-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Doug Barton wrote:
> Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
>> Again, the idea here was not to change anything in the ports
>> themselves: just what was presented in the INDEX,
>
> Ok, then I think it's incumbent on you to explain what the benefit
> would be.
Doug Barton wrote:
> > and then mainly as a resource to make easier the lives of the
> > people that write ports management software.
>
> Well, I'm one of those people, and portmaster ignores the index file
> altogether, for whatever that's worth.
Me too for pkgupgrade. In my case the rationale
Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Again, the idea here was not to change anything in the ports
> themselves: just what was presented in the INDEX,
Ok, then I think it's incumbent on you to explain what the benefit
would be.
> and then mainly as a resource to make easier the lives of the
> people that wri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Doug Barton wrote:
> Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
>> In many ways it would be more useful to delete from the
>> EXTRACT_DEPENDS, FETCH_DEPENDS, PATCH_DEPENDS, BUILD_DEPENDS[*]
>> lists in the INDEX any package that also appears in the RUN_DEPENDS
>> list
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 12:01:30 -0700
Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW, the -r option for portmaster only rebuilds those ports that
> depend directly on the new version, not things that depend on the
> things that depend on it.
When portmanager was changed to work this way it seemed sen
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 12:40:02PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> the INDEX files -- so many that I think that items common to both
> >> build_deps and run_deps should be isolated and put into a new category
> >> called 'common_deps':
> >
> >How will this benefit us?
> >
> >Doug
>
> Reduce a
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Mark Linimon wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 12:40:02PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the INDEX files -- so many that I think that items common to both
build_deps and run_deps should be isolated and put into a new category
called 'common_deps':
How will this benefit us?
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 05:11:27PM +0200, Michel Talon wrote:
> The only relevant info for determining what to install or build
> previously is RUN_DEPENDS and BUILD_DEPENDS. Everything else is garbage.
The pointyhat error logs would tend to indicate that this isn't correct.
mcl
_
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Doug Barton wrote:
Garrett Cooper wrote:
>I just ran a quick analysis with a Perl script and found that there
> are a number of similarities in the build_deps and run_deps fields in
> the INDEX files -- so many that I think that items common to both
> build_deps and run
Garrett Cooper wrote:
>I just ran a quick analysis with a Perl script and found that there
> are a number of similarities in the build_deps and run_deps fields in
> the INDEX files -- so many that I think that items common to both
> build_deps and run_deps should be isolated and put into a new
Matthew Seaman wrote:
> In many ways it would be more useful to delete from the
> EXTRACT_DEPENDS, FETCH_DEPENDS, PATCH_DEPENDS, BUILD_DEPENDS[*]
> lists in the INDEX any package that also appears in the RUN_DEPENDS
> list. This leaves the four listed fields with just the extra
> packages that ne
Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Another interesting idea would be to separate out the LIB_DEPENDS
> data. At the moment there is a separate LIB_DEPENDS variable that
> can be used in Makefiles, but the INDEX processing includes the
> LIB_DEPENDS data with both the BUILD_DEPENDS and the RUN_DEPENDS
> fiel
On Friday, 2007-07-20 at 01:18:02 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> %cat /dev/zero 2> /dev/null > /dev/null
> Ambiguous output redirect.
You're trying to use Bourne Shell Syntax with the csh. With csh, you can
only redirect stdout and stderr together like this:
%cat /dev/zero >& /dev/null
Lupe C
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Garrett Cooper wrote:
>I just ran a quick analysis with a Perl script and found that there
> are a number of similarities in the build_deps and run_deps fields in
> the INDEX files -- so many that I think that items common to both
> build_deps a
Garrett Cooper wrote:
Lupe Christoph wrote:
On Thursday, 2007-07-19 at 23:55:14 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
redirecting input in and out doesn't work for (t)csh
Huh?!?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ csh %cat > /tmp/aaa
Some garbage text
%cat < /tmp/aaa > /tmp/bbb
%cat /tmp/bbb
Some garbage
Lupe Christoph wrote:
On Thursday, 2007-07-19 at 23:55:14 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
redirecting input in and out doesn't work for (t)csh
Huh?!?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ csh
%cat > /tmp/aaa
Some garbage text
%cat < /tmp/aaa > /tmp/bbb
%cat /tmp/bbb
Some garbage text
Lupe Christop
Garrett Cooper wrote:
Hello porters,
Currently in the INDEX files there are 13 categories describing
dependencies, 2 of which are:
8. build_deps
9. run_deps
I just ran a quick analysis with a Perl script and found that there
are a number of similarities in the build_deps and run_
Hello porters,
Currently in the INDEX files there are 13 categories describing
dependencies, 2 of which are:
8. build_deps
9. run_deps
I just ran a quick analysis with a Perl script and found that there
are a number of similarities in the build_deps and run_deps fields in
the IND
18 matches
Mail list logo
