https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195268
Steve Wills changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|New |Closed
CC|
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195268
--- Comment #4 from Lawrence Chen ---
Why did this port get deprecated on March 1st, 2015, and then get unbroke on
March 23rd, 2015 where
my files/patch-ext-slide.c and files/patch-math-remainder are similar
and
my files/patch-ext-lhali
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195268
--- Comment #3 from Lawrence Chen ---
Created attachment 149704
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=149704&action=edit
poudriere testport log for ruby 2.1
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195268
--- Comment #2 from Lawrence Chen ---
Created attachment 149703
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=149703&action=edit
poudriere testport log for ruby 2.0
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the a
Lawrence Chen has asked r...@freebsd.org for
maintainer-feedback:
Bug 195268: [patch] archivers/ruby-lha: fix build for ruby 2.0
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195268
--- Description ---
Created attachment 149702
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195268
Bug ID: 195268
Summary: [patch] archivers/ruby-lha: fix build for ruby 2.0
Product: Ports Tree
Version: Latest
Hardware: amd64
OS: Any
Status: Needs Triage
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Steve Wills wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 07:36:35PM +, Steve Wills wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 10:04:18AM -0700, Patrick wrote:
> > > Are there any plans to make Ruby 2.0 (or even 2.1) the default Ruby
> version
> > >
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Steve Wills wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 10:04:18AM -0700, Patrick wrote:
> > Are there any plans to make Ruby 2.0 (or even 2.1) the default Ruby
> version
> > for FreeBSD? Most every Ruby developer and company I know has moved past
&g
On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 07:36:35PM +, Steve Wills wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 10:04:18AM -0700, Patrick wrote:
> > Are there any plans to make Ruby 2.0 (or even 2.1) the default Ruby version
> > for FreeBSD? Most every Ruby developer and company I know has moved past
>
On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 10:04:18AM -0700, Patrick wrote:
> Are there any plans to make Ruby 2.0 (or even 2.1) the default Ruby version
> for FreeBSD? Most every Ruby developer and company I know has moved past
> 1.9, and the 1.9 default in FreeBSD makes it impossible to use the offic
Are there any plans to make Ruby 2.0 (or even 2.1) the default Ruby version
for FreeBSD? Most every Ruby developer and company I know has moved past
1.9, and the 1.9 default in FreeBSD makes it impossible to use the official
pkg sources because any pkg upgrade action wants to replace ruby20 with
Synopsis: www/rubygem-actionpack make fails with ruby 2.0
Responsible-Changed-From-To: ruby->swills
Responsible-Changed-By: swills
Responsible-Changed-When: Fri Jul 19 13:05:26 UTC 2013
Responsible-Changed-Why:
I'll take it.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?p
The following reply was made to PR ports/178842; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: "Steve Wills"
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, josephc...@gmail.com
Cc:
Subject: Re: ports/178842: www/rubygem-actionpack make fails with ruby 2.0
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 11:42:53 -0400
This is a languag
Synopsis: www/rubygem-actionpack make fails with ruby 2.0
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->ruby
Responsible-Changed-By: edwin
Responsible-Changed-When: Wed May 22 20:50:08 UTC 2013
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Over to maintainer (via the GNATS Auto Assign Tool)
h
For those who want it working right now. Patch is too bad for GNAT, I
think...
↑255 /usr/ports → cat databases/ruby-bdb/files/patch-src_features.rb
--- src/features.rb 2013-02-25 18:07:53.324227387 +0200
+++ src/features.rb 2013-02-25 18:17:36.0 +0200
@@ -813,7 +813,7 @@
begin
15 matches
Mail list logo
