> I thought the first Intel Minis had 2 slots that could take 1GB DIMMs. Bill
> Cole
> Bill, you may be correct! My last bit of internet sleuthing agrees with you…
> I think it is about time I took that beast apart and looked inside
I did this project on a MacMini 1,1 yesterday, and indeed there
Hi,
Bill Cole wrote:
>> This is all on 10.5/i386 - then I already started my luck on PPC,
>> then 10.6/universal - and last 10.5/x86_64
>
> Can you explain any practical justification for supporting Leopard on
> Intel?
well, practical... because it is nice. Of course, anybody can jsut run
and bu
> > Perhaps I can upgrade it, but that would be a soldering project.
>
> Aha! That explains it. I was not aware that such machines existed. I
> thought the first Intel Minis had 2 slots that could take 1GB DIMMs.
>
> --
> Bill Cole
Bill, you may be correct! My last bit of internet sleuthing agr
On 29 Nov 2020, at 16:11, Ken Cunningham wrote:
I have a MacMini 1,1 with 1GB of Ram that runs either MacOS X 10.4 or
10.5. It doesn’t have enough ram to run 10.6. Perhaps I can upgrade
it, but that would be a soldering project. I use it to build
TenFourFox for Intel which I upload to the TenF
> Can you explain any practical justification for supporting Leopard on
> Intel?
>
> I'm not suggesting that it's in any way "wrong" but I just can't see
> where the utility for such machines is. I'm still making use of a 2006
> Core Duo iMac which is 10.6/i386, so I'm familiar with the fact t
On 29 Nov 2020, at 6:55, Riccardo Mottola via macports-users wrote:
This is all on 10.5/i386 - then I already started my luck on PPC, then
10.6/universal - and last 10.5/x86_64
Can you explain any practical justification for supporting Leopard on
Intel?
I'm not suggesting that it's in any w
I have a patch for gcc that forces it to use the old assembler ever if
clang-5.0 is installed. I haven't pushed it yet, but I can send it to you if
you like.
The binaries server I put up basically _is_ an Intel builder...covers 10.4 &
10.5 PPC and Intel. Use it if you want.
Glad you're well! B
On Nov 29, 2020, at 06:24, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> On 2020-11-17 00:30:33 + Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On Nov 16, 2020, at 17:58, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
>
>>> Here were are in the situation that if, for some upstream reason, libxml2
>>> stops compiling with gcc 4.2, the user has no work
Hi,
On 2020-11-17 00:30:33 + Ryan Schmidt
wrote:
On Nov 16, 2020, at 17:58, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
Here were are in the situation that if, for some upstream reason,
libxml2
stops compiling with gcc 4.2, the user has no workaround and is
stuck in an
endless dependency.
If such
Hi Ken,
On 2020-11-18 17:07:43 + Ken Cunningham
wrote:
Riccardo et al,
I have finished rebuilding all the common compilers for Leopard Intel
i386,
up to clang-9.0.
It is apparently possible now to build up to gcc-10 on Tiger and up,
and I
have built some of these, but MacPorts ha
Riccardo et al,
I have finished rebuilding all the common compilers for Leopard Intel i386, up
to clang-9.0.
It is apparently possible now to build up to gcc-10 on Tiger and up, and I have
built some of these, but MacPorts has presently held some older systems back a
bit to avoid overly-compli
> MacPorts compiler to break is a pain on systems which have an older
> toolchain. Probably this goes unnoticed on newer macs where the system
> clang/gcc is "new enough".
> Here were are in the situation that if, for some upstream reason,
> libxml2 stops compiling with gcc 4.2, the user has no
On Nov 16, 2020, at 17:58, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
>
> Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>> So I have to force the "gcc-4.2" of xcode... that one works (and, luckily,
>>> libxml2 still compiles with it)
>> My point is that "sudo port upgrade outdated" should work. If it does not,
>> we may have a bug some
Hi Ryan!
Ryan Schmidt wrote:
So I have to force the "gcc-4.2" of xcode... that one works (and, luckily,
libxml2 still compiles with it)
My point is that "sudo port upgrade outdated" should work. If it does not, we
may have a bug somewhere that we need to fix, and what you're describing above
On Nov 13, 2020, at 17:45, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> On 2020-11-08 08:18:22 +0100 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On Nov 7, 2020, at 12:46, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
>>> I need to rebuild a package which is not working due to a dependency
>>> upgrde. revdep "catches" it but revdep fails to build it be
> It is a delicate siuation, with Ken we were supposing to make a static
> version or link statically, so that an upgrade does not "turn down"
> all MacPort compilers.
>
Ideally the compiler should have as few fragile deps as possible. Static
linking in the compiler deps might help us get to a
Hi,
On 2020-11-08 08:18:22 +0100 Ryan Schmidt
wrote:
On Nov 7, 2020, at 12:46, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
I need to rebuild a package which is not working due to a dependency
upgrde. revdep "catches" it but revdep fails to build it because it
uses
the wrong compiler and I need to force i
On Nov 7, 2020, at 12:46, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> I need to rebuild a package which is not working due to a dependency upgrde.
> revdep "catches" it but revdep fails to build it because it uses the wrong
> compiler and I need to force it (also because the compiler itself is broken
> becaus
Hi,
I need to rebuild a package which is not working due to a dependency
upgrde. revdep "catches" it but revdep fails to build it because it uses
the wrong compiler and I need to force it (also because the compiler
itself is broken because it is broken because the library is broken)
I us
19 matches
Mail list logo
