December 2007 - macports-dev - lists.macosforge.org

Re: Different dmgs for different felines
by Rainer Müller 10 Jan '08

10 Jan '08

Ryan Schmidt wrote: > Rainer, would you prefer for us to distribute 5 different disk images of > MacPorts then -- Panther PowerPC, Tiger PowerPC, Tiger Intel, Leopard > PowerPC, Leopard Intel? A disk image with four architectures will be around four times bigger than it needs to be... Why should anybody want to download a large file if 3/4 are useless data and just occupy disk space? > Apple wants developers to make universal binaries so that users don't > need to care what kind of processor they have. Other Mac developers are > making universal binaries. We should too. And we already do. We just > have separate images for Panther, Tiger and Leopard right now. And I'd > like to unify that as well so that we end up with a single downloadable > for our software, like most other Mac developers already have. So why does Apple not just provide a interface to strip uneeded architectures right on installing? Instead, they copy useless data. I don't understand this... At least one can do it himself and remove them with ditto. > We already had several cases where users downloaded the Leopard MacPorts > disk image, installed it on Tiger, and of course it didn't work. So > distributing a single disk image which works everywhere is simpler for > users. [Those stupid users should learn to read...] But if you download an universal disk image; after the first selfupdate, which you normally do after install to get a newer minor version, you will end up with a single architecture - the one of your system. Why should disk images distribute a different version than selfupdate? I don't want to debate over support universal building for ports, somebody might need it. And I don't want to say that universal in general is bad. Rainer

4 6

Re: [32334] trunk/www/install.php
by Anders F Björklund 08 Jan '08

08 Jan '08

> Revision > 32334 > Author > jmpp(a)macports.org > Date > 2007-12-25 13:33:06 -0800 (Tue, 25 Dec 2007) > > Log Message > Clarify that Leopard users need to install Xcode 3.0, while Tiger > users need 2.5 (sorry Anders, no direct link to 2.4 off apple's site > :-P). As long as you are willing to deal with the breakage from using Xcode 2.5 (like #13736 et al), feel free to recommend either... I still think 2.4(.1) is the one to use while on Tiger. But the link is the same as ever: http://connect.apple.com "Xcode 2.5 is a minor update to the Tiger tools that is functionally similar to Xcode 2.4.1. It is not considered a critical update. ... This release is recommended for developers needing to continue to use the Tiger tools while running Leopard, and serves as a transition to Xcode 3.0..." > Also switch to the now more familiar "Xcode" name, as the older > "Developer Tools" is apparently being phased out. Closes #12779. I only use the name "Developer Tools" since "Xcode Tools" is somewhat ambiguous and easily confused with Xcode.app even though it also installs a lot of BSD tools... But you can say "Xcode Tools 2.4" instead of "August 2006 Developer Tools" if you prefer that name (but not just Xcode please) So saying Developer Tools is just a personal preference of mine, that extends to FreeBSD and Fedora as well. But the name hasn't been in use since Project Builder, when everything was renamed to Xcode. I kinda expected Interface Builder to be renamed to Xgui or something too, but that never happened. --anders

2 2

Re: [MacPorts] #13352: Shortened "Assign to" list in tickets
by Ryan Schmidt 08 Jan '08

08 Jan '08

On Dec 20, 2007, at 13:29, MacPorts wrote: > #13352: Shortened "Assign to" list in tickets > -------------------------------- > +------------------------------------------- > Reporter: jmpp(a)macports.org | Owner: wsiegrist(a)apple.com > Type: defect | Status: closed > Priority: Normal | Milestone: > Component: server/hosting | Version: 1.5.2 > Resolution: fixed | Keywords: assign to list > -------------------------------- > +------------------------------------------- > Changes (by wsiegrist(a)apple.com) > > * status: new => closed > * resolution: => fixed > > Comment: > > Closing. Trac generates the list from all valid accounts, so if a > maintainer is missing they can just login to trac and they will > show up. So why do we have so few of our maintainers logging into Trac? The list of possible assignees contains only four email addresses not @macports.org, and two of those are @apple.com: kvv(a)apple.com macosforge(a)otierney.net pguyot(a)kallisys.net wsiegrist(a)apple.com But I count well over 200 maintainer email addresses in our portfiles that aren't @macports.org. How can it be that only two of our non- @macports.org maintainers are logging in? Take as an example this ticket: http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/13597 It was filed by Paulo Moura, one of our maintainers. Surely he logged in in order to file the ticket. Why is his email address not showing up in the assignee list?

4 6

Fwd: macforge.org via https?
by js 02 Jan '08

02 Jan '08

Forwarding to macports developers. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: js <ebgssth(a)gmail.com> Date: Dec 25, 2007 12:19 AM Subject: macforge.org via https? To: MacPorts Users <macports-users(a)lists.macosforge.org> Hi list, A simple question. is there any reason http://www.macosforge.org/wp-login.php is not HTTPS?

5 7

Portfile patch for libotr
by Thomas Reifferscheid 31 Dec '07

31 Dec '07

Dear list, I updated libotr from 3.0.0 to 3.1.0. Please see the attached file and commit it to svn. Kind regards Thomas Reifferscheid

2 1

Request: commit ufraw update 0.12 to 0.13
by Frank McPherson 31 Dec '07

31 Dec '07

Could someone please commit http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/13741 to update ufraw from 0.12 to 0.13? Thanks, Frank McPherson

2 1

Please commit #13532 (arch: default livecheck.name doesn't work)
by Joshua Root 31 Dec '07

31 Dec '07

<https://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/13532> Thanks. - Josh

2 1

Re: New port bashforth
by Thomas Reifferscheid 30 Dec '07

30 Dec '07

I just spoke to the owner, he will correct it shortly/soon. Something about restoring/misconfiguration of his webserver config. Kind regards Thomas Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > The source distribution is 404 from that site. Has it been moved? > > - Jordan > > On Dec 30, 2007, at 5:58 AM, Thomas Reifferscheid wrote: > >> Dear list, >> >> there is a new port called bashforth which is a >> forth interpreter, entirly written in bash. >> >> Please see the attached file and commit it to the svn, >> section lang. >> >> Kind regards >> Thomas Reifferscheid >> >> >> <bashforth.tar.gz>_______________________________________________ >> macports-dev mailing list >> macports-dev(a)lists.macosforge.org >> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev >

1 0

Open MPI
by Takeshi Enomoto 30 Dec '07

30 Dec '07

Hello, I have just created a ticket for openmpi to suport fortran better. I found that it does not build if mpich2 is installed. If we do not allow both to install at the same time, (is there a counterpart of "Conflicts" field of Fink?) we do not need to put "open" before mpirun mpicc and mpif90. Any opinions? Takeshi

2 3

New port bashforth
by Thomas Reifferscheid 30 Dec '07

30 Dec '07

Dear list, there is a new port called bashforth which is a forth interpreter, entirly written in bash. Please see the attached file and commit it to the svn, section lang. Kind regards Thomas Reifferscheid

1 0