On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 09:53:28AM -0800, David Wolfskill wrote:
> I strongly suspect that you are encountering "complications" because of
> a lack of consistency with respect to installed ports/packages on the
> system in question.
>
> That is, "consistency" with respect to the state of the under
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 08:52:58AM -0800, bob prohaska wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 04:43:18PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 03:57:22PM -0800, bob prohaska wrote:
> > > Using pkg delete resolved the ImageMagick vs ImageMagic6 conflict,
> > > allowing
> > > inkscape to b
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 04:43:18PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 03:57:22PM -0800, bob prohaska wrote:
> > Using pkg delete resolved the ImageMagick vs ImageMagic6 conflict, allowing
> > inkscape to build successfully from ports on an RPI3.
> >
> > Alas, I somehow deleted li
On Tue, 20 Nov 2018 at 13:25, bob prohaska wrote:
[...]
> Is there a resolution to this dilemma, other than just waiting for
> inkscape to catch up? Is it possible to determine which revision of
> the ports tree can make a runnable version of a particular port?
The correct thing to do is to build
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 03:57:22PM -0800, bob prohaska wrote:
> Using pkg delete resolved the ImageMagick vs ImageMagic6 conflict, allowing
> inkscape to build successfully from ports on an RPI3.
>
> Alas, I somehow deleted libicuuc.so.62, causing a runtime failure. Rebuilding
> devel/icu got ver
Using pkg delete resolved the ImageMagick vs ImageMagic6 conflict, allowing
inkscape to build successfully from ports on an RPI3.
Alas, I somehow deleted libicuuc.so.62, causing a runtime failure. Rebuilding
devel/icu got version 63, so that didn't help.
Noticing that inkscape is now available
