Re: Use configure.ldflags-delete instead of configure.ldflags?

On Mar 15, 2011, at 11:16, Landon J Fuller wrote: > On Mar 14, 2011, at 9:13 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >> Sounds like a good suggestion. Right now, the two are equivalent, but it >> might be better for ports to specify exactly what they mean -- i.e. if >> deleting -L${prefix}/lib is what's desi

Re: [76968] trunk/dports/kde/skrooge/Portfile

>> +post-activate { >> +ui_msg "Calling kbuildsycoca4 - in case KDE hasn't called it yet - to >> make sure that skrooge can run." >> +system "${prefix}/bin/kbuildsycoca4" >> +} > > We can probably dispense with that ui_msg. Does a user installing skrooge > know what kbuildsycoca4 is, or

Re: [76955] trunk/dports/games/wtf/Portfile

On Mar 15, 2011, at 03:37, j...@macports.org wrote: > Revision: 76955 > http://trac.macports.org/changeset/76955 > Author: j...@macports.org > Date: 2011-03-15 01:37:31 -0700 (Tue, 15 Mar 2011) > Log Message: > --- > wtf: license > > Modified Paths: > -- >t

Re: [76968] trunk/dports/kde/skrooge/Portfile

On Mar 15, 2011, at 14:25, m...@macports.org wrote: > Revision: 76968 > http://trac.macports.org/changeset/76968 > Author: m...@macports.org > Date: 2011-03-15 12:25:12 -0700 (Tue, 15 Mar 2011) > Log Message: > --- > skrooge: introduce a kbuildsycoca4 call at post-activate p

Re: Use configure.ldflags-delete instead of configure.ldflags?

>> How about the addition of "-Xlinker -headerpad_max_install_names" >> as a >> default in portconfigure.tcl? Would macport consider it? > > We could consider that. I wonder if there are any negative > implications for any ports? Have you already been trying this on many > ports, with positive res

Re: How to introduce a call to kbuildsycoca4 in a kde port

> Depending on what it actually does this might be better to have once the > program is installed in the proper place with post-activate {...}, like > texhash. Yep, thanks for that remark, you are absolutely right, only after activation it has to be run: This --- post-activate { ui_msg "Call

Re: How can I remove '-arch x86_64' during configure

On 2011-3-16 01:49 , Konis Kjell wrote: > Hello, > > R port maintainer here. I am trying to build the R port using the > compilers in the llvm-gcc42 port (since I believe this is the only set of > compilers that includes Fortran and is compatible with Xcode). If I run > ./configure by hand everyth

Re: Bumping other py*-lint when bumping py26-lint

On 2011-3-16 04:17 , Blair Zajac wrote: > PS Is there a list of macport logins and real names, so we don't have to say > "Hey you" :) ? - Josh ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforg

Bumping other py*-lint when bumping py26-lint

Hello, Regarding the py26-lint, when you bump that revision, could you also bump the other Python versions to keep them all in sync, where the module can be installed on older and newer versions. Thanks, Blair PS Is there a list of macport logins and real names, so we don't have to say "Hey y

Re: Use configure.ldflags-delete instead of configure.ldflags?

On Mar 14, 2011, at 9:13 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > Sounds like a good suggestion. Right now, the two are equivalent, but it > might be better for ports to specify exactly what they mean -- i.e. if > deleting -L${prefix}/lib is what's desired, the port should say that, rather > than assume that

How can I remove '-arch x86_64' during configure

Hello, R port maintainer here. I am trying to build the R port using the compilers in the llvm-gcc42 port (since I believe this is the only set of compilers that includes Fortran and is compatible with Xcode). If I run ./configure by hand everything works, e.g. CFLAGS=-I/MacPorts/include \ L