On 11/4/2013 11:46 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-11-04 21:01, Walter Bright wrote:
The libraries were not built correctly (my old machine runs out of
memory building them). FreeBSD users have needed to, for some time now,
fork/build to get it.
I don't understand, the binaries and Phobos
On 11/4/2013 11:46 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
For the second time, the license on the readme.txt distributed with the sources
is wrong?
Which one in which directory and what should it be?
Why not volunteer to handle the FreeBSD package builds?
I have access to FreeBSD machine(s) and willing to lend a hand
and spend some time on this.
What is needed to do the FreeBSD package build?
(Currently I just do a git clone/pull of the github dlang stuff
and build it to get the master
On 2013-11-05 10:09, Walter Bright wrote:
They aren't, actually. The 64 bit stuff isn't, and the 32 bit phobos is
old.
Ok, that's quite confusing. Isn't it better to _not_ include the 32bit
files instead of including old ones.
The reason for that is I could never get NetBSD to run (either
On 2013-11-05 10:09, Walter Bright wrote:
Why not volunteer to handle the FreeBSD package builds?
Actually, I guess I could to a quick build tonight or tomorrow night and
just send you the files.
But as you have said, it would be better if the autotester could do that.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 5 November 2013 09:35, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
On 11/4/2013 11:46 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
For the second time, the license on the readme.txt distributed with the
sources
is wrong?
Which one in which directory and what should it be?
There's only one file named
On 11/5/2013 4:02 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
There's only one file named readme.txt. ;-)
See here for the latest file:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/blob/master/src/readme.txt
Thanks, I'll take care of it.
On 2013-11-05 10:09, Walter Bright wrote:
Why not volunteer to handle the FreeBSD package builds?
Hmm, turns out it's currently not possible to build C++ code for 32bit
on a 64bit FreeBSD machine. This might take a bit longer than I
expected. I can still send you 64bit binaries if that is
On 11/5/2013 1:50 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-11-05 10:09, Walter Bright wrote:
Why not volunteer to handle the FreeBSD package builds?
Hmm, turns out it's currently not possible to build C++ code for 32bit on a
64bit FreeBSD machine. This might take a bit longer than I expected. I can
On 11/5/2013 1:52 AM, Arjan wrote:
Why not volunteer to handle the FreeBSD package builds?
I have access to FreeBSD machine(s) and willing to lend a hand and spend some
time on this.
What is needed to do the FreeBSD package build?
(Currently I just do a git clone/pull of the github dlang stuff
On 11/5/13 2:00 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/5/2013 1:52 AM, Arjan wrote:
Why not volunteer to handle the FreeBSD package builds?
I have access to FreeBSD machine(s) and willing to lend a hand and spend some
time on this.
What is needed to do the FreeBSD package build?
(Currently I just do
On 11/5/2013 2:10 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
I really do intend to get the package builder producing bundles (not for every
single build, that'd be.. scary). It's on my todo list. Maybe I'll dedicate my
christmas vacation to that project.
That would be awesome, and would be a big step forward
On 11/5/13 2:10 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
I really do intend to get the package builder producing bundles (not for
every single build, that'd be.. scary). It's on my todo list. Maybe
I'll dedicate my christmas vacation to that project.
That would be awesome!!
Andrei
On Tuesday, 5 November 2013 at 21:58:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/5/2013 1:50 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-11-05 10:09, Walter Bright wrote:
Why not volunteer to handle the FreeBSD package builds?
Hmm, turns out it's currently not possible to build C++ code
for 32bit on a
64bit
On 2013-11-04 09:03, Walter Bright wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:35:26 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-11-04 09:03, Walter Bright wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm
On 2013-11-04 09:03, Walter Bright wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm
On 2013-11-04 09:03, Walter Bright wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:03:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:03:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm
On 11/4/2013 12:42 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
dmd.2.064.dmg
There now.
and dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz are missing.
Seems to no longer be in 2.064. The installer builder was changed.
The naming scheme is inconsistent. I don't know if they follow a platform
specific naming scheme.
On 11/4/2013 12:34 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Based on the time you sent this I'm guessing you failed to include my recent
pull requests for the documentation which Kenji merged, see:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/CAFDvkctqW-QDsGLA+Y6z67O686J1W0si2ZeBBF=b05armwn...@mail.gmail.com
Kenji merged
On 11/4/2013 12:35 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
You might want to name the release candidates properly and uniquely, just as you
started to do with the betas.
It'll follow the 2.063 pattern.
On 11/4/2013 12:34 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Still no dmd.conf or 64bit binaries for FreeBSD.
They'll be dropped from the zip file. I don't have the equipment to build them
at the moment.
On 2013-11-04 11:52, Walter Bright wrote:
There now.
Thanks.
They don't, but they've followed this pattern since they were originally
created by Jordi, and I've left it as is.
Too bad. I guess you don't want to change that?
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2013-11-04 11:58, Walter Bright wrote:
They'll be dropped from the zip file. I don't have the equipment to
build them at the moment.
Will FreeBSD be dropped? We never have had 64bit binaries but the 32bit?
Can't you just setup a virtual machine?
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 10:53:22 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
and dmd-2.064-0-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz are missing.
Seems to no longer be in 2.064. The installer builder was
changed.
I have asked Jordi to remove those some time ago to avoid
confusion with official Arch packages as matching
Walter Bright, el 4 de November a las 02:57 me escribiste:
On 11/4/2013 12:35 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
You might want to name the release candidates properly and uniquely, just as
you
started to do with the betas.
It'll follow the 2.063 pattern.
You mean after this release it will be
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 13:09:10 UTC, Leandro Lucarella
wrote:
eles, el 4 de November a las 09:37 me escribiste:
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:35:26 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2013-11-04 09:03, Walter Bright wrote:
Is sad
Yes
, but it makes sense, this is a new feature that
On 11/4/2013 4:19 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-11-04 11:52, Walter Bright wrote:
They don't, but they've followed this pattern since they were originally
created by Jordi, and I've left it as is.
Too bad. I guess you don't want to change that?
I don't like breaking my scripts and other
On 04.11.2013 19:16, Alvaro wrote:
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:03:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip [...]
dmd -m64 xx.d says:
Can't run '\bin\link.exe', check PATH
Was that supposed to work? (as there are files in lib64 I thought
it was ready) 32
On Monday, 4 November 2013 at 08:03:55 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip [...]
dmd -m64 xx.d says:
Can't run '\bin\link.exe', check PATH
Was that supposed to work? (as there are files in lib64 I thought
it was ready) 32 bit is OK.
On 11/4/2013 10:20 AM, Jordi Sayol wrote:
On 04/11/13 19:04, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/4/2013 4:19 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-11-04 11:52, Walter Bright wrote:
They don't, but they've followed this pattern since they were originally
created by Jordi, and I've left it as is.
Too bad.
On 11/4/2013 10:43 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
Walter, can you also add the Windows installer to the RC?
What exactly do you mean?
On 2013-11-04 20:19, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/4/2013 10:43 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
Walter, can you also add the Windows installer to the RC?
What exactly do you mean?
You posted links to installers for all platforms except for Windows.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2013-11-04 19:01, Walter Bright wrote:
Absolutely not. We just don't have a download package for it (this is
not a new development).
There are binaries for FreeBSD 32bit, but the dmd.conf file is still
missing.
I've had a virtual machine setup at one point, but those things require
On 11/4/2013 11:30 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-11-04 19:01, Walter Bright wrote:
Absolutely not. We just don't have a download package for it (this is
not a new development).
There are binaries for FreeBSD 32bit, but the dmd.conf file is still missing.
The libraries were not built
On 11/4/2013 11:32 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2013-11-04 20:19, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/4/2013 10:43 AM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
Walter, can you also add the Windows installer to the RC?
What exactly do you mean?
You posted links to installers for all platforms except for Windows.
On 11/4/2013 12:03 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.x86_64.rpm
On 04.11.2013 21:06, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/4/2013 12:03 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm
On 11/4/2013 2:47 PM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
Thanks. The Visual D installation is missing from this installer. Obviously,
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/installer/pull/23 has never been
merged. As I've just released a new version, it would be nice if it could link
to the new 0.3.37.
On 11/4/13 5:20 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/4/2013 2:47 PM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
Thanks. The Visual D installation is missing from this installer. Obviously,
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/installer/pull/23 has never been
merged. As I've just released a new version, it would be
On 4 November 2013 08:03, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.zip
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.064.dmg
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd_2.064-0_amd64.deb
http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd-2.064-0.fedora.i386.rpm
On 2013-11-04 21:01, Walter Bright wrote:
The libraries were not built correctly (my old machine runs out of
memory building them). FreeBSD users have needed to, for some time now,
fork/build to get it.
I don't understand, the binaries and Phobos are included in the zip (I
haven't verified
44 matches
Mail list logo
