| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|
|
|
|
| |
PR: 31553
Submitted by: MAINTAINER
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
o remove unnecessary patches
o PATCH_* and LIB_DEPENDS (iconv) added
o INSTALLS_SHLIB and LDCONFIG_DIRS added
o scripts/pre-configure changes:
-e added
PREFIX -> LOCALBASE for external programs
new iconv support added (untested)
config.sh generation fixed
PR: 29868
Submitted by: MAINTAINER
|
|
|
|
|
| |
PR: 27310
Submitted by: Cyrille Lefevre <clefevre@poboxes.com> MAINTAINER
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
o change package name elm-2.4ME+82 -> elm+ME-2.4.87. previous naming scheme
violates our porting rule.
o add PORTEPOCH not to confuse pkg_version.
o change maintainer.
o add more and more MASTER_SITES.
PR: 24171
Submitted by: Cyrille Lefevre <clefevre@citeweb.net> (new maintainer)
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
to change pkg/PLIST when adding MLINKS support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fix pkg_delete while I'm here.
Gee, wouldn't it be nice if bsd.port.mk had support for MLINKs? ;-)
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
PLISTs.
Note: I know that this is going to break some symlinks and/or .so
includes, I will back some of these out as I run into these during
package building.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
please check out the PLIST!
The port is still IS_INTERACTIVE and NO_PACKAGE, too many questions
asked by the configure script it doesn't seem to make sense to build
a package. If someone with elm knowledge can check this, that will
be great too.
Suggested by: jkh, ache
|