On 2016-12-8 04:51 , René J.V. Bertin wrote:
On Wednesday December 07 2016 17:09:35 Brandon Allbery wrote:
Use a double quoted string and escape anything that needs it (but
specifically not those variables for which you need the current value).
I don't think that's going to make things much m
> On Dec 7, 2016, at 11:43, Christopher Jones wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Ah I see now. The differences come from the fact I append to the fallback
> list, rather than set it. I think I will update the port to explicitly set
> the fallback list, so wipe out the defaults, to thus get consistent behavio
> On Dec 7, 2016, at 11:15, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>
>> On Dec 7, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Christopher Jones
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 7 Dec 2016, at 5:32 pm, Joshua Root wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2016-12-8 04:24 , Chris Jones wrote:
Hi,
I'm working on an update to the root6 port, where the
Hi,
I have finally managed to come up with ports for MinGW-w64. It seems
to work as expected except for a tiny problem: gcc has to be compiled
in two stages. The first stage installs the bootstrapped version of
the compiler and the second stage installs everything (else).
I created two subports (
Hi,
Ah I see now. The differences come from the fact I append to the fallback list,
rather than set it. I think I will update the port to explicitly set the
fallback list, so wipe out the defaults, to thus get consistent behaviour
across the OSX versions.
cheers Chris
> On 7 Dec 2016, at 7:15
> On Dec 7, 2016, at 1:26 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
>
> On Tuesday December 6 2016 11:41:39 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> I haven't taken the time to look into how I could configure that. So
>> instead, I configure EDITOR to run TextWrangler, and whenever I ssh in and
>> need to edit a portfile,
> On Dec 7, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Christopher Jones
> wrote:
>
>
>> On 7 Dec 2016, at 5:32 pm, Joshua Root wrote:
>>
>> On 2016-12-8 04:24 , Chris Jones wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm working on an update to the root6 port, where the minimum compiler
>>> requirement has been increased in the lates
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 6:42 PM, René J.V. Bertin
wrote:
> My experience with Python (even from the rather early 2.x days in the late
> 90s) is that it's always been very strict about scoping and closures
Oh, it's strict enough, it just doesn't *have* some kinds of scope.
--
brandon s allbery
On Wednesday December 07 2016 18:35:04 Brandon Allbery wrote:
> (iirc you can get into the same mess with python 2, although maybe not in
> 2.7)
My experience with Python (even from the rather early 2.x days in the late 90s)
is that it's always been very strict about scoping and closures. But I
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 6:32 PM, René J.V. Bertin
wrote:
> In this case it indeed won't work because $code is not evaluated
> immediately inside `proc variant` but is instead used to create a procedure
> that's invoked if the user activates a variant
Right, that was implicit in my description of
On Wednesday December 07 2016 17:56:56 Brandon Allbery wrote:
> It won't, but that's the best you will do in a stringy language like Tcl
> (or shells, for that matter).
Fortunately there's also the alternative of using an if construct inside the
loop, which does work as expected.
> > Not "whic
> On 7 Dec 2016, at 5:32 pm, Joshua Root wrote:
>
> On 2016-12-8 04:24 , Chris Jones wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm working on an update to the root6 port, where the minimum compiler
>> requirement has been increased in the latest release, such that I need
>> to update the compiler blacklist/fallback
On Wednesday December 07 2016 17:09:35 Brandon Allbery wrote:
> Use a double quoted string and escape anything that needs it (but
> specifically not those variables for which you need the current value).
I don't think that's going to make things much more readable, would it?
I did notice one som
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 5:51 PM, René J.V. Bertin
wrote:
> On Wednesday December 07 2016 17:09:35 Brandon Allbery wrote:
> > Use a double quoted string and escape anything that needs it (but
> > specifically not those variables for which you need the current value).
>
> I don't think that's going
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 5:42 PM, René J.V. Bertin
wrote:
> > This is almost exactly the same situation as:
> >
> > foreach foo {bar baz} {
> > proc p_$foo {} {
> > puts $foo
> > }
> > }
> > p_bar
> > p_baz
>
> Huh? This complains about foo not being known, I think there s
On Thursday December 08 2016 04:04:57 Joshua Root wrote:
> This is almost exactly the same situation as:
>
> foreach foo {bar baz} {
> proc p_$foo {} {
> puts $foo
> }
> }
> p_bar
> p_baz
Huh? This complains about foo not being known, I think there should be a
`global
On 2016-12-8 04:24 , Chris Jones wrote:
Hi,
I'm working on an update to the root6 port, where the minimum compiler
requirement has been increased in the latest release, such that I need
to update the compiler blacklist/fallback to force a macports compiler
to be used on OSX 10.8 and 10.9 (wherea
Hi,
I'm working on an update to the root6 port, where the minimum compiler
requirement has been increased in the latest release, such that I need
to update the compiler blacklist/fallback to force a macports compiler
to be used on OSX 10.8 and 10.9 (whereas previously the system one was OK).
On 2016-12-8 04:14 , René J.V. Bertin wrote:
On Wednesday December 07 2016 10:07:31 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
Hi,
The boost port shows a typical example of using "eval" and "subst" to ensure
the variable values are substituted immediately.
In a nutshell, put the whole block where you want to for
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 5:14 PM, René J.V. Bertin
wrote:
> That seems to do the trick all right. I was a bit hoping for a `foreach`
> option to make limit the scope of the loop variable and all variables
> declared inside the loop
Tcl doesn't grok closures, or scoping in general (although it doe
On Wednesday December 07 2016 10:07:31 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
Hi,
> The boost port shows a typical example of using "eval" and "subst" to ensure
> the variable values are substituted immediately.
In a nutshell, put the whole block where you want to force using the current
values of all variables
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 10:20 AM, René J.V. Bertin
wrote:
> variant python${pv} description "Add bindings for Python ${pdv}" {
> depends_libs-append port:python${pv}
> # snip
> }
>
tcl tends to encourage you to think that { } is a block construct, and in
many languages tha
> On Dec 7, 2016, at 11:04 AM, Joshua Root wrote:
>
> On 2016-12-8 03:07 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> On Dec 7, 2016, at 4:20 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> See https://trac.macports.org/ticket/53022#comment:2
>>>
>>> I'm still waiting for the final verdict from the ticket
On 2016-12-8 03:07 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Dec 7, 2016, at 4:20 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
Hi,
See https://trac.macports.org/ticket/53022#comment:2
I'm still waiting for the final verdict from the ticket reporter, but it seems
that issue was one of those cases where I shouldn't have used
> On Dec 7, 2016, at 4:20 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> See https://trac.macports.org/ticket/53022#comment:2
>
> I'm still waiting for the final verdict from the ticket reporter, but it
> seems that issue was one of those cases where I shouldn't have used a loop
> variable in the d
On Wednesday December 7 2016 15:23:50 Brandon Allbery wrote:
>> VISUAL_EDITOR could be used instead of MP_GUI_EDITOR
>
>
>That name could be confusing considering that historically $VISUAL was a
>full screen CUI editor alternative to $EDITOR (that is, VISUAL=vi EDITOR=ed
Yes, sorry, I had misread
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 9:26 AM, René J.V. Bertin
wrote:
> VISUAL_EDITOR could be used instead of MP_GUI_EDITOR
That name could be confusing considering that historically $VISUAL was a
full screen CUI editor alternative to $EDITOR (that is, VISUAL=vi EDITOR=ed
...).
--
brandon s allbery kf8nh
On Wednesday December 7 2016 15:17:47 Rainer Müller wrote:
>> So the port__editor variable is never defined and the whole if could be
>> removed?
>
>Of course it is defined. The variable is where proc parse_options stores
>the value of the --editor argument.
Right, my fault. I couldn't find
On 2016-12-07 14:30, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Wednesday December 07 2016 14:15:26 Rainer Müller wrote:
>
>> There used to be 'port ed' as an alias for 'port edit'. This was before
>> the unambiguous shortening of actions was introduced. This code in proc
>> action_portcmds was shared by both a
On Wednesday December 07 2016 14:15:26 Rainer Müller wrote:
> There used to be 'port ed' as an alias for 'port edit'. This was before
> the unambiguous shortening of actions was introduced. This code in proc
> action_portcmds was shared by both actions.
So the port__editor variable is never d
On 2016-12-07 13:22, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> My question about the weird port_${action}_editor variable still stands
> though. What's that about?
There used to be 'port ed' as an alias for 'port edit'. This was before
the unambiguous shortening of actions was introduced. This code in proc
actio
On Wednesday December 7 2016 12:49:52 Rainer Müller wrote:
>If you still need something shorter, think about a shell function or alias.
No, now that I thought of a suitable and simple patch I can add to my
port:MacPorts-devel I'll just use that.
My question about the weird port_${action}_editor
On 2016-12-07 12:20, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
>> What does that achieve that setting $EDITOR doesn't?
>
> For one thing it would also provide a convenient way to use a simple,
> lightweight editor when you want or have to avoid the usual editor
> for a few quick changes. The standard vi fallback al
On Wednesday December 7 2016 11:36:20 Clemens Lang wrote:
>MacPorts should not be in the business of having a short option for everybody's
>favorite editor. We'd have -e for emacs, -t for textmate, -w for textwrangler,
>-d for ed(1), -s for sublime.
No, indeed, but that wasn't the gist of my sugg
Hi,
- On 7 Dec, 2016, at 10:26, René J.V. Bertin rjvber...@gmail.com wrote:
> I often use `port edit --editor XX foo` when I don't want to use the default
> editor. Maybe the cleanest solution would be to add a short option equivalent
> of `port edit --editor vi`. I'd say `port edit -v` as a
Hi,
See https://trac.macports.org/ticket/53022#comment:2
I'm still waiting for the final verdict from the ticket reporter, but it seems
that issue was one of those cases where I shouldn't have used a loop variable
in the declaration scope of a variant (nor subport):
{{{
set pythonversions {3.4
On Tuesday December 6 2016 11:41:39 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>I haven't taken the time to look into how I could configure that. So instead,
>I configure EDITOR to run TextWrangler, and whenever I ssh in and need to edit
>a portfile, which is rare, I use 'vi $(port file someport)` instead of `port
>e
37 matches
Mail list logo
