1vjwTEyLq/vmhgRWwGEcWcEQ8Ldp8zjUY6z/O0baDP6Iics zJUxT9X5sY0fDU5Jjpu2Zf8aK/fAl169mX3GE1rW1RPmhNTqthFvL1X8xsI/k7zZ 31UviQp82ViOLB0Pgn4tUp05Ehd/A07IyDwmoSbFa2Kdh65MXcSaiwh6pzVNSQYD TRNnVYiOLndf1HocQvhhwlxsSfESftdmsAaLyrS2+UUP1/5Ygxj/ltUZrovNHyqX BBERUG4ZC73esbI+BJ5DEeN7CT97vIe71LO+hciS/bqGs2t3I/9rARyc8hpDfCw8 Oo2eDQiRCdlW5XbKUYaM5eZ0gGJnzC9u5RDSfEQtyTMmCmQvSmE= =yBmx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vsycp4kboztgq2gn-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 11 10:49:15 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2F74147C5E for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:49:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46qPpM3p0yz4LmM; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:49:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (etoilebsd.net [178.32.217.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: bapt) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A9E38429; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:49:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: by ivaldir.etoilebsd.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 1797595443; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:49:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:49:13 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Jeremy Chadwick Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-ID: <20191011104912.6at6rcigtig7zmlw@ivaldir.net> References: <20191011010223.GA88878@koitsu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="dc6o4kcvkdrd327l" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191011010223.GA88878@koitsu.org> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:49:15 -0000 --dc6o4kcvkdrd327l Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 06:02:23PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick via freebsd-ports= wrote: > > Now we can get back on the ipv6 option. > >=20 > > so if we want to proceed further in removing the option to build with o= r without > > ipv6 for the ports side. Please speak up in reply to this email, if you= are > > building without ipv6, why are you doing so, what are the real benefit = for it. > > How bad it will impact you if we do remove that option? >=20 > Whenever I use ports over FreeBSD-provided packages (or to use ports to > build my own packages), I often disable IPV6 support. The lengthy > response below should explain why. >=20 > In short: the IPV6 option is useful and important. Please keep it. >=20 > In length: I think anyone operating in the Real World knows quite well > that IPv6 is still treated as a third-class citizen when it comes to > both general connectivity/reliability* and general use cases > code-wise**. It's still very much in utero; or a toddler, if you will. >=20 > When you encounter IPv6 vs. IPv4 prioritisation issues, they are painful > and annoying. No user or administrator is going to sit for hours > fiddling with it all to restore things to a working state when simply > removing IPv6 relieves the problem permanently. Time and time again I > see companies advertising AAAA records and webservers listening on IPv6 > yet IPv6 transit fails but their A/IPv4 endpoint works fine. It's the > dual-stack nature that makes a lot of this worse than it should be. (I > do think this subject should be re-visited once the world as a whole > starts to seriously decommission IPv4, though. Yes I'm serious.) >=20 > I've worked for several companies that are IPv4-only, where the belief > (and one I share) is that IPv6-only clients have some 6-to-4-ish > gateway/NAT somewhere upstream, otherwise they wouldn't be able to reach > most of the Internet. IPv4 NAT still works for the majority of use > cases still as of 2019. >=20 > Furthermore, faux-political statements like "IPv6 is more widely used > than 2012" should be ignored and facts reiterated: IPv6 adoption is > around 25% as of mid-2019. And it's taken over 10 years to reach that. >=20 > IPv4 is also well-understood, and not, as Dave Horsfall accurately > described, "a horse designed by a committee"; people are still trying to > wrap their head around IPv6 NDP/RA, SLAAC, and a myriad of other things > (dare I mention syntax?). It's this which explains the sluggish > adoption rate. >=20 > And yes, I am well-aware of how important IPv6 is in other regions, > particularly Asia. I am not belittling that need at all. But not > everyone globally has the same needs. >=20 > What should really be asked for is the opposite: for the FreeBSD ports > folks to justify its removal. >=20 > How is this hurting you on a daily basis? Is there a large percentage > of Mk/ framework bits causing you pain? Are the bulk of per-port > patches inducing maintainer grief? At what scale is this impacting you? > In 7 years (since the OP picked 2012), how much time has been spent by > maintainers ensuring IPV6=3Dtrue works for their port(s)? Are you truly > OK throwing away the integration work done by many, many people (not > just Project members!) over the past N years (see: per-port patches), > and forcing people who still need the option to make their own ports > tree to retain it? >=20 > Here's some harsh advice for the FreeBSD Project: quit changing shit for > sake of change, often masked by lies like "XXX is stagnant/old" or > similarly fallacious and loaded statements. The project (both src and > ports, but especially ports) have lost many very good people in the past > 10+ years (and I'm not talking about me) *because* of that change for > sake of change mindset -- the same mindset driving this request! It's > changes like this that drive people away from FreeBSD. Really. It's > the same mindset that provoked people to stop using Linux distros due > to systemd integration. >=20 > I will not be replying to this thread past this point. I have said all > that I care to say / spent enough time on it. Just please stop hurting > administrators and end users with proposals/actions like this. >=20 > * - Real-world IPv6 failures impacting end users tend to be higher > than IPv4; this is anecdotal on my part, but I have a myriad of peers > who have had to disable IPv6 for similar reasons. The IPv4 fallback in > software (both userland apps and network stacks) does not always work > "correctly". Just go see how often IPv6 failures/issues are reported on > both NANOG and the outages@ mailing list. And yes I am quite aware that > a good portion of the Internet backbone at this point is IPv6 (that's > nice, and not what we're talking about here). >=20 > ** - I still continue to see open-source software committing major fixes > to AF_INET6 related code bits. Major pieces of software include curl, > wget, Busybox, DNS servers (pick one!), and ntp... just for starters. >=20 Let's get on the long version, but that one is the most useful for me ;), a= nd skipping the free trolling because it brings nothing to the discussion we a= re have here. The main problem with the ipv6 option right now, is that it does not really= make sense anymore, as most of the application are friendly with both and do not provide anymore a build switch to disable v6 at build time. Actually plenty of them don't know they can and they do use both at the same time, as it is transparent to them. Leaving to the administrator/users the ability to disable ipv6 at the OS level (runtime) and nothing as to be done at the application level.. Other than that the ipv6 option is not spread correctly over the ports tree, depending the maintainer they do add the option or not. The goal of removing this option if we do (and nothing has been decided yet here). is to stop misleading users who disable it by making them think this option is actually entirely disabling ipv6 support in ports which is it cle= arly not. Side note that if you do disable ipv6 at runtime on your os, you won't hit = the ipv6 bugs in the software you do use, so you will reach the same point as i= f you had disable entirely at build time ipv6 in every of the portswhere it is possible. Best regards, Bapt --dc6o4kcvkdrd327l Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEgOTj3suS2urGXVU3Y4mL3PG3PloFAl2gXiYACgkQY4mL3PG3 Plpc8A/+ICicjCAtp/WDf54aDo/h49RpnGfKiPZUrnlZStqkI72xKQdSNRp5Yoq4 89EweAbud8TldD8OFnVfo9RJkahYDoffZbU33MspNb0SumPo+XNUSyN9+q6o5Pvt IV0bRt+mb1ndRiWjWt3DyS3PEXY6qoHsXFVBysQeDbm1iZKAzCv3vZFcFf1Pwq9c tUf6Lu7ZqaTCGHw4TN5B0QHoM9NRRiFbwRiLW7p5xjUTizuCZNr4EMTpxTFWCJYo t2XSJlboxErxn2hdAZaBCFS4Yuupg8E8LKaZHXhapyuHljokVWP7LQKO00B6wpid q7HcNYFbrcycTUFKVd6Vh0hv9Av7xujs6NVnkyW/5wLUL32YAHIEsb9mBokw8DaU LVOdmsI+u/zCUd4HoC3Ci/tfdAKDKWEIrC94JRP1wSpXE03xkb2BhjdD7l3kR+Fk L6P6S1MMCKWHM9DQv9d7+S0iCnUGJEcAKkOWBboeHaCFU7wKXeasaOyGEdOMv1v+ 6D5x6eQNdZVJ4kjOLN3c46dFdKsVGkIkLgPitgAFec17rBDezI0CV22qfuBF9Znv lwt7JTTSJwT4h1ZwBDNZTsmzm6CQwl7STdACQ+VZ80H/AWhG+L4WbBtLjg7Q+zoQ 0zCWTF+o3Z2lbWcKqOcc0l0VdQ6juhiyS93pMFmu0mynh5xrBOo= =fDz3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --dc6o4kcvkdrd327l-- From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 11 12:23:21 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0616214C1C7 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:23:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stb@lassitu.de) Received: from gilb.zs64.net (gilb.zs64.net [212.12.50.234]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "gilb.zs64.net", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46qRtw010fz4SvK for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:23:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stb@lassitu.de) Received: by gilb.zs64.net (Postfix, from stb@lassitu.de) id D122429D329 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:23:16 +0000 (UTC) From: Stefan Bethke Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 14:22:50 +0200 References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <9b8c9b1b-0d26-d9d7-018a-cafa8ec98c1e@abinet.ru> <20191009061538.re66hcii2z73ry6p@ivaldir.net> To: FreeBSD Ports In-Reply-To: <20191009061538.re66hcii2z73ry6p@ivaldir.net> Message-Id: <7CCD6F03-062C-4A4F-AE05-DDF0EE13B291@lassitu.de> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46qRtw010fz4SvK X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of stb@lassitu.de designates 212.12.50.234 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=stb@lassitu.de X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.76 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.92)[-0.922,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.992,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[lassitu.de]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[234.50.12.212.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.05)[asn: 13135(-0.22), country: DE(-0.01)]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:13135, ipnet:212.12.48.0/21, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:23:21 -0000 Am 09.10.2019 um 08:15 schrieb Baptiste Daroussin : >=20 > I agree I don't see the reason why we should keep that ipv6 option. = When off > this option does not bring much value to the users as the code for = apps to > support ipv6 mostly reside in the libc. Actually that was my intent in = 2012 to > first turn it on by default everywhere and then drop the option = entirely. Is there an easy way to tell which ports pay attention to the option? Stefan --=20 Stefan Bethke Fon +49 151 14070811 From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 11 12:43:54 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00C3914D7A4 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:43:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=jdQc=YE=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46qSLd0qLmz4VRR for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:43:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=jdQc=YE=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 563D528474; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 14:43:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from illbsd.quip.test (ip-62-24-92-232.net.upcbroadband.cz [62.24.92.232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5720128423; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 14:43:49 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? To: LuKreme , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <566f28fc-8c6b-0d43-8455-0524e1965896@punkt.de> From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 14:43:45 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0 SeaMonkey/2.49.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46qSLd0qLmz4VRR X-Spamd-Bar: +++++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of SRS0=jdQc=YE=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz has no SPF policy when checking 94.124.105.4) smtp.mailfrom=SRS0=jdQc=YE=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz X-Spamd-Result: default: False [5.10 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.91)[ip: (0.45), ipnet: 94.124.104.0/21(0.23), asn: 42000(3.78), country: CZ(0.09)]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[quip.cz]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.99)[0.990,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[4.105.124.94.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(1.00)[0.999,0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[000.fbsd@quip.cz,SRS0=jdQc=YE=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:42000, ipnet:94.124.104.0/21, country:CZ]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[000.fbsd@quip.cz, SRS0=jdQc=YE=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:43:54 -0000 LuKreme wrote on 2019/10/11 00:23: > On Oct 10, 2019, at 10:01, Lars Liedtke wrote: >> >> Why not just make building in IPv6 support the default, and introduce a >> flag if someone really needs or wants to build without that support? > > Because it adds to the load of testing. If you really need it, build from source. Building official packages with IPv6 is OK. Removing existing options from ports and saying "build from source" is ... stupid. Miroslav Lachman From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 11 13:09:22 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C014814E63C for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 13:09:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kremels@kreme.com) Received: from mail.covisp.net (mail.covisp.net [65.121.55.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46qSw15QmWz4X58 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 13:09:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kremels@kreme.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: LuKreme Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:09:19 -0600 Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? Message-Id: <2E9007CC-E0C3-4E50-A21C-96658AEC5F91@kreme.com> References: In-Reply-To: To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailer: iPad Mail (17A860) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46qSw15QmWz4X58 X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of kremels@kreme.com designates 65.121.55.42 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kremels@kreme.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.42 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.99)[-0.994,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MISSING_MIME_VERSION(2.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.97)[-0.972,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kreme.com]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.22)[ip: (-0.76), ipnet: 65.112.0.0/12(-0.21), asn: 209(-0.06), country: US(-0.05)]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[42.55.121.65.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:209, ipnet:65.112.0.0/12, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 13:09:22 -0000 On Oct 11, 2019, at 06:44, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFLuKreme wrote on 2019/10/11 00:23: >> On Oct 10, 2019, at 10:01, Lars Liedtke wrote: >>> Why not just make building in IPv6 support the default, and introduce a >>> flag if someone really needs or wants to build without that support? >> Because it adds to the load of testing. If you really need it, build from= source. > Building official packages with IPv6 is OK. Removing existing options from= ports and saying "build from source" is ... stupid. How many ports do you maintain? Are you willing to test and patch ports for removing ipv6 on each new versio= n? From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sat Oct 12 13:06:49 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52849131321 for ; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 13:06:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from abi@abinet.ru) Received: from mail.abinet.ru (mail.abinet.ru [109.167.172.107]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46r4pb5Mdgz435k; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 13:06:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from abi@abinet.ru) Received: from sphinx.abinet.ru (unknown [10.0.2.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.abinet.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 581A916443; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 13:06:39 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Is IPV6 option still necessary? To: Baptiste Daroussin Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> <9b8c9b1b-0d26-d9d7-018a-cafa8ec98c1e@abinet.ru> <20191009061538.re66hcii2z73ry6p@ivaldir.net> From: abi Message-ID: Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:06:35 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191009061538.re66hcii2z73ry6p@ivaldir.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46r4pb5Mdgz435k X-Spamd-Bar: -- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.18 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[abinet.ru:s=dkim]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:109.167.172.107/32]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; IP_SCORE(-0.28)[asn: 25408(-1.44), country: RU(0.01)]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[abinet.ru:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[abinet.ru,reject]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:25408, ipnet:109.167.128.0/18, country:RU]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 13:06:49 -0000 09.10.2019 09:15, Baptiste Daroussin пишет: >> I'm writing from 2019 and I build kernel and ports without IPv6. For all >> this years I fail to understand why I need it. >> >> My home devices fit 10.0.0.0/16 nicely, I have faith in NAT and I >> encountered no IPv6-only sites. >> >> But I saw CVEs in IPv6 stack. > Plenty of FreeBSD things are ipv6 only in the FreeBSD cluster. In particular if > you do look at the build machines in the cluster, no ipv6 will mean no access to > the build log in case of failures. > > I agree I don't see the reason why we should keep that ipv6 option. When off > this option does not bring much value to the users as the code for apps to > support ipv6 mostly reside in the libc. Actually that was my intent in 2012 to > first turn it on by default everywhere and then drop the option entirely. Are you going to keep IPv6 kernel option? If off and ports can detect ipv6 availability in runtime, I don't see problem at all.