Remember to Reply All so the conversation stays on the mailing list. On Jan 30, 2013, at 04:30, Petr Vaněk wrote:
>> This port hadn't been touched in 7 months. Was this a stealth >> update? If so please follow additional required steps shown here: >> >> https://trac.macports.org/wiki/PortfileRecipes#stealth-updates > > got the point, thanks. So this patch should be sufficient? > > > lister:qlipper pvanek$ svn diff > Index: Portfile > =================================================================== > - --- Portfile (revision 102263) > +++ Portfile (working copy) > @@ -14,6 +14,9 @@ > homepage http://code.google.com/p/qlipper/ > master_sites googlecode > > +# a stealth update of 2.0.1 > +dist_subdir ${name}/${version}_ The diff between the two versions of 2.0.1 appears to be very small; I'm attaching it. It looks like none of the changes have an effect on what files get installed by the port, so yes, the above should be sufficient. If there had been any changes in the files that get installed, then the port's revision should also be increased.
qlipper.diff
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
