Re: [152440] trunk/dports/net

> On Sep 8, 2016, at 11:28 PM, ebori...@macports.org wrote: > > Revision > 152440 > Author > ebori...@macports.org > Date > 2016-09-08 21:28:04 -0700 (Thu, 08 Sep 2016) > Log Message > > zabbix3: New port. > Added Paths > > • trunk/dports/net/zabbix3/ > +--with-gnu

Re: lldb ...

Sent from my iPhone... > On Sep 8, 2016, at 17:32, Rainer Müller wrote: > >> On 2016-09-08 22:03, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: >> >>> On Sep 2, 2016, at 05:19, Rainer Müller wrote: >>> >>> In my opinion, the actual implementation of codesigning should be in base: >>> >>> 1) Create a se

Re: lldb ...

Sent from my iPhone... > On Sep 8, 2016, at 17:30, Rainer Müller wrote: > > On 2016-09-08 22:09, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: >>> On Sep 5, 2016, at 03:49, Rainer Müller wrote: >>> My intention here is to describe a way how the code-signing can be >>> automated. We do not gain much by pro

Re: lldb ...

On 2016-09-08 22:03, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: > >> On Sep 2, 2016, at 05:19, Rainer Müller wrote: >> >> In my opinion, the actual implementation of codesigning should be in base: >> >> 1) Create a self-signed certificate/identity for code-signing >> 2) Import certificate/identity into key

Re: lldb ...

On 2016-09-08 22:09, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 03:49, Rainer Müller wrote: >> My intention here is to describe a way how the code-signing can be >> automated. We do not gain much by providing a solution that still >> requires manual interaction by the user. Generating

Re: lldb ...

> On Sep 8, 2016, at 15:13, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > > On Thursday September 08 2016 13:09:33 Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: >>> codesign.files ${prefix}/bin/binary1 developer \ >>>${prefix}/bin/binary2 firewall >>> codesign.identifier org.macports.${name} >> >> >

Re: lldb ...

On Thursday September 08 2016 13:09:33 Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: >> codesign.files ${prefix}/bin/binary1 developer \ >> ${prefix}/bin/binary2 firewall >> codesign.identifier org.macports.${name} > > >I don't like this approach. > >We should solve this type of probl

Re: lldb ...

> On Sep 5, 2016, at 03:49, Rainer Müller wrote: > > On 2016-09-05 00:57, René J.V. Bertin wrote: >> In a first draft the command accepted a list of binaries to sign, and read >> the identify from a configuration file. I suppose that corresponds to what >> you mean with a declarative syntax? >

Re: lldb ...

> On Sep 2, 2016, at 05:19, Rainer Müller wrote: > > On 2016-08-31 23:25, Lawrence Velázquez wrote: >>> On Aug 31, 2016, at 4:57 PM, René J.V. Bertin wrote: >>> >>> I noticed that Apple don't ship an lldb-mi executable (at least they don't >>> for OS X 10.9). >> >> Xcode 7.3 includes it (`x

Re: Do I want subports?

On 8 September 2016 at 19:33, Ken Cunningham wrote: > Working on the optimal way to do this emulator + GUI program. > > The emulator itself is best built with i386, for the JIT. This requires > libSDL to be available in i386 (so presumably +universal). You can monkey > around with a no-JIT version,

Re: Do I want subports?

> On Sep 8, 2016, at 12:33 PM, Ken Cunningham > wrote: > > Working on the optimal way to do this emulator + GUI program. > > The emulator itself is best built with i386, for the JIT. This requires > libSDL to be available in i386 (so presumably +universal). You can monkey > around with a no-

Do I want subports?

Working on the optimal way to do this emulator + GUI program. The emulator itself is best built with i386, for the JIT. This requires libSDL to be available in i386 (so presumably +universal). You can monkey around with a no-JIT version, but you wouldn't want it, ultimately. The rather tiny littl

Re: weird (buggy?) build dependency on a clang port

Because macports-clang-3.7 occurs first in the fallback list. Print out ${compiler.fallback} if you don't believe me. :) Installed compiler ports are not considered "more available" than uninstalled ones. Which of course is a good thing. A port installation should be fully reproducible. For

Re: weird (buggy?) build dependency on a clang port

First let me point you to this recent thread: On 2016-9-9 00:09 , René J.V. Bertin wrote: I can still understand (=/= agree) that the compiler selection procedure is designed to take the lowest version of a compiler th

weird (buggy?) build dependency on a clang port

Hi, I have the following in my KDevelop5 PortFile: compiler.blacklist *gcc* {clang < 602} macports-clang-3.3 macports-clang-3.4 macports-clang-3.5 compiler.fallback-append macports-clang-3.9 macports-clang-3.8 macports-clang-3.7 macports-clang-3.6 I have installed: {{{ port installed "llvm*"