Re: www/epiphany wants graphics/gdk-pixbuf that's not available in ports

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 08:09:06PM +0200, Koop Mast wrote: > > Epiphany depends on graphics/gdk-pixbuf2 not the really older gdk- > pixbuf. > That's the key point I had missed, thanks for clarifying! > > I think your trying to build ports from the HEAD ports tree, but have > quartery packages

Re: situation with www/node6 and www/node

Adam Weinberger writes: >> On 18 May, 2017, at 12:45, Joseph Mingrone wrote: >> Adam Weinberger writes: On 18 May, 2017, at 12:25, Adam Weinberger wrote: > On 18 May, 2017, at 12:22, Luca Pizzamiglio

Re: situation with www/node6 and www/node

> On 18 May, 2017, at 12:45, Joseph Mingrone wrote: > > Adam Weinberger writes: > >>> On 18 May, 2017, at 12:25, Adam Weinberger wrote: > On 18 May, 2017, at 12:22, Luca Pizzamiglio wrote: > Hi,

Re: situation with www/node6 and www/node

Adam Weinberger writes: >> On 18 May, 2017, at 12:25, Adam Weinberger wrote: >>> On 18 May, 2017, at 12:22, Luca Pizzamiglio >>> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> node6 is the LTS, node is the current. From a stability point of view, >>> node6

Re: situation with www/node6 and www/node

> On 18 May, 2017, at 12:25, Adam Weinberger wrote: > >> On 18 May, 2017, at 12:22, Luca Pizzamiglio >> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> node6 is the LTS, node is the current. From a stability point of view, >> node6 is the choice, but node (7) is already

Re: situation with www/node6 and www/node

> On 18 May, 2017, at 12:22, Luca Pizzamiglio > wrote: > > Hi, > > node6 is the LTS, node is the current. From a stability point of view, > node6 is the choice, but node (7) is already widely used. > Probably, the best solution would be to provide the desired node >

Re: situation with www/node6 and www/node

Hi, node6 is the LTS, node is the current. From a stability point of view, node6 is the choice, but node (7) is already widely used. Probably, the best solution would be to provide the desired node version via Mk/bsd.default-versions.mk and then all ports depends to the common version (like perl,

Re: www/epiphany wants graphics/gdk-pixbuf that's not available in ports

On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 20:16 -0700, bob prohaska wrote: Hi, > For some reason the port of www/epiphany is asking for a  version > of graphics/gdk-pixbuf (2.36.5) later than the most recent version  > available via svn ( 2.32.3). Epiphany depends on graphics/gdk-pixbuf2 not the really older gdk-

Re: situation with www/node6 and www/node

Steve Wills writes: > Can execjs work with node6? What else would have to change to get it all > onto node6? It can, but other changes would be needed. For example www/gitlab pulls in www/npm, which pulls in www/node. It also pulls in other ports that pull in

Re: situation with www/node6 and www/node

> On 18 May, 2017, at 11:22, Joseph Mingrone wrote: > > Hello, > > I am hitting an issue where the conflicting www/node6 and www/node > packages are attempting to be installed together. For example, the > upcoming net-im/mastodon pulls in www/yarn (which depends on www/node6

Re: situation with www/node6 and www/node

Can execjs work with node6? What else would have to change to get it all onto node6? Steve On 05/18/2017 13:22, Joseph Mingrone wrote: > Hello, > > I am hitting an issue where the conflicting www/node6 and www/node > packages are attempting to be installed together. For example, the > upcoming

situation with www/node6 and www/node

Hello, I am hitting an issue where the conflicting www/node6 and www/node packages are attempting to be installed together. For example, the upcoming net-im/mastodon pulls in www/yarn (which depends on www/node6 by default), and indirectly depends on devel/rubygem-execjs (which depends on

FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date

Dear port maintainer, The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more of your ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity to check each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate, submit/commit an update. If any ports have already been updated,

py-backports.* conflict

After the update of devel/py-backports.functools_lru_cache to 1.4 it started to conflict with devel/py-backports.shutil_get_terminal_size: py27-backports.functools_lru_cache-1.4 [FreeBSD] conflicts with py27-backports.shutil_get_terminal_size-1.0.0 [installed] on

Re: security/openvpn23 tarball size mismatch

Am 16.05.2017 um 14:00 schrieb Renato Botelho: > On 16/05/17 08:54, Renato Botelho wrote: >> Hello Mathias, >> >> I was trying to get openvpn23 installed from quarterly branch and got >> the following error: >> >> root@buildbot1:/usr/local/poudriere/ports/pfSense_v2_3/security/openvpn23 >> # make