Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 21:30:57 +0000 From: Stacey Roberts <stacey@vickiandstacey.com> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/62494: portupgrade -rf gettext -m BATCH=yes fails at gnomemeeting stage Message-ID: <20040208213057.GQ38997@crom.vickiandstacey.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0402081210160.32540-100000@pancho> References: <20040208114901.GE38997@crom.vickiandstacey.com> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0402081210160.32540-100000@pancho>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello Mark, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>" To: To Stacey Roberts Date: Sun, 08 Feb, 2004 18:14 GMT Subject: Re: ports/62494: portupgrade -rf gettext -m BATCH=yes fails at gnomemeeting stage > No, it's not necessary; we can assign the updated PR to roger > just as easily than a new one, and then there's one less PR to > look after. Fair enough.., > > OTOH I don't really know how responsive roger has been recently, > but that's the way we do things here ... > I'll see what happens.., > In any case, did you try the rebuild suggested by mezz in his > response (pull up the amendend text to read it, if you didn't > get it via email)? The ports tree is going through about four > large changes simultaneously and the problem may go away if you > force things to rebuild. Yes, I did. Those procedures did not fix the problem (results cc'd to gnome@), not did any of the other suggestions he had. > > Generally, it's not necessary to do that, but if enough things > move around in the infrastructure, it is. (Some of the things > in /usr/local/bin will have dependended on other, obsolete, things > in /usr/local/bin by that point, etc.) Not sure what this refers to.., Regards, Stacey > > mcl > > -- Stacey Roberts B. Sc (HONS) Computer Science Web: www.vickiandstacey.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040208213057.GQ38997>