* Pav Lucistnik (p...@freebsd.org) wrote:
Here's it:
http://people.freebsd.org/~amdmi3/xprefix_obliterate.1.patch
Thank you, queued.
Ok, it's already finished and the only failure is x11/libsx which I've
mistakingly patched in another working copy. I've checked in and two
ports dependent
* Dmitry Marakasov (amd...@hades.panopticon) wrote:
Ok, it's already finished and the only failure is x11/libsx which I've
s/already/almost/
--
Dmitry Marakasov . 55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56 9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D
amd...@amdmi3.ru ..: jabber: amd...@jabber.ruhttp://www.amdmi3.ru
Dmitry Marakasov píše v út 09. 06. 2009 v 18:33 +0400:
* Pav Lucistnik (p...@freebsd.org) wrote:
Here's it:
http://people.freebsd.org/~amdmi3/xprefix_obliterate.1.patch
Thank you, queued.
Ok, it's already finished and the only failure is x11/libsx which I've
mistakingly patched
* Pav Lucistnik (p...@freebsd.org) wrote:
Where are you tracking the progress of it? I'm curious.
http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-7-exp-latest/
Btw, I remember there was some more useful view, something like
`previously unknown failures list'. Was there really, and where?
Dmitry Marakasov píše v út 09. 06. 2009 v 18:48 +0400:
* Pav Lucistnik (p...@freebsd.org) wrote:
Where are you tracking the progress of it? I'm curious.
http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-7-exp-latest/
Btw, I remember there was some more useful view, something like
* Erwin Lansing (er...@freebsd.org) wrote:
i386 is operated by erwin@ so try talking to him. But I must warn you
that i386 run will take about a week, due to much older hardware we have
available for it.
And there are two other builds in queue before you, so it will take a
while. Let
Dmitry Marakasov píše v so 06. 06. 2009 v 07:13 +0400:
* Pav Lucistnik (p...@freebsd.org) wrote:
The experimental run is nearly over, so far 15 failures found and sent
in separate mails.
Once you have next iteration of the patch, I'll be happy to run it
again.
Here's it:
* Pav Lucistnik (p...@freebsd.org) wrote:
Also I forgot to mention that this is better to be run on i386, as many
ports depend on xview which is i386-only.
i386 is operated by erwin@ so try talking to him. But I must warn you
that i386 run will take about a week, due to much older
On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 05:36:26PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
Also I forgot to mention that this is better to be run on i386, as many
ports depend on xview which is i386-only.
i386 is operated by erwin@ so try talking to him. But I must warn you
that i386 run will take about a week, due
Dmitry Marakasov píše v po 01. 06. 2009 v 20:02 +0400:
Thought we've switched to modular xorg more than a year ago, some
ports still define USE_XLIB and thus depend on all X libraries (even
when it's not really required). Which is even worse, USE_XLIB is
implicitely defined for ports that
10 matches
Mail list logo
