On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 18:13:57 +0200 Andrea Venturoli wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I think FireFox (ESR) on my system makes really too much disk I/O.
> My profile is on an NFS drive, but I hear local disks spinning, so I
> guess it's writing to /tmp or /var/tmp (or another local folder).
>
> Looks like
Hello.
I think FireFox (ESR) on my system makes really too much disk I/O.
My profile is on an NFS drive, but I hear local disks spinning, so I
guess it's writing to /tmp or /var/tmp (or another local folder).
Looks like animations are what really make him go mad: just opening
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018, the wise Lorenzo Salvadore via freebsd-ports wrote:
Show us your makefile please.
The Makefile I have so far:
PORTNAME= pgadmin4
PORTVERSION=3.3
CATEGORIES= databases
MASTER_SITES=
Thanks, koobs, I reported the issue here:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231361
I didn't see how to add you as a watcher or CC you on the bug, sorry.
Thanks again for your help!
Todd
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 6:47 PM Kubilay Kocak wrote:
> On 11/09/2018 1:36 am, Todd Wasson
> Hi,
>
> In my quest for creating a new port (pgadmin4) I'm having a problem with
> creating a working pkg-plist. Seems to me that at least the created binary
> should be in the pkg-plist file, in my case "bin/pgAdmin4". But when I do
> that, make check-plist results in an error:
>
> ===>
Hi,
In my quest for creating a new port (pgadmin4) I'm having a problem with
creating a working pkg-plist. Seems to me that at least the created binary
should be in the pkg-plist file, in my case "bin/pgAdmin4". But when I do
that, make check-plist results in an error:
===> Checking for
Hi,
there has be no reaction from the maintainer for 3 weeks now, I guess
Bernard is on a well-deserved vacation. Could someone have a look
at the patch in #230839 please?
I would really like to have it in the Q4 branch ...
Greetings,
Wolfgang
___
On Thu, 13 Sep 2018, the wise Loïc Bartoletti wrote:
You have to build outsource so:
USES=??? pgsql python qmake:outsource qt:5
QMAKE_SOURCE_PATH=??? ${WRKSRC}/runtime
Good luck for the next steps
Loïc
Yes this one is solved. Thanks!
Regards,
Marco
--
The days just prior to
part is the combination of 2-only holdouts and new 3-only code,
which is why it's easy to end up with both installed.
_This_ is really annoying. I try to keep my systems with exactly
what they need installed, to reduce both bloat and possibly security
issues. There's one Perl
