Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread Anton Shterenlikht
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 05:18:40AM -0800, David Wolfskill wrote: This was under stable/6; it may be relevant to note that as I have 4 slices configured on my laptop's disk, each of which is bootable (stable/6, stable/7, stable/8, head), /usr/ports is actually a symlink from each of those

Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread David Wolfskill
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 01:27:31PM +, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: ... (Though I note that /bkp/ports/print/ghostscript8/work/ghostscript-8.70/base/ does seem to be populated with several other files.) is this i386? Aye I reported this already for sparc and ia64:

Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread Gary Jennejohn
On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 05:32:38 -0800 David Wolfskill da...@catwhisker.org wrote: On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 01:27:31PM +, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: ... (Though I note that /bkp/ports/print/ghostscript8/work/ghostscript-8.70/base/ does seem to be populated with several other files.)

Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread Rainer Hurling
On 20.12.2009 14:18 (UTC+1), David Wolfskill wrote: This was under stable/6; it may be relevant to note that as I have 4 slices configured on my laptop's disk, each of which is bootable (stable/6, stable/7, stable/8, head), /usr/ports is actually a symlink from each of those slices to a file

Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread Hiroki Sato
David Wolfskill da...@catwhisker.org wrote in 20091220133238.gr...@bunrab.catwhisker.org: da On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 01:27:31PM +, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: da ... da (Though I note that /bkp/ports/print/ghostscript8/work/ghostscript-8.70/base/ da does seem to be populated with

Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread Anton Shterenlikht
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 02:06:39AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: David Wolfskill da...@catwhisker.org wrote in 20091220133238.gr...@bunrab.catwhisker.org: da On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 01:27:31PM +, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: da ... da (Though I note that

Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread Jamie Griffin
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 02:06:39AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: Fixed just now. This build error occurred only when WITH_FT_BRIDGE was enabled regardless of the platform. I'm still not able to build this. I've updated my ports tree which hasn't helped. Is there anything else I can do to get

Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread Anton Shterenlikht
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 12:54:42AM +, Jamie Griffin wrote: On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 02:06:39AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: Fixed just now. This build error occurred only when WITH_FT_BRIDGE was enabled regardless of the platform. I'm still not able to build this. I've updated my

Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread David Wolfskill
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 12:54:42AM +, Jamie Griffin wrote: On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 02:06:39AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: Fixed just now. This build error occurred only when WITH_FT_BRIDGE was enabled regardless of the platform. I'm still not able to build this. I've updated my

Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread Hiroki Sato
Jamie Griffin j...@koderize.com wrote in 20091221005442.ga54...@bsdbox.koderize.com: jg On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 02:06:39AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: jg jg Fixed just now. This build error occurred only when WITH_FT_BRIDGE jg was enabled regardless of the platform. jg jg I'm still not able

Re: Attempted upgrade of ghostscript8-8.64_7 - ghostscript-8.70 failed

2009-12-20 Thread Jamie Griffin
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 12:57:50AM +, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: cd /usr/ports/print/ghostscript8 make distclean make rmconfig make This did the trick. Oddly, though, I did do this about an hour ago and it still failed but, and probably completely coincidental, I rebooted and gave it