Philipp Ost wrote:
I can't confirm this here. I just build lang/gcc43 on my dual Athlon MP
system running a recent CURRENT. There were no such error as in your
case; both CPUs were used just fine.
Yeah maybe your system is just fast enough to keep up?
--
Oliver Lehmann
GNOME 2.26 has been merged into the ports tree. See
http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/2.26/ for a list of what's
new. On the FreeBSD front, we introduced a port of libxul 1.9 as an
alternative for Firefox 2.0 as a Gecko provider. Almost all of the
Gecko consumers can make use of this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Howdy,
If someone want to play with firefox 3.1 beta3 here, is a patch for marcuscom
portstree:
http://miwi.homeunix.com/patches/firefox31_b3.diff
and here a tarball :)
http://miwi.homeunix.com/firefox3-devel.tgz
Happy Testing.
- - Martin
-
Hello,
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Parv p...@pair.com wrote:
Does this Perl (5.8 onwards) program ...
http://www103.pair.com/parv/comp/src/perl/check-portupgrade-00
... produces anything when run *without any arguments*?
FWIW, I tried it on two machines, no it does not produce any
in message b79ecaef0904091219t4f20f65br36f6e2405ff60...@mail.gmail.com,
wrote Chris Rees thusly...
2009/4/9 Parv p...@pair.com:
in message b79ecaef0904080551x74c80227h1a4ba5d2adcca...@mail.gmail.com,
wrote Chris Rees thusly...
I recall from
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 2:57 PM, p...@pair.com wrote:
What was the last working version? It would be simpler for this
Ruby simpleton to generate a patch than to debug through the
stack trace.
FWIW, my current workaround for thi problem is to portdowngrade to the
latest portupgrade 2.4.3
Hello,
2009/3/30 Bernhard Fröhlich de...@bluelife.at:
Yeah i can reproduce that too. It's because it takes libavcodec from the
system path which is wrong. Attached patch fixes that problem but then I
get another compile error with Intel XvMC in mythtranscode. That one
probably needs further
Torfinn Ingolfsen writes:
What was the last working version? It would be simpler for this
Ruby simpleton to generate a patch than to debug through the
stack trace.
FWIW, my current workaround for thi problem is to portdowngrade to the
latest portupgrade 2.4.3
According to /usr/ports/UPDATING, if you want to upgrade to perl5.10, you do
the following:
Portupgrade users:
0) Fix pkgdb.db (for safety):
pkgdb -Ff
1) Reinstall perl with new 5.10:
portupgrade -o lang/perl5.10 -f perl-5.8.\*
2) Reinstall everything that depends on
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 09:55:30 -0700
Brian Whalen br...@brianwhalen.net wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
According to /usr/ports/UPDATING, if you want to upgrade to
perl5.10, you do the following:
Portupgrade users:
0) Fix pkgdb.db (for safety):
pkgdb -Ff
1) Reinstall perl with new
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 16:17:00 +
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
According to /usr/ports/UPDATING, if you want to upgrade to perl5.10,
you do the following:
Portupgrade users:
0) Fix pkgdb.db (for safety):
pkgdb -Ff
1) Reinstall perl with new 5.10:
RW wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 16:17:00 +
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
According to /usr/ports/UPDATING, if you want to upgrade to perl5.10,
you do the following:
Portupgrade users:
0) Fix pkgdb.db (for safety):
pkgdb -Ff
1) Reinstall perl with new 5.10:
* Brian Whalen (br...@brianwhalen.net) wrote:
According to /usr/ports/UPDATING, if you want to upgrade to perl5.10,
you do the following:
Portupgrade users:
0) Fix pkgdb.db (for safety):
pkgdb -Ff
1) Reinstall perl with new 5.10:
portupgrade -o lang/perl5.10
--On Friday, April 10, 2009 11:17:00 -0500 Paul Schmehl
pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
According to /usr/ports/UPDATING, if you want to upgrade to perl5.10, you do
the following:
Portupgrade users:
0) Fix pkgdb.db (for safety):
pkgdb -Ff
1) Reinstall perl with new 5.10:
--On Friday, April 10, 2009 13:05:04 -0500 Dmitry Marakasov amd...@amdmi3.ru
wrote:
* Brian Whalen (br...@brianwhalen.net) wrote:
According to /usr/ports/UPDATING, if you want to upgrade to perl5.10,
you do the following:
Portupgrade users:
0) Fix pkgdb.db (for safety):
Oliver Lehmann wrote:
Philipp Ost wrote:
I can't confirm this here. I just build lang/gcc43 on my dual Athlon MP
system running a recent CURRENT. There were no such error as in your
case; both CPUs were used just fine.
Yeah maybe your system is just fast enough to keep up?
That may
--On Friday, April 10, 2009 12:55:53 -0500 RW rwmailli...@googlemail.com
wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 16:17:00 +
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
According to /usr/ports/UPDATING, if you want to upgrade to perl5.10,
you do the following:
Portupgrade users:
0) Fix pkgdb.db
Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Friday, April 10, 2009 11:17:00 -0500 Paul Schmehl
pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
According to /usr/ports/UPDATING, if you want to upgrade to perl5.10,
you do
the following:
Portupgrade users:
0) Fix pkgdb.db (for safety):
pkgdb -Ff
1) Reinstall
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:45:22 +
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
Have portupgrade exclude the ports built after perl.
portupgrade -fr perl -x '=perl'
This immediately started upgrade perl again, so I halted it.
Then either you've found a portupgrade bug, or the original
--On Friday, April 10, 2009 15:47:16 -0500 RW rwmailli...@googlemail.com
wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:45:22 +
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
Have portupgrade exclude the ports built after perl.
portupgrade -fr perl -x '=perl'
This immediately started upgrade perl
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 03:22:31PM +1000, Tom Mende wrote:
sorry http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=133558
yes, that's the PR number, but what port supplies foo2zjs?
mcl
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
--On Friday, April 10, 2009 15:47:16 -0500 RW rwmailli...@googlemail.com
wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:45:22 +
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
Have portupgrade exclude the ports built after perl.
portupgrade -fr perl -x '=perl'
This immediately started upgrade perl
The description in the PR is referring to print/foo2zjs
On 4/10/09, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 03:22:31PM +1000, Tom Mende wrote:
sorry http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=133558
yes, that's the PR number, but what port supplies foo2zjs?
mcl
On Friday 10 April 2009, Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Friday, April 10, 2009 15:47:16 -0500 RW
rwmailli...@googlemail.com
wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:45:22 +
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
Have portupgrade exclude the ports built after perl.
portupgrade -fr perl
Hi,
I want to propose that net-mgmt/nrpe2 gets net-mgmt/nrpe, and that the
actual net-mgmt/nrpe port gets removed. I strongly doubt that there
are still users of nrpe 1.
In the current situation, there are a lot of confusions: If you get
nrpe from source, (version 2.12), it'll install check_nrpe
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009, Frank Steinborn wrote:
I want to propose that net-mgmt/nrpe2 gets net-mgmt/nrpe, and that the
actual net-mgmt/nrpe port gets removed. I strongly doubt that there are
still users of nrpe 1.
I have already had both net-mgmt/nagios12 and net-mgmt/nrpe marked for
deletion,
--On April 10, 2009 4:51:40 PM -0500 David Booth
dav...@boothscientific.com wrote:
Perhaps I have found a bug. Each time I run this it reinstalls
perl5.10 again - successfully (supposedly).
Try a little different syntax:
portupgrade -fr -x '=perl' perl
Also, you can use the -n switch
27 matches
Mail list logo
