MacVim?
Today I have installed the macports flavor of vim. It seems fine. Next I tried to install vim-app but port told me that vim-app does not work and I should rather install MacVim. So, I did or rather think I did. When I issue comermacpro:~ comerduncan$ port installed vim MacVim The following ports are currently installed: MacVim @7.4.snapshot72_0+huge (active) vim @7.4.052_0+huge (active) However only vim runs and is in /opt/local/bin. MacVim is not there. So my question is where is it? Name is different than listed by port installed? I tried gvim but nothing is there. Is there a problem with MacVim on Mavericks, which I am running? Thanks for suggestions. Comer ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: MacVim?
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Comer Duncan comer.dun...@gmail.comwrote: Today I have installed the macports flavor of vim. It seems fine. Next I tried to install vim-app but port told me that vim-app does not work and I should rather install MacVim. So, I did or rather think I did. When I issue port contents is helpful here. MacVim is a native app bundle, and it is installed as /Applications/MacPorts/MacVim.app. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: MacVim?
Hi Comer, I think the command line executable you're looking for is `mvim`. `open -a MacVim` might also work, but I'm in front of the stupid work machine so I cannot verify this. Kind Regards, Brian Wisti http://randomgeekery.org On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Comer Duncan comer.dun...@gmail.com wrote: Today I have installed the macports flavor of vim. It seems fine. Next I tried to install vim-app but port told me that vim-app does not work and I should rather install MacVim. So, I did or rather think I did. When I issue comermacpro:~ comerduncan$ port installed vim MacVim The following ports are currently installed: MacVim @7.4.snapshot72_0+huge (active) vim @7.4.052_0+huge (active) However only vim runs and is in /opt/local/bin. MacVim is not there. So my question is where is it? Name is different than listed by port installed? I tried gvim but nothing is there. Is there a problem with MacVim on Mavericks, which I am running? Thanks for suggestions. Comer ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: MacVim?
Brian, Thanks. mvim works as does open -a MacVim. Comer On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Brian Wisti brian.wi...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Comer, I think the command line executable you're looking for is `mvim`. `open -a MacVim` might also work, but I'm in front of the stupid work machine so I cannot verify this. Kind Regards, Brian Wisti http://randomgeekery.org On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Comer Duncan comer.dun...@gmail.com wrote: Today I have installed the macports flavor of vim. It seems fine. Next I tried to install vim-app but port told me that vim-app does not work and I should rather install MacVim. So, I did or rather think I did. When I issue comermacpro:~ comerduncan$ port installed vim MacVim The following ports are currently installed: MacVim @7.4.snapshot72_0+huge (active) vim @7.4.052_0+huge (active) However only vim runs and is in /opt/local/bin. MacVim is not there. So my question is where is it? Name is different than listed by port installed? I tried gvim but nothing is there. Is there a problem with MacVim on Mavericks, which I am running? Thanks for suggestions. Comer ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re-installing a port from source
If I have an installed port and want to force re-installation from source, I
can do it with 'port upgrade -s -f {portname}'. But then all of its
dependencies are also re-installed from source. Why is this? I thought usually
this recursive upgrade has to be forced with --enforce-variants? Is there a
better way to do it?
Davor
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: Re-installing a port from source
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Davor Cubranic cubra...@stat.ubc.cawrote:
If I have an installed port and want to force re-installation from source,
I can do it with 'port upgrade -s -f {portname}'. But then all of its
dependencies are also re-installed from source. Why is this? I thought
usually this recursive upgrade has to be forced with --enforce-variants?
Is there a better way to do it?
upgrade checks if dependencies need to be upgraded as well. these checks
are as subject to -f as the original upgrade is.
Perhaps you want the -n option. (`man port` is a good thing to read
occasionally.)
--
brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: building clang-3.4 on 10.6.8
Remember to Reply All so that the conversation stays on the mailing list. On Jan 13, 2014, at 04:08, René J.V. Bertin wrote: On Sunday January 12 2014 22:48:08 you wrote: sudo port clean clang-3.4 sudo port -s destroot clang-3.4 OK, replacing destroot with the path of my choice I presume? …no, run the commands exactly as I showed. “destroot” is a MacPorts command, just like “install” or “clean”. “destroot” means do everything up to destroot, but do not install. If this fails, you’ll have a main.log file you can attach to a ticket. If it succeeds and you want to replace your existing gcc-4.8-compiled clang-3.4 with this one, you can then: sudo port -f uninstall clang-3.4 sudo port -s install clang-3.4 Is there an advantage to replacing the version built with gcc-mp-4.8 with a gcc-4.2 built version? Such as making future updates easier? I never checked the clang build process in detail, but I presume it does something similar as gcc does, i.e. deliver a final product that has been compiled purely by itself? If your clang-3.4 is working fine compiled with gcc 4.8 then you could leave it. Next time you upgrade the port it will rebuild with the default compiler. I was only trying to get you to rebuild it so that you could get a log file so that you could report the bug to the port’s maintainer so that he could work on fixing it. But since I was able to reproduce the problem on my system I was able to do that part for you. I also see a build failure on Snow Leopard, for which I filed this ticket: https://trac.macports.org/ticket/42108 Maybe this is the same problem you were seeing. That is indeed the problem (as well as the solution) I encountered with gcc-mp-4.8 . Is it possible to disable parallel builds on a port-by-port basis Yes; if parallel building does not work, the maintainer of the port should add the line: use_parallel_build no to the Portfile. Better yet, the bug in the build system should be fixed so that parallel building is possible. (or indeed via the port command, so that the brunt of the build process is done in parallel, and only the failed part in series after relaunching the upgrade/install command ;) ) Yes you can disable parallel building at the command line, e.g.: sudo port install clang-3.4 build.jobs=1 However, parallel building will be disabled not only for clang-3.4 but also any other dependencies that might need to be installed first. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: Re-installing a port from source
I do read it more than occasionally, but it's easy to miss things in the mass
of detail. Besides, it doesn't work:
~$ sudo port -s -f -n upgrade emacs-app
--- Scanning binaries for linking errors: 100.0%
--- No broken files found.
On 2014-01-13, at 12:03 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Davor Cubranic cubra...@stat.ubc.ca wrote:
If I have an installed port and want to force re-installation from source, I
can do it with 'port upgrade -s -f {portname}'. But then all of its
dependencies are also re-installed from source. Why is this? I thought
usually this recursive upgrade has to be forced with --enforce-variants? Is
there a better way to do it?
upgrade checks if dependencies need to be upgraded as well. these checks are
as subject to -f as the original upgrade is.
Perhaps you want the -n option. (`man port` is a good thing to read
occasionally.)
--
brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: Re-installing a port from source
Your flags swapped location:
Originally you had port upgrade -f but now you have port -f upgrade. Switching
back to upgrade -f is likely all that’s wrong here.
sudo port -s -n upgrade -f emacs-app
On Jan 13, 2014, at 16:24, Davor Cubranic cubra...@stat.ubc.ca wrote:
I do read it more than occasionally, but it's easy to miss things in the mass
of detail. Besides, it doesn't work:
~$ sudo port -s -f -n upgrade emacs-app
--- Scanning binaries for linking errors: 100.0%
--- No broken files found.
On 2014-01-13, at 12:03 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Davor Cubranic cubra...@stat.ubc.ca wrote:
If I have an installed port and want to force re-installation from source, I
can do it with 'port upgrade -s -f {portname}'. But then all of its
dependencies are also re-installed from source. Why is this? I thought
usually this recursive upgrade has to be forced with --enforce-variants?
Is there a better way to do it?
upgrade checks if dependencies need to be upgraded as well. these checks are
as subject to -f as the original upgrade is.
Perhaps you want the -n option. (`man port` is a good thing to read
occasionally.)
--
brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: Re-installing a port from source
No, sorry:
$ sudo port -s -n upgrade -f emacs-app
--- Scanning binaries for linking errors: 100.0%
--- No broken files found.
But, using upgrade --force did:
$ sudo port -s -n upgrade --force emacs-app
--- Computing dependencies for emacs-app
--- Fetching distfiles for emacs-app
--- Verifying checksums for emacs-app
--- Extracting emacs-app
In retrospect, I can sort of see this in the man page, but you really have to
know what you're looking for... (Global switches vs. action switches can be a
real pain.) Thanks for setting me on the right path.
Davor
On 2014-01-13, at 1:27 PM, Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
Your flags swapped location:
Originally you had port upgrade -f but now you have port -f upgrade.
Switching back to upgrade -f is likely all that’s wrong here.
sudo port -s -n upgrade -f emacs-app
On Jan 13, 2014, at 16:24, Davor Cubranic cubra...@stat.ubc.ca wrote:
I do read it more than occasionally, but it's easy to miss things in the
mass of detail. Besides, it doesn't work:
~$ sudo port -s -f -n upgrade emacs-app
--- Scanning binaries for linking errors: 100.0%
--- No broken files found.
On 2014-01-13, at 12:03 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Davor Cubranic cubra...@stat.ubc.ca
wrote:
If I have an installed port and want to force re-installation from source,
I can do it with 'port upgrade -s -f {portname}'. But then all of its
dependencies are also re-installed from source. Why is this? I thought
usually this recursive upgrade has to be forced with --enforce-variants?
Is there a better way to do it?
upgrade checks if dependencies need to be upgraded as well. these checks
are as subject to -f as the original upgrade is.
Perhaps you want the -n option. (`man port` is a good thing to read
occasionally.)
--
brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: Re-installing a port from source
Likewise, I assumed your initial use of -f was a hidden action shorthand so I reused it in the example :-) On Jan 13, 2014, at 17:00, Davor Cubranic cubra...@stat.ubc.ca wrote: In retrospect, I can sort of see this in the man page, but you really have to know what you're looking for... (Global switches vs. action switches can be a real pain.) Thanks for setting me on the right path. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
