From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 25 20:51:55 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AF80659 for ; Sun, 25 May 2014 20:51:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailhost.netlab.sk (mailhost.netlab.sk [84.245.65.10]) (using SSLv3 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5ABF20EA for ; Sun, 25 May 2014 20:51:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from zeta.dino.sk (fw1.dino.sk [84.245.95.252]) (AUTH: LOGIN milan) by mailhost.netlab.sk with ESMTPA; Sun, 25 May 2014 22:51:55 +0200 id 005080AF.538257EB.00015AA1 Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 22:51:51 +0200 From: Milan Obuch To: Kurt Jaeger Subject: Re: mail/courier build failures on newer FreeBSD versions Message-ID: <20140525225151.227ea602@zeta.dino.sk> In-Reply-To: <20140525204314.GR2341@home.opsec.eu> References: <20140525213854.0d952d1d@zeta.dino.sk> <20140525201008.GQ2341@home.opsec.eu> <20140525222726.47261ae9@zeta.dino.sk> <20140525204314.GR2341@home.opsec.eu> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.3 (GTK+ 2.24.22; i386-portbld-freebsd10.0) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 20:51:55 -0000 On Sun, 25 May 2014 22:43:14 +0200 Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi! > > > > > In the mean time, could someone review PR ports/190209 which > > > > addresses this issue > > > > (http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=190209)? It is > > > > really simple and should solve package builder failures for > > > > [REL - 10i386-default], [REL - 10amd64-default], [REL - > > > > 10i386-quarterly], [REL - 10amd64-quarterly], [REL - > > > > head-i386-default] and [REL - head-amd64-default]. > > > > > > The commit system rejects ports which are still unstaged, so we > > > we need a patch which also addresses staging. > > > > As far as I understand, you are the maintainer ? > > > Yes, I just use unique addresses for mailing lists... > > > > Patch for stage is in works, but as mail/courier is a complex port, > > I need to investigate various cases. Currently I work on pkg-plist, > > and some questions will come, I am sure. > > Do you also plan to upgrade to 0.73. ? With 0.65 we're badly behind > the times, aren't we ? > Yes, this upgrade is long due, but it has some issues too. So I would like to work on it in a step by step manner... it looks like staging is actually prerequisite now :( > > I just do not like to submit uncomplete work, and patch mentioned > > solves the other issue, and being simple... > > Well, I have a patch for eclipse-devel, which is not accepted, > because it's not staged either. So I'm in the same situation 8-} > It's a pity... anyway, I am working on it, however slowly... Milan