Guys,
Due to problem with driveway.com I've filed another PR, specified previous
PR id (named "update devel/boost") and new file locations. I hope this will
help to resolve the issue.
Alexander Churanov
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://
Hi folks!
I've just picked up new places to share files:
devel-boost-from-1.34.1-to-1.37.diff.txt :
http://www.flyupload.com/?fid=712178626
http://www.gigasize.com/get.php?d=gdgsc7nnr8c
http://rapidshare.com/files/168020620/devel-boost-from-1.34.1-to-1.37.diff.txt.html
boost-port-1_37_0.tar.b
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 02:04:22AM +0300, Alexander Churanov wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
> This is a status update on porting boost-1.37. It is finished. Port builds,
> installs and deinstalls correctly. Currently I have a patch and port
> tarball. Files can be downloaded from:
>
> boost-port-1_37_0.tar
Hi folks!
This is a status update on porting boost-1.37. It is finished. Port builds,
installs and deinstalls correctly. Currently I have a patch and port
tarball. Files can be downloaded from:
boost-port-1_37_0.tar.bz2 - http://www.driveway.com/w1d2c5l7t4
devel-boost-from-1.34.1-to-1.37.diff.tx
Andrea,
OK, after finishing with currently mutually exclusive "Boost without Python"
and "Boost with Python" ports I will try to create "Base libraries from
Boost" port and complementary "Boost.Python bridge" ports.
Alexander Churanov
2008/11/24 Andrea Venturoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Alexander
Alexander Churanov ha scritto:
... To my mind suggested approach would simplify understanding of how
to install boost. The user would ask a question like 'should I add python to
my boost installation' instead of 'is my boost built with python support or
not'.
Sounds like a good idea to me.
b
Hi folks!
This is a status update on boost-1.37 porting.
Currently port builds, installs and removes successfully. However, a PR is
not filed, because I've suddenly discovered the way 'boost-python' port
works. So, I've decided to take additional time for verifying that
'boost-python' is OK. I su
OK, I'll send a PR.
Alexander Churanov
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
If you are reasonably confident that the port will work, and that there are
no glaring errors, why not file a PR now, and then set to work checking
things? It will probably take a few days to process the PR anyway, because
there is a backlog, and because committers are cautious about making change
Hi folks!
I've finished with the first phase of porting boost-1.37:package builds,
installs, and deinstalls correctly. The remaining tasks are to ensure how it
behaves in different environments and without optional components.
Boost.Python is not tested.
The question is "what to do next?". I see
Hi folks!
I'm glad to announce that I have working patch that makes possible to build
boost-1.37 on FreeBSD. At present, I am investigating into port for
boost-1.34 in order to create a working port for 1.37 with no regressions.
Three things do not enable boost to compile out-of-box: First is the
On 2008-Nov-05 09:52:12 -0600, Jeremy Messenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 03:13:33 -0600, Flex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Also please note that http://home.leo.org isn't accessible anymore.
>
>Yeah, two people have told me about that URL is dead. Too bad, I don't
>have th
On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 03:13:33 -0600, Flex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I also agree with you Jeremy. devel/boost-devel makes no sense as it is a
stable and not a development version.When there are so much ports that
depend on devel/boost (as version 1.34) then I see two approaches to
solve
this.
I also agree with you Jeremy. devel/boost-devel makes no sense as it is a
stable and not a development version.When there are so much ports that
depend on devel/boost (as version 1.34) then I see two approaches to solve
this.
1.) Try to find out if boost 1.37 is binary compatible with boost 1.34.
On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 17:29:42 -0600, Emanuel Haupt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Emanuel,
Copying devel/boost to devel/boost-devel sounds reasonable.
However, I'd like to suggest moving devel/boost to devel/boost-134 and
having devel/boost updated to 1.37. For me '-devel' is always felt like
som
> Emanuel,
>
> Copying devel/boost to devel/boost-devel sounds reasonable.
>
> However, I'd like to suggest moving devel/boost to devel/boost-134 and
> having devel/boost updated to 1.37. For me '-devel' is always felt like
> something not stable enough. Another concern is that maintaners of port
Emanuel,
Copying devel/boost to devel/boost-devel sounds reasonable.
However, I'd like to suggest moving devel/boost to devel/boost-134 and
having devel/boost updated to 1.37. For me '-devel' is always felt like
something not stable enough. Another concern is that maintaners of ports
that depend
> It's also disappoints me that there is only year-old boost library in ports
> tree. I've already offered my help to Simon (see
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2008-September/050846.html).
> I have time, equipment, experience and will for assisting in porting latest
> stable boo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Alexander Churanov wrote:
| Emanuel,
|
| It's also disappoints me that there is only year-old boost library in
ports
| tree. I've already offered my help to Simon (see
|
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2008-September/050846.html).
|
Emanuel,
It's also disappoints me that there is only year-old boost library in ports
tree. I've already offered my help to Simon (see
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2008-September/050846.html).
I have time, equipment, experience and will for assisting in porting latest
stable boo
> Hi!
>
> We're still having Boost 1.34 in the ports tree and missed version 1.35 and
> waited so long for a port version 1.36!
> Sadly if it (will ever) arrive the ports tree it's not up to date then. So
> what's up with this port at all?
>
> Looking forward to see Boost 1.37 in the ports tree s
its surprisingly easier to install boost directly from tarball
probably he has lost interest or not able to find time,
I reminded him to update 1.35 then 1.36, it felt my mails were redirected to
/dev/null ;-)
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Flex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> We're still h
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 16:12:08 +0100
Flex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>We're still having Boost 1.34 in the ports tree and missed version
>1.35 and waited so long for a port version 1.36!
>Sadly if it (will ever) arrive the ports tree it's not up to date
>then. So what's up with this port at all?
>
>L
Hi!
We're still having Boost 1.34 in the ports tree and missed version 1.35 and
waited so long for a port version 1.36!
Sadly if it (will ever) arrive the ports tree it's not up to date then. So
what's up with this port at all?
Looking forward to see Boost 1.37 in the ports tree soon.
/Flex
___
24 matches
Mail list logo
