On Jul 14, 2007, at 7:56 PM, Chris Pickel wrote:
On 14 Jul, 2007, at 19:20, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote:
-) enhancement: tickets with or without patches that simply aim
to enhance something that's not necessarily failing (which would
be a defect);
-) task: have never been able to
Le 07-07-15 à 00:04, Ryan Schmidt a écrit :
On Jul 10, 2007, at 23:49, Yves de Champlain wrote:
Le 07-07-11 à 00:25, Ryan Schmidt a écrit :
As for variant x86, the correct syntax would be platform
i386, wouldn't it? I don't see any ports with platform x86,
and nobody with an Intel Mac
landonf isn't in the list of people to whom I can assign tickets in
Trac. Can he be added please, since he does maintain several ports?
How is that list in Trac kept up to date anyway? Do we have a script
that routinely goes through portfiles to look at the maintainer field
and see who
On 15 Jul, 2007, at 14:56, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
landonf isn't in the list of people to whom I can assign tickets in
Trac. Can he be added please, since he does maintain several ports?
How is that list in Trac kept up to date anyway? Do we have a
script that routinely goes through portfiles
On Jul 15, 2007, at 10:03, Yves de Champlain wrote:
Mmm i386 is for intel, sure. But x86 targets a wider set of
platforms (intel and AMD). So I always saw i386 as a subset of x86.
Am I far off ?
On Jul 11, 2007, at 00:26, Yves de Champlain wrote:
I just saw platform intel Does that
On Jul 15, 2007, at 3:11 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Jul 15, 2007, at 10:03, Yves de Champlain wrote:
Mmm i386 is for intel, sure. But x86 targets a wider set of
platforms (intel and AMD). So I always saw i386 as a subset of
x86.
Am I far off ?
On Jul 11, 2007, at 00:26, Yves de
On Jul 15, 2007, at 04:44, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote:
-) Expected: for most reports on port build failures, users are
free to *expect* these to be fixed;
I always felt this name was odd. To me, it implies a sort of
indifference to the bug: we expect it'll get fixed sooner or later.
On Jul 15, 2007, at 14:25, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote:
On Jul 15, 2007, at 3:11 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Jul 15, 2007, at 10:03, Yves de Champlain wrote:
Mmm i386 is for intel, sure. But x86 targets a wider set of
platforms (intel and AMD). So I always saw i386 as a subset of
x86.
When someone gets a chance, could you apply the patch from ticket
#12301:
http://trac.macports.org/projects/macports/ticket/12301
Thanks,
Bryan
___
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
Ryan Schmidt wrote:
And you posited that x86 worked on some platforms, while I know that
i386 is correct for Intel Macs. In terms of what happens if you
write a platform selector in MacPorts, I don't think i386 is a subset
of x86 at all; if I were to draw a Venn diagram, I don't think the two
On 15 Jul, 2007, at 5:44, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote:
My understanding of the difference between these is that an
enhancement is something that goes /into/ the repository, whereas
a task is something that's done /to/ it. For example, requesting
an update to port 'foo' is an enhancement,
Revision
27014
Author
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date
2007-07-15 13:49:24 -0700 (Sun, 15 Jul 2007)
Log Message
xgalaga: darwin x86 should be darwin i386
Modified Paths
• trunk/dports/games/xgalaga/Portfile
This port doesn't build anyway, it needs
a newer config.sub and config.guess
(not
On Jul 15, 2007, at 15:40, Chris Pickel wrote:
I believe the type ticket field is already ignored enough, the
vast majority of tickets simply go by the default (defect) even
when some of them don't belong in it:
defect: 5480
contribution: 24
enhancement: 1141
task: 52
So it doesn't make
Think FreeBSD has the needed patches ?
(see ports/games/xgalaga in FreeBSD)
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=114072
And just accidently, so did Fink project as well...
http://pdb.finkproject.org/pdb/package.php/xgalaga
Makes you think more about collaboration ?
Hope it's a good
On Jul 15, 2007, at 14:40, Bryan Blackburn wrote:
When someone gets a chance, could you apply the patch from ticket
#12301:
http://trac.macports.org/projects/macports/ticket/12301
Done.
You don't have commit access yourself? I figured you did, given your
@macports.org email address.
On Jul 15, 2007, at 17:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Revision: 27018
http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/changeset/27018
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007-07-15 15:06:34 -0700 (Sun, 15 Jul 2007)
Log Message:
---
add new commands for selecting compilers:
On Jul 15, 2007, at 18:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Revision: 27025
http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/changeset/27025
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007-07-15 16:19:45 -0700 (Sun, 15 Jul 2007)
Log Message:
---
add warning that configure.compiler wont add
Doing a complete rebuild of 1.5.0 today, I ran into this bug:
man8/sasldblistusers2.8.gz: changing permissions from 00644 to 00444
man8/saslpasswd2.8: 51.8% -- replaced with man8/saslpasswd2.8.gz
man8/saslpasswd2.8.gz: changing permissions from 00644 to 00444
--- Packaging tbz2 archive for
On Jul 15, 2007, at 6:07 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
Doing a complete rebuild of 1.5.0 today, I ran into this bug:
man8/sasldblistusers2.8.gz: changing permissions from 00644 to 00444
man8/saslpasswd2.8: 51.8% -- replaced with man8/saslpasswd2.8.gz
man8/saslpasswd2.8.gz: changing permissions
On Jul 16, 2007, at 3:26 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
For ImageMagick I had this livecheck defined:
livecheck.check moddate
livecheck.url ftp://ftp.imagemagick.net/pub/${name}/$
{name}.tar.bz2
When the portfile was up to date, sudo port livecheck ImageMagick
returned quickly.
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:41:49 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org on Sunday, July 15, 2007 at 9:53 PM
-0800 wrote:
Log Message
Add examples variant.
This includes useful tools that use chmlib. For example,
extract_chmLib takes a chm file and extracts it to a
21 matches
Mail list logo
