On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:06:02PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned the
python update posted on ports@ some time ago, so below is the update as well
as moving the default.
I've not removed 2.5 for the time being
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 10:50:37AM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:06:02PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned the
python update posted on ports@ some time ago, so below is the update as
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:06:02PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned the
python update posted on ports@ some time ago, so below is the update as well
as moving the default.
I've not removed 2.5 for the time being
Hi,
On Tue, 06.07.2010 at 00:11:26 -0400, William Yodlowsky will...@openbsd.org
wrote:
3.0 won't be upgraded any more, which is why -current has 3.6 in its
place.
ok - I've yesterday seen an empty 3.6 directory, but at least a working
3.5 directory. 4.7 ships with 3.0.18, though.
Even
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 12:40:46PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 06.07.2010 at 00:11:26 -0400, William Yodlowsky will...@openbsd.org
wrote:
3.0 won't be upgraded any more, which is why -current has 3.6 in its
place.
ok - I've yesterday seen an empty 3.6 directory, but at
Hi,
I'm on the list, so please...
On Sun, 04.07.2010 at 12:22:21 +0100, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org
wrote:
On 2010/07/04 11:18, Toni Mueller wrote:
I can go. In many cases, this works just fine.
In many cases, it works, but also in many cases, it breaks.
right. I didn't say
Hi,
On Sun, 04.07.2010 at 14:00:11 +0200, Marc Espie es...@nerim.net wrote:
That's no longer true, we do have people handling stable ports and packages
for security purposes.
it would be great, then, to also note updates on this page:
http://www.openbsd.org/pkg-stable.html
TIA!
--
Kind
On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 05:29:12PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, 04.07.2010 at 14:00:11 +0200, Marc Espie es...@nerim.net wrote:
That's no longer true, we do have people handling stable ports and packages
for security purposes.
it would be great, then, to also note updates on
On 2010/07/05 17:41, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 05:29:12PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, 04.07.2010 at 14:00:11 +0200, Marc Espie es...@nerim.net wrote:
That's no longer true, we do have people handling stable ports and
packages
for security
Hi,
there seems to be some kind of misunderstanding about what I consider
to be the problem, and what you think what I'm doing.
On Sat, 03.07.2010 at 22:49:19 +0200, Matthias Kilian k...@outback.escape.de
wrote:
If you're trying to use a current ports tree on a -stable system,
To clarify:
On 2010/07/04 11:18, Toni Mueller wrote:
Hi,
there seems to be some kind of misunderstanding about what I consider
to be the problem, and what you think what I'm doing.
On Sat, 03.07.2010 at 22:49:19 +0200, Matthias Kilian
k...@outback.escape.de wrote:
If you're trying to use a
On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 11:18:59AM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
Umm... Marc's response made it very clear that a user of ports or
packages is mostly out in the dust. I didn't expect much else,
anyway, but this is one of OpenBSD's real weaknesses, as there is
no security support for ports nor
Hi Stuart,
On Fri, 02.07.2010 at 12:27:27 +0100, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org
wrote:
Sorry reports from 4.7 are not too helpful here for this. If it
happens for anyone on -current, please capture full build logs -
I'm aware that the project may not have that much of an interest in
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 01:40:54PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2010/07/02 15:34, Pekka Niiranen wrote:
Damien Miller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
The things I use regularly work fine. Admittedly this is not all that
many programs, but in the absence of
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 06:53:07PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
On Fri, 02.07.2010 at 12:27:27 +0100, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org
wrote:
Sorry reports from 4.7 are not too helpful here for this. If it
happens for anyone on -current, please capture full build logs -
I'm aware that
Hi,
On Wed, 23.06.2010 at 20:06:02 +0100, Federico G. Schwindt fg...@lodoss.net
wrote:
specially on something else than i386 and amd64, although more testing on
those won't hurt.
I just tested it on i386 so far.
FTBFS on 4.7/amd64:
=== Building package for python-2.6.5
Create
On 2010/07/02 13:01, Toni Mueller wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 23.06.2010 at 20:06:02 +0100, Federico G. Schwindt fg...@lodoss.net
wrote:
specially on something else than i386 and amd64, although more testing on
those won't hurt.
I just tested it on i386 so far.
FTBFS on 4.7/amd64:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
The things I use regularly work fine. Admittedly this is not all that
many programs, but in the absence of better reports from the people who
actually requested the update...
No additional regression test failures on amd64 (one is fixed).
I am
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Pekka Niiranen
pekka.niira...@pp5.inet.fi wrote:
Damien Miller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
The things I use regularly work fine. Admittedly this is not all that
many programs, but in the absence of better reports from the people who
On 2010/07/02 15:34, Pekka Niiranen wrote:
Damien Miller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
The things I use regularly work fine. Admittedly this is not all that
many programs, but in the absence of better reports from the people who
actually requested the update...
No
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010, Pekka Niiranen wrote:
Damien Miller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
The things I use regularly work fine. Admittedly this is not all that
many programs, but in the absence of better reports from the people who
actually requested the update...
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 10:42:05PM +1000, Damien Miller wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010, Pekka Niiranen wrote:
Damien Miller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
The things I use regularly work fine. Admittedly this is not all that
many programs, but in the absence of
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Damien Miller d...@mindrot.org wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010, Pekka Niiranen wrote:
Damien Miller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
The things I use regularly work fine. Admittedly this is not all that
many programs, but in the absence of
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 01:01:59PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 23.06.2010 at 20:06:02 +0100, Federico G. Schwindt fg...@lodoss.net
wrote:
specially on something else than i386 and amd64, although more testing on
those won't hurt.
I just tested it on i386 so far.
On 2010/07/02 14:49, David Coppa wrote:
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Damien Miller d...@mindrot.org wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010, Pekka Niiranen wrote:
Damien Miller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Stuart Henderson wrote:
The things I use regularly work fine. Admittedly this is not
On 2010/07/02 14:49, David Coppa wrote:
You may have reasons, but these sentences from
http://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/2.7.html sound good to me:
Python 2.7 is planned to be the last of the 2.x releases, so we
worked on making it a good release for the long term.
This means that 2.7
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Marc Espie es...@nerim.net wrote:
Don't believe the hype. It might be that python 2.7 is going to be great,
but experience has shown that, for many software projects, upstream
engineering quality is sorely lacking... (of course, python is not
GNU python, so it
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010, David Coppa wrote:
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Damien Miller d...@mindrot.org wrote:
Care to give a reason why not? Typically 2.x.0 releases have suffered
from a number of bugs and compatibility problems. I don't think it is
a great idea that we jump onto them
On 2010/06/29 14:49, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:06:02PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned the
python update posted on ports@ some time ago, so below is the update as well
as moving
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 06:09:42PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2010/06/29 14:49, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:06:02PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned
the
python update
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:06:02PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned the
python update posted on ports@ some time ago, so below is the update as well
as moving the default.
I've not removed 2.5 for the time being
I've been using it this way for over a year now with my own patch on i386
and amd64. Things like easy_install, pylons, py-libxml, py-libxslt, psycopg2
etc all work well. As it's been said before plone might suck.
Cheers,
Brandon
On Jun 29, 2010 9:51 AM, Federico G. Schwindt fg...@lodoss.net
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned the
python update posted on ports@ some time ago, so below is the update as well
as moving the default.
I've not removed 2.5 for the time being as some have shown some concerns
and we can always kill it later.
So if
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:06:02PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned the
python update posted on ports@ some time ago, so below is the update as well
as moving the default.
I've not removed 2.5 for the time being
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:01:22PM +0200, Joachim Schipper wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:06:02PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned the
python update posted on ports@ some time ago, so below is the update as
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:06:02PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned the
python update posted on ports@ some time ago, so below is the update as well
as moving the default.
I've not removed 2.5 for the time being
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:13:26PM +0200, Joachim Schipper wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:06:02PM +0100, Federico G. Schwindt wrote:
Hi,
Since the plan is to make 2.6 the default, some people have mentioned the
python update posted on ports@ some time ago, so below is the update as
37 matches
Mail list logo
