On Sun, 24 Dec 2006 13:43:17 +0100 Armin Arh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>I get the following error each time i group reply to Scott's posts.
>Is it just me, or doesn't cs.niu.edu like to receive mails in general?
>
>-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT
On Wed, 2006-12-27 at 18:59 -0500, Michael Johnson wrote:
> On 12/27/06, Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Michael Johnson wrote:
> >
> > >> I can't reproduce this on 6.2-RC1. Are nspr and nss ports up to date?
> > >> And is www/mozilla/Makefile.common up to date?
> >
> > Yes, everything i
On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 08:13:18 -0800
Jeremy Chadwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 10:24:19AM -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
> > In response to Shaun Amott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > > On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 05:39:50PM -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Why should the fet
Michael Johnson wrote:
> On 12/27/06, Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Michael Johnson wrote:
>>
>> >> I can't reproduce this on 6.2-RC1. Are nspr and nss ports up to date?
>> >> And is www/mozilla/Makefile.common up to date?
>>
>> Yes, everything is up to date.
>>
>> > What version of GCC
On 12/27/06, Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Michael Johnson wrote:
>> I can't reproduce this on 6.2-RC1. Are nspr and nss ports up to date?
>> And is www/mozilla/Makefile.common up to date?
Yes, everything is up to date.
> What version of GCC are you using?
4.1.2, on -current as of 12
Michael Johnson wrote:
>> I can't reproduce this on 6.2-RC1. Are nspr and nss ports up to date?
>> And is www/mozilla/Makefile.common up to date?
Yes, everything is up to date.
> What version of GCC are you using?
4.1.2, on -current as of 12/18 plus patches to make gcc 4.1 the system
compiler.
On 12/27/06, Michael Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/27/06, Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With the latest updates to either port, I get the same error for both:
>
> if test ! -d system_wrappers; then mkdir system_wrappers; fi
> /usr/local/bin/perl5.8.8 ../config/preprocessor.p
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> I've installed lang/gcc34 and lang/gcc41 and I looked for libgcc.
> I found:
>
> lang/gcc34: TARGLIB=${PREFIX}/lib/gcc/${CONFIGURE_TARGET}/${PORTVERSION}
> lang/gcc41: TARGLIB=${PREFIX}/lib/gcc-${PORTVERSION}
>
> Is there a reason for such incoherency
On 12/25/06, Vitold S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In file included from /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xlibint.h:43,
from glxclient.h:48,
from clientattrib.c:39:
/usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xlib.h:3573: error: syntax error before
"_X_SENTINEL"
/usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xlib.h:35
On 12/27/06, Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
With the latest updates to either port, I get the same error for both:
if test ! -d system_wrappers; then mkdir system_wrappers; fi
/usr/local/bin/perl5.8.8 ../config/preprocessor.pl
-DOSTYPE=\"FreeBSD7\" -DOSARCH=\"FreeBSD\" -DBUILD_ID=
-DMOZI
HPGL-Distiller can be used as a post-processor to
graphics/pstoedit to prepare HPGL for vinyl sign cutters.
I don't have time to maintain this, but if someone out there
finds such a thing useful, feel free to slap your name on it and
send it in...
-=EPS=-
-
Shaun Amott wrote:
On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 09:50:28PM -0600, Eric wrote:
it seems that the latest imp port update is insisting to install courier
no matter what arguments are passed to make.
my ports.conf file for imp looks like:
mail/imp: WITHOUT_LDAP|WITHOUT_SMIME|WITH_DOVECOT
yet every
In response to Jeremy Chadwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 10:24:19AM -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
> > In response to Shaun Amott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > > On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 05:39:50PM -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Why should the fetch-recursive target care w
On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 10:24:19AM -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to Shaun Amott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 05:39:50PM -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
> > >
> > > Why should the fetch-recursive target care what's installed? Hell, I just
> > > want the distfile on the ser
In response to Shaun Amott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 05:39:50PM -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
> >
> > Why should the fetch-recursive target care what's installed? Hell, I just
> > want the distfile on the server so I can install it on other machines.
>
> I agree. Perhaps we shou
> It looks like a bug in gnatmake and/or gnatgcc. I've built and
> installed all three versions of gnat from ports, and all three versions
> install the normative environment library as libgnat.a. It shouldn't be
> possible to build too many working programs without correctly linking to
> lib
On Dec 27, 2006, at 5:04 , Vasil Dimov wrote:
Currently I get this:
% portversion -v gnupg
gnupg-1.4.6_2 < needs updating (port has 2.0.1)
gnupg-2.0.1 = up-to-date with port
%
This is incorrect and is caused by the fact that portupgrade is not
aware that securi
On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 12:04:21PM +0100, Heino Tiedemann wrote:
> Hi There,
>
> one question about this antry in UPDATING:
>
> ,
> | 20061221:
> |AFFECTS: users of security/gnupg
> |AUTHOR: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> |
> |The security/gnupg port was upgraded to 2.0.1 (with securty fix)
Hi,
Currently I get this:
% portversion -v gnupg
gnupg-1.4.6_2 < needs updating (port has 2.0.1)
gnupg-2.0.1 = up-to-date with port
%
This is incorrect and is caused by the fact that portupgrade is not
aware that security/gnupg has been moved to security/gnupg1.
19 matches
Mail list logo
