Re: [141132] trunk/dports/lang/apple-gcc42/Portfile

> On Oct 13, 2015, at 09:55, Landon Fuller wrote: > > > On Oct 12, 2015, at 14:14, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia > wrote: > >> Yes, and I was quite happy that the compilers failed to work in Yosemite, >> allowing me to mark them as unavailable.

Re: passing variants to dependencies; pre-activate check

Would something like this be a good idea to prevent multiple definition? This could potentially be an issue with other nested portgroups too. Index: dports/_resources/port1.0/group/active_variants-1.1.tcl === ---

Re: #49026: update of fail2ban to v0.9.3

Le 09/10/2015 16:49, Rainer Müller a écrit : Thanks for your work in porting and patching fail2ban! You welcome. Thanks to you and other macports developpers for having carefully checked and committed it. I noticed some things while trying to set this up. I don't know if these were introduced

Re: passing variants to dependencies; pre-activate check

Hi Josh, Thanks for the response. On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 8:26 PM, Joshua Root wrote: > On 2015-10-14 04:53 , David Strubbe wrote: > > Can anyone help me with these questions? > > > > In short, I am wondering: > > - Why does 'port install xcrysden +x11' pass the variant +x11

Re: passing variants to dependencies; pre-activate check

On 2015-10-14 13:04 , David Strubbe wrote: > > - Why is pre-activate code executed twice? > > It isn't, two pre-activate procedures have been registered and they are > each executed once. > > > Well, I only put one block of code in active variants, as below. Why > does it end up in

Re: passing variants to dependencies; pre-activate check

> On Oct 13, 2015, at 10:38 PM, David Strubbe wrote: > > Would something like this be a good idea to prevent multiple definition? This > could potentially be an issue with other nested portgroups too. > > Index: dports/_resources/port1.0/group/active_variants-1.1.tcl >

Re: [141129] trunk/dports/science/gr-fosphor

On Oct 12, 2015, at 8:28 AM, Michael Dickens wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015, at 01:49 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> On Oct 11, 2015, at 10:15 AM, michae...@macports.org wrote: >>> gr-fosphor: add a patch to fix finding Freetype2 headers, for those having >>> issues (e.g., in 10.11). >> Can you tell

Re: [141132] trunk/dports/lang/apple-gcc42/Portfile

As mentioned earlier, I updated base and the ports to defer dropping support for these legacy compilers. I also did an audit of the ports that are blacklisting clang and fixed a few along the way to remove the blacklisting. It's not surprising that most of the remainder are dead ports, over

Re: llvm-3.7 release and OpenMP

Hey Eric, Last month, you mentioned rewriting the llvm Portfile to use the cmake build system. I think now might be an opportune time to do that in llvm-3.8. Have you looked into that yet? --Jeremy > On Sep 3, 2015, at 10:10, Eric A. Borisch wrote: > > I'll defer on

Re: [141201] trunk/dports/math/ceres-solver/Portfile

> On Oct 12, 2015, at 5:54 PM, Joshua Root wrote: > > On 2015-10-13 08:26 , Mark Moll wrote: >> >>> On Oct 12, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> >>> On Oct 12, 2015, at 12:25 PM, mm...@macports.org wrote: Revision

Re: passing variants to dependencies; pre-activate check

Can anyone help me with these questions? In short, I am wondering: - Why does 'port install xcrysden +x11' pass the variant +x11 to the installation of tk only if BWidget is also not installed? - Why is pre-activate code executed twice? Thanks, David On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 3:19 PM, David

Re: passing variants to dependencies; pre-activate check

On 2015-10-14 04:53 , David Strubbe wrote: > Can anyone help me with these questions? > > In short, I am wondering: > - Why does 'port install xcrysden +x11' pass the variant +x11 to the > installation of tk only if BWidget is also not installed? It passes the variant on during installation of