On Mar 22, 2009, at 22:54 , Darren Weber wrote:
I In effect, every time anybody on this grid has to build a package
from source, some kind of meta-package monitor can detect whether
the build and install was successful and then make an inquiry of a
central managment system as to whether
Dave Howell wrote:
What about this: I do a ports install widget, ports looks for a
binary, doesn't find one that matches (in this case, the default
options and current version), so it goes about building it. When it's
done, it says upload compiled binary to binary archives? I say Y,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Rainer Müller rai...@macports.org wrote:
Dave Howell wrote:
What about this: I do a ports install widget, ports looks for a
binary, doesn't find one that matches (in this case, the default
options and current version), so it goes about building it. When
On Mar 22, 2009, at 13:19, Darren Weber wrote:
On balance, I'm both impressed and disappointed with the complexity
of the macports system to date. For example, dependency resolution
needs a lot of work during upgrades, binary distributions are a
great idea in the making (perhaps forever
On Mar 23, 2009, at 12:47 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Mar 22, 2009, at 13:19, Darren Weber wrote:
On balance, I'm both impressed and disappointed with the
complexity of the macports system to date. For example,
dependency resolution needs a lot of work during upgrades, binary
On Mar 23, 2009, at 1:08 AM, Frank J. R. Hanstick wrote:
On Mar 23, 2009, at 12:47 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Mar 22, 2009, at 13:19, Darren Weber wrote:
On balance, I'm both impressed and disappointed with the
complexity of the macports system to date. For example,
dependency
Darren Weber wrote:
when I look at a Portfile, I also take a little time to check out
darwinports and Debian packages to learn something about how these
software are built and distributed.
I'm confused - is this a slip of the keyboard? DarwinPorts no longer
exists, the name changed to
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Joshua Root j...@macports.org wrote:
Darren Weber wrote:
when I look at a Portfile, I also take a little time to check out
darwinports and Debian packages to learn something about how these
software are built and distributed.
I'm confused - is this a
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 11:58:33PM -0500, Ryan Schmidt said:
[...]
There are valid reasons for wanting to rebuild a port that's already
installed. But it's probably reasonable to require the use of the -f flag
in those situations. And I believe that's what is supposed to be
implemented.
On Mar 22, 2009, at 02:34, Bryan Blackburn wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 11:58:33PM -0500, Ryan Schmidt said:
[...]
There are valid reasons for wanting to rebuild a port that's already
installed. But it's probably reasonable to require the use of the -
f flag
in those situations. And I
Ryan Schmidt wrote:
* I was under the impression Mac Ports was sort of to replace
Fink, is that not the case? What are the pros and cons,
differences? Is Fink still active?
Fink and MacPorts are both package management systems for Mac OS X.
I myself switched from Fink to what is now
Ryan Schmidt wrote:
I think port not only pays attention to epoch/version/revision but
also the
timestamp of Portfile; when Portfile is newer than the install,
even when
the versioning says it's already installed, it'll run again.
I would not have expected that.
If a rebuild is
Darren Weber wrote:
What is up with port? It just ran for about 15 mins to build a package
that is already installed. If I were to work on the same damn thing,
repeating it all day, day after day, I would get the sack pretty
quickly. Just think of the useless load on the network and the
On Mar 21, 2009, at 8:10 PM, Darren Weber wrote:
What is up with port? It just ran for about 15 mins to build a
package that is already installed. If I were to work on the same
damn thing, repeating it all day, day after day, I would get the
sack pretty quickly. Just think of the
Darren Weber wrote:
What is up with port? It just ran for about 15 mins to build a package that
is already installed. If I were to work on the same damn thing, repeating
it all day, day after day, I would get the sack pretty quickly. Just think
of the useless load on the network and the
Hello,
Wouldn't it be better and faster to do the check at request time
rather than wait until everything has been done and then request if
an update is wanted rather than an install?
Frank
On Mar 22, 2009, at 6:56 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
Darren Weber wrote:
What is up with port? It
2009/3/22 Frank J. R. Hanstick tro...@comcast.net
Hello,
Wouldn't it be better and faster to do the check at request time rather
than wait until everything has been done and then request if an update is
wanted rather than an install?
Frank
Yes, sounds reasonable.
Also, my apologies!
On Mar 22, 2009, at 9:34 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
Ryan Schmidt wrote:
I think port not only pays attention to epoch/version/revision but
also the
timestamp of Portfile; when Portfile is newer than the install,
even when
the versioning says it's already installed, it'll run again.
I would not
On Mar 22, 2009, at 4:16 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
On Mar 22, 2009, at 9:34 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
Ryan Schmidt wrote:
I think port not only pays attention to epoch/version/revision but
also the
timestamp of Portfile; when Portfile is newer than the install,
even when
the versioning says
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:19:35AM -0700, Darren Weber said:
[...]
On balance, I'm both impressed and disappointed with the complexity of the
macports system to date. For example, dependency resolution needs a lot of
work during upgrades,
What do you mean, performance-wise? If so, that's
Daniel J. Luke wrote:
If nobody can think of a valid use for this check we should just
drop it.
It is somewhat useful when one is developing a new port (since you
don't have to remember to clean before you rebuild after changing the
Portfile), and there's the -o flag one can use to
Can we talk more about this? I have the ability to host such a build
farm. Now, I could not host one machine, of every architecture, of
every OS, I just do not have the room in colocation.
I do have quite a bit of room if we go 1U though. So 2 1U machines, a
PPC and a Intel, and I would
Daniel J. Luke wrote:
On Mar 22, 2009, at 9:34 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
Ryan Schmidt wrote:
I think port not only pays attention to epoch/version/revision but
also the
timestamp of Portfile; when Portfile is newer than the install,
even when
the versioning says it's already installed, it'll
Scott Haneda wrote:
Can we talk more about this? I have the ability to host such a build
farm. Now, I could not host one machine, of every architecture, of
every OS, I just do not have the room in colocation.
I do have quite a bit of room if we go 1U though. So 2 1U machines, a
PPC and a
Is it possible to create a distributed build system that uses Xgrid, to
allow all macport users the option of adding their machine to a distributed
macports build system? In effect, every time anybody on this grid has to
build a package from source, some kind of meta-package monitor can detect
What is up with port? It just ran for about 15 mins to build a package that
is already installed. If I were to work on the same damn thing, repeating
it all day, day after day, I would get the sack pretty quickly. Just think
of the useless load on the network and the servers for all those
On Mar 21, 2009, at 11:10 PM, Darren Weber wrote:
What is up with port? It just ran for about 15 mins to build a
package that is already installed.
It doesn't usually do this for me. Are you running the current
released version or are you running the development version?
Perhaps you have
On Mar 21, 2009, at 22:10, Darren Weber wrote:
What is up with port? It just ran for about 15 mins to build a
package that is already installed. If I were to work on the same
damn thing, repeating it all day, day after day, I would get the
sack pretty quickly. Just think of the useless
28 matches
Mail list logo
