On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 12:37:34AM -0200, Federico Schwindt wrote:
[..]
If you look at the whole thread, having a flavor was the original
idea from the OP, so if more people consider it the best option,
we should have a look at it instead of trying to make this port
a
[..]
If you look at the whole thread, having a flavor was the original
idea from the OP, so if more people consider it the best option,
we should have a look at it instead of trying to make this port
a multipackage.
Comments on the original diff ?
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:39:42AM -0300, Federico Schwindt wrote:
[..]
we stated many times that for some ports you just need X installed. So
it is no problem.
Yes, some ports. Some ports there is no option at all. In this case there
is an
option. So either the port uses
On Jan 16, 2008 10:50 AM, Landry Breuil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:39:42AM -0300, Federico Schwindt wrote:
[..]
we stated many times that for some ports you just need X installed. So
it is no problem.
Yes, some ports. Some ports there is no option
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:32:52PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On 11/14 08:56, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:38:38PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
This diff adds a no_x11 flavor to textproc/xpdf. This is necessary if
you want to use the pdftotext program without X being
On 2008-01-15, Landry Breuil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
xpdf users, what do you think about it ? Is it worth making this
MULTI_PACKAGES ? Attached diff needs comments and feedback.
Being xpdf user i use only bin/xpdf.
--
Alexey Vatchenko
http://www.bsdua.org
Landry Breuil wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:32:52PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On 11/14 08:56, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:38:38PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
This diff adds a no_x11 flavor to textproc/xpdf. This is necessary if
you want to use the pdftotext program
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 03:10:26PM +0100, Marc Balmer wrote:
Landry Breuil wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:32:52PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On 11/14 08:56, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:38:38PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
This diff adds a no_x11 flavor to textproc/xpdf.
Marc Balmer [2008-01-15, 15:10:26]:
Landry Breuil wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:32:52PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On 11/14 08:56, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:38:38PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
This diff adds a no_x11 flavor to textproc/xpdf. This is necessary if
you
I'm not sure wether I'm happy with splitting xpdf at all (expect
people asking where pdftotext and friends has been gone after the
update), but anyway, here are some comments:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:24:29AM +0100, Landry Breuil wrote:
Ah, yes, bernd@ sent me a diff a while ago about this
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 09:21:18PM +0100, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
Marc Balmer [2008-01-15, 15:10:26]:
Landry Breuil wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:32:52PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On 11/14 08:56, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:38:38PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
This
On 11/14 08:56, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:38:38PM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
This diff adds a no_x11 flavor to textproc/xpdf. This is necessary if
you want to use the pdftotext program without X being installed. This
patch is the same is one sent last week, update to
This diff adds a no_x11 flavor to textproc/xpdf. This is necessary if
you want to use the pdftotext program without X being installed. This
patch is the same is one sent last week, update to -current for the
recent security patch to xpdf.
Tested on i386. Please test and commit.
Jeremy
?
This diff adds a no_x11 flavor to textproc/xpdf. This is necessary if
you want to use the pdftotext program without X being installed.
Tested on i386. Please test and commit.
Jeremy
? w-xpdf-3.02pl1p1
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file:
14 matches
Mail list logo
