Bug 237374 - [NEW PORT] textproc/kibana7
Summary: [NEW PORT] textproc/kibana7
Status: Open
Alias: None
Product: Ports & Packages
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Individual Port(s) (show other bugs)
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any Any
: --- Affects Only Me
Assignee: freebsd-ports-bugs mailing list
Keywords: feature, needs-patch
Depends on:
Reported: 2019-04-19 01:13 UTC by rlwestlund
Modified: 2019-10-06 10:12 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description rlwestlund 2019-04-19 01:13:40 UTC
See https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237372 for background; Kibana 7 is out now and the kibana6 port won't work with elasticsearch7.

Unfortunately I couldn't manage to get Kibana7 working. I got this error when running it:

{"type":"log","@timestamp":"2019-04-18T03:27:59Z","tags":["fatal","root"],"pid":23386,"message":"{ ExtractError: Failed to extract the browser archive\n    at err (/usr/local/www/kibana7/node_modules/x-pack/plugins/reporting/server/browsers/extract/unzip.js:14:23)\n    at /usr/local/www/kibana7/node_modules/extract-zip/index.js:20:23\n    at /usr/local/www/kibana7/node_modules/extract-zip/node_modules/yauzl/index.js:29:21\n    at FSReqCallback.args [as oncomplete] (fs.js:145:20)\n  name: 'ExtractError',\n  cause:\n   { [Error: ENOENT: no such file or directory, open '/usr/local/www/kibana7/node_modules/x-pack/plugins/reporting/.chromium/chromium-04c5a83-darwin.zip']\n     errno: -2,\n     code: 'ENOENT',\n     syscall: 'open',\n     path:\n      '/usr/local/www/kibana7/node_modules/x-pack/plugins/reporting/.chromium/chromium-04c5a83-darwin.zip' } }"}

They now have separated linux and darwin builds so I don't know why it's trying to find a darwin zip in there... Hoping someone more knowledgeable about Kibana/Node/Javascript knows something about this.
Comment 1 rlwestlund 2019-04-21 12:59:15 UTC
Hi, I see you chaged the severity down to Affects Only Me... I set it to Affects Some People because I figured there must be other people that could use this, it's not a fluke bug or something. Is that field supposed to be a measure of only people that we *know* have been affected by it? Makes more sense in retrospect... I thought it was weird that we were supposed to try to estimate.
Comment 2 Kubilay Kocak freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2019-04-21 14:42:06 UTC
(In reply to rlwestlund from comment #1)

The best way to describe it is a 'scope of the issue', not a measure of usefulness or value. Technically its the 'Severity' field, which technically only applies to 'bugs', say, as opposed to feature requests. 

If you treat a 'new port' as a 'bug' (a proposed change), the only person affected is the reporter, or the maintainer (also usually the reporter)
Comment 3 mzs_47 2019-10-06 10:12:51 UTC
Hi, Thanks to @rlwestlund(and others) for the effort, I am planning to use this or ELK 6 in production with CBSD.
A quick search and I came across this below issue on Github, not sure whether this is related.


On similar note, I guess sysutils/logstash7 is not required(for EL7) and sysutils/logstash6 is compatible.