Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 10 Apr 2012 10:26:15 +1000
From:      Da Rock <freebsd-ports@herveybayaustralia.com.au>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD Port: samba34-3.4.14
Message-ID:  <4F837E27.8070503@herveybayaustralia.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <FD46D7FF-E4C7-438D-9959-A5ADF4047C0D@mac.com>
References:  <4F7E498E.7070007@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <CALdFvJG7-4mP3w0U339L80hoRwVaexbCS40h3tbmjLkA%2Br=Asw@mail.gmail.com> <4F804679.2040803@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <CADLo83-FabXgEBxOAxuHGYDCoz6hv7vA5J9qKhVhg%2B5Ausogow@mail.gmail.com> <4F80D4F9.9020207@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <4F836A65.7080402@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <FD46D7FF-E4C7-438D-9959-A5ADF4047C0D@mac.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 04/10/12 09:12, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> Hi--
>
> On Apr 9, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Da Rock wrote:
>> To drag this up again, I was thinking about the number of cases I've found like this recently, and I was considering what the most appropriate action to take here. This one is obviously controversial, and I didn't have the time to do more or test further, but for future reference I'd like some clarification.
>>
>> I'd say a PR is not really appropriate as a response to an issue such as this (unless the maintainer offers no response at all), but should I create a patch to assist the maintainer? Or is that over doing it?
>>
>> If I were to create a patch, what is the correct (usable) procedure? And for something like this it would be an adjustment to BUILD_DEPENDS, correct?
> If you think there is a missing dependency, then doing send-pr with the fix is a reasonable procedure.

I was only thinking the maintainer might want to know and fix and test 
themselves before commit. I know I would as a maintainer.

> However, you might first want to look into what was different in your case from pointyhat, since the builds of samba-3.x worked fine:
>
>    http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-9-latest-logs/samba34-3.4.14.log
>    http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-9-latest-logs/samba35-3.5.11.log
>    http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-9-latest-logs/samba36-3.6.3.log

Hmmm. You're right.

I can narrow it down to the SWAT or AIO option (most likely given the 
obvious network connection there), but it could be ADS, ACL, or FAM; but 
I doubt that very much. You have me intrigued now, I have to look into 
it to know :)

So what should the patch look like? Am I correct in my understanding of 
the BUILD_DEPENDS, or have I chased a goose on that one?



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F837E27.8070503>