On 2019-10-11 08:10, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
I just was wondering what this game has to do with the browser:
pkg install firefox says:
New packages to be INSTALLED:
firefox: 69.0.2_1,1
kf5-kholidays: 5.62.0
opencv: 3.4.1_24
tesseract: 4.1.0_3
tes
Hi,
On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 09:08:27 +0200
Andrea Venturoli wrote:
> On 2019-10-11 08:10, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just was wondering what this game has to do with the browser:
> >
> > pkg install firefox says:
> >
> > New packages to be INSTALLED:
> > firefox: 69.0.2_1,1
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 02:10:57PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just was wondering what this game has to do with the browser:
>
> pkg install firefox says:
>
> New packages to be INSTALLED:
> firefox: 69.0.2_1,1
> kf5-kholidays: 5.62.0
> opencv: 3.4.1_24
>
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 06:02:23PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick via freebsd-ports
wrote:
> > Now we can get back on the ipv6 option.
> >
> > so if we want to proceed further in removing the option to build with or
> > without
> > ipv6 for the ports side. Please speak up in reply to this email, if you
Am 09.10.2019 um 08:15 schrieb Baptiste Daroussin :
>
> I agree I don't see the reason why we should keep that ipv6 option. When off
> this option does not bring much value to the users as the code for apps to
> support ipv6 mostly reside in the libc. Actually that was my intent in 2012 to
> first
LuKreme wrote on 2019/10/11 00:23:
On Oct 10, 2019, at 10:01, Lars Liedtke wrote:
Why not just make building in IPv6 support the default, and introduce a
flag if someone really needs or wants to build without that support?
Because it adds to the load of testing. If you really need it, build
On Oct 11, 2019, at 06:44, Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> wrote:
>
> LuKreme wrote on 2019/10/11 00:23:
>> On Oct 10, 2019, at 10:01, Lars Liedtke wrote:
>>> Why not just make building in IPv6 support the default, and introduce a
>>> flag if someone really needs or wants to build without th
