On Apr 8, 2014, at 21:38, Eric A. Borisch wrote:
> A related item that bubbled on the mailing list for a while would be to get
> the http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/CommitTicketUpdater configured for MP. This
> would let us refer to and take actions on ("ref #1234" or "closes #5432")
> tickets i
A related item that bubbled on the mailing list for a while would be to get
the http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/CommitTicketUpdater configured for MP.
This would let us refer to and take actions on ("ref #1234" or "closes
#5432") tickets in commit messages, which ties a nice bow around commits
tied t
Hi Michael,
On Apr 7, 2014, at 2:13 PM, Michael Klein
wrote:
> as I have currently no access to an Intel Mac and therefore stuck with 10.5,
> I'd like to give up maintainership of the ports below:
>
> py-lightblue (open tickets: 36371, 38666)
> linuxdoc-tools (42988)
> AppKiDo (36865)
I hav
Hi,
Is it possible to wildcard the files in a _select port, so that all
the files that match the wildcard are installed when a version is
selected ? In particular with
https://trac.macports.org/browser/users/mojca/ports/sysutils/root_select
we would like some way to just have root_select ins
Well I really think this needs to be documented more clearly. The examples
in the guide do not mention it is a regex rather than the exact name of a
port, and that is the only documentation I have seen on it.
David
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> On Apr 7, 2014, at 17:14
On 2014-4-8 22:58 , Clemens Lang wrote:
> Hey,
>
>> The giving up isn't usually a problem because it only does that if the
>> archive is not available on packages.macports.org.
>
> That might be the case for you, since you're close to packages.macports.org,
> but it isn't necessarily true for peo
SO unless MacPorts is planning on switch its 10.8 builds to by default use
libc++, this doesn't help much with getting the port working on 10.8
At this time, we believe it is best to leave 10.8 and earlier on libstdc++, and
use libc++ on 10.9 and later. There is a FAQ entry…
Yes of course.
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:46, Chris Jones wrote:
> On 08/04/14 13:41, Joshua Root wrote:
>> On 2014-4-8 22:35 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>> On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
>>>
>> PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
>> sooner or later. But it wo
I'll see if I can manage to build the whole ROOT 6 with -stdlib=libc++
(without referencing any other piece from MacPorts). But that probably
means that I shouldn't use OpenGL from the system, right?
Don't forget, you will also need to rebuild each and every port that
root uses, that uses a c
Hey,
> The giving up isn't usually a problem because it only does that if the
> archive is not available on packages.macports.org.
That might be the case for you, since you're close to packages.macports.org,
but it isn't necessarily true for people in Europe like me.
> sudo port archivefetch out
On 08/04/14 13:52, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
Thats OK for a standalone build, but the whole point of having root in
macports is to pick up various dependencies from Macports. This trick would
then only work if the user built all of these dependenci
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
> On 2014-4-8 22:48 , Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>> I'll see if I can manage to build the whole ROOT 6 with -stdlib=libc++
>> (without referencing any other piece from MacPorts). But that probably
>> means that I shouldn't use OpenGL from the system, ri
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
>
> Thats OK for a standalone build, but the whole point of having root in
> macports is to pick up various dependencies from Macports. This trick would
> then only work if the user built all of these dependencies against libc++ as
> well. SO unles
On 2014-4-8 22:48 , Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> I'll see if I can manage to build the whole ROOT 6 with -stdlib=libc++
> (without referencing any other piece from MacPorts). But that probably
> means that I shouldn't use OpenGL from the system, right?
>
>> otool -L /System/Library/Frameworks/OpenGL.fr
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
> On 2014-4-8 22:35 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
>>
> PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
> sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
>>>
On 2014-4-8 22:37 , Clemens Lang wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Unfortunately there's no easy way to say "fetch the archives for the
>> ports that have them, and the distfiles for those that don't."
>
> You can use
> $> sudo port -bp archivefetch $portlist
> to get all the binary archives available and ignor
On 08/04/14 13:41, Joshua Root wrote:
On 2014-4-8 22:35 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
worked on 10.9.
As a general
On 2014-4-8 22:35 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
>
PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
worked on 10.9.
>>
>> As a general point, I agree,
On 08/04/14 13:35, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
worked on 10.9.
As a general point, I agree, only OSX10.9 has full c
Hi,
> Unfortunately there's no easy way to say "fetch the archives for the
> ports that have them, and the distfiles for those that don't."
You can use
$> sudo port -bp archivefetch $portlist
to get all the binary archives available and ignore those that aren't.
This is one of the few places whe
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
>>> PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
>>> sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
>>> worked on 10.9.
>
> As a general point, I agree, only OSX10.9 has full c++11 support. However,
> u
PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
worked on 10.9.
As a general point, I agree, only OSX10.9 has full c++11 support.
However, upstream claim to be targeting 10.8 and 10.9, so I would hope
I didn't say that libc++ doesn't work – I didn't try that at all (I'm
not even sure I know how to do it; maybe I could create a new macports
installation with instructions posted by Jeremy a while ago). I just
said that using clang-3.4 doesn't help as that doesn't support all
c++11 features need
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:13, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> The point is you wouldn’t be mixing C++ runtimes. On 10.8 and earlier, the
>> C++ runtime is libstdc++, just as gcc48’s is. They’re different versions of
>> libstdc++, but sometimes they
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> The point is you wouldn’t be mixing C++ runtimes. On 10.8 and earlier, the
> C++ runtime is libstdc++, just as gcc48’s is. They’re different versions of
> libstdc++, but sometimes they’re similar enough to still work together.
Does that mea
On Apr 8, 2014, at 03:12, Chris Jones wrote:
>>> Indeed. They aren't quite the same thing though in the end, as on OSX 10.8
>>> and newer it supports c++11, whereas on 10.7 it doesn't, because of the
>>> underlying system support. So the same clang34 compiler now builds root6
>>> fine on OSX10
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
> On 08/04/14 11:26, Joshua Root wrote:
>> On 2014-4-8 20:02 , Chris Jones wrote:
>>>
You can actually use libc++ all the way back to 10.6 (with the libcxx
port). The trick is that if you build root against libc++, then every
librar
On 08/04/14 11:26, Joshua Root wrote:
On 2014-4-8 20:02 , Chris Jones wrote:
You can actually use libc++ all the way back to 10.6 (with the libcxx
port). The trick is that if you build root against libc++, then every
library it uses via a C++ API must also be built against libc++, and
likewise
On 2014-4-8 20:02 , Chris Jones wrote:
>
>> You can actually use libc++ all the way back to 10.6 (with the libcxx
>> port). The trick is that if you build root against libc++, then every
>> library it uses via a C++ API must also be built against libc++, and
>> likewise for every library that uses
> You can actually use libc++ all the way back to 10.6 (with the libcxx
> port). The trick is that if you build root against libc++, then every
> library it uses via a C++ API must also be built against libc++, and
> likewise for every library that uses it via a C++ API.
Yes, but that doesn't he
On 2014-4-8 18:06 , Chris Jones wrote:
> On 08/04/14 01:48, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 7, 2014, at 18:09, Christopher Jones wrote:
>>
>>> p.s. whats the most recent MacPorts clang compiler you can install on
>>> OSX10.7 ?
>>
>> clang 3.4 and earlier should build fine on 10.7.
>
> Indeed. The
Hi,
On 08/04/14 10:14, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
Indeed. They aren't quite the same thing though in the end, as on OSX
10.8 and newer it supports c++11, whereas on 10.7 it doesn't, because of the
underlying system support. So the same clang34 co
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
>
>>> Indeed. They aren't quite the same thing though in the end, as on OSX
>>> 10.8 and newer it supports c++11, whereas on 10.7 it doesn't, because of the
>>> underlying system support. So the same clang34 compiler now builds root6
>>> fine on O
Indeed. They aren't quite the same thing though in the end, as on OSX 10.8 and
newer it supports c++11, whereas on 10.7 it doesn't, because of the underlying
system support. So the same clang34 compiler now builds root6 fine on OSX10.9,
but fails on 10.7.
My recollection of all the previous
On Apr 8, 2014, at 03:06, Chris Jones wrote:
> On 08/04/14 01:48, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 7, 2014, at 18:09, Christopher Jones wrote:
>>
>>> p.s. whats the most recent MacPorts clang compiler you can install on
>>> OSX10.7 ?
>>
>> clang 3.4 and earlier should build fine on 10.7.
>
On 08/04/14 01:48, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Apr 7, 2014, at 18:09, Christopher Jones wrote:
p.s. whats the most recent MacPorts clang compiler you can install on OSX10.7 ?
clang 3.4 and earlier should build fine on 10.7.
Indeed. They aren't quite the same thing though in the end, as on OSX
36 matches
Mail list logo
