Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 07:55:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Luke Dean <LukeD@pobox.com> To: Neal Nelson <neal@nelson.name> Cc: Martin Tournoij <carpetsmoker@xs4all.nl>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: wxPython 2.8? Message-ID: <20070910075105.E5313@border.crystalsphere.multiverse> In-Reply-To: <1189411397.14439.3.camel@naboo.home> References: <20070909154811.B2084@border.crystalsphere.multiverse> <20070910012811.GA42413@glitch.rwxrwxrwx.net> <20070909214729.W3201@border.crystalsphere.multiverse> <20070910074913.GA43990@glitch.rwxrwxrwx.net> <1189411397.14439.3.camel@naboo.home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Neal Nelson wrote: > On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 09:49 +0200, Martin Tournoij wrote: >> On Sun 09 Sep 2007 21:09, Luke Dean wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Martin Tournoij wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun 09 Sep 2007 15:09, Luke Dean wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I've got a Python app that seems to require wxPython 2.8. >>>>> The ports collection only has 2.6. >>>>> Do you think it would it be worthwhile for me to download the source and attempt to compile it on my system or should I ask the port >>>>> maintainer? >>>> >>>> wxgtk 2.8 is in the ports collection(x11/toolkits/wxgtk28), you're >>>> probably using an outdated snapshot of the ports collection. >>>> See the FreeBSD handbook on how to update your ports collection: >>>> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ports-using.html >>> >>> I guess I don't understand the relationship between wxPython and wxgtk. >>> wxPython 2.6 builds with wxgtk 2.6 by default. If it works with wxgtk >>> 2.8, maybe that's what I need. I'll give it a shot. Thanks. >> >> Ignore my previous post, it was late and I thought you couldn't find >> wxgtk2.8, I kind of missed the wxPython part ... :/ >> My fault, I'm sorry. >> >> I've cc-ed this email to the maintainer of py-wxPython26, I will look into >> creating a port for py-wxPython28 later today. > > I have already submitted a port for wxPython 2.8 some weeks ago but for > some reason it's languishing in the pr database. So if you want the port > badly, hassle some committer to get it committed. > > For your reference the relevant PRs are: 115349 for the base port, > 115350 for the common parts and 115351 for the unicode port. > > Regards, > > Neal. Ah, I didn't think to search for PRs. I should've looked there. I will try to check this out tonight and pass along any feedback I can give. Thank you for your work!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070910075105.E5313>