On 12 Oct 2014, at 6:13 am, C.T.
mailto:semaphor...@yahoo.com>> wrote:
Apple never provided a suitable replacement for my scanner driver that would
render Rosetta unnecessary.
I have an old Canon N670U. It never had Mac drivers, as far as I know.
However I can run it perfectly well on Maveri
> On 12 Oct 2014, at 1:20 am, C.T. wrote:
>
> Apple didn't make the scanner, but when they cut something the software
> relies upon to work, that's Apple's responsibility.
Apple did not just cut it with no warning, vendors where given plenty of
warning via, for instance, the developer prev
Apple didn't make the scanner, but when they cut something the software relies
upon to work, that's Apple's responsibility. Of course it would much easier if
there were no patent on Rosetta's technology, where it could have been released
as open source.
> El 11/10/2014, a las 17:25, Dominik Rei
> On 11.10.2014, at 21:22, Chris Jones wrote:
>
>> But now 10.6 has less of the automation and integration we love from OS X.
>> Using its Safari is now strongly discouraged because of security flaws. I
>> absolutely need two independent browsers, and I won't install a Google
>> product on my
On Oct 11, 2014, at 11:39 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> Which isn't exhaustive ...
It's not exhaustive, but it's close. Both requested ports and command-line
logical operators are covered.
vq
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macos
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Chris Jones
wrote:
> Did Apple make that scanner ? I presume not, in which case its not Apples
> responsibility to provide drivers for all possible third party devices, but
> the vender of those devices. If they choose not to provide an Intel driver
> supporting 1
> On 11 Oct 2014, at 8:13 pm, C.T. wrote:
>
>
>> El 11/10/2014, a las 6:25, Chris Jones escribió:
>>
>> A lot. Rosetta was not just an application you could install, but an
>> extension of the underlying OS to provide the translation layer for PowerPC
>> applications. It would need to be k
> El 11/10/2014, a las 6:25, Chris Jones escribió:
>
> A lot. Rosetta was not just an application you could install, but an
> extension of the underlying OS to provide the translation layer for PowerPC
> applications. It would need to be kept in sync with any updates to the OS,
> and clearly
Akonadi depends on boost. When you installed boost, did you change the
compiler used? If so, this may be the issue. I found out the hard way
and forced boost to use the Macports GCC 4.7, and as time went on, I
found that ports depending on boost need to be built with the same compiler.
On 10/10/1
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:37 AM, René J.V. wrote:
> >...which they picked up from Ubuntu and is why Ubuntu upgrades are
> risky
>
> I'm not so sure about that ...
>
I am. Ubuntu takes a lot of things from testing and does its own release
engineering, but misses a lot of stuff Debian does as
On Oct 11, 2014, at 8:07 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Saturday October 11 2014 07:40:16 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> If a port depends on p5.12-X but p5.16-X would work, the port should update
>> its dependency. 5.16 is the default version of perl in MacPorts at this time
>> which all ports th
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:07 AM, René J.V. wrote:
> Maybe it's time for me to get re-acquainted with TcL ... ;)
MacPorts' filter syntax has nothing to do with Tcl, aside from happening to
have been written in it; it's also been around for over a decade. :p
Perhaps getting (re)acquainted with `m
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:10 AM, René J.V. wrote:
> Linux Mint is right to do so because they have a habit of modifying things
> to their own tastes and against established "rules"
...which they picked up from Ubuntu and is why Ubuntu upgrades are risky
--
brandon s allbery kf8nh
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Ryan Schmidt
wrote:
> It's the version of bash the scripts that came with your operating system
> were tested with. It's possible there are backwards-incompatible changes in
> bash 4.
There are definitely backwards incompatible changes; most notably, they
remove
On 11 Oct 2014, at 13:35, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> On Oct 11, 2014, at 7:29 AM, Barrie Stott wrote:
>
>> I have no objection at all to rebuilding Apple's /bin/bash and /bin/sh when
>> all I have to do is run the given script. However, Greg, do I need to do it?
>> I already have shellshock-proof v
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 5:31 AM, René J.V. wrote:
> Actually, you can. Either update the addresses in your
> /etc/apt/sources.list and sources.list.d/*
Ubuntu is moderately infamous for even stepping up one version not working;
multiple versions in a single go usually fails in my experience. (T
On Oct 11, 2014, at 7:01 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Saturday October 11 2014 06:53:27 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>>
>> Obviously, the naming is intentional. p5.12-X ports use perl5.12, p5.16-X
>> ports use perl5.16, etc.
>> I don't understand. If a port depends on p5.12-X, then it will use p5
On Oct 11, 2014, at 7:29 AM, Barrie Stott wrote:
> I have no objection at all to rebuilding Apple's /bin/bash and /bin/sh when
> all I have to do is run the given script. However, Greg, do I need to do it?
> I already have shellshock-proof versions of bash 4.3.27. Is there something
> special a
On 10 Oct 2014, at 23:45, Greg Earle wrote:
> On Oct 10, 2014, at 16:06 PM, Barrie Stott wrote:
>
>> On 10 Oct 2014, at 15:27, Brandon Allbery wrote:
>>
>>> That said, 10.6 being unsupported by Apple, it is possible that your best
>>> bet is to copy /bin/bash to /bin/bash.apple and then copy
On Saturday October 11 2014 06:53:27 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> Obviously, the naming is intentional. p5.12-X ports use perl5.12, p5.16-X
> ports use perl5.16, etc.
> I don't understand. If a port depends on p5.12-X, then it will use p5.12-X.
Obviously, yes. But what if a port depends on functiona
On Oct 11, 2014, at 6:38 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Saturday October 11 2014 06:27:33 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> What exactly do you mean by "cleaning up"? I've already seen many commits go
>> through with old python ports being added to the new "py-graveyard" port.
>> This should facilita
On Oct 11, 2014, at 4:31 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
>> No. Snow Leopard no longer receives updates of any sort, and Lion will
>> likely follow as soon as Yosemite drops.
>> http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1222
>
> I see they still haven't produced an EOL statement (is 10.6 Server still for
> sale
On Saturday October 11 2014 06:27:33 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> What exactly do you mean by "cleaning up"? I've already seen many commits go
> through with old python ports being added to the new "py-graveyard" port.
> This should facilitate upgrades by making the old ports "replaced_by" the new
> v
On Oct 11, 2014, at 4:23 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Friday October 10 2014 23:56:09 Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
>
>> Ports using these series will be migrated to Python 2.7 or 3.4 as
>> appropriate. New ports will only use 2.7 and 3.4 (and 3.5, when it is
>> released).
>
> Will there also
>
> In fact, certain changes in 10.9 (like with Mail.app) have gotten me to
> investigate KDE for alternatives ... And 10.6 still has Rosetta (and frankly,
> how much would it have cost to provide that tech as an optional install?)
A lot. Rosetta was not just an application you could install,
25 matches
Mail list logo
