2010/9/30 Anonymous
> Paolo Bormida writes:
>
> > I understand maintaing a port is an huge gift to the FreeBSD
> > community, and gratitude goes to those, such as you, that do this
> > job.
>
> Keep the thanks for previous maintainers. It seems like I've contr
Hi,
I am here again with a consideration about the choiche to use a snapshot for
the amule port.
I understand maintaing a port is an huge gift to the FreeBSD community, and
gratitude goes to those, such as you, that do this job.
It is not my goal to ask you to steer the port in the direction tha
lds just wxbase
and amuled+amulecmd.
If I ever can afford the time I might try doing that after reading the
porter handbook far more deeply that what I have done up to now...
Thanx for your time.
Paolo
2010/9/22 Anonymous
> Paolo Bormida writes:
>
> > My goal is not to build the g
,
along with amuled+amulecmd, then never use the X part.
Paolo
2010/9/22 Paolo Bormida
> Double answer:
>
> The functions you see in amulecmd should be in wxbase and wx is not a
> problem.
>
> My goal is not to build the gui version, just amuled and amulecmd, and I
> thin
/HowTo_Compile_aMuled
So, I think a knob for passing to configure those flags would do the job.
This way X11 should not be needed.
Paolo
2010/9/22 Anonymous
> Anonymous writes:
>
> > Paolo Bormida writes:
> >
> >> Can the new knobs be used to do a gui-less build of amule?
> &g
ed to do a gui-less build of amule?
Thanx
Paolo
2010/9/22 Anonymous
> Paolo Bormida writes:
>
> > Does amule2 port switched from a stable 2.2.5 release to a daily
> > snapshot?
>
> Yes, snapshots are gonna be used unless there are more frequent releases
> upstream. You
Sorry, but I think I should forward this to you as well.
Paolo Bormida
-- Forwarded message --
From: Paolo Bormida
Date: 2010/9/22
Subject: Question about amule port version
To: ganael.laplan...@martymac.org
Sorry to bother you, but I think I understood the problem I described
