-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 06/01/14 04:24, Matthew Luckie wrote:
> Please commit. Thanks Guido for doing the digging on this one.
Patch commited.
Thanks to both of you!
- --
Guido Falsi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuP
> On Jun 1, 2014, at 1:17 PM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>
> On 2014-05-31, Mark Linimon wrote:
>
>>> I forgot I had the DOCS option unset as it was unset ages ago
>>> and updates have always worked. The question is "why are changes
>>> to a port committed without proper testing?" Yes, "pro
On 2014-05-31, Mark Linimon wrote:
>> I forgot I had the DOCS option unset as it was unset ages ago
>> and updates have always worked. The question is "why are changes
>> to a port committed without proper testing?" Yes, "proper
>> testing" should include testing of the effects of (un)setting
>
Please commit. Thanks Guido for doing the digging on this one.
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 05:34:14PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> On 05/31/14 17:09, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 05:00:34PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> >> On 05/31/14 16:35, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >>> On Sat, May 31, 201
On 2014-05-31 20:29, Steve Kargl wrote:
The number of combinations is huge.
There are 3 options for graphics/xfig. It takes all of 5 minutes
to build and install xfig on a 5 year old laptop. The options
are mutually exclusive, so one needs to build and install the
port 4 times (i.e., a whole
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 12:31:28PM -0500, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 08:09:36AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > I forgot I had the DOCS option unset as it was unset ages ago
> > and updates have always worked. The question is "why are changes
> > to a port committed without proper
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 08:09:36AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> I forgot I had the DOCS option unset as it was unset ages ago
> and updates have always worked. The question is "why are changes
> to a port committed without proper testing?" Yes, "proper
> testing" should include testing of the effe
On 05/31/14 17:09, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 05:00:34PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
>> On 05/31/14 16:35, Steve Kargl wrote:
>>> On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 03:31:34PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
On 05/31/14 02:08, Steve Kargl wrote:
> Can someone please revert r354029 for graph
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 05:00:34PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> On 05/31/14 16:35, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 03:31:34PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> >> On 05/31/14 02:08, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >>> Can someone please revert r354029 for graphics/xfig?
> >>> This revision breaks the
On 05/31/14 16:35, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 03:31:34PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
>> On 05/31/14 02:08, Steve Kargl wrote:
>>> Can someone please revert r354029 for graphics/xfig?
>>> This revision breaks the ability to install the port.
>>>
>>> cd /usr/ports/graphics/xfig
>>> sv
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 03:31:34PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote:
> On 05/31/14 02:08, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > Can someone please revert r354029 for graphics/xfig?
> > This revision breaks the ability to install the port.
> >
> > cd /usr/ports/graphics/xfig
> > svn merge -r 354029:340725 .
> >
>
> Hi,
On 05/31/14 02:08, Steve Kargl wrote:
> Can someone please revert r354029 for graphics/xfig?
> This revision breaks the ability to install the port.
>
> cd /usr/ports/graphics/xfig
> svn merge -r 354029:340725 .
>
Hi,
I did commit the revision you mention. I just tested the port and it
installs
12 matches
Mail list logo
