Re: sysutils/fusefs-ntfs breakage

2010-10-16 Thread Mykhaylo Yehorov
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 14:47, Mykhaylo Yehorov yeho...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 21:27, Michael Butler i...@protected-networks.net wrote: The most recent update to sysutils/fusefs-ntfs appears to have broken it on -current. It looks as if /usr/local/include/glib-2.0 is missing

Re: sysutils/fusefs-ntfs breakage

2010-10-16 Thread Mykhaylo Yehorov
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 21:27, Michael Butler i...@protected-networks.net wrote: The most recent update to sysutils/fusefs-ntfs appears to have broken it on -current. It looks as if /usr/local/include/glib-2.0 is missing from the includes and /usr/local/lib from the libraries .. I've faced

Re: sysutils/fusefs-ntfs breakage

2010-10-16 Thread Michael Butler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/16/10 08:02, Mykhaylo Yehorov wrote: I've faced this build failure too. It's described in PR ports/146434. The following patches for sysutils/fusefs-ntfs will solve this problem. Could anybody add this to CVS? The previous patches is

No-op port updates

2010-10-16 Thread Rob Farmer
What is the best practice for no-op port updates - i.e. version 1.0 and 1.1 produce identical FreeBSD packages but they might be different on Linux/elsewhere? Update to have to port appear current or avoid forcing people to do unnecessary updates? -- Rob Farmer

Re: No-op port updates

2010-10-16 Thread Doug Barton
On 10/16/2010 8:30 AM, Rob Farmer wrote: What is the best practice for no-op port updates - i.e. version 1.0 and 1.1 produce identical FreeBSD packages but they might be different on Linux/elsewhere? Update to have to port appear current or avoid forcing people to do unnecessary updates? When

xf86-video-intel29 - does it work with Ironlake graphics now?

2010-10-16 Thread Torfinn Ingolfsen
Hi, So, does the xf86-video-intel29 port work with Ironlake graphics now? I remember that there was a lot of testing when the Xorg 7.5 port was getting finalized. I just upgraded my Core i3 machine[1] to FreeBSD 8.1-stable, and upgraded all the ports on it. r...@kg-v7# uname -a FreeBSD

Re: xf86-video-intel29 - does it work with Ironlake graphics now?

2010-10-16 Thread Warren Block
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010, Torfinn Ingolfsen wrote: So, does the xf86-video-intel29 port work with Ironlake graphics now? I don't think so (although I don't have newer Intel video to test), but there's hope (from yesterday):

Re: xf86-video-intel29 - does it work with Ironlake graphics now?

2010-10-16 Thread Charlie Kester
On Sat 16 Oct 2010 at 12:11:41 PDT Warren Block wrote: On Sat, 16 Oct 2010, Torfinn Ingolfsen wrote: So, does the xf86-video-intel29 port work with Ironlake graphics now? I don't think so (although I don't have newer Intel video to test), but there's hope (from yesterday):

Re: xf86-video-intel29 - does it work with Ironlake graphics now?

2010-10-16 Thread Mark Linimon
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 02:04:20PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote: BTW, does anyone know what's going on with miwi? Job change involving relocation halfway around the planet. mcl ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: No-op port updates

2010-10-16 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 09:47:55AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: On 10/16/2010 8:30 AM, Rob Farmer wrote: What is the best practice for no-op port updates - i.e. version 1.0 and 1.1 produce identical FreeBSD packages but they might be different on Linux/elsewhere? Update to have to port appear

Re: No-op port updates

2010-10-16 Thread Rob Farmer
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 14:24, Peter Pentchev r...@ringlet.net wrote: I've sometimes added a comment to the port's Makefile explaining the needlessness of an update. Ok - I'm not sure if this is worthy of adding to the PR load so I'll just post it to the list and if someone has time, great, if