port selfupdate failed because of signature

Worked up until two days ago, then I'm getting this: Locohost.local:~ % get.port ---> Updating MacPorts base sources using rsync receiving file list ... done sent 36 bytes received 69 bytes 210.00 bytes/sec total size is 27013120 speedup is 257267.81 receiving file list ... done sent 36

Re: Rebuild old version of port?

Ah; OK; that makes some sense now. If this port build with qt4 before the move, then it should be pretty straight forward to get it working post-move. 95% of the ports I tested worked out of the box with the PortGroup change; the others have required minimal patching to get working. Nothing major

rtorrent/libtorrent compile fail

Hello, can some one please help me out? First, why is the macports rtorrent version so old? > Felipes-MacBook-Pro:~ fmo$ port search rtorrent > rtorrent @0.9.2_1 (net) > console-based BitTorrent client > > rtorrent-devel @0.9.3_1 (net) > console-based BitTorrent client (unstable

header intact

Hi, i installed mac ports OS X 10.11 EI CAPTIAN on Mac OS X EI CAPTIAN with xcode 7.0.1. i am facing an issue on the below command line below that ports not found. Note: i have installed mac ports first time successfuly it comes fine and again i uninstalled macports and reinstalled the macports

Re: rtorrent/libtorrent compile fail

On Oct 14, 2015, at 2:29 AM, Felipe Mannshardt Oliveira wrote: > can some one please help me out? > > First, why is the macports rtorrent version so old? > >> Felipes-MacBook-Pro:~ fmo$ port search rtorrent >> rtorrent @0.9.2_1 (net) >>console-based BitTorrent client >> >> rtorrent-devel

Re: header intact

On Oct 14, 2015, at 4:05 AM, Mallikharjuna Rao wrote: > i installed mac ports OS X 10.11 EI CAPTIAN on Mac OS X EI CAPTIAN with xcode > 7.0.1. i am facing an issue on the below command line below that ports not > found. > > Note: i have installed mac ports first time successfuly it comes fine

Re: header intact

Hi Peter, 'some days old' is still OK for me, so for now I stick with this and wait for the server to be online again for an update to a more recent version of MacPorts. Thanks a lot!!! Fab On 14 October 2015 at 22:08, Peter Danecek wrote: > > Fabrizio, > if you have

Re: header intact

Following a comment that was sent 20' ago on the forum I have used the sudo port -v sync instead of selfupdate and it seems to work. Not sure if after that I have to do something else, though... if anyone has got any idea... BTW, does anyone know if there is an online support forum for Mac that

Re: header intact

For me still does not work: sudo port -v selfupdate Password: ---> Updating MacPorts base sources using rsync receiving file list ... done sent 36 bytes received 69 bytes 42.00 bytes/sec total size is 27013120 speedup is 257267.81 receiving file list ... done sent 36 bytes received 76

header intact

Hi, i installed mac ports OS X 10.11 EI CAPTIAN on Mac OS X EI CAPTIAN with xcode 7.0.1. i am facing an issue on the below command line below that ports not found. *sudo port install autoconf automake pkgconfig doxygen antlr3 nasm gettext wget yasm optipng ImageMagick coreutils intltool* *-->

Re: about fragmentation (of free disk space)

On Sun, 11 Oct 2015, Justin C. Walker wrote: > > Unix[tm] has been doing that for years (ISTR that it was even in > > Edition 5); has Apple only just caught up? > > The disk/paging/FS code is far beyond what Edition 5 (or System 5) was > doing. For sure, they did try to stream back then, but

Re: header intact

Fab, you are not alone with this error. `sudo port selfupdate` has been failing for about 2 days now: https://trac.macports.org/ticket/49233 I'm getting this same error on two Macs, both Yosemite. On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Fabrizio Salvatore < p.fabrizio.salvat...@googlemail.com> wrote:

Re: about fragmentation (of free disk space)

On Oct 14, 2015, at 13:42 , Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Sun, 11 Oct 2015, Justin C. Walker wrote: > >>> Unix[tm] has been doing that for years (ISTR that it was even in >>> Edition 5); has Apple only just caught up? >> >> The disk/paging/FS code is far beyond what Edition 5 (or System 5) was

Re: port selfupdate failed because of signature

These two tickets address this issue, which is a problem with the rsync server: https://trac.macports.org/ticket/49224 https://trac.macports.org/ticket/49233 Regards, Geoffrey Odhner On 14 Oct 2015, at 12:03, Randal L. Schwartz wrote: Worked up until two days ago, then I'm getting this:

Re: Rebuild old version of port?

Hi Adam - 1) I find no OpenModelica port in my search ("port search OpenModelica"). Maybe this port actually goes by a different name? Maybe it is local to your system? Since this is a qt4 issue, I'm happy to help (being the one who committed the change to move the qt4 install into

Re: Rebuild old version of port?

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Michael Dickens wrote: > 1) I find no OpenModelica port in my search ("port search OpenModelica"). > Maybe this port actually goes by a different name? Maybe it is local to > your system? Since this is a qt4 issue, I'm happy to help (being

Re: Rebuild old version of port?

> On Oct 14, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Brandon Allbery wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Michael Dickens > wrote: > 1) I find no OpenModelica port in my search ("port search OpenModelica"). > Maybe this port

Re: Rebuild old version of port?

Thanks! Yes, I will try that, and see how it does. > On Oct 14, 2015, at 8:57 AM, Michael Dickens wrote: > > Hi Adam - > > 1) I find no OpenModelica port in my search ("port search OpenModelica"). > Maybe this port actually goes by a different name? Maybe it is

Subversion Component Down

Dear Developers and Users The subversion server seems to eventually also be affected by recent server problems and is currently effectively down. This is a continuation of the general problems we have experienced with the rsync server and, to some extent, trac. For the time being, please stash

Re: Subversion Component Down

On Oct 14, 2015, at 9:58 PM, Mihai Moldovan wrote: > Dear Developers and Users > > The subversion server seems to eventually also be affected by recent server > problems and is currently effectively down. > > This is a continuation of the general problems we have experienced with the > rsync