From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 15 14:32:04 2011 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 8CC351065672; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:32:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sahil@tandon.net) Received: from spartan.hamla.org (spartan.hamla.org [206.251.255.30]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 360628FC15; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:32:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spartan.hamla.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16CB017088; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 09:32:34 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tandon.net; h= date:date:subject:subject:from:from:x-mailer:message-id :content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:in-reply-to:references:received:received; s=aegis; t=1321367553; bh=vO4qVHt7JEum8Et7ybAK+jo4SG8uqIBJxjtyqzKiRGI=; b= e5mgP7QRnKuk+0Q3qeJETYWaRnPtCJerOSs/ezM5c1NjDMgrsV57o0BKWABtELPg XOFSUVoPpWhTbYmzLvNA2VeHCfe/S2JiVersZX4ObDRgcnID6nou8VB1WcaCH9gS 80seqLfZ4rMBOeUyPy3du9OotvHvUa1HplL3Lhpsdl4= X-Virus-Scanned: by ClamAV at spartan.hamla.org Received: from spartan.hamla.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (spartan.hamla.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10027) with LMTP id H1RJ0yqeSUrM; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 09:32:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from [10.83.137.59] (mobile-166-137-137-074.mycingular.net [166.137.137.74]) by spartan.hamla.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 268E517042; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 09:32:31 -0500 (EST) References: <20111114083713.29fbecda@scorpio> <20111115022430.GA19970@magic.hamla.org> <1321350319.84509.2.camel@hood.oook.cz> In-Reply-To: <1321350319.84509.2.camel@hood.oook.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Message-Id: <2859B9B3-0A75-40FD-B444-8885A6589A37@tandon.net> X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9A405) From: Sahil Tandon Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 09:31:49 -0500 To: "pav@FreeBSD.org" Cc: "swills@FreeBSD.org" , "freebsd@beardz.net" , "eadler@FreeBSD.org" , "freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org" , "gjb@FreeBSD.org" Subject: Re: "postfix-current" broken on amd64 platform X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:32:04 -0000 It was marked broken on a particular architecture, hence the genesis of this= thread. I appreciate that diagnosis is difficult; perhaps Olli's suggestio= n is helpful in isolating the issue. I do not know how else to troubleshoot= since these pointyhat errors are not - AFAIK - reproducible by others, on e= ither i386 or amd64 platforms. On Nov 15, 2011, at 4:45 AM, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > 1) The problem is not amd64 specific >=20 > 2) No point unmarking BROKEN, it currently fails on i386 pointyhat nodes > too >=20 > 3) Diagnosis is hard because the postfix-install shell script prints no > useful progress messages >=20 > Example failure log: > http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-errorlogs/e.8.20111103071512/p= ostfix-current-2.9.20111012,4.log >=20 > Sahil Tandon p=C3=AD=C5=A1e v po 14. 11. 2011 v 21:24 -0500: >> [ pav@ and those who tested mail/postifx-current on amd64 added to Cc: ] >>=20 >> On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 08:37:13 -0500, Jerry wrote: >>=20 >>> The "postfix-current" port is still marked as broken: >>>=20 >>> .if ${ARCH} =3D=3D "amd64" >>> BROKEN=3D fails during installation >>> .endif >>>=20 >>> Since all previous releases of Postfix worked on FreeBSD, and since >>> Postfix is/was developed on FreeBSD, I was wondering what the problem >>> is with this release. Is there a possibility that this phenomena might >>> be rectified in the near future? >>=20 >> Thanks for your report, Jerry. You are correct that FreeBSD is the main >> development platform for Postfix. It seems that pointyhat's amd64 >> machine throws an error during the install phase. Pav noticed this and >> marked the port BROKEN; however, neither I nor a few others I've >> enlisted can reproduce the error. Would you mind removing the >> conditional that marks this port BROKEN, try to build/install in your >> amd64 environment, and report the results?=20 >>=20 >> Pav, if nobody else can reproduce the error seen on pointyhat, can >> portmgr look into whether there is something quirky with the amd64 >> pointyhat machine? >>=20 >=20 > --=20 > --=20 > Pav Lucistnik > > Two sausages are in a frying pan. One says, "Geez, it's hot in here > isn't it?" And the other one says, "Aaaaaah! A talking sausage!"