Re: /etc/paths
>> (1) We consider /etc/paths to be a "system file". We don't like modifying >> system files. >> (2) Modifying /etc/paths affects all users' settings, which is undesirable. > > Actually it is desirable, or it has at least been desired by some users, e.g.: > > https://trac.macports.org/ticket/36323 Note that it was suggested in this discussion you linked to add files in /etc/paths.d but that would not do what many users want because the paths listed in /etc/paths are put first in PATH and then those from /etc/paths.d are appended. Since /etc/paths lists /bin, /user/bin, etc by default, Macports paths would not override system ones. I like it the other way around and I am not the only one I think. I am happy to see that my initial noise led to informative a discussion after all ;-) And then there the orthogonal issue of Apps launched from the Finder which get PATH from launchd and for which neither path_helper nor shell startup files help. Once upon a time, I hacked a solution with a daemon watching .bashrc and friends to keep the PATH of the shell and that of launchd in synch but eventually I gave up and just launched the PATH-sensitive Apps with "open" from the Terminal. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: /etc/paths
On 6 Feb 2015, at 19:21, Michael wrote: >> Shame on me! You are right. This is a new computer and /etc/paths did not >> get copied from the old one as I thought. Sorry for the noise and thanks for >> your patience! > > /etc/paths? > This is the first I've seen any indication of this. Where is this documented? > Is this the apple-approved way to add stuff to PATH for programs run by > launchD? Not launchd, no. It's for the shell and it helps with MANPATH too. "man path_helper" for the details. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: Error: No valid Xcode installation is properly selected.
Hi Ryan, > sudo port -f selfupdate thanks, it worked. I guess those installing from source are supposed to know what they are doing, which was not quite true in my case! Thanks again, Luc ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: Error: No valid Xcode installation is properly selected.
Hi Clemens, thanks for spending time on this. I looked into the code you quoted: on my computer _is_valid_developer_dir still checks for a subdirectory Headers inside $dir, which has the correct value /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer. That is precisely what the fix for #35150 should have removed. And indeed: ~> port version Version: 2.1.99 Thus the upgrade to 2.1.2 failed and indeed: ~> sudo port -d selfupdate Password: DEBUG: Copying /Users/luc/Library/Preferences/com.apple.dt.Xcode.plist to /opt/local/var/macports/home/Library/Preferences DEBUG: MacPorts sources location: /opt/local/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs ---> Updating MacPorts base sources using rsync receiving file list ... done sent 36 bytes received 69 bytes 42.00 bytes/sec total size is 3543040 speedup is 33743.24 receiving file list ... done sent 36 bytes received 76 bytes 44.80 bytes/sec total size is 512 speedup is 4.57 DEBUG: successful verification with key /opt/local/share/macports/macports-pubkey.pem DEBUG: /usr/bin/tar -C /opt/local/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/tmp -xf /opt/local/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/base.tar MacPorts base version 2.1.99 installed, DEBUG: Rebuilding and reinstalling MacPorts if needed MacPorts base version 2.1.2 downloaded. ---> Updating the ports tree Synchronizing local ports tree from file:///Users/luc/Developer/macports/dports Creating port index in /Users/luc/Developer/macports/dports Total number of ports parsed: 0 Ports successfully parsed: 0 Ports failed: 0 Up-to-date ports skipped: 15604 ---> MacPorts base is probably trunk or a release candidate DEBUG: Setting MacPorts sources ownership to root The ports tree has been updated. To upgrade your installed ports, you should run port upgrade outdated So it downloads 2.1.2 but it does not install it! What is it I am missing here? Best wishes, Luc ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Error: No valid Xcode installation is properly selected.
Hi,
"install" or "upgrade" prints
{{{
Error:
Error: No valid Xcode installation is properly selected.
Error: Please use xcode-select to select an Xcode installation:
Error: sudo xcode-select -switch /Applications/Xcode.app # version
4.4.1
Error:
}}}
even after issuing that very xcode-select command. Then "port" seem to carry on
with its business
in a successful manner. I am aware of #35150 and of the fix
that went into 2.1.2 but that is precisely the version I run. More info:
{{{
~> cc --version
Apple clang version 4.0 (tags/Apple/clang-421.0.60) (based on LLVM 3.1svn)
Target: x86_64-apple-darwin11.4.0
Thread model: posix
}}}
Please CC me.
Best wishes,
Luc Bourhis
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Python 2.6.1 i386+x86_64 doesn't work with command arch?
Hi,
I installed a universal i386 + x86_64 Python 2.6.1 as follow. Here is
the relevant part of my macports.conf:
# Options for Universal Binaries (+universal variant)
# MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET
universal_target10.5
# the SDK "sysroot" to use
universal_sysroot /Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.5.sdk
# machine architectures
universal_archs i386 x86_64
and my variants.conf features "+universal".
On my MacPro, the following
python -c 'import sys; print sys.maxint'
prints 9223372036854775807, proving that it ran in 64-bit mode. But then
arch -i386 python -c 'import sys; print sys.maxint'
prints the same number whereas the first command without arch run on
my first gen MacBook Pro (32-bit) prints 2147483647, proving that it
correctly runs in 32-bit mode. I compiled an universal snippet
#include
#include
int main() {
std::cout << std::numeric_limits::max() << "\n";
return 0;
}
It prints 9223372036854775807 and 2147483647 with and without arch -
i386 respectively. So arch is not broken.
So clearly, arch does not manage to correctly run that python
installed by MacPorts.
Would anybody have any insight into that issue?
Thanks in advance,
Luc Bourhis
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
