On 06/14/2012 23:26, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 15/06/2012 07:55 Doug Barton said the following:
>> On 06/14/2012 05:48, Jan Beich wrote:
>>> I use WRKDIRPREFIX=/usr/obj
>>
>> As I've mentioned to you a non-zero number of times, this is a bad idea.
>> The fact that it either works and/or can be made
on 15/06/2012 10:05 Doug Barton said the following:
> On 06/14/2012 23:26, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> on 15/06/2012 07:55 Doug Barton said the following:
>>> On 06/14/2012 05:48, Jan Beich wrote:
I use WRKDIRPREFIX=/usr/obj
>>>
>>> As I've mentioned to you a non-zero number of times, this is a bad
On 06/15/2012 00:06, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> Could you please point me to those past explanations?
If the fact that using it actually causes things to break (as described
in this thread) isn't sufficient, I have no idea what else I could say
that would help you.
Doug
--
This .signature sanit
on 15/06/2012 10:11 Doug Barton said the following:
> On 06/15/2012 00:06, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> Could you please point me to those past explanations?
>
> If the fact that using it actually causes things to break (as described
> in this thread) isn't sufficient, I have no idea what else I could s
Hi,
Just touching base to see if you were aware that 0.7.0 has been released.
If you could update the port when you get a chance (have time), that
would be excellent.
Cheers,
Kris
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mail
Thanks for the heads up. I've been out of town on business all week, and
we're coming up on the close of the quarter, so I've been a bit busy. I'll
do my best to get it ported soon, though I expect it may take longer than
usual given that it's a "larger" update, the extent of which I don't yet
kn
On 15/06/2012 00:06, Jason Helfman wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:14:52AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin thus spake:
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 04:21:16PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> After recent mention in this list that UNIQUENAME is not actually a
>>> unique name for e
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 08:43:59AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 15/06/2012 00:06, Jason Helfman wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:14:52AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin thus spake:
> >> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 04:21:16PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Dear all,
> >>>
> >>> After recen
I maintain math/slatec.
I see in http://people.freebsd.org/~ehaupt/distilator/math/slatec/
http://netlib.linux-mirror.org/slatec/guide 2012-06-15, 00:25:17
2012-05-27, 11:46:28NXDOMAIN
http://netlib.linux-mirror.org/blas/d1mach.f2012-06-14, 22:15:50
2012-05-27, 13:55:49NXDO
While checking the new packages/ports in NetBSD pkgsrc and FreeBSD ports, I
noticed png-1.5.11 just added in NetBSD pkgsrc, which is usually behind FreeBSD
ports, but not yet in FreeBSD ports (just ran "portsnap fetch update").
Not to be unduly impatient, but I don't want to upgrade a whole lot
> In my port I have
>
> MASTER_SITES= NL:slatec,blas
>
> which, according to bsd.sites.mk, does not
> include linux-mirror.org. In fact I can't
> find it in bsd.sites.mk at all.
> So where is it coming from?
I recently removed it from the Netlib master sites because of recent
failures, so you ne
That's slightly bizarre - urandom should be in the os module. Just to verify:
mr16613: > uname -srm
FreeBSD 9.0-STABLE amd64
mr16613: > python2.7 --version
Python 2.7.3
mr16613: > python2.7 -c 'from os import urandom as _urandom ; print
str(_urandom)'
Out of curiosity, could you try something
Hi joh...@freebsd.org
& cc ports@
A 9.0-RELEASE ports fails on
cd print/texinfo ; make fetch
unless one imports newer values from current, (as I did in my
http://berklix.com/~jhs/src/bsd/fixes/FreeBSD/ports/gen/print/texinfo/distinfo.REL=ALL.diff
)
But periodicaly patching distinfo with
> current Mk/bsd.port.mk has
> # DISABLE_SIZE - Do not check the size of a distfile even if the SIZE field
> # has been specified in distinfo. This is useful
> # when using an alternate FETCH_CMD.
PS:
It's a port wide variable, not for individual files. Used here:
Skype 4.0 for Linux is now available. Is there any possibility of
getting it ported to FreeBSD? The latest version in ports is only
2.x.
--
Jerry ♔
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
___
On 06/15/2012 01:08 PM, Jerry wrote:
Skype 4.0 for Linux is now available. Is there any possibility of
getting it ported to FreeBSD? The latest version in ports is only
2.x.
Why not? Thinking FreeBSD could become immune to remote exploits is absurd.
So without much efforts I can guess ports
On 6/15/12 1:53 PM, Etienne Robillard wrote:
A good reason to stop using this bloated OS if you ask me and use
something more respectful to their users base relaying on STABLE for
stability reasons...
PLEASE use linux.. they need you and love you.
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
>*| * SECNAP Netwo
On 15 June 2012 18:53, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/15/2012 01:08 PM, Jerry wrote:
>>
>> Skype 4.0 for Linux is now available. Is there any possibility of
>> getting it ported to FreeBSD? The latest version in ports is only
>> 2.x.
>
>
>
> Why not? Thinking FreeBSD could become immune to remot
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Jerry wrote:
> Skype 4.0 for Linux is now available. Is there any possibility of
> getting it ported to FreeBSD? The latest version in ports is only
> 2.x.
I don't have time to do it right at the moment, but since this is
pre-compiled binary software, updating the
On 6/15/2012 5:08 PM, Robert Simmons wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Jerry wrote:
>> Skype 4.0 for Linux is now available. Is there any possibility of
>> getting it ported to FreeBSD? The latest version in ports is only
>> 2.x.
> I don't have time to do it right at the moment, but since
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 19:12:58 +0100
Chris Rees articulated:
>On 15 June 2012 18:53, Etienne Robillard wrote:
>> On 06/15/2012 01:08 PM, Jerry wrote:
>>>
>>> Skype 4.0 for Linux is now available. Is there any possibility of
>>> getting it ported to FreeBSD? The latest version in ports is only
>>> 2
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Jerry wrote:
> Skype 4.0 for Linux is now available. Is there any possibility of
> getting it ported to FreeBSD? The latest version in ports is only
> 2.x.
One last thing. These are the files that you are going to want to patch:
ports/net-im/skype/
If you've nev
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rich Neese wrote:
> I just wish skype would get off their buts and make a bsd version. time
> to break code and make a opensource version
That's not the answer. Really, everyone needs to move away from Skype
altogether. Use Blink. It is a superior client and it
Rich Neese writes:
> >> Skype 4.0 for Linux is now available. Is there any possibility of
> >> getting it ported to FreeBSD? The latest version in ports is only
> >> 2.x.
> I just wish skype would get off their buts and make a bsd
> version. time to break code and make a opensourc
On 06/15/2012 05:25 PM, Robert Simmons wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rich Neese wrote:
I just wish skype would get off their buts and make a bsd version. time
to break code and make a opensource version
That's not the answer. Really, everyone needs to move away from Skype
altogethe
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 6:06 PM, wrote:
> On 06/15/2012 05:25 PM, Robert Simmons wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rich Neese wrote:
>>>
>>> I just wish skype would get off their buts and make a bsd version. time
>>> to break code and make a opensource version
>>
>>
>> That's not the
No, the aswer is Skype still. Why? Because Skype use user of Windows 3.1 to
Windows 7, MAC, Linux...
How many people use FreeBSD? Does FreeBSD user comunicate just with the
other FreeBSD user?
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Robert Simmons wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rich Neese
On 2012-06-15 14:25, Robert Simmons wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rich Neese wrote:
I just wish skype would get off their buts and make a bsd version. time
to break code and make a opensource version
That's not the answer. Really, everyone needs to move away from Skype
altogether.
The problem is with 2.6. 2.7 performs the below just fine. 2.6 does not,
The mailman port seems to insist on 2.6 no matter what I do.
brightstar# uname -srm
FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE-p2 amd64
brightstar# python2.6 --version
Python 2.6.7
brightstar# python2.6 -c 'from os import urandom as _urandom; print
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Franci Nabalanci wrote:
> No, the aswer is Skype still. Why? Because Skype use user of Windows 3.1 to
> Windows 7, MAC, Linux...
> How many people use FreeBSD? Does FreeBSD user comunicate just with the
> other FreeBSD user?
Please reread my post to the list. I w
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Darren Pilgrim
wrote:
> On 2012-06-15 14:25, Robert Simmons wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rich Neese wrote:
>>>
>>> I just wish skype would get off their buts and make a bsd version. time
>>> to break code and make a opensource version
>>
>>
>> Tha
Robert Simmons wrote ..
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Darren Pilgrim
> wrote:
> > On 2012-06-15 14:25, Robert Simmons wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rich Neese wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I just wish skype would get off their buts and make a bsd version. time
> >>> to break code a
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Waitman Gobble wrote:
> dude like since MS bought it they haven't even released any non-win32
> version. i agree, a different alternative to skype is better, and get your
> contacts to join up with that.
Huh? "New in this version 4.0":
http://www.skype.com/intl
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Robert Simmons wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Darren Pilgrim
> wrote:
>> On 2012-06-15 14:25, Robert Simmons wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rich Neese wrote:
I just wish skype would get off their buts and make a bsd version.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> You might look at ekiga. It is in ports and a standard part of Gnome.
> It does sip and also claims to support H.323 conferencing, but I have
> not had much success making it work with our H.323 system. I will
> admit that I have not tried in
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:17 PM, Robert Simmons wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>> You might look at ekiga. It is in ports and a standard part of Gnome.
>> It does sip and also claims to support H.323 conferencing, but I have
>> not had much success making it work
El día Saturday, June 16, 2012 a las 02:17:53AM -0400, Robert Simmons escribió:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> > You might look at ekiga. It is in ports and a standard part of Gnome.
> > It does sip and also claims to support H.323 conferencing, but I have
> > not had m
37 matches
Mail list logo
