[PC-BSD Pbi-dev] qBittorrent v1.3.1 PBI Posting
ahopstetter at gmail.com
Tue Feb 3 18:30:48 PST 2009
Kris Moore wrote:
> Adam Hopstetter wrote:
>> Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
>>> On Mon, 02 Feb 2009 14:45:29 -0500
>>> Adam Hopstetter <ahopstetter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Now as far as the ports go .... I'm in full agreement!
>>>> However, I have not been able to successfully get in touch with the
>>>> port maintainers. There are two ports in question
>>>> net-p2p/rblibtorrent/ and net-p2p/qbittorrent/. Unfortunately I'm
>>>> starting to feel as if they really aren't being maintained .... it's
>>>> been over 9 months since the last update for these 2 ports. (While
>>>> the developers have been updating the source constantly throughout
>>> Please fill a PR with the update in question; if the maintainers don't
>>> respond in a timely manner it will be committed via maintainer timeout.
>>> Please drop linimon at freebsd.org an email describing your efforts to
>>> contact the maintainers, update the port, etc. He's the one from
>>> portmngr@ that handles this king of issues.
>>> Thank you,
>> Been doing research on this issue as it relates to the
>> qbittorrent and rblibtorrent ports and have encountered a few
>> potential hangups.
>> First of all, please forgive me for being a "newbie" at
>> interacting with the FreeBSD/PC-BSD dev groups (not a newbie at c/c++
>> ;) )... I've simply never have participated till now. That said,
>> I've taken much from our beloved FreeBSD open-OS and now want to give
>> back and absolutely love what PC-BSD is aimed at accomplishing.
>> Now ... all that said ... the last thing I want to do is waste
>> anyones time (especially yours) ... so please, would everyone bear
>> with a probably too-long message here and give me insight as to how I
>> should proceed!
>> First to address Ion-Mihai ... I received your mail regarding
>> submiting an e-mail to linimon at freebsd.org. Appreciate it!
>> However, sorry "newbie" here ... PR = "Patch Request" ??? If
>> So (or whatever you mean) ... is there some official document I can
>> obtain or format I'm to follow???
>> Further, apparently, my old e-mail provider was having issues
>> when I attempted to contact the port maintainers previously (found
>> this out by other known contacts not receiving my e-mails .... now
>> I'm solid on GMAIL ... that said ... I'm copying the port maintainers
>> on this e-mail ... and for their benefit this e-mail regards
>> upgrading the net-p2p/qbittorrent port to the latest v1.3.1 release).
>> Now to the business of the ports themselves ... after
>> researching ... there appear to be 3 ports that rely on
>> net-p2p/rblibtorrent ... net-p2p/hrktorrent, net-p2p/sharktorrent and
>> net-p2p/qbittorrent. Apparrently if we upgrade rblibtorrent to
>> version 0.14.1 (required for the new qbittorrent 1.3.1) it will
>> definately break sharktorrent and possibly break hrktorrent (at least
>> in my testing).
>> -- sharktorrent -- Definately breaks with
>> '/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: sharktorrent: Undefined symbol
>> -- hrktorrent - Appears to function properly (but appearances
>> are deceiving) ... but during the make process for core.cpp ... it
>> complains with the following messages ...
>> core.cpp: In member function 'int CCore::Run()':
>> core.cpp:246: warning: '__comp_ctor ' is deprecated
>> (declared at /usr/local/include/libtorrent/torrent_info.hpp:132)
>> core.cpp:253: warning: 'add_torrent' is deprecated
>> (declared at /usr/local/include/libtorrent/session.hpp:202)
>> But again, ... seems to function probably ... in
>> my testing of it's "finite features".
>> -- qbittorrent (of course works flawlessly) :)
>> Now, worthy of noting .... sharktorrent has extremely
>> outdated source ... still at 0.1.8.2-BETA ... and hasn't been worked
>> on since July 2007. Even worse the interface it provides is WEAK (in
>> my humble opinion). Is such old beta??? source code worth maintaining
>> hrktorrent (a console based torrent client) is being
>> actively updated however and deserves attention as many MAY seek to
>> wrap web-based (or other) interfaces around it for any number of
>> centralized torrent server apps. Which (of course) qbittorrent
>> already has a nice web-based centralized torrent server built-in. But
>> is Nice thought anyway!
>> Finally, I've noticed ... that there is a
>> net-p2p/rblibtorrent-devel/ port, which is a slightly higher version
>> than rblibtorrent-0.13 currently in the ports.
>> Now to my question ... Would it be possible to upgrade
>> rblibtorrent-devel to version 0.14.1 and making qbittorrent rely
>> depend on this ??? (thus not breaking hrktorrent or sharktorrent!!!).
>> Problems I can foresee there (of course) is that if one were to
>> attempt to install hrktorrent/sharktorrent and qbittorrent ... they
>> would most certainly experience library/linking issues! (or port
>> build issues). But this would make the qbittorrent port upgradable.
>> So I'm almost certain these are the reasons the ports have
>> not been updated as of yet ... even though I've yet to speak with the
>> maintainers. Unfortunately though ... it seems that qbittorrent is
>> the only active open-sourced project fully leveraging the updates to
>> rblibtorrent (and in FreeBSD is suffering at the expense of shark/hrk).
>> Lastly ... and thanks for hanging in there with me All ...
>> one of the advantages of the PC-BSD PBI installation structure is
>> that conflicting libraries can be installed in a isolated fashion (an
>> isolated program container/bucket if you will) which eliminate
>> run-time library/linking issues ... but of course not building ones.
>> So (now that the background/research has been stated) ...
>> the directed questions/comments ...
>> Kris ... if I'm unable to get these ports updated ...
>> are there exceptions in the pcbsd pbi-dev for situations like these???
> Our prefered method of PBI building is to "piggyback" off the ports
> tree, so that when the associated port gets updated, the PBI will be
> rebuilt automatically as well for both 32bit / 64bit.
> That being said, if there is some reason that wont work, like a PBI
> for a program not in ports, or the port isn't being maintained, we can
> make an exception and approve the 3rd party PBI manually. Its just
> more a pain for you in the long run, since you'll need to update the
> PBI manually, as opposed to our server doing all the grunt-work from
> the port for you.
Hi & thanks for the reply ... suppose we will wait a little bit to
hear from the port maintainers and/or ion-mihia regarding this issue.
Off topic ... but ... in the mean time would there by any ports I
could get my feet wet with pbibuilder ? ... was thinking of possibly the
net/vnc. Is a GUI program with a simplistic port and is a suitable
alternative to the built-in KDE Remote Desktop Client (and quite
possibly some users may be searching for "vnc" on pbidir, unaware of
KDE-RDC). Please let me know what ya think (or if I should re-post in
pbidir ... new thread).
More information about the Pbi-dev