Frederick Akalin wrote:
I want to have the test phase run automatically for a particular port
because it is important to guarantee correctness for that port (in
this case, I'm working with gmp). I couldn't find a switch to do it;
test.run only enables the test phase and does not have it run.
Hello,
I updated the pike Portfile five days ago, but the ticket hasn't been
processed yet. Could you commit the changes for me since I have no
commit rights myself?
Here's the URL to the ticket:
http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/14796
Thanks in advance,
Robert
On Mar 31, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Florian Ebeling wrote:
I come to the impression that there are too few committers. What do
others think on this?
We are in serious need of:
1. An open repository where to exchange precompiled archives in
order to avoid the lengthy compilations of the
Florian Ebeling wrote:
I updated the pike Portfile five days ago, but the ticket hasn't
been
processed yet. Could you commit the changes for me since I have no
commit
rights myself?
I come to the impression that there are too few committers. What do
others think on this? And how many are
Guido Soranzio wrote:
We are in serious need of:
1. An open repository where to exchange precompiled archives in
order to avoid the lengthy compilations of the dependencies.
Which requires 2.
2. A buildbot on a central server which automatically builds
and tests the proposed
On Mar 31, 2008, at 3:16 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
1. An open repository where to exchange precompiled archives in
order to avoid the lengthy compilations of the dependencies.
Which requires 2.
I meant a simple hosting infrastructure outside of the subversion
repository where the
Guido Soranzio wrote:
I meant a simple hosting infrastructure outside of the subversion
repository where the submitters and the committers could upload and
share their precompiled packages/archives: we already have the
archive mode and the support for RPM.
Sure, but it doesn't integrate with
On Mar 31, 2008, at 4:03 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
Sure, but it doesn't integrate with MacPorts and installs outside the
registry. So it will rather screw up your existing installation.
Let's talk on more practical terms.
On trunk several pieces of Gnome 2.22 have been already committed
On Mar 31, 2008, at 8:53 AM, Guido Soranzio wrote:
It's really sad that we are hosted in the same community
infrastructure of WebKit and of his buildbots but you have to
spend hours to recompile it yourself in order to test the latest
new Gnome application which makes use of WebKit's latest
On Mar 31, 2008, at 4:32 AM, Guido Soranzio wrote:
We are in serious need of:
1. An open repository where to exchange precompiled archives in
order to avoid the lengthy compilations of the dependencies.
One might argue instead that we are in serious need of a binary
packages collection,
On Mar 31, 2008, at 6:16 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
There is of course much to do with MacPorts, but we are still
lacking a roadmap...
No offense to jmpp intended, but I think what macports is really
lacking is effective technical leadership. There are a lot of good
ideas floating
On Mar 31, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
No offense to jmpp intended, but I think what macports is really
lacking is effective technical leadership. There are a lot of good
ideas floating around, but nobody really driving the bus. I also
used to think that you could elect
Those of you who are a college student, work on a college campus, know
college students, or have a college student as a child, please notice:
The Google Summer of Code student application deadline for 2008 has
been extended for one week to April 7. This means that students have
one
On Mar 31, 2008, at 6:55 AM, Guido Soranzio wrote:
I meant a simple hosting infrastructure outside of the subversion
repository where the submitters and the committers could upload and
share their precompiled packages/archives: we already have the
archive mode and the support for RPM.
That's
Guido Soranzio wrote:
On trunk several pieces of Gnome 2.22 have been already committed
sparsely without coordination: almost a nightmare.
Why is this a nightmare? Gnome ports got no maintainer, so others did
what they could.
Let's suppose that someone (me!) is busy building Gnome again from
On Mar 31, 2008, at 9:47 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
On Mar 31, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
No offense to jmpp intended, but I think what macports is really
lacking is effective technical leadership. There are a lot of good
ideas floating around, but nobody really driving
On Mar 31, 2008, at 9:14 AM, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
There are two few committers for dports/ and REALLY very few
committers for base/ - I think we should be more liberal in allowing
new committers, being ever mindful of the fact that source control
always means you can back things out
Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
Either way, you've provided a nice abstraction boundary for the
developer and can refine the definition of chroot as various edge
cases are found without having to disseminate updated instructions
to everyone. I probably updated my chroot definition about 20
On Mar 31, 2008, at 6:53 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
Step up and provide ports for them if you think they are valuable.
Done: I have proposed the first WebKit's portfile, I have fixed it and I
have patched the makefiles for all the ports depending on PyGTK:
I asked for commit privileges to
Guido Soranzio wrote:
On Mar 31, 2008, at 6:53 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
We have a port for ruby.
No: MacRuby is a new project which is porting Ruby 1.9 directly on the
Objective-C runtime.
Okay, so it is different from the default Ruby and seems to be a
separate project. Make a ruby-mac
On Mar 31, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote:
chroot was discussed last year, but somewhat discarded as overkill
compared to trace mode and flexible logging... I updated the chroot
scripts from OpenDarwin to install Tiger instead, but there never
was a minimum footprint decided
Speaking as someone who's applied, and is awaiting a response on
whether I'll be allowed to take over an existing port, I'm sure that
new committer blood is out here. However, I'm still awaiting a reply.
How many people process the commit requests at the moment?
I'm not chasing up, as I've
On Mar 31, 2008, at 6:53 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
On trunk several pieces of Gnome 2.22 have been already committed
sparsely without coordination: almost a nightmare.
Why is this a nightmare? Gnome ports got no maintainer, so others did
what they could.
So did I: as I said, I am trying to
On Mar 31, 2008, at 7:32 PM, Guido Soranzio wrote:
There is no coherency in how the dependencies are expressed in
MacPorts at the moment: some ports lists all the dependencies
recursively while other ones limit to list only their direct
dependencies, as garnome and jhbuild do the right
24 matches
Mail list logo
