On Nov 19, 2011, at 14:12, Fyodor Vassiley wrote:
> port install -d py27-wxpython
> ---> Computing dependencies for py27-wxpython
> ---> Building py27-wxpython
> Error: Target org.macports.build returned: shell command failed (see
> log for details)
> Log for py27-wxpython is at:
> /opt/local/v
On Nov 19, 2011, at 14:32, klaus wrote:
> i can not compile the digikam port. And i have no idea what causes the
> problem. Can someone help me out? Or just point me into a direction i can
> investigate.
As always, please file a bug report in the issue tracker.
_
On Nov 19, 2011, at 14:21, James Hozier wrote:
> $ sudo port install mailx
> Password:
> Sorry, try again.
> Password:
> ---> Fetching archive for mailx
> ---> Attempting to fetch mailx-12.4_0.darwin_10.x86_64.tbz2 from
> http://packages.macports.org/mailx
> ---> Fetching mailx
> ---> Attempt
> The binary build thread made me realize my 2 year old default macports.conf
> is hopelessly out of date. A quick search of FAQ, Guide, etc. didn't turn up
> any advice on how best to update it, and I expect that just replacing it with
> the latest default may not be it. If I replace it, do I
On Nov 19, 2011, at 19:46, Peter Trudelle wrote:
> The binary build thread made me realize my 2 year old default macports.conf
> is hopelessly out of date. A quick search of FAQ, Guide, etc. didn't turn up
> any advice on how best to update it, and I expect that just replacing it with
> the l
On Nov 19, 2011, at 11:36, Marko Käning wrote:
> My German-English 'uncomment' == "auskommentieren" is of course a false
> friend and I am not proud of it. ;-)
> Especially now… Now that I realized that I am almost caused a nuclear war…
> ;-) Richard seems to have a typical dark British humour!
Hi,
The binary build thread made me realize my 2 year old default
macports.conf is hopelessly out of date. A quick search of FAQ, Guide,
etc. didn't turn up any advice on how best to update it, and I expect
that just replacing it with the latest default may not be it. If I
replace it, do I
On Nov 19, 2011, at 11:40 AM, Peter Trudelle wrote:
> No, I tried that too.
>
> Peter
>
> On 11/19/11 11:03 AM, Marko Käning wrote:
>> I think a --- man macports.conf --- should answer most of your questions.
This should point out most things of interest.
$ diff -u /opt/local/etc/macports/macpo
On Nov 19, 2011, at 16:30, Rodolfo Aramayo wrote:
> export PATH=/opt/local/lib:$PATH
There are no programs in lib directories; there's no reason to have a lib
directory in your PATH.
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
Thanks Brandon
That seems to help
I re-installed coreutils, just in case
Thanks
--R
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 16:52, Brandon Allbery wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 17:43, Rodolfo Aramayo wrote:
>
>> People,
>>
>> So I found the culprit and it is:
>>
>> coreutils @8.14 (sysutils)
>> GNU
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 17:43, Rodolfo Aramayo wrote:
> People,
>
> So I found the culprit and it is:
>
> coreutils @8.14 (sysutils)
> GNU File, Shell, and Text utilities
>
Remove /opt/local/libexec/gnubin from your $PATH; that's where coreutils is
overriding all the system utilities, usuall
People,
So I found the culprit and it is:
coreutils @8.14 (sysutils)
GNU File, Shell, and Text utilities
When I activate MacPorts and uninstall coreutils, everything seems to be
working well
How do we proceed now?
Thanks
--R
___
macports-users m
People,
I am having the most unusual problem
Ports is working just fine and by fine I mean I can upgrade and install
packages without any problems
Until few weeks ago I was able to install non-macports programs by myself.
This is, I was able to ./configure, make and sudo make install
This mornin
Could you post that log
(/opt/local/var/macports/logs/_opt_local_var_macports_sources_rsync.macports.org_release_tarballs_ports_mail_mailx/mailx/main.log)
to a public site or attach it?
vq
On Nov 19, 2011, at 3:21 p.m., James Hozier wrote:
> $ sudo port install mailx
> Password:
> Sorry, try a
> i can not compile the digikam port. And i have no idea what causes the
> problem. Can someone help me out? Or just point me into a direction i can
> investigate.
> Build log can be found at:
> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8286796/digikam_problem_main.log
>
> The only guess i have is, that it has t
Hi all,
i can not compile the digikam port. And i have no idea what causes the
problem. Can someone help me out? Or just point me into a direction i can
investigate.
Build log can be found at:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8286796/digikam_problem_main.log
The only guess i have is, that it has to do som
$ sudo port install mailx
Password:
Sorry, try again.
Password:
---> Fetching archive for mailx
---> Attempting to fetch mailx-12.4_0.darwin_10.x86_64.tbz2 from
http://packages.macports.org/mailx
---> Fetching mailx
---> Attempting to fetch mailx-12.4.tar.bz2 from
http://voxel.dl.sourceforge.
No, I tried that too.
Peter
On 11/19/11 11:03 AM, Marko Käning wrote:
I think a --- man macports.conf --- should answer most of your questions.
--
Peter Trudelle
831.704.6880
pe...@trudelle.com
http://linkedin.com/in/trudelle
___
macports-users mai
On Nov 19, 2011, at 8:00 PM, Peter Trudelle wrote:
> This thread made me realize my 2 year old default macports.conf is hopelessly
> out of date. A quick search of FAQ, Guide, etc. didn't turn up any advice on
> how best to update it, and I expect that just replacing it with the latest
> defaul
This thread made me realize my 2 year old default macports.conf is
hopelessly out of date. A quick search of FAQ, Guide, etc. didn't turn
up any advice on how best to update it, and I expect that just replacing
it with the latest default may not work. Any pointers?
thanks,
Peter
On 11/19/1
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 12:26, Marko Käning wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2011, at 5:33 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:
> > Sadly, very few of the packages that MacPorts manages come with support
> for alternate prefixes at runtime.
> Ah, ok, that means there are indeed binary packages which could be
> installe
On 19.11.2011, at 18:42, Marko Käning wrote:
>> No, it means there *aren't* any, because the few ports that have that
>> capability in their source aren't anywhere near enough to bother with the
>> additional complexity of trying to support it in the buildbot.
> OK, now you successfully annihil
On Nov 19, 2011, at 6:40 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:
> No, it means there *aren't* any, because the few ports that have that
> capability in their source aren't anywhere near enough to bother with the
> additional complexity of trying to support it in the buildbot.
OK, now you successfully annihil
On Nov 19, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Dominik Reichardt wrote:
> Am 19.11.2011 um 12:59 schrieb Joshua Root :
>> On 28164-7-23 05:59 , Marko Käning wrote:
>>> Well, Josh, that setting was indeed a MUST for me to get the binary port
>>> installation working for my /opt/local MacPorts install.
>>> Actually I
On Nov 19, 2011, at 5:33 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:
> Sadly, very few of the packages that MacPorts manages come with support for
> alternate prefixes at runtime.
Ah, ok, that means there are indeed binary packages which could be installed
with alternate prefixes??
If so, how is that achieved?
Ca
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 05:27, Marko Käning wrote:
> I wonder whether there will be support for alternative prefixes, if that's
> possible at all…
Sadly, very few of the packages that MacPorts manages come with support for
alternate prefixes at runtime.
--
brandon s allbery
On 19/11/11 13:17, "Richard L. Hamilton" wrote:
> Ok, there's only one English language (well, two, but the Brits are just
> wrong).
It is called the Queen's English for a very good reason my young, colonial
friend ;-).
Cheers,
Phil...
--
Nothing to see here... move along, move along
__
Ok, there's only one English language (well, two, but the Brits are just wrong).
This line is commented out:
# run global_thermonuclear_war
To uncomment the line is to remove the notation that makes it only a comment,
and perhaps thereby allow the line to be acted on by whatever program reads t
Am 19.11.2011 um 13:53 schrieb Harald Hanche-Olsen :
> [Dominik Reichardt (2011-11-19 12:17:00 UTC)]
>
> [...]
Actually I uncommented:
---
#portarchivetypetgz
---
and things started working. :-)
>>>
>>> I was discussing how it should work, not how it does. I t
[Dominik Reichardt (2011-11-19 12:17:00 UTC)]
[...]
> >> Actually I uncommented:
> >> ---
> >> #portarchivetypetgz
> >> ---
> >> and things started working. :-)
> >
> > I was discussing how it should work, not how it does. I think you've got
> > your story backwards though; uncommenting
Am 19.11.2011 um 12:59 schrieb Joshua Root :
> On 28164-7-23 05:59 , Marko Käning wrote:
>> On Nov 19, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
>>> That setting should really just control what kind of archives are
>>> generated locally, and there needs to be another one associated with
>>> each arch
On Nov 19, 2011, at 12:59 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
> I was discussing how it should work, not how it does. I think you've got
> your story backwards though; uncommenting that line would have made it
> *stop* working since the server only has tbz2 archives.
Do I?
I thought tbz2 is the new default?!
I
On 28164-7-23 05:59 , Marko Käning wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
>> That setting should really just control what kind of archives are
>> generated locally, and there needs to be another one associated with
>> each archive source indicating what archive type(s) it provide
On Nov 19, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
> That's because it no longer exists. Archive mode has been combined with
> image mode and you can't turn it off (because there is no alternative).
Is portarchivepath also not used anymore?
___
macports-us
On Nov 19, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
> That's because it no longer exists. Archive mode has been combined with
> image mode and you can't turn it off (because there is no alternative).
Ah, ok, will eliminate it from my confs then. Thanks.
___
On Nov 19, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
> That setting should really just control what kind of archives are
> generated locally, and there needs to be another one associated with
> each archive source indicating what archive type(s) it provides. Of
> course there's no way to configure mult
On 28164-7-23 05:59 , Marko Käning wrote:
> ---
> # Create and use binary archive packages for installation/reinstallation ease
> portarchivemode no
> ---
>
> Hmmm, this is not even documented in macports.conf's man page?
That's because it no longer exists. Archive mode has been combined with
Scott Webster wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Marko K?ning
> wrote:
>> Looks like - since buildbot made his way through all port files - it is
>> possible to install binary packages, is that true?
>>
>> If so, how could that be enable in a local MacPorts installation? (From what
>> I
On Nov 19, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> I wonder whether there will be support for alternative prefixes, if that's
>> possible at all…
> I suspect this will never happen. Things installed with MacPorts have never
> been very relocatable. Sorry.
Too sad. ;-)
But I can live with it,
On Nov 19, 2011, at 04:27, Marko Käning wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> Also if you've compiled MacPorts in a different prefix than /opt/local you
>> can't get the binaries.
> Ha, THIS IS MY PROBLEM with respect to my other MacPorts trees.
> They are NOT using /opt/lo
On Nov 19, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> Try to install a port for which you see that an archive is available at
> http://packages.macports.org. Does the archive get downloaded and used? Then
> you are capable of using binaries.
Yep, it works - as already posted - for one of my MacPort
On Nov 19, 2011, at 02:46, Marko Käning wrote:
> How can I verify whether my setup is capable or not to use the new binary
> installs?
Try to install a port for which you see that an archive is available at
http://packages.macports.org. Does the archive get downloaded and used? Then
you are c
And it looks like port ALWAYS DOWNLOADS the tbz2 file from the server, even if
it had done that previously.
Is there no caching for binary files like it is done for tarballs?
___
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
http://list
That's funny, I've got one MacPorts installation which now uses the binary
install method and I've got another MacPorts installation which obviously
doesn't use it, although the macports.conf's are seemingly more or less
identical.
What are the *necessary* settings to allow binary installs?
___
Thanks so much Scott!
On Nov 19, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Marko Käning wrote:
> I have here
> ---
> portarchivetype tgz
> ---
>
> but that's probably not so much the point…
THAT WAS EXACTLY THE POINT.
tbz2 might be NOW the default setting, but it wasn't in my macports.conf, very
probably because
On Nov 19, 2011, at 9:38 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> We haven't announced it yet, but you might have noticed talk about it on the
> -dev list.
Somehow it went past my attention. :-(
> In fact there's no way to globally turn it off. MacPorts will use binaries if
> they're available, unless you use
Thanks Scott,
On Nov 19, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Scott Webster wrote:
> I think it should be automatic. Maybe check that your portarchivetype
> line is tbz2 (or commented out) in macports.conf. Somehow mine was
> set to something else and it wouldn't use the binaries.
I have here
---
portarchivetype
On Nov 19, 2011, at 02:09, Marko Käning wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Roger Pack wrote:
>> Hey thanks for all those binary builds--they probably saved me a heap
>> of time today. The speed just doesn't compare it's so much faster
>> now. Thanks!
>
> Ooops, I obviously missed this someho
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Marko Käning wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Roger Pack wrote:
> Ooops, I obviously missed this somehow...
>
> Looks like - since buildbot made his way through all port files - it is
> possible to install binary packages, is that true?
>
> If so, how could
On Nov 19, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Roger Pack wrote:
> Hey thanks for all those binary builds--they probably saved me a heap
> of time today. The speed just doesn't compare it's so much faster
> now. Thanks!
Ooops, I obviously missed this somehow...
Looks like - since buildbot made his way through all
50 matches
Mail list logo
