Anyone have a moment to check out kismet on a Tiger box? Specifically I've got
issues with -fnested-functions not working.
I don't have Tiger, but #24951 builds for me on a Leopard ppc box as-is with
the same compiler as the OP (gcc-4.0).
Thanks.
___
On Nov 27, 2010, at 6:53 PM, Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
> Anyone have a moment to check out kismet on a Tiger box? Specifically I've
> got issues with -fnested-functions not working.
You guys are still supporting Tiger? Really? Why? Even the most die-hard PPC
hold-out can still run Leopard, so
On 2010-11-29 06:28 , Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>
> You guys are still supporting Tiger?
Nope. Base just "still works" there, so it's possible for port
maintainers to try to keep their stuff working too if they want to.
- Josh
___
macports-dev mailing l
> Even the most die-hard PPC hold-out can still run Leopard, so it's not like
> some specific demographic is going to be locked out by dropping support for
> anything older than 10.5?
Business still run IE6. Businesses still run Tiger.
"Support the two previous releases" is all I've ever heard-
On Nov 28, 2010, at 1:57 PM, Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
> "Support the two previous releases" is all I've ever heard--which I don't
> think is mentioned officially (email list archives are not policies).
> Following this, dropping Tiger would be when 10.7 materializes.
OK, fair enough. Perhaps wh
On Nov 28, 2010, at 13:28, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> On Nov 27, 2010, at 6:53 PM, Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
>
>> Anyone have a moment to check out kismet on a Tiger box? Specifically I've
>> got issues with -fnested-functions not working.
>
> You guys are still supporting Tiger? Really? Why? E
On 2010-11-29 09:48 , Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>
> On Nov 28, 2010, at 1:57 PM, Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
>
>> "Support the two previous releases" is all I've ever heard--which I don't
>> think is mentioned officially (email list archives are not policies).
>> Following this, dropping Tiger would
> The homepage says that MacPorts targets "mainly the current Mac OS X release
> (10.6, A.K.A Snow Leopard) and the immediately previous one (10.5, A.K.A.
> Leopard)". The download page refers to Tiger as a legacy platform.
If this is meant to imply MacPorts doesn't support Tiger then why:
* pr
On Nov 28, 2010, at 19:49, Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
>> The homepage says that MacPorts targets "mainly the current Mac OS X release
>> (10.6, A.K.A Snow Leopard) and the immediately previous one (10.5, A.K.A.
>> Leopard)". The download page refers to Tiger as a legacy platform.
>
> If this is me
On 2010-11-29 02:49 , Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
> Perhaps this leads us to another issue: why is the MacPorts site a mountain
> of text? Even our downloads must be found mid-sentence.
Most of the website content was written by jmpp and he loves text ;-)
I totally agree with you that the download li
In article <9b401a82-fc71-4636-9d87-474f44e03...@apple.com>,
"Jordan K. Hubbard"
wrote:
> You guys are still supporting Tiger? Really? Why? Even the most die-hard
> PPC hold-out can still run Leopard, so it's not like some specific
> demographic is going to be locked out by dropping suppor
On Nov 29, 2010, at 1:23 AM, Ned Deily wrote:
> In article <9b401a82-fc71-4636-9d87-474f44e03...@apple.com>,
> "Jordan K. Hubbard"
> wrote:
>> You guys are still supporting Tiger? Really? Why? Even the most die-hard
>> PPC hold-out can still run Leopard, so it's not like some specific
>> d
On Nov 29, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> P.S. OK, I'll confess that I still have a DEC Alpha in the corner, running at
> a whopping 500MHz, but it hasn't been powered up for over 5 years. Anyone
> looking for a doorstop? You pay shipping and its yours. :)
Just to follow up on
On 2010-11-30 07:50 , Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>
> How many people (in the maintainers group) even still have G4/Tiger
> hardware to test on and what sorts of statements can be made about what
> percentage of the MacPorts "ports collection" works on SnowLeopard,
> Leopard and Tiger? Probably non
On Nov 29, 2010, at 1:24 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
> On 2010-11-30 07:50 , Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>>
>> How many people (in the maintainers group) even still have G4/Tiger
>> hardware to test on and what sorts of statements can be made about what
>> percentage of the MacPorts "ports collection" wo
On Nov 29, 2010, at 2:09 PM, William Siegrist wrote:
> Of course, "full" run here means it tried all 7000+ ports and built
> everything it could (somewhere in the 4000's iirc). Anyway, as Josh pointed
> out, we're doing some backend work on Mac OS Forge still and are trying not
> to disturb th
16 matches
Mail list logo
