Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Dec 13, 2007, at 13:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-
-patchfileslibssh2-0.17-banner-wait.diff
-patch.args-p1
-
Should the libssh2-0.17-banner-wait.diff file also be removed from the
files directory, since it appears no longer to be referenced?
Thanks
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Or change the name of the software. These restrictions apply only
in this case:
[quoted from the LICENSE file]
If the name Ion(tm) or other names that can be associated with the Ion
project are used to distribute this software, then:
[/quoted]
Seems like Debian
On Dec 10, 2007, at 6:50 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Dec 10, 2007, at 11:42, Weissmann Markus wrote:
On 10.12.2007, at 18:27, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Dec 10, 2007, at 08:43, Weissmann Markus wrote:
On 10.12.2007, at 15:23, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Dec 10, 2007, at 08:16, Weissmann Markus
On Dec 14, 2007, at 11:48 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
Markus Weissmann wrote:
yes. As we were running out of time in GSoC, we didn't manage to
better
integrate merge.rb into port(1) sooner.
Is there still work going on with merge.rb? As far as I know pipping
dropped all of his ports and works
Interesting idea; this brings yet another possibility. The only problem
I could see with that strategy is yet-another-license-change forbidding
derivative works.
If PortMgr thinks this is the way it should be handled, we could do the
rename in the Debian fashion, but personally I won't be
On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 12:20:27AM +0100, Markus Weissmann wrote:
Hi Simon,
please keep them separate -- I haven't participated in writing e.g. the
port(1) man page and it wouldn't be nice to claim I would have.
Regards,
-Markus
Hi Markus,
will do so. Thanks for the reply.
Simon
--
+
Hi,
I updated the ntfs-3g and added destroot.violate_mtree yes because it installs
a file into /sbin (which is necessary).
Now a user reported to me he gets the following warning during install:
--- Fetching ntfs-3g
--- Verifying checksum(s) for ntfs-3g
--- Extracting ntfs-3g
---
On Dec 16, 2007, at 11:56, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-# http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?
func=detailaid=1810588group_id=148174atid=770756
-patchfiles 20071015_rc2a.patch
Should this patchfile also be removed from the files directory then?
On Dec 16, 2007, at 07:31, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Log Message:
---
fixed bug with GetMessageManager (upstream r4737)
Modified Paths:
--
trunk/dports/devel/codeblocks-devel/Portfile
Modified: trunk/dports/devel/codeblocks-devel/Portfile
On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Dec 16, 2007, at 11:56, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-# http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?
func=detailaid=1810588group_id=148174atid=770756
-patchfiles 20071015_rc2a.patch
Should this patchfile also be removed from the files
10 matches
Mail list logo