On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:14:21 -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
> Just made that into a batch file for my library. Should be a target in
> the standard ports Makefile, IMHO. Maybe call it "rdistclean". Perhaps
> this could be submitted as a PR.
There are various options in portsclean (provided by ports-mg
Just made that into a batch file for my library. Should be a target in
the standard ports Makefile, IMHO. Maybe call it "rdistclean". Perhaps
this could be submitted as a PR.
--Brett Glass
At 12:37 PM 4/10/2013, Greg Larkin wrote:
Here's an easy way to delete all of the distfiles for a port an
On 4/10/2013 at 3:39 PM Michael Powell wrote:
|Mike. wrote:
|
|[snip]
|>
|>
|> Additionally, for me, building from ports for me has tended to pull
in
|> many, many X-windows support files when they are not needed.
|>
|> Specifically, I run a non-windowing system using command line tools.
|> Whe
Mike. wrote:
[snip]
>
>
> Additionally, for me, building from ports for me has tended to pull in
> many, many X-windows support files when they are not needed.
>
> Specifically, I run a non-windowing system using command line tools.
> When I tried to compile Samba from ports, I finally killed t
On 04/10/2013 22:19, Mike. wrote:
On 4/10/2013 at 11:39 AM Brett Glass wrote:
|For many years, I've used FreeBSD binary packages to avoid long
|waits and/or having to set up a special build machine when creating
|small systems. But even though the development server security
|breach is now long
On 4/10/2013 at 11:39 AM Brett Glass wrote:
|For many years, I've used FreeBSD binary packages to avoid long
|waits and/or having to set up a special build machine when creating
|small systems. But even though the development server security
|breach is now long past, there are no published bina
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 4/10/13 2:19 PM, Brett Glass wrote:
> Unfortunately, I've never experimented with pkgng, so will have to
> come up to speed on this. Might be a temporary workaround.
>
> In the meantime, I'm trying to install Apache 2.2 on a small
> server. So fa
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Brett Glass wrote:
> Unfortunately, I've never experimented with pkgng, so will have to come up
> to speed on
> this. Might be a temporary workaround.
>
it is def. where the project is moving towards for binary pkg
distribution, so it won't be a wasted effort :)
Unfortunately, I've never experimented with pkgng, so will have to
come up to speed on
this. Might be a temporary workaround.
In the meantime, I'm trying to install Apache 2.2 on a small
server. So far, just to
build the port, the machine has built Perl, Python, m4, Berkeley
DB, and an incredi
On 04/10/2013 20:39, Brett Glass wrote:
For many years, I've used FreeBSD binary packages to avoid long waits
and/or having to set up a special build machine when creating small
systems. But even though the development server security breach is now
long past, there are no published binary packa
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Brett Glass wrote:
>
> For many years, I've used FreeBSD binary packages to avoid long waits and/or
> having to set up a special build machine when creating small systems. But
> even though the development server security breach is now long past, there
> are no
For many years, I've used FreeBSD binary packages to avoid long
waits and/or having to set up a special build machine when creating
small systems. But even though the development server security
breach is now long past, there are no published binary packages for
FreeBSD 9.1. When will they be b
12 matches
Mail list logo