I truly appreciate everyone who maintains things for MP - couldn’t live without
this stuff. My initial query was just trying to understand whether ‘port
diagnose’ was telling me something I should be concerned about. I think the
answer was ‘no’.
The message could be improved for that case,
I truly appreciate everyone who maintains things for MP - couldn’t live without
this stuff. My initial query was just trying to understand whether ‘port
diagnose’ was telling me something I should be concerned about. I think the
answer was ‘no’.
Jim
3222 NE 89th St
Seattle, WA 98115
(206)
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022, Chris Jones wrote:
> MacPorts is not (just) 'a simple package manager'. Yes, it performs this
> function, but first and foremost (and long before we even had binary
> tarballs to distribute as a 'package mnager') it is a system for
> building packages and their
Additionally, I was thinking that the binary downloads of ports might be
codesigned. That would prevent people from all having to buy a certificate
themselves (and self-signed is not really an option, these are generally
ignored, maybe not if you mark them as trusted). You can of course also
I’ve recently moved from macOS Mojave with MacPorts to macOS Monterey with
MacPorts
I’ve had serious trouble with the application level firewall
(alf/socketfilterfw). I now suspect that one reason is that Apple is getting
stricter and stricter about only allowing binaries that have been code
On 11/03/2022 8:02 am, Michele Venturi wrote:
What is wrong is that a simple package manager
requires an entire multigigabyte professional IDE;
I have even taken the time to talk to them about it
and file a bug about it,but they clearly don't care...
It's surely not a new issue,it's like that
What is wrong is that a simple package manager
requires an entire multigigabyte professional IDE;
I have even taken the time to talk to them about it
and file a bug about it,but they clearly don't care...
It's surely not a new issue,it's like that by design...
Il ven 11 mar 2022, 01:40 James
