Scott Haneda wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2009, at 5:17 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
>
>>> I have somewhere around 40 or these to do, it is a process. If there is
>>> anything anyone can share to make it easier, I sure would love to
>>> hear it.
>>
>> This is the main problem that trace mode (-t) was designed t
On Feb 26, 2009, at 01:49, Scott Haneda wrote:
On Feb 25, 2009, at 5:17 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
I have somewhere around 40 or these to do, it is a process. If
there is
anything anyone can share to make it easier, I sure would love to
hear it.
This is the main problem that trace mode (-t)
On Feb 25, 2009, at 5:17 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
I have somewhere around 40 or these to do, it is a process. If
there is
anything anyone can share to make it easier, I sure would love to
hear it.
This is the main problem that trace mode (-t) was designed to solve.
Does trace mode actuall
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:52:49PM -0600, Ryan Schmidt said:
> On Feb 25, 2009, at 19:17, Joshua Root wrote:
>
>> This is the main problem that trace mode (-t) was designed to solve.
>
> Speaking of trace mode, it doesn't work for me. Fails during extract
> already:
>
> $ port -dt extract zlib
[.
On Feb 25, 2009, at 19:17, Joshua Root wrote:
This is the main problem that trace mode (-t) was designed to solve.
Speaking of trace mode, it doesn't work for me. Fails during extract
already:
$ port -dt extract zlib
DEBUG: Found port in file:///Users/rschmidt/macports/dports/archivers/
Scott Haneda wrote:
> This ASSP port is going to kill me.
>
> I have either through MacPorts, or local ports I have made, nearly made
> ASSP as a new port. Below, is my testing methodology, can someone
> confirm this is the best process, or if there are simpler methods that I
> should be using?
>
This ASSP port is going to kill me.
I have either through MacPorts, or local ports I have made, nearly
made ASSP as a new port. Below, is my testing methodology, can
someone confirm this is the best process, or if there are simpler
methods that I should be using?
Clean up as if a new use
