Am 26.07.2011 um 06:45 schrieb Ryan Schmidt:
>
> On Jul 25, 2011, at 23:43, Titus von Boxberg wrote:
>
>> Why not make sure the number is below 500?
>> That's the normal range for daemon users.
>
> For one thing, because MacPorts isn't a daemon.
s/daemon/system/g
What are the other things, the
On Jul 25, 2011, at 23:43, Titus von Boxberg wrote:
> Why not make sure the number is below 500?
> That's the normal range for daemon users.
For one thing, because MacPorts isn't a daemon.
___
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.
Am 26.07.2011 um 04:21 schrieb James Berry:
>
> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:16 PM, Rodolfo Aramayo wrote:
>
>> David is right. This is a hard issue and believe me I have burn many,
>> many candles during Holidays and weekends trying to solve userIDs
>> conflicts in MacOSServers.
>
> What if MacPorts w
On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:16 PM, Rodolfo Aramayo wrote:
> David is right. This is a hard issue and believe me I have burn many,
> many candles during Holidays and weekends trying to solve userIDs
> conflicts in MacOSServers.
>
> It looks to me that MacPorts installer has these options:
>
> 1. Look
On Jul 25, 2011, at 5:50 PM, Scott Webster wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 5:43 PM, David L Ballenger
> wrote:
>> - Install macports on client B, macports created as local account on B with
>> UID 1042.
>> - Create another OD account, it gets UID 1042 since WorkGroup Manager can't
>> see
>>
On Jul 25, 2011, at 9:17 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
>
> The only time the old version is uninstalled first should be if the same
> version is being installed, i.e. it's a forced upgrade or a rebuild due
> to changed platform. This has been the behaviour for quite a long time
> as well.
yep, you're ri
On 2011-7-26 10:53 , Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> It used to be that the actual time between uninstall of the old
> version/install of the new version was very short with upgrade.
>
> It looks like now it's possibly _much_ longer since the old version is
> deactivated before the new version is built
It used to be that the actual time between uninstall of the old version/install
of the new version was very short with upgrade.
It looks like now it's possibly _much_ longer since the old version is
deactivated before the new version is built (instead of the new version being
built/installed or
The "." in the dscl command specifies the local directory domain. If you
change that "." in the dscl command to "/Search" it will pickup the OD Users
as well as the local users of the current system.
However, just doing that won't fix the problem since it can then still create a
local accoun
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 19:27, Joshua Root wrote:
>
> The 'archive' action was repurposed to install but not activate, yes.
Nice, thanks.
--
arno s hautala /-| a...@alum.wpi.edu
pgp b2c9d448
___
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.mac
On Jul 25, 2011, at 04:06, Rainer Müller wrote:
> On 2011-07-24 22:28 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> Correction: it appears using four kinds of checksums for a distfile
>> (md5, sha1, rmd160, and sha256) causes this error. I have now
>> corrected this problem in all ports found doing this. Using sha256
On Jul 25, 2011, at 4:18 PM, Rodolfo Aramayo wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 18:10, Rainer Müller wrote:
>> On 2011-07-26 00:53 , Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>>> On Jul 25, 2011, at 6:26 PM, David L Ballenger wrote:
On my laptop, which is connected to my Open Directory domain, my personal
a
On Jul 25, 2011, at 18:33, Joshua Root wrote:
> On 2011-7-26 09:30 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 25, 2011, at 18:24, j...@macports.org wrote:
>>
>>> Revision: 81123
>>> http://trac.macports.org/changeset/81123
>>> Author: j...@macports.org
>>> Date: 2011-07-25 16:24:39 -0700
On 2011-7-26 09:30 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> On Jul 25, 2011, at 18:24, j...@macports.org wrote:
>
>> Revision: 81123
>> http://trac.macports.org/changeset/81123
>> Author: j...@macports.org
>> Date: 2011-07-25 16:24:39 -0700 (Mon, 25 Jul 2011)
>> Log Message:
>> ---
>> gui
On Jul 25, 2011, at 3:53 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> On Jul 25, 2011, at 6:26 PM, David L Ballenger wrote:
>>
>> I'm assuming that the process is to find the highest unused UniqueID in
>> the local directory and use the next ID. For systems with with no mobile
>> accounts and not a lot of users
On Jul 25, 2011, at 18:24, j...@macports.org wrote:
> Revision: 81123
> http://trac.macports.org/changeset/81123
> Author: j...@macports.org
> Date: 2011-07-25 16:24:39 -0700 (Mon, 25 Jul 2011)
> Log Message:
> ---
> guide: update xcode info
We should mention that on Lion
On 2011-7-26 09:01 , Arno Hautala wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 13:56, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 15, 2011, at 11:02, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
>>
>>> Is there a port command to install but not activate a port?
>>
>> Not in MacPorts 1.9.2. I think I saw something go into trunk to do that
On 2011-07-26 00:53 , Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> On Jul 25, 2011, at 6:26 PM, David L Ballenger wrote:
>> On my laptop, which is connected to my Open Directory domain, my personal
>> account is set up as a mobile accoun, which means I have an account int the
>> local domain with a UID of 1025 and mac
On Jul 25, 2011, at 6:26 PM, David L Ballenger wrote:
>
> On my laptop, which is connected to my Open Directory domain, my personal
> account is set up as a mobile accoun, which means I have an account int the
> local domain with a UID of 1025 and macports got an ID of 1026. That meant
> that
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 13:56, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> On Jun 15, 2011, at 11:02, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
>
>> Is there a port command to install but not activate a port?
>
> Not in MacPorts 1.9.2. I think I saw something go into trunk to do that a
> little while ago?
Now that 2.0 is out, is t
On Jul 25, 2011, at 6:26 PM, David L Ballenger wrote:
>
> I'm assuming that the process is to find the highest unused UniqueID in
> the local directory and use the next ID. For systems with with no mobile
> accounts and not a lot of users that's probably somewhere in the 500's.
well, it does a l
On Jul 25, 2011, at 2:09 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
> On 2011-07-25 21:44 , Rodolfo Aramayo wrote:
>> The latest installation of MacPorts is taking over mobile accounts on
>> MacOSXServer
>
> AFAIK mobile account means they have a home exported over the network?
> I am not sure if it is NIS/yp, bu
Please join us in welcoming the following new MacPorts committers:
- Christoph Iserlohn (ciserlohn)
- Hiroshi Umemoto (hum)
- Martin Wilke (miwi)
We look forward to continued excellent contributions from these new team
members.
- Bryan, Joshua, Rainer, and Ryan
Do you want to join the MacPo
On 2011-07-25 21:44 , Rodolfo Aramayo wrote:
> The latest installation of MacPorts is taking over mobile accounts on
> MacOSXServer
AFAIK mobile account means they have a home exported over the network?
I am not sure if it is NIS/yp, but is this a similar solution?
> Obviously the installer does
I'm looking for more detail documentation and help about how port
select should be used, and how ports should use it.
Basically, the following example, install maven2, select maven2,
uninstall maven2, install maven3. Then if you try and select maven3,
it complains because it is currently selecting
On Jul 25, 2011, at 14:44, Rodolfo Aramayo wrote:
> IMPORTANT
>
> For those if you running MacPorts on MacOSXServers...be aware!
>
> The latest installation of MacPorts is taking over mobile accounts on
> MacOSXServer
>
> Obviously the installer does not determine the presence of 'mobile'
> ac
> +supported_archs i386 x86_2
Is that so?
___
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
Hello,
while not in topic I'd like to point out this utility called DTerm
[1], it's a command line that is sensitive to context, it really comes
in handy and it's freeware.
I'm in no way related to the author, just thought it could be useful
to many readers on the mailing list.
Regards
--
Andr
On 2011-07-24 22:28 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> Correction: it appears using four kinds of checksums for a distfile
> (md5, sha1, rmd160, and sha256) causes this error. I have now
> corrected this problem in all ports found doing this. Using sha256 in
> combination with only one or two other kinds of c
29 matches
Mail list logo
