Opened 14 years ago
Closed 14 years ago
#28879 closed update (fixed)
fossil: update to 20110316111914
Reported by: | ci42 | Owned by: | macports-tickets@… |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
Component: | ports | Version: | 1.9.2 |
Keywords: | haspatch maintainer | Cc: | |
Port: | fossil |
Description
Updated fossil to the latest version (20110316111914)
Attachments (1)
Change History (6)
comment:1 follow-up: 2 Changed 14 years ago by ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)
Keywords: | haspatch maintainer added |
---|---|
Summary: | Update: fossil → fossil: update to 20110316111914 |
comment:2 Changed 14 years ago by ci42
Replying to ryandesign@…:
Instead of ui_msgs, you should use the notes feature. Even better would be if the port could run the required command automatically and not require user intervention, but I don't know if that's possible here. (For example, what if the user has already run it -- is there any harm in the port running it again?)
Updated the patch:
- try to automatically rebuild the repositories
- clarified the upgrade note
comment:3 follow-up: 4 Changed 14 years ago by raimue (Rainer Müller)
What Ryan meant was to use notes
instead of post-activate { ui_msg ... }
.
notes "These are the notes for this port."
The rebuilding can still be done in post-activate, but notes would allow to read the message again using port notes
.
Changed 14 years ago by ci42
Attachment: | fossil.diff added |
---|
comment:4 Changed 14 years ago by ci42
Replying to raimue@…:
What Ryan meant was to use
notes
instead ofpost-activate { ui_msg ... }
.notes "These are the notes for this port."The rebuilding can still be done in post-activate, but notes would allow to read the message again using
port notes
.
Updated the patch accordingly
comment:5 Changed 14 years ago by raimue (Rainer Müller)
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
Committed in r77594.
Instead of ui_msgs, you should use the notes feature. Even better would be if the port could run the required command automatically and not require user intervention, but I don't know if that's possible here. (For example, what if the user has already run it -- is there any harm in the port running it again?)