-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Here's an updated version of this patch. It should fix the issues
related to fetching and rdoc that have been reported to me. I believe
this is ready to commit. Please test.
With this and an upcoming change to portupgrade, portupgrade should be
r
> Please see the attached patch. This should get us past ruby-bdb and
> allow portupgrade to work with Ruby 1.9.
>
> Steve
I couldn't fetch from the source given in your patch:
fetch: https://download.github.com/knu-ruby-bdb-v0.6.5-8-g6feba54.tar.gz:
Not Found
However I obtained a copy of that
[SNIP lists]
> I'm going to be trying to see if I can update any of these to make them
> work with 1.9. If anyone is willing to help out, that would be great.
> Just wanted to get the list out there so people who are interested can
> lend a hand if they want. Some of them look rather old and speci
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I've submitted a PR with a request for an exp-run with my patches. I'm
waiting for that, but in the mean time, I've been doing some build
testing of my own. I've found these ports fail to build with Ruby 1.9:
archivers/ruby-bz2
audio/liblastfm
au
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Please see the attached patch. This should get us past ruby-bdb and
allow portupgrade to work with Ruby 1.9.
Steve
On 03/20/11 13:27, Eric wrote:
> [SNIP]
>
>>> Portupgrade is a bit of a problem. Perhaps it's due to my patches, but
>>> at the m
[SNIP]
>> Portupgrade is a bit of a problem. Perhaps it's due to my patches, but
>> at the moment I can't get databases/ruby-bdb to build with RUBY_VER ==
>> 1.9. If I could get past that, I could test the above PR. I wonder if
>> anyone else has the same issue.
>>
>
> It does not work with 1.9.
>> [SNIP]
>>> This is good idea. But beautiful port portupgrade :),
>>> not work with 1.9 version.
>>
>> What about ports/144605 - "[PATCH] Get ports-mgmt/portupgrade to build under
>> Ruby 1.9.1"
>>
>> I've not tried it, but does that patch do what it says on the tin?
>
> [...]
>
>> There are
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:52:16 -0400
Steve Wills mentioned:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 03/16/11 07:25, Eric wrote:
> >> From: paranormal
> > [SNIP]
> >> This is good idea. But beautiful port portupgrade :),
> >> not work with 1.9 version.
> >
> > What about ports/14
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/16/11 07:25, Eric wrote:
>> From: paranormal
> [SNIP]
>> This is good idea. But beautiful port portupgrade :),
>> not work with 1.9 version.
>
> What about ports/144605 - "[PATCH] Get ports-mgmt/portupgrade to build under
> Ruby 1.9.1"
>
> I'v
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:31:36 -0700
milki mentioned:
> On 13:42 Wed 16 Mar , Stanislav Sedov wrote:
> > > I've been hanging out at #bsdports@efnet and I've gathered that is the
> > > consensus of committers that portupgrade is no longer maintained and
> > > portmaster is the preferred tool. Th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/16/11 22:54, Steve Wills wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> On 03/16/11 00:46, Martin Wilke wrote:
>> I'd like to say come up with patches, and let see how the result is. If
>> it works
>> i vote +1 to make it default.
>
> Of course, you are right, the re
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Martin,
On 03/16/11 00:46, Martin Wilke wrote:
> I'd like to say come up with patches, and let see how the result is. If
> it works
> i vote +1 to make it default.
Of course, you are right, the results are all that matter. I just wanted
to ensure
On 13:42 Wed 16 Mar , Stanislav Sedov wrote:
> > I've been hanging out at #bsdports@efnet and I've gathered that is the
> > consensus of committers that portupgrade is no longer maintained and
> > portmaster is the preferred tool. The docs need some patching to reflect
> > this.
> >
>
> It's
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:00:48 -0700
milki mentioned:
> On 11:25 Wed 16 Mar , Eric wrote:
> > There are plenty of outstanding PRs regarding portupgrade, which does seem
> > to suffer from being both loved and unloved (in terms of maintenance). I
> > personally use it, but am wondering if it's
On 11:25 Wed 16 Mar , Eric wrote:
> There are plenty of outstanding PRs regarding portupgrade, which does seem
> to suffer from being both loved and unloved (in terms of maintenance). I
> personally use it, but am wondering if it's time to switch to Doug's
> PortMaster now... However given tha
> From: paranormal
[SNIP]
> This is good idea. But beautiful port portupgrade :),
> not work with 1.9 version.
What about ports/144605 - "[PATCH] Get ports-mgmt/portupgrade to build under
Ruby 1.9.1"
I've not tried it, but does that patch do what it says on the tin?
> I'm ruby programmer and us
This is good idea. But beautiful port portupgrade :),
not work with 1.9 version.
I'm ruby programmer and use tags like so:
.if ${.CURDIR:M*/*/rubygem-*}
RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=1.9
.endif
.if ${.CURDIR:M*/*/ruby-*}
RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=1.9
.endif
I think we need update portupgrade before update syste
> From: Steve Wills
[SNIP]
> Ruby 1.9.x has been the "current stable version" of Ruby (according to
> ruby-lang.org) since April 21, 2009 (at least according to my reading of
> the WebBack machine). It seems to me it would be really nice to get Ruby
> 1.9 as the default version by 9.0. Does that
I'd like to say come up with patches, and let see how the result is. If it
works
i vote +1 to make it default.
- Martin
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Steve Wills wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> Ruby 1.9.x has been the "current stable version" of Ruby (ac
19 matches
Mail list logo
