On Saturday October 10 2015 21:58:10 Rainer Müller wrote:
> package1.0/portdpkg.tcl and package1.0/portrpm.tcl are also gone.
>
> Well, these might still exist in your prefix because old files of base
> are not purged during upgrades.
Yeah, I noticed, but I managed to create a reverse patch that
On 2015-10-10 20:28, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Saturday October 10 2015 20:21:54 Rainer Müller wrote:
>
>> The 'port dpkg' action definitely is not available on current
>> trunk. Probably you are running 2.3.4? Check 'port version', trunk
>> would identify itself as '2.3.99'.
>
> Sorry, a bout
On Saturday October 10 2015 20:21:54 Rainer Müller wrote:
> The 'port dpkg' action definitely is not available on current trunk.
> Probably you are running 2.3.4? Check 'port version', trunk would
> identify itself as '2.3.99'.
Sorry, a bout of confusion on my end. I'd been able to do `port dpkg`
On 2015-10-10 19:07, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Saturday October 10 2015 14:43:00 Rainer Müller wrote:
>
>> Hm, if ${os_arch} ends up in the package, I am not sure this is correct as
>> you
>> could build i386 packages on x86_64. Shouldn't this respect ${build.arch}?
>
> I guess you're right,
On 2015-10-10 19:53, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Saturday October 10 2015 14:43:00 Rainer Müller wrote:
>
>> Hm, if ${os_arch} ends up in the package, I am not sure this is
>> correct as you could build i386 packages on x86_64. Shouldn't this
>> respect ${build.arch}?
>
> In practice, it uses ${
On Saturday October 10 2015 14:43:00 Rainer Müller wrote:
>Hm, if ${os_arch} ends up in the package, I am not sure this is correct as you
>could build i386 packages on x86_64. Shouldn't this respect ${build.arch}?
In practice, it uses ${configure.build_arch}, but that variable is empty (at
least
On Saturday October 10 2015 14:43:00 Rainer Müller wrote:
> Hm, if ${os_arch} ends up in the package, I am not sure this is correct as you
> could build i386 packages on x86_64. Shouldn't this respect ${build.arch}?
I guess you're right, indeed. That said, building for something other than
os_ar
On 10/10/2015 12:54 PM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> MacPorts can generate .deb packages, a feature I just tried on Linux. Turns
> out it set the architecture to i386, which AFAIK is not appropriate for a 64
> bit platform like mine.
>
> So fwiw, attached is a patch that appears to address that issue
Since trac is still down:
MacPorts can generate .deb packages, a feature I just tried on Linux. Turns out
it set the architecture to i386, which AFAIK is not appropriate for a 64 bit
platform like mine.
So fwiw, attached is a patch that appears to address that issue; it prevents
os.arch from b
