FreeBSD Port: amule-10275
Paolo Bormida
Paolo Bormida
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Paolo Bormida <pbor...@gmail.com>
Date: 2010/9/22
Subject: Question about amule port version
To: ganael.l...@martymac.org
Sorry to bother you, but I think I understood the problem I described in
this post to the freebsd forums:
http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=17961
Does amule2 port switched from a stable 2.2.5 release to a daily snapshot?
Does the sparc64 port still has the daily snapshot instad of the more
up-to-date 2.2.6_4 available?
If this is correct I will tag my post as solved describing this: I see the
new port has improved on the knobs available to build it, and that is
***very*** good
Thanx
-----------------------
Paolo Bormida
Giaveno - Torino
-----------------------
Italy
-----------------------
--
-----------------------
Paolo Bormida
Giaveno - Torino
-----------------------
Italy
-----------------------
_______________________________________________
freebs...@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-port...@freebsd.org"
Ganael LAPLANCHE
> To: ganael.l...@martymac.org
Hi Paolo,
(this is a re-post of my previous, private answer)
I am sorry but I am no more the maintainer of aMule. You should get in touch
with swe...@gmail.com, who is the new maintainer.
> Sorry to bother you, but I think I understood the problem I described
> in this post to the freebsd forums:
>
> http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=17961
>
> Does amule2 port switched from a stable 2.2.5 release to a daily snapshot?
> Does the sparc64 port still has the daily snapshot instad of the more
> up-to-date 2.2.6_4 available?
You can find the history of the changes made to this port on Freshports here :
http://www.freshports.org/net-p2p/amule2
Yes, the ports seems to have switched to using a code snapshot on Aug, 13 2010
with version r.10266, leaving version 2.2.6 behind.
Best regards,
Ganael LAPLANCHE
ganael.l...@martymac.org
http://www.martymac.org | http://contribs.martymac.org
Anonymous
> Does amule2 port switched from a stable 2.2.5 release to a daily
> snapshot?
Yes, snapshots are gonna be used unless there are more frequent releases
upstream. You can find the history of changes on freshports.
http://www.freshports.org/net-p2p/amule2
The package name also switched from `aMule' to `amule' in order to
remove silly vendor capitalization and match port *directory* name.
Besides, I plan to rename the port to plain `amule' with the next update
in order to remove last bit of confusion, i.e. `2' version suffix in
port directory name and in LATEST_LINK.
> Does the sparc64 port still has the daily snapshot instead of the more
> up-to-date 2.2.6_4 available?
aMule-10266.tbz and amule-10275.tbz are newer than aMule-2.2.6_4.tbz
unless I'm missing smth.
$ pkg_version
aMule <
$ portmaster -L
===>>> aMule-2.2.6_4
===>>> New version available: amule-10275
I can only find aMule-10266.tbz for sparc64 for 8-stable, though.
Anonymous
> Besides, I plan to rename the port to plain `amule' with the next update
> in order to remove last bit of confusion, i.e. `2' version suffix in
> port directory name and in LATEST_LINK.
Pass me pointyhat for not doing it when the port switched to use snapshots.
Paolo Bormida
are great as well, but isn't risky to use snapshots for a port? Are there
any policies about what to base a port upon?
And yes, you are correct about the availability of the sparc64 packages.
Can the new knobs be used to do a gui-less build of amule?
Thanx
Paolo
2010/9/22 Anonymous <swe...@gmail.com>
> Paolo Bormida <pbor...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Does amule2 port switched from a stable 2.2.5 release to a daily
> > snapshot?
>
> Yes, snapshots are gonna be used unless there are more frequent releases
> upstream. You can find the history of changes on freshports.
>
> http://www.freshports.org/net-p2p/amule2
>
> The package name also switched from `aMule' to `amule' in order to
> remove silly vendor capitalization and match port *directory* name.
>
> Besides, I plan to rename the port to plain `amule' with the next update
> in order to remove last bit of confusion, i.e. `2' version suffix in
> port directory name and in LATEST_LINK.
>
> > Does the sparc64 port still has the daily snapshot instead of the more
> > up-to-date 2.2.6_4 available?
>
> aMule-10266.tbz and amule-10275.tbz are newer than aMule-2.2.6_4.tbz
> unless I'm missing smth.
>
> $ pkg_version
> aMule <
> $ portmaster -L
> ===>>> aMule-2.2.6_4
> ===>>> New version available: amule-10275
>
> I can only find aMule-10266.tbz for sparc64 for 8-stable, though.
>
--
-----------------------
Paolo Bormida
Giaveno - Torino
-----------------------
Italy
-----------------------
Anonymous
> Can the new knobs be used to do a gui-less build of amule?
No, even without --disable-monolithic amule would still require WX.
$ readelf -d $(which amulecmd) | fgrep wx
0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libwx_baseu_net-2.8.so.0]
0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libwx_baseu-2.8.so.0]
$ nm -D $(which amulecmd) | sed -n '/_/d; /wx/p'
000000000045a6d8 B wxConvFileName
000000000045a260 B wxConvLocal
000000000045a6c0 B wxConvUTF8
000000000045a1c0 B wxEmptyString
And I don't think we have a WX package that ships only libs without X11
dependency.
Anonymous
> Paolo Bormida <pbor...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Can the new knobs be used to do a gui-less build of amule?
>
> No, even without --disable-monolithic amule would still require WX.
^^^
Typo: without -> with.
Perhaps, I misinterpreted your question and you just don't want to build
`amule' while still having WX dependency. It's easy to provide a knob
for monolithic. Do you need it?
Paolo Bormida
The functions you see in amulecmd should be in wxbase and wx is not a
problem.
My goal is not to build the gui version, just amuled and amulecmd, and I
think this can be done in amule calling configure like described in this
howto http://wiki.amule.org/index.php/HowTo_Compile_aMuled
So, I think a knob for passing to configure those flags would do the job.
This way X11 should not be needed.
Paolo
2010/9/22 Anonymous <swe...@gmail.com>
> Anonymous <swe...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Paolo Bormida <pbor...@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> Can the new knobs be used to do a gui-less build of amule?
> >
> > No, even without --disable-monolithic amule would still require WX.
> ^^^
> Typo: without -> with.
>
> Perhaps, I misinterpreted your question and you just don't want to build
> `amule' while still having WX dependency. It's easy to provide a knob
> for monolithic. Do you need it?
>
--
-----------------------
Paolo Bormida
Giaveno - Torino
-----------------------
Italy
-----------------------
Paolo Bormida
on a server, whether it be a i386/amd64 or a sparc64 or other architectures
that does not have a graphic card on the server (an headless machine) .
In this case would be useless to do a very long build of X11 and amule gui,
along with amuled+amulecmd, then never use the X part.
Paolo
2010/9/22 Paolo Bormida <pbor...@gmail.com>
Anonymous
> My goal is not to build the gui version, just amuled and amulecmd,
> and I think this can be done in amule calling configure like
> described in this howto http://wiki.amule.org/index.php/
> HowTo_Compile_aMuled
Have you looked at x11-toolkits/wxgtk28 port? You'd need to split it
into more slave ports in order to install wx_base separately.
Well, one can build wxgtk28 port as part of amule build an then link it
statically but I'd rather not complicate already not very trivial port.
Paolo Bormida
split it. Building it as part of amule would be better.
But I am not here to ask you to do that, just suggesting what might be
useful to people wishing to use amule on servers. On the other hand it is
true that compiling with X11 and not to use it isnt dangerous nor
exceedingly troublesome, just boring and a waste of disk space (and might
mess packages db a little).
Doing this might be a nice feature of the port for future releases. Or maybe
making another port, like "amuled" or amule-core" that builds just wxbase
and amuled+amulecmd.
If I ever can afford the time I might try doing that after reading the
porter handbook far more deeply that what I have done up to now...
Thanx for your time.
Paolo
2010/9/22 Anonymous <swe...@gmail.com>
> Paolo Bormida <pbor...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > My goal is not to build the gui version, just amuled and amulecmd,
> > and I think this can be done in amule calling configure like
> > described in this howto http://wiki.amule.org/index.php/
> > HowTo_Compile_aMuled
>
> Have you looked at x11-toolkits/wxgtk28 port? You'd need to split it
> into more slave ports in order to install wx_base separately.
>
> Well, one can build wxgtk28 port as part of amule build an then link it
> statically but I'd rather not complicate already not very trivial port.
>
--
-----------------------
Paolo Bormida
Giaveno - Torino
-----------------------
Italy
-----------------------