port:gpgme / Fwd: Review Request 129265: Port from KF5Gpgme to GpgME

Hi, I'm not getting into trac (github being DDoS'ed again??), so I'm forwarding this info via the ML hoping Ryan will catch it. First, gpgme has been updated to 1.7.1 which apparently brings bug fixes we "definitely want". But more importantly, KDE is dropping the use of its own version of

Re: port:gpgme / Fwd: Review Request 129265: Port from KF5Gpgme to GpgME

On 2016-10-27 09:58, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > I'm not getting into trac (github being DDoS'ed again??), so I'm forwarding > this info via the ML hoping Ryan will catch it. Once again, our Trac is not hosted by GitHub. This is still the same cause Clemens reported on yesterday. Please bear with

Re: port:gpgme / Fwd: Review Request 129265: Port from KF5Gpgme to GpgME

On Thursday October 27 2016 12:05:33 Rainer Müller wrote: > Once again, our Trac is not hosted by GitHub. I know, but logging in does involve github as far as I can tell. I restarted my login session, so I have to log in again. R. ___ macports-dev

nested port upgrading and variants

Hi, Marko tells me he's been having issues with upgrading one of my KF5 ports that uses the active_variants portgroup to "depend" on variants of one of its dependencies. From our exchange: > > >> BUT that’s not all yet. Once also needs to select the +contrib variant, > > >> otherwise you have

Fwd: [154314] trunk/dports/security/paperkey/Portfile

Please do not commit version updates to my openmaintainer ports. I don't consider such changes "minor". vq > Begin forwarded message: > > From: not...@macports.org > Subject: [154314] trunk/dports/security/paperkey/Portfile > Date: October 27, 2016 at 1:46:10 PM EDT > To:

Re: nested port upgrading and variants

On Thursday October 27 2016 14:55:59 Ryan Schmidt wrote: > > That's what I told Marko too, but we're not talking here about the initial > > installation. I think that when you already have opencv+qt5+opencv > > installed, an automatic upgrade to opencv should behave like `port upgrade > >

Re: nested port upgrading and variants

On Thursday October 27 2016 11:12:10 David Strubbe wrote: Hi David, >used for a dependency. That's all it does. The only way I know of that you >could make opencv get installed with +qt5 in this context is to do "port >install kf5-digikam-devel +qt5" (whether that is a meaningful variant for

Re: nested port upgrading and variants

I agree with you about what should happen. I just wanted to clarify that the active_variants portgroup doesn't make that happen, and probably cannot -- this is a base issue. On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:28 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > On Thursday October 27 2016 11:12:10

Review request for new-port ticket #50421 (wallet @1.3)

Good morning! Would someone mind checking out ticket #50421? This is a new port submission I posted a while ago, but it hasn't been acted on. There are a number of patches, but they have been accepted upstream, so when the next release happens the number of patches should be much lower

Re: nested port upgrading and variants

Hi René, The purpose of the active_variants portgroup is to provide error messages like the one you mentioned, after checking whether a certain variant was used for a dependency. That's all it does. The only way I know of that you could make opencv get installed with +qt5 in this context is to do

Re: nested port upgrading and variants

> On Oct 27, 2016, at 1:28 PM, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > > On Thursday October 27 2016 11:12:10 David Strubbe wrote: > > Hi David, > > >> used for a dependency. That's all it does. The only way I know of that you >> could make opencv get installed with +qt5 in this

port:libcxx : use via DYLD_INSERT_LIBRARIES

Hi, I've built and been testing the libraries from port:libcxx 3.7.1 for a while now, on OS X 10.9.5 . I didn't take the completely adventurous approach; instead, I copied them into a new directory (/opt/lib) and wrote a little wrapper script that inserts them before loading any application.

Re: nested port upgrading and variants

Hi folks, thanks René, for reporting, but ... On 27 Oct 2016, at 21:59 , René J.V. Bertin wrote: > On Thursday October 27 2016 14:55:59 Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >>> That's what I told Marko too, but we're not talking here about the initial >>> installation. I think that when