On Feb 6, 2008, at 15:27, Omar Green wrote:
Anders F Björklund wrote:
Omar Green wrote:
I wouldn't have necessarily thought this was a bug (maybe double referencing CC is just how you guys roll), but I stumbled on a different bug while Googling around trying to diagnose the problem (completely different system, but consistent behavior)
No it's not a particular rolling style, Some ports are getting GCC twice - that's a bug. (did you file a ticket?) Some ports are getting no GCC - that's a bug too. (bug #13930 and friends) I would suspect something wrong between base/libtool/portfile interaction... It's supposed to look something like: "checking for gcc... /usr/bin/gcc-4.0" But some aren't expecting $CC to be a path.
I''ve entered in a bug for this now, bug #14213.
Thanks!
Set the priority to normal, and I have no idea how you guys prioritize.
FYI, priorities are explained in the guide: http://guide.macports.org/#project.tickets.guidelines "High - Reserved for the use of MacPorts team members, as they are the best fit to determine which reports warrant a higher priority over others." "Normal - The default. For normal port failures, non-critical enhancement requests, non-critical port failures." "Low - For mostly cosmetic improvements, documentation corrections/ improvements, etc." Though these descriptions could use some work. Users may be left to wonder under what priority they should file critical port failures or critical enhancement requests, or by what criteria a failure or enhancement request can be designated as critical.
Thanks a bunch, Anders for the swift reply. Guess, for now I'll have to get the install of Ruby done manually.