> I don't think we will ever support that... so while I see no problem having
> these files around as part of a standard install target, I see no reason to
> force the installation of such files if upstream does not do it.
Ok I just tried the diff and the appdata is properly installed without th
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 08:00:53PM -0500, Brad Smith wrote:
> On 01/09/15 19:46, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> >On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 09:34:02PM +, Scarlett wrote:
> >>Needs testing on non-amd64 and of redshift-gtk by someone with a
> >>gnomish setup.
> >>
> >>Are the makefile changes ok?
> >
> >
On 2015-01-09 21:34:02, Scarlett wrote:
> Needs testing on non-amd64 and of redshift-gtk by someone with a
> gnomish setup.
>
> Are the makefile changes ok?
>
I can't comment on the Makefile changes, but it seems to working
fine so far on i386. I don't use Gnome, so I can't comment on the
-gtk
On 01/09/15 19:46, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 09:34:02PM +, Scarlett wrote:
Needs testing on non-amd64 and of redshift-gtk by someone with a
gnomish setup.
Are the makefile changes ok?
Seems fine at first glance.
I'll have a deeper look tomorrow, thanks for the diff.
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 09:34:02PM +, Scarlett wrote:
> Needs testing on non-amd64 and of redshift-gtk by someone with a
> gnomish setup.
>
> Are the makefile changes ok?
Seems fine at first glance.
I'll have a deeper look tomorrow, thanks for the diff.
Just one question, what's the point in
Needs testing on non-amd64 and of redshift-gtk by someone with a
gnomish setup.
Are the makefile changes ok?
Scarlett
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/misc/redshift/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -p -r1.21 Makef
