Dear port maintainer,
The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more of your
ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity to check
each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate,
submit/commit an update. If any ports have already been updated, you
On 09/04/17 21:50, Dan Mahoney wrote:
Hey there All,
Is there an easy way to have poudriere auto-track the latest quarterly
ports build tree, without having to manually reset it to a specific
branch?
Poudriere knows how to portsnap the latest ports/head, but not the latest
quarterly.
Example:
Hi all,
I'll be shorty deprecating Tcl/Tk 8.4 in our ports tree. The latest
release of this series was 8.4.20 (June 2013).
Tcl/Tk series 8.5 and 8.6 are fully supported, and 8.7 is coming
soon-ish.
Thus, I will soon mark the following ports as DEPRECATED, with expiry
date sometimes this fall. If
Le 05/09/2017 à 03:50, Dan Mahoney a écrit :
> Hey there All,
>
> Is there an easy way to have poudriere auto-track the latest quarterly
> ports build tree, without having to manually reset it to a specific
> branch?
>
> Poudriere knows how to portsnap the latest ports/head, but not the latest
>
Hi,
Can a committer have a look at this? It blocks another port update
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222001
Thanks!
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe,
Hi, Good Day
I'm writing to check if you would be interested to acquire the newly released
200,000+ "Tele-communication Executive" Leads with verified business emails and
complete contact information.
Data Fields: Contact name, Title, Company name, Size, Any Location, Opt-In
Email address,
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 5:03 AM, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'll be shorty deprecating Tcl/Tk 8.4 in our ports tree. The latest
> release of this series was 8.4.20 (June 2013).
> Tcl/Tk series 8.5 and 8.6 are fully supported, and 8.7 is coming
> soon-ish.
>
> Thus, I will soon mark the fo
Hi,
I prepare a port which needs plpython. Is there any reason that we don't
have the choice to write in our Makefile "USES pgsql:plpython"?
Only because there are no ports dependent upon this port? Can I add it
to my diff?
Regards
Loïc Bartoletti.
Hey,
No reason at all... I just missed it out when I wrote that bit of pgsql.mk :)
If you feel up to patching Mk/Uses/pgsql.mk (have a look at line 135, add
plpython and make another line below it to match the others). Please
alphabetise the list while you're at it!
If you can't get it to wo
By the way, the syntax is:
USES= pgsql
WANT_PGSQL= plpython
The argument to USES is for version selection.
Chris
On 5 September 2017 19:33:53 BST, Chris Rees wrote:
>Hey,
>
>No reason at all... I just missed it out when I wrote that bit of
>pgsql.mk :)
>
>If you feel up to p
Yes sorry. I wrote too fast :)
My patch is near to be ready. Just some tests to be sure.
Thanks.
Envoyé de mon smartphone BlackBerry 10.
Message d'origine
De: Chris Rees
Envoyé: mardi 5 septembre 2017 20:44
À: L.Bartoletti; po...@freebsd.org
Cc: pg...@freebsd.org
Objet: Re: USES pgsql:plpytho
On Monday, 4 September 2017 10:54:21 Geoffrey Huntley wrote:
> See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHllisWOCpU and
> https://twitter.com/GeoffreyHuntley/status/904227946084294656
Hi Geoffrey
It is great to hear there is more interest in finishing the port of .NET Core
to FreeBSD (and, I hope, to
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 11:52 AM, David Naylor wrote:
> On Monday, 4 September 2017 10:54:21 Geoffrey Huntley wrote:
>> See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHllisWOCpU and
>> https://twitter.com/GeoffreyHuntley/status/904227946084294656
>
> Hi Geoffrey
>
> It is great to hear there is more interest
In an experiment with building some arm ports via poudriere
cross building on amd64 I got the following. It appears that
clang does not handle all the assembler notation and a
different assembler might need to be used for x11/pixman .
(The x11/pixman usage is indirect from having specified
x11/lumi
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 5:03 AM, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'll be shorty deprecating Tcl/Tk 8.4 in our ports tree. The latest
> release of this series was 8.4.20 (June 2013).
> Tcl/Tk series 8.5 and 8.6 are fully supported, and 8.7 is coming
> soon-ish.
>
> Thus, I will soon mark the fo
Mark Millard writes:
> In an experiment with building some arm ports via poudriere
> cross building on amd64 I got the following. It appears that
> clang does not handle all the assembler notation and a
> different assembler might need to be used for x11/pixman .
> (The x11/pixman usage is indire
On 2017-Sep-5, at 1:13 PM, Jan Beich wrote:
> Mark Millard writes:
>
>> In an experiment with building some arm ports via poudriere
>> cross building on amd64 I got the following. It appears that
>> clang does not handle all the assembler notation and a
>> different assembler might need to be u
> On 5 Sep 2017, at 22:01, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 5:03 AM, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'll be shorty deprecating Tcl/Tk 8.4 in our ports tree. The latest
>> release of this series was 8.4.20 (June 2013).
>> Tcl/Tk series 8.5 and 8.6 are fully supported
On 2017-Sep-5, at 1:33 PM, Mark Millard wrote:
> On 2017-Sep-5, at 1:13 PM, Jan Beich wrote:
>
>> Mark Millard writes:
>>
>>> In an experiment with building some arm ports via poudriere
>>> cross building on amd64 I got the following. It appears that
>>> clang does not handle all the assemble
On Tuesday, 5 September 2017 at 15:56:12 +0200, Fernando Apesteguía wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can a committer have a look at this? It blocks another port update
>
> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222001
Probably. In fact, you've probably caused several committers to look
at it, but pos
This is a bit odd so I give it in stages. The context
is based on:
poudriere jail -c -j zrFBSDx64CjailArmV7 -a arm.armv6 -x -m null -M
/usr/obj/DESTDIRs/clang-armv7-installworld-poud -S /usr/src -v 12.0-CURRENT
poudriere bulk -j zrFBSDx64CjailArmV7 -w -f /root/armv7-origins.txt
(More details gi
21 matches
Mail list logo
