From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 10 02:40:39 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 259491065672 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:40:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bf1783@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0EF98FC14 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:40:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyj26 with SMTP id 26so13384781wyj.13 for ; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 19:40:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:reply-to:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=d7I0O4aHPw8b4ATu6qq4xcSKCqwmHDIMEqzq2rqcaH0=; b=X+6CPDAuySaKWsVYKGhmb2unRlx8O/CpYdMZEmkhUmI/qL+DsrYW15IbMNvfmLX//2 EdZEJ/bot0Yz2HG29o5RzgM2zdns5BskHTskyn7jKAlWZfg7cxFfI9UjfhH5zIhRVTPa 6Xv1o+LHPyn8B9mhJi5lx6wX1oeHdimcZfZ5w= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; b=jK9Sy+OdZBQYa3HCXUQz+Dg6Sy/KDOYRxjkFaYaZPQCOOgXWN8uLIxm4eI4Igg+eaE pI+lzXkwdJTRfzq4QmoE6opq51cV5Sbwucccygw4koLCdpW54G7YU36Pn1lXcJWl8c08 yOuGzhHF/YnHq+Y65rgosxaslxpjyJvL78JQY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.26.139 with SMTP id c11mr3360116wea.6.1281408037633; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 19:40:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.183.212 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 19:40:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:40:34 +0000 Message-ID: From: "b. f." To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Barbara Subject: Re: something wrong with portsnap and INDEX ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: bf1783@gmail.com List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:40:39 -0000 >Could it be that net/p5-IO-INET6 and net/p5-IO-Socket-INET6 are making the >indexing crazy? >Maybe this is not the cause, but isn't an entry in MOVED required? There were a number of problem commits in the past day or two, breaking the INDEX and some individual ports. Some of these are now supposed to be fixed, e.g. [*]. Wait a bit longer, then update and check your ports tree, and if something is still broken afterward, let us know. [*] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports/2010-August/200183.html b.