Re: Clang: Mavericks v. the rest (was Re: buildbot failure in MacPorts on buildports-mavericks-x86_64)

On Oct 14, 2014, at 9:22 PM, Craig Treleaven wrote: > Mavericks Clang errors out with the following: > > test_dr.c:49:3: error: comparison of constant 12 with expression of type > 'bool' is always true [-Werror,-Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare] > BOZO_end_boolean(b_multiple_frame_

Re: Clang: Mavericks v. the rest (was Re: buildbot failure in MacPorts on buildports-mavericks-x86_64)

I’d assume (even though I’m not that Jeremy) that the clang on mavericks is newer and simply has more warnings as errors. The warning flags in the brackets are what were triggered: do they exist on the older compiler version and if so are they active? That’s probably all it is. On Oct 14, 2014,

Re: [126720] trunk/dports

On 10/14/14 9:23 AM, Craig Treleaven wrote: Re: [126720] trunk/dports At 7:16 AM -0700 10/14/14, dev...@macports.org wrote: Revision 126720 Author dev...@macports.org Date 2014-10-14 07:16:52 -0700 (Tue, 14 Oct 2014)

Re: [126720] trunk/dports

At 7:16 AM -0700 10/14/14, dev...@macports.org wrote: Revision 126720 Author dev...@macports.org Date 2014-10-14 07:16:52 -0700 (Tue, 14 Oct 2014) Log Message binary dependents of libcdio: increment revision to rebuild with latest libcdio, libiso9

Re: Releasing code as portgroup instead of in base/

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote: > > I suppose so. I never considered that there might be users that would > actually read a port's / portgroup's / base's code to validate it before > installing a port. Do such people actually exist? > > I exist, and I do it. > For what it

Re: Releasing code as portgroup instead of in base/

On Oct 13, 2014, at 6:51 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > > On Oct 13, 2014, at 5:31 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote: >> On Oct 13, 2014, at 6:19 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> There's no difference in the capabilities of code in a portgroup vs code in >>> a portfile. >> >> portfiles are usually simpler than po

Re: Releasing code as portgroup instead of in base/

On Oct 14, 2014, at 2:10 AM, Joshua Root wrote: > > On 2014-10-14 09:31 , Daniel J. Luke wrote: >> Another way to look at it is that generally the portgroup is unversioned >> (and an end user doesn't necessarily know which version of a portgroup was >> used when a particular port was installed)

Re: svn fetch multiple directories

On Oct 14, 2014, at 7:30 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote: > > Yes, some care needs to be taken, but I'm sure that something is feasible. it doesn't have to be complicated? Why don't we just make it easy for maintainers to upload a .tar.gz (or whatever) to our mirrors? a /long/ time ago, we used to t

Re: svn fetch multiple directories

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Clemens Lang wrote: > Hi, > > - On 14 Oct, 2014, at 08:39, Mojca Miklavec mo...@macports.org wrote: > >> - One could fetch files from SVN, zip them, checksum the zip, store >> the zip as if the zip was fetched from elsewhere and just unzip that >> file during t

Re: svn fetch multiple directories

Hi, - On 14 Oct, 2014, at 08:39, Mojca Miklavec mo...@macports.org wrote: > - One could fetch files from SVN, zip them, checksum the zip, store > the zip as if the zip was fetched from elsewhere and just unzip that > file during the repeated installation. Fetching from SVN doesn't mean > that

Port updates - ROOT5 and ROOT6

Hi All, Please could someone with commit rights take a look a these two port updates https://trac.macports.org/ticket/45345 https://trac.macports.org/ticket/45265 Mojca would normally handle these, but is unavailable right now, so I am looking for another volunteer to commit them ;) cheers C