Am 11.12.2009 00:50 (UTC+1) schrieb Dima Panov:
On Friday 11 December 2009 07:07:48 Rainer Hurling wrote:
When trying to update from jdk-1.6.0.3p4_12 to jdk-1.6.0.3p4_13 under
recent 9.0-CURRENT (amd64) the following error occurs. Does anyone else
observe this behaviour?
It seems that something
Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 02:08:43PM -0800, Xin LI wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
> > The attachment never made it through (not sure why: in my MUA it looks
> > like it was sent) and after some more looking I decided I was probably
> > a bit to fast. I'll send a repost whe
On Friday 11 December 2009 07:07:48 Rainer Hurling wrote:
> When trying to update from jdk-1.6.0.3p4_12 to jdk-1.6.0.3p4_13 under
> recent 9.0-CURRENT (amd64) the following error occurs. Does anyone else
> observe this behaviour?
>
> It seems that something with threading or signal handling is not
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
>> I don't see the script.
>
> The attachment never made it through (not sure why: in my MUA it looks
> like it was sent) and after some more looking I decided I was probably
> a bit to fast. I'll send a repost when I improve it
Try sending it i
> I don't see the script.
The attachment never made it through (not sure why: in my MUA it looks
like it was sent) and after some more looking I decided I was probably
a bit to fast. I'll send a repost when I improve it
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mail
On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 10:27:58PM +0200, Eitan Adler wrote:
> The attached script is designed to work with the 20+ ports that
> currently have to resort to hacks to automatically figure out the head
> version, checkout from svn, make a tar file, and then upload the file
> to freefall.
>
> It is b
When trying to update from jdk-1.6.0.3p4_12 to jdk-1.6.0.3p4_13 under
recent 9.0-CURRENT (amd64) the following error occurs. Does anyone else
observe this behaviour?
It seems that something with threading or signal handling is not as it
should be?
Thanks in advance,
Rainer Hurling
On Thu, December 10, 2009 1:48 pm, Wesley Shields wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 01:30:00PM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
>> On 8.0-PRELEASE, ports tree up to date.
>>
>> I have altered the Makefile to remove some @ from the do-build section
>> of
>> the Makefile.
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>> [r...@subie
Alberto Villa wrote:
> On Thursday 10 December 2009 01:53:01 Alberto Villa wrote:
>>> --delete-build-only
>>> For packages/ports that are ONLY listed as build dependencies for the
>>> ports being updated in this run, delete them when the run is over.
>> it's still building, then i don't know if
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Langille wrote:
> On Thu, December 10, 2009 1:58 pm, Greg Larkin wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Dan Langille wrote:
>>> On 8.0-PRELEASE, ports tree up to date.
>>>
>>> I have altered the Makefile to remove some @ f
On Thu, December 10, 2009 1:58 pm, Greg Larkin wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dan Langille wrote:
>> On 8.0-PRELEASE, ports tree up to date.
>>
>> I have altered the Makefile to remove some @ from the do-build section
>> of
>> the Makefile.
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>> [r..
On Thu, December 10, 2009 1:58 pm, Greg Larkin wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dan Langille wrote:
>> On 8.0-PRELEASE, ports tree up to date.
>>
>> I have altered the Makefile to remove some @ from the do-build section
>> of
>> the Makefile.
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>> [r..
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 8.0-PRELEASE, ports tree up to date.
>
> I have altered the Makefile to remove some @ from the do-build section of
> the Makefile.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> [r...@subie:/usr/ports/security/logcheck] # make clean
> ===> Cleaning fo
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 01:30:00PM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> On 8.0-PRELEASE, ports tree up to date.
>
> I have altered the Makefile to remove some @ from the do-build section of
> the Makefile.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> [r...@subie:/usr/ports/security/logcheck] # make clean
> ===> Cleaning for log
On 8.0-PRELEASE, ports tree up to date.
I have altered the Makefile to remove some @ from the do-build section of
the Makefile.
Any ideas?
[r...@subie:/usr/ports/security/logcheck] # make clean
===> Cleaning for logcheck-1.2.54_3
[r...@subie:/usr/ports/security/logcheck] # make
===> Extracting
On 12/8/2009 7:52 PM, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
What is the policy for package building nodes? I mean, is it possible to
use some machines not owned directy by FreeBSD.org?
For example, I have spare machine in our rack which I can lend for some
period (until some production machine goes down and n
Marco Alberoni writes:
> Hello, are there any news about the Seamonkey 2.0 port?
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-gecko/2009-November/000420.html
Robert Huff
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing li
Hello, are there any news about the Seamonkey 2.0 port?
Yours sincerely
--
Marco Alberoni
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-por
Hello, are there any news about the Amsn 0.98.1 port?
Yours sincerely
--
Marco Alberoni
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports
19 matches
Mail list logo
