Hi all,
#13046 is a pretty annoying, although minor bug with MacPort's OpenSSH
port. There's a patch available, but appearantly there's nobody
working on it right now. (It has been assigned to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Can somebody please have a look at it and commit the patch if
appropriate? Ki
On 31.10.2007, at 16:35, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2007-10-31 15:57:56 +0100, Markus Weissmann wrote:
So the discussion has narrowed to:
1.) disabled by default on an "per-installation" option:
Can be toggled system-wide (with default "off"); ports have to
actively
deny a parallel build atte
On Nov 5, 2007, at 08:28, Christian Aust wrote:
#13046 is a pretty annoying, although minor bug with MacPort's
OpenSSH port. There's a patch available, but appearantly there's
nobody working on it right now. (It has been assigned to
[EMAIL PROTECTED])
Can somebody please have a look at it
Am 05.11.2007 um 16:35 schrieb Ryan Schmidt:
On Nov 5, 2007, at 08:28, Christian Aust wrote:
#13046 is a pretty annoying, although minor bug with MacPort's
OpenSSH port. There's a patch available, but appearantly there's
nobody working on it right now. (It has been assigned to [EMAIL PROTEC
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org writes:
>Revision
>[ http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/changeset/30721 ]30721
>Author
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date
>2007-11-05 10:01:13 -0800 (Mon, 05 Nov 2007)
>
>Log Message
>
>use_bzip2 default to 'no';
>document 'use_parallel_build';
>
>
>Modified Paths
Mark Duling writes:
>One question about "use_parallel_build". Do you think that keyword
>relates to a phase, or should it be considered a "global keyword"? I
>thought perhaps "global", or do you consider it specifically related to
>the build phase? I thought parallelism applied more generally to
On Nov 5, 2007, at 2:30 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps I was influenced by my recollections that some ports stop
installing outside of the build phase until another port is finished
installing. At least I think I've seen this.
you have.
If that is so and a ports
hangs at activate or an
"Daniel J. Luke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Perhaps I was influenced by my recollections that some ports stop
>> installing outside of the build phase until another port is finished
>> installing. At least I think I've seen this.
>
>you have.
>
>> If that is so and a ports
>> hangs at activate
Hey everyone!
It's very pleasing to see the amount of work that has gone into base
since our last release, but the negative side of that is that our
current code delta between trunk and the last release branch is huge.
Therefore I propose we make a 1.6 release with a new release b
I've just added a way to automatically set the number of build jobs
(if desired):
If the number of build jobs is set to "0" (in the config file), the
number of jobs is set to the number of cores.
This works only on Mac OS X (and FreeBSD -- though untested).
-Markus
On 05.11.2007, at 20:32,
So, do we have an agreement on this? Any objections to turning on
warnings against /Library/Frameworks in the upcoming MacPorts 1.6? I
support to move to discourage writing to that directory, gcc's -F
flag should allow any application needing a framework to look for it
under prefix, just
On Nov 4, 2007, at 6:29 PM, Anders F Björklund wrote:
Ryan Schmidt wrote:
In follow-ups, nox and jmpp agreed that using ".diff" at the end
of the filename is a good idea. Therefore, "port lint" recommends
this.
Right, and in follow-ups I didn't... But it's not _that_ important
to me, a
Juan Manuel Palacios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>-) documentation people, can we count on rewritten man pages to go
>with 1.6? How far off is the new guide?
I think it will be awhile before the man pages and guide are done, but
work is ongoing I think both are probably now as useful and complet
13 matches
Mail list logo
