On 13.04.2009, at 23:19, Bryan Blackburn wrote:
Right, the way the py25-* version installs it is different than if you
install it directly with python25, that's actually part of the
problem with
splitting them out, as mentioned with the -S stuff on #12369:
${prefix}/lib/python2.5/site-packa
Hi,
I reproduced the problem #19131 on ppc 10.4.11 with trunk r49611.
but succeeded build on ppc 10.5.3 and i386 10.5.6.
ruby port runs ruby(+miniruby) in build process, then ruby do not
allow some options (-I, -r, -e,..) under uid <> euid or gid <> egid
for security reasons.
I tested `sudo port
just did sync + upgrade py25-elixir and it looks like someone upgraded
py25-sqlalchemy without upgrading/checking dependencies and/or someone
upgraded py25-elixir and did not test it.
Below is my transcript. Note that openssl could not be installed but
was forced to anyway. But I guess that is not
I could temporarily fix this by deactivating py25-sqlalchemy @0.5.2_0
and activating the old py25-sqlalchemy @0.4.7p1_0
Obviously the py25-elixir port is outdated. Support for SQLAlchemy 0.5
first appeared in Elixir 0.6 ("Added support for SQLAlchemy 0.5" –
http://elixir.ematia.de/trac/browser/eli
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:10:32AM +0200, Arthur Koziel said:
>
> On 13.04.2009, at 23:19, Bryan Blackburn wrote:
>>
>> Right, the way the py25-* version installs it is different than if you
>> install it directly with python25, that's actually part of the problem
>> with
>> splitting them out, as
Am 14.04.2009 um 22:00 schrieb Bryan Blackburn:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:10:32AM +0200, Arthur Koziel said:
On 13.04.2009, at 23:19, Bryan Blackburn wrote:
Right, the way the py25-* version installs it is different than if
you
install it directly with python25, that's actually part of t
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:25 PM, Bryan Blackburn wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:21:08PM +0200, C. Florian Ebeling said:
>> >> So the course of action will be:
>> >> 1 rename ruby port to ruby18
>> >> 2 create ruby_select port
>> >>
>> >> I added the suggestion to maybe have another third ste
ma...@macports.org wrote:
> If you can produce better docs than what I've done it doesn't matter what
> has already been done. I would naturally want to use the simplest method
> that can produce acceptable output. If you can't with the method you have
> proposed, then it doesn't matter if it has
Perry Lee wrote:
> On Apr 13, 2009, at 1:00 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>> Revision: 49606
>>> http://trac.macports.org/changeset/49606
>>> Author: pe...@macports.org
>>> Date: 2009-04-13 00:40:18 -0700 (Mon, 13 Apr 2009)
>>> Log Message:
>>> ---
>>> port1.0/portactivate.tcl - W
On Apr 14, 2009, at 10:11, ro...@macports.org wrote:
Revision: 49648
http://trac.macports.org/changeset/49648
Author: ro...@macports.org
Date: 2009-04-14 08:11:57 -0700 (Tue, 14 Apr 2009)
Log Message:
---
Added ipv6 - see #19310
[snip]
+variant ipv6 description {Add
On Apr 14, 2009, at 10:48, macsforever2...@macports.org wrote:
Revision: 49649
http://trac.macports.org/changeset/49649
Author: macsforever2...@macports.org
Date: 2009-04-14 08:48:51 -0700 (Tue, 14 Apr 2009)
Log Message:
---
Fix for +tcltk +x11 +python variants. (#19111)
On Apr 14, 2009, at 15:52, Rainer Müller wrote:
I made a call for contributions on macports-users before about writing
more helpful strings for the current implementation, but nobody
seems to
be interested. So why should I not be allowed to do something about it
if nobody else cares? And as
Blair Zajac wrote:
> Blair Zajac wrote:
>> Rainer Müller wrote:
>>> As far as I know the only advantage of the frameworks is currently to
>>> have working pythonw and IDLE. Is there really no way to get this
>>> without a framework build or did just nobody try yet?
>> The Ice Python bindings requir
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:19:30PM +0200, Jannis Leidel said:
> Am 14.04.2009 um 22:00 schrieb Bryan Blackburn:
[...]
>>
>> As long as the one in lib-dynload is always loaded first, it shouldn't
>> be
>> too big a deal, but someone really should test it...
>
> At the risk of not knowing how that c
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:30:11PM +0200, C. Florian Ebeling said:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:25 PM, Bryan Blackburn wrote:
[...]
> >
> > Unless there's better support in base for such things, the best option may
> > be to try and document it with the right ports (via ui_msg) and mailing
> > lis
I think it might be wise to create a list of such volatile variants
(system_x11, universal, no_x11, etc) and mention them to users in the
install guide, so they can make decisions about them before it's too
late.
Also, this brings up a point that has been bothering me for a while.
Why do
Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
I think it might be wise to create a list of such volatile variants
(system_x11, universal, no_x11, etc) and mention them to users in the
install guide, so they can make decisions about them before it's too
late.
maybe volatile is a bit harsh? ;-)
Also, this brings u
Rainer Müller wrote:
Blair Zajac wrote:
Blair Zajac wrote:
Rainer Müller wrote:
As far as I know the only advantage of the frameworks is currently to
have working pythonw and IDLE. Is there really no way to get this
without a framework build or did just nobody try yet?
The Ice Python bindings
Sorry Ryan... sent a response directly to you accidentally.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Jon Hermansen wrote:
> I seriously support the idea of setting up a build system / distributing
> binary packages.
>
> Most modern Linux distributions (unless source-based) install files
> contained withi
Forgot to send this to the list ...
>AsciiDoc still gives control over DocBook and CSS. It is still possible
>to change the XSL stylesheet converting the DocBook to HTML and the CSS
>is in a separate file. It is even possible to add your own DocBook
>elements if that would be necessary.
Yes, but
20 matches
Mail list logo
