This would have all just magically worked if bug 7361 was fixed.
See http://svn.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/7361
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 5:35 AM, Randall Wood
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Everyone:
>
> Recently, the GNOME developers wrote a replacement for scroll
Everyone:
Recently, the GNOME developers wrote a replacement for scrollkeeper
named rarian. rarian is a drop-in replacement for scrollkeeper with
the advantage of continuing active development and support as well as
other under-the-hood improvements.
Unfortunately, it has caused some problems on
all it with
"sudo port -f uninstall rarian ; sudo port install rarian" ?
I think I might understand the problem now. At some point port may
have attempted to activate, and been blocked by the then active
scrollkeeper port. Upgrading scrollkeeper may have deactivated
scrollkeeper without a
ith
>
> "sudo port -f uninstall rarian ; sudo port install rarian" ?
I think I might understand the problem now. At some point port may
have attempted to activate, and been blocked by the then active
scrollkeeper port. Upgrading scrollkeeper may have deactivated
scrollkeeper wit
On Apr 7, 2008, at 9:10 AM, William Davis wrote:
As I previously reported: I did (and still do) have rarian installed.
Have you already tried to reinstall it with
"sudo port -f uninstall rarian ; sudo port install rarian" ?
-Guido
___
macports-d
On Apr 6, 2008, at 8:14 PM, Randall Wood wrote:
There are no ports that depend on scrollkeeper. None. Every port
that
had a dependency on scrollkeeper now has a dependency on rarian. Try
sudo port selfupdate ; sudo port clean --all all ; sudo port upgrade
outdated
and see if that
ort rarian contains:
/opt/local/bin/rarian-example
/opt/local/bin/rarian-sk-config
[...]
/opt/local/bin/scrollkeeper-config
/opt/local/bin/scrollkeeper-extract
[...]
/opt/local/bin/scrollkeeper-update
[...]
bug-buddy already use
system "${prefix}/bin/scrollkeeper-update&q
On Apr 6, 2008, at 8:14 PM, Randall Wood wrote:
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 10:48 AM, William Davis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Apr 6, 2008, at 4:26 AM, Randall Wood wrote:
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 1:55 AM, William Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
dang it all
you have fixed
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 10:48 AM, William Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Apr 6, 2008, at 4:26 AM, Randall Wood wrote:
>
>
> > On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 1:55 AM, William Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > dang it all
> > > yo
On Apr 6, 2008, at 4:26 AM, Randall Wood wrote:
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 1:55 AM, William Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
dang it all
you have fixed scrollkeeper so I cant re-install it but now I cant
install
half the gnome updates because they want scrollkeeper!
Im disg
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 1:55 AM, William Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dang it all
> you have fixed scrollkeeper so I cant re-install it but now I cant install
> half the gnome updates because they want scrollkeeper!
> Im disgussted
There are no ports that depe
dang it all
you have fixed scrollkeeper so I cant re-install it but now I cant
install half the gnome updates because they want scrollkeeper!
Im disgussted
Well I need some sleep. Ill try to write it all up tommorow because if
I do it now Ill rant
:/
William Davis
On Mar 30, 2008, at 11:33 AM, Randall Wood wrote:
I know that rarian is supposed to be a drop-in replacement for
scrollkeeper. but is it really?
Yes, scrollkeeper has been deprecated in Gnome 2.22: rarian
provides its own substitutes of the "scrollkeeper-*" commands
required fo
Does the rarian port completely obsolete scrollkeeper or does it
merely conflict with scrollkeeper?
I'm getting the following message and am wondering if I can simply
uninstall scrollkeeper and replace all dependencies on it with a
dependency on rarian?
---> Activating rarian 0.8.0
an empty log file after activation. See ticket:10847
>
> Modified Paths:
> --
> trunk/dports/textproc/scrollkeeper/Portfile
>
> Modified: trunk/dports/textproc/scrollkeeper/Portfile
> ===
>
15 matches
Mail list logo
