To view an individual PR, use:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users,
which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering
all versions including experimental development code and ob
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228545
Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ports-b...@freebsd.org |sunp...@freebsd.org
--
Y
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228541
Martin Wilke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m...@freebsd.org
Assignee
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228545
John W. O'Brien changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #193763||maintainer-approval+
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228545
John W. O'Brien changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easy, patch, patch-ready
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228523
Kubilay Kocak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|New |Open
Keywords|easy, patc
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228523
Kubilay Kocak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #193732|maintainer-approval+|
Flags|
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228541
Bug ID: 228541
Summary: devel/py-flex: update to 6.13.2
Product: Ports & Packages
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any
OS: Any
Status: New
Severity: Affect
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228309
--- Comment #6 from Kevin Golding ---
(In reply to Antoine Brodin from comment #5)
Thanks, I had been under the impression everything was moving to the metaport
so it's nice to hear otherwise. I'll phase it out in the future (having been
ph
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228309
--- Comment #5 from Antoine Brodin ---
(In reply to Kevin Golding from comment #4)
No, using the django metaport is not best practice.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228309
--- Comment #4 from Kevin Golding ---
I'm struggling to understand how this was committed as "Approved by:
maintainer" when the patch I rejected was used in favour of the patch I
actually approved.
- My patch used the same default image e
11 matches
Mail list logo