David Naylor píše v út 26. 05. 2009 v 08:19 +0200:
> pav: ${_MAKE_JOBS:C/-j//} won't work with DISABLE_MAKE_JOBS (or
> MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE) since it needs to always be a positive number, secondly it
> still cannot be used for conditional code (since it is defined in the post
> section, but the who
From: Pav Lucistnik
Subject: Re: MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE (some more ports)
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 10:48:25 +0200
> David Naylor pí¹e v út 26. 05. 2009 v 08:19 +0200:
>
>> pav: ${_MAKE_JOBS:C/-j//} won't work with DISABLE_MAKE_JOBS (or
>> MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE) since it needs to always be a positive number,
On Mon, 25 May 2009 20:49:50 +0100 Steven Hartland wrote:
> Why does emulators/linux_base-f10 contain a Fedora 8 port
> most confusing!
It was just a repocopy. I'm working on it, just enotime now.
WBR
--
bsam
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing lis
as so many folk build server-only, there must e a make.conf or whatever
option to tell ports that you just do not want an x server or any of
it's 500kg friends. but i can not seem to find it.
i do cvsup-without-gui, emacs-nox11, etc. but one mistake with some
port, and you get the whole boatload
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 08:32:50PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> as so many folk build server-only, there must e a make.conf or whatever
> option to tell ports that you just do not want an x server or any of
> it's 500kg friends. but i can not seem to find it.
>
> i do cvsup-without-gui, emacs-nox11
>> as so many folk build server-only, there must e a make.conf or whatever
>> option to tell ports that you just do not want an x server or any of
>> it's 500kg friends. but i can not seem to find it.
> I think you're looking for WITHOUT_X11=yes :)
i have that. i still get a lot of x with some p
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 08:32:50PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
>> as so many folk build server-only, there must e a make.conf or whatever
>> option to tell ports that you just do not want an x server or any of
>> it's 500kg friends. but i can
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 08:44:43PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> >> as so many folk build server-only, there must e a make.conf or whatever
> >> option to tell ports that you just do not want an x server or any of
> >> it's 500kg friends. but i can not seem to find it.
> > I think you're looking for
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Erik Trulsson wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 08:44:43PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
>> >> as so many folk build server-only, there must e a make.conf or whatever
>> >> option to tell ports that you just do not want an x server or any of
>> >> it's 500kg friends. bu
On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 16:00 +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> >
> >
> > We rolled a new version with a fix for all users where
> > has problems with kernel load and unload. Many thanks to
> > Shin-ichi Okano where submitted this patch to the vbox ml.
> >
> > http://people.freebsd.or
Florent Thoumie wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Erik Trulsson wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 08:44:43PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
as so many folk build server-only, there must e a make.conf or whatever
option to tell ports that you just do not want an x server or any of
it's 500
On Tuesday 26 May 2009 10:48:25 Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> David Naylor píše v út 26. 05. 2009 v 08:19 +0200:
> > pav: ${_MAKE_JOBS:C/-j//} won't work with DISABLE_MAKE_JOBS (or
> > MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE) since it needs to always be a positive number, secondly
> > it still cannot be used for conditional cod
Le 26/05/2009 à 18:05:17+0200, lysergius2001 a écrit
>
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Albert Shih wrote:
>
> >
> I concur. It's work for me too.
>
>
>
> Me too... but what did it do? That a plain deinstall/reinstall did not?
>
The more complex software I ever wrote is
Le 25/05/2009 à 09:57:15-0700, GESBBB a écrit
>
> > From: Yuri
> >
> > See log below:
> >
> > mv -f .deps/libsane_canon_dr_la-canon_dr-s.Tpo
> > .deps/libsane_canon_dr_la-canon_dr-s.Plo^M
> > /bin/sh ../libtool --silent --tag=CC --mode=compile cc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
> > -I../include/sane -I. -
I run the following command to upgrade from audacious 1.5.* to 2.0.*:
$ portmaster audacious\*
This starts to build three ports: audacious, audacious-plugins, audacious-skins.
At the end of audacious upgrade portmaster asked me if I want to delete not only
the older distfile of audacious but also
on 26/05/2009 19:31 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> I run the following command to upgrade from audacious 1.5.* to 2.0.*:
> $ portmaster audacious\*
> This starts to build three ports: audacious, audacious-plugins,
> audacious-skins.
> At the end of audacious upgrade portmaster asked me if I wa
On Tue, 26 May 2009, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 26/05/2009 19:31 Andriy Gapon said the following:
>> I run the following command to upgrade from audacious 1.5.* to
>> 2.0.*: $ portmaster audacious\*
FYI, the \* at the end of that is not necessary. If the command line
argument doesn't match a specif
> Something like the following would work as a safety net.
>
> --- /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.xorg.mk.orig2009-05-26 13:42:52.0 +0100
> +++ /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.xorg.mk 2009-05-26 13:42:58.0 +0100
> @@ -28,6 +28,11 @@
> # xserver - there's only one atm, I guess everything can fit into the
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 03:52:53AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> > Something like the following would work as a safety net.
> >
> > --- /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.xorg.mk.orig 2009-05-26 13:42:52.0 +0100
> > +++ /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.xorg.mk 2009-05-26 13:42:58.0 +0100
> > @@ -28,6 +28,11 @
>> i think this whole thing is worth a few days to settle in our heads.
>> essentially, if we believe that freebsd is used extensively in
>> headless server deployments, we should make that easy and smooth.
> But even a headless server can run X clients with the display being on
> some other (presu
David Naylor píše v út 26. 05. 2009 v 18:17 +0200:
> What about the change that exposes MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER when MAKE_JOBS_SAFE or
> FORCE_MAKE_JOBS are defined (to avoid using ${_MAKE_JOBS:C/-j//}, not sure
> what the policy is of ports using *.mk internals). I think that is a
> reasonable chang
Frank J. Laszlo wrote:
You could also just rm the x11-* directories from the ports tree, and
then set exceptions for csup/cvsup/whatever to not update them. It'll
generate an error if you try to install any X11 dependent ports, but it
wont install them ;)
This is precisely what I do. I don't
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Martin Wilke wrote:
> Once the installed Python has been updated to 2.6, by using one of the
> methods above, it is required to run the upgrade-site-packages target in
> lang/python to assure that site-packages are made available to the new
> Python
>
23 matches
Mail list logo
