Re: [MacPorts] #14342: python25 drops modules by default, but python25 doesn't (js)
On 8/03/2008, at 8:06 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 00:22:42 +0900 From: js [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [MacPorts] #14342: python25 drops modules by default,but python25 doesn't To: Markus Weissmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: MacPorts Developers macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org Apparently more people like this change. I'll get back to trac ticket and start working on this. I'm not sure I particularly like this proposed change. As I understand it, you explicitly want to *downgrade* the functionality of python24 to make it more like python25, by for example, removing hashlib and zlib. I cannot understand the logic of this. This can only conceivably break python24 installations. Even if all existing py-* ports are altered to bring in extra required dependencies, peoples (and institutions) own proprietary code that previously assumed the existence of these standard libraries will break. And that will annoy them greatly. Why are you proposing to explicitly *downgrade* python24, instead of *upgrading* python25? I also do not buy into the inference that's been made in this thread in the past that more people must be using python25 than python24. For institutions with large proprietary codebases (eg financial companies), shifting python versions *is* a costly business that is not worth the often negligible benefit. I would suggest that many are still running more code off 2.4 than 2.5 (companies I have been involved with have moved from 1.5-20-2.2-2.4-2.6). I'm not suggesting many such companies run code on OSX, but mine certainly is. derek. ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
Rails 2.0 port ?
Dear MacPorts developers: Does anyone know if (or when) Ruby on Rails 2.0 will be available in MacPorts ? Thanks for the info. Keep up the wonderful work! Yann. ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
Re: livecheck not finding latest version
Simon Ruderich wrote:
I found another small problem with the livecheck. I have a port in my local
repository which uses ${name}-${version} as livecheck.version. With the
current version it gives me the following. First it says it matched and then
it doesn't.
I can also reproduce the issue with e.g. enblend from the macports port
tree.
[...]
I looked into this and the problem is that [rpm-vercomp $upver
$updated_version] returns -1 if $updated_version is 0 and $upver is something
like fdm-1.5 which is true before any version is found. It works fine for
$upvar 1.5.
Hm, you are right. rpm-vercomp just skips any alphabetic characters at
the begin of the string if they appear in both versions.
The following patch fixes the problem for me but I'm not sure if it causes any
other problems. Please check if it works fine.
--- src/port1.0/portlivecheck.tcl (revision 34864)
+++ src/port1.0/portlivecheck.tcl (working copy)
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@
while {[gets $chan line] = 0} {
if {[regexp $the_re $line matched upver]} {
set foundmatch 1
-if {[rpm-vercomp $upver $updated_version] 0} {
+if {[rpm-vercomp $upver $updated_version] 0 ||
$updated_version == 0} {
set updated_version $upver
}
ui_debug The regex matched \$matched\,
extracted \$upver\
I committed a similar fix in r34874.
Rainer
___
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
Maintainer away tracking
Hi, It happens from time to time that some maintainer is busy with work or school, has to move, is on vacation or attends some other event which prevents him from taking action on new tickets. So I want to setup a new wiki page (like MaintainerAway) where anybody can add himself with a small explanation how long he is going to be away and maybe also why. If someone adds himself onto this wiki page all of his/her ports will be treated like if they have openmaintainer on them, so anybody can commit updates without explicit permission. This should be taken like a temporarily openmaintainer status. Or the maintainer could also add someone else who should take care of his/her ports for this time. The main advantage would be that the 72h delay does not have to pass as the maintainer will not answer anyway. The wiki page could look like this (with a proper table, of course): [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 2008-04-01 to 2008-04-10 | On vacation, please ask foobar@ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 2008-03-14 to 2008-04-01 | Exams Of course this would also need to be documented in our guide. Any comments appreciated. Do you think this would be an improvement to our infrastructure? Rainer PS: I am writing to both lists as I think this is also an interesting topic for our users. ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
Re: livecheck not finding latest version
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 04:31:56AM +0100, Rainer Müller wrote:
Anders F Björklund wrote:
That's probably because livecheck doesn't check to see if the
new version is actually *newer*, it only checks if it changed...
if {$updated_version != ${livecheck.version}} {
set updated 1
} else {
set updated 0
}
We could also use rpm-vercomp here, but you would never notice if the
site being checked is not updated anymore (happens e.g. with freshmeat).
So if the port version is newer than the version livecheck finds, we
should at least issue a warning that livecheck needs to be tweaked.
Rainer
Hi,
I found another small problem with the livecheck. I have a port in my local
repository which uses ${name}-${version} as livecheck.version. With the
current version it gives me the following. First it says it matched and then
it doesn't.
DEBUG: The regex matched titlefdm fdm-1.5 released (Tue, 04 Mar 2008
08:33:08 GMT)/title, extracted fdm-1.5
DEBUG: The regex matched titlefdm fdm-1.4 released (Mon, 01 Oct 2007
12:45:11 GMT)/title, extracted fdm-1.4
DEBUG: The regex matched titlefdm fdm-1.3 released (Mon, 30 Jul 2007
17:38:15 GMT)/title, extracted fdm-1.3
DEBUG: The regex matched titlefdm fdm-1.2 released (Wed, 27 Jun 2007
08:16:56 GMT)/title, extracted fdm-1.2
DEBUG: The regex matched titlefdm fdm-1.1 released (Fri, 06 Apr 2007
13:40:32 GMT)/title, extracted fdm-1.1
DEBUG: The regex matched titlefdm fdm-1.0 released (Tue, 27 Feb 2007
23:45:33 GMT)/title, extracted fdm-1.0
DEBUG: The regex matched titlefdm fdm-0.9 released (Thu, 25 Jan 2007
16:49:31 GMT)/title, extracted fdm-0.9
DEBUG: The regex matched titlefdm fdm-0.8 released (Tue, 09 Jan 2007
16:53:07 GMT)/title, extracted fdm-0.8
DEBUG: The regex matched titlefdm fdm-0.7 released (Tue, 12 Dec 2006
17:59:35 GMT)/title, extracted fdm-0.7
DEBUG: The regex matched titlefdm fdm-0.6 released (Mon, 04 Dec 2006
14:11:36 GMT)/title, extracted fdm-0.6
Error: cannot check if fdm was updated (regex didn't match)
I looked into this and the problem is that [rpm-vercomp $upver
$updated_version] returns -1 if $updated_version is 0 and $upver is something
like fdm-1.5 which is true before any version is found. It works fine for
$upvar 1.5.
The following patch fixes the problem for me but I'm not sure if it causes any
other problems. Please check if it works fine.
--- src/port1.0/portlivecheck.tcl (revision 34864)
+++ src/port1.0/portlivecheck.tcl (working copy)
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@
while {[gets $chan line] = 0} {
if {[regexp $the_re $line matched upver]} {
set foundmatch 1
-if {[rpm-vercomp $upver $updated_version] 0} {
+if {[rpm-vercomp $upver $updated_version] 0 ||
$updated_version == 0} {
set updated_version $upver
}
ui_debug The regex matched \$matched\,
extracted \$upver\
Thanks,
Simon
--
+ privacy is necessary
+ using http://gnupg.org
+ public key id: 0x6115F804EFB33229
pgpYJ5wYGAwsg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
