Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)

2017/freebsd-ports/20170702.freebsd-ports

Messages: 108, sorted by Subject.
Last update: Sun Jul 2 3:50:08 2017

Up | Home | Archive Sorted by: Subject | Author | Date | Reverse Date
  1. Jun 25 Carmel NY           "clamav-unofficial-sigs" error message
  2. Jun 25 =?utf-8?Q?Martin_Wa  Re: "clamav-unofficial-sigs" error message
  3. Jun 25 Carmel NY            Re: "clamav-unofficial-sigs" error message
  4. Jun 26 Marko Njezic         Re: "clamav-unofficial-sigs" error message
  5. Jun 26 Carmel NY            Re: "clamav-unofficial-sigs" error message
  6. Jun 26 Marko Njezic         Re: "clamav-unofficial-sigs" error message
  7. Jun 28 Andy Farkas         'pkg version' strangeness - No valid entries found
  8. Jun 28 Adam Weinberger      Re: 'pkg version' strangeness - No valid entries fou
  9. Jun 28 Andy Farkas          Re: 'pkg version' strangeness - No valid entries fou
 10. Jun 29 Mark Millard        /usr/ports -r444615 (e.g.) & head -r320458 (e.g.
 11. Jun 29 Mark Millard         Re: /usr/ports -r444615 (e.g.) & head -r320458 (
 12. Jun 29 Emmanuel Vadot       Re: /usr/ports -r444615 (e.g.) & head -r320458 (
 13. Jun 25 Thomas Mueller      Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 
 14. Jun 25 Michelle Sullivan    Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 
 15. Jun 25 Grzegorz Junka       Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 
 16. Jun 25 Dave Hayes           Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 
 17. Jun 26 Guido Falsi          Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 
 18. Jun 26 Guido Falsi          Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 
 19. Jun 26 Kurt Jaeger          Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 
 20. Jun 26 Franco Fichtner      Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 


21. Jun 26 Torsten Zuehlsdorff Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 22. Jun 26 Grzegorz Junka Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 23. Jun 26 Dave Hayes Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 24. Jun 27 Thomas Mueller Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 25. Jun 27 Julian H. Stacey Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 26. Jun 27 <scratch65535@att.n Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 27. Jun 27 Mark Linimon Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 28. Jun 27 Mark Linimon Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 29. Jun 27 <scratch65535@att.n Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 30. Jun 27 Thomas Mueller Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 31. Jun 27 Mark Linimon Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 32. Jun 27 Mark Linimon Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 33. Jun 27 Grzegorz Junka Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 34. Jun 28 Thomas Mueller Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 35. Jun 28 Torsten Zuehlsdorff Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 36. Jun 28 Torsten Zuehlsdorff Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 37. Jun 28 <scratch65535@att.n Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 38. Jun 28 Dirk Meyer Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by 39. Jun 27 Aryeh Friedman best way to handle GCC version detection 40. Jun 27 Dimitry Andric Re: best way to handle GCC version detection
41. Jun 25 Kurt Jaeger Re: clamav-unofficial-sigs 42. Jun 25 Carmel NY Re: clamav-unofficial-sigs 43. Jun 27 Technical Support E-mail account blacklisted 44. Jul 1 portscout@FreeBSD.o FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date 45. Jun 25 portscout@FreeBSD.o FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date 46. Jun 26 portscout@FreeBSD.o FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date 47. Jun 27 portscout@FreeBSD.o FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date 48. Jun 28 portscout@FreeBSD.o FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date 49. Jun 29 portscout@FreeBSD.o FreeBSD ports you maintain which are out of date 50. Jun 25 Mark Millard lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the 51. Jun 26 Patrick Powell Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and 52. Jun 26 Mark Millard Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and 53. Jun 28 Gerald Pfeifer Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and 54. Jun 28 Mark Millard Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and 55. Jun 29 Gerald Pfeifer Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and 56. Jun 29 Mark Millard Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and 57. Jun 30 Gerald Pfeifer Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and 58. Jul 1 David Wolfskill Re: math/R: Build failure after PORTREVISION for shl 59. Jun 28 David Wolfskill math/R: Build failure after PORTREVISION for shlib c 60. Jun 28 David Wolfskill Re: math/R: Build failure after PORTREVISION for shl
61. Jun 28 Joseph Mingrone Re: math/R: Build failure after PORTREVISION for shl 62. Jun 29 Joseph Mingrone Re: math/R: Build failure after PORTREVISION for shl 63. Jun 29 David Wolfskill Re: math/R: Build failure after PORTREVISION for shl 64. Jul 1 =?UTF-8?Q?Ren=c3=a9 New 2017Q3 branch 65. Jul 1 Larry Rosenman Re: New 2017Q3 branch 66. Jul 1 Adam Weinberger Re: New 2017Q3 branch 67. Jun 26 Andre Goree Re: NEW APR/APR-Utils 68. Jun 29 Susan Mullins Re: New Healthcare Industry Email List 2017 69. Jun 26 Dave Cottlehuber Re: perl problem 70. Jun 25 Ben Woods pkg(8) fails to upgrade to different branches of sof 71. Jun 30 Jov PostgreSQL related NEW PORTS need committers 72. Jun 30 Torsten Zuehlsdorff Re: PostgreSQL related NEW PORTS need committers 73. Jun 30 Jov Re: PostgreSQL related NEW PORTS need committers 74. Jun 26 =?utf-8?Q?Martin_Wa PRs in need of some TLC 75. Jun 26 Greg 'groggy' Lehey Re: PRs in need of some TLC 76. Jun 26 Kurt Jaeger Re: PRs in need of some TLC 77. Jun 27 =?utf-8?Q?Martin_Wa Re: PRs in need of some TLC 78. Jun 27 =?utf-8?Q?Martin_Wa Re: PRs in need of some TLC 79. Jun 27 Kurt Jaeger Re: PRs in need of some TLC 80. Jun 28 Helen Koike review of google-compute-engine: better quality of t
81. Jun 25 Peter Jeremy Re: security/libressl not API-compatible with OpenSS 82. Jun 27 Matthias Fechner Should a package restart on upgrade itself 83. Jun 27 Franco Fichtner Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 84. Jun 27 Baptiste Daroussin Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 85. Jun 27 Vlad K. Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 86. Jun 27 David Wolfskill Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 87. Jun 27 Miroslav Lachman Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 88. Jun 27 Matthias Fechner Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 89. Jun 27 Vlad K. Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 90. Jun 27 Miroslav Lachman Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 91. Jun 27 Michael Gmelin Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 92. Jun 27 Miroslav Lachman Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 93. Jun 27 Vlad K. Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 94. Jun 28 Torsten Zuehlsdorff Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 95. Jun 28 Guido Falsi Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 96. Jun 28 Matthias Fechner Re: Should a package restart on upgrade itself 97. Jun 26 Miroslav Lachman Re: sysutils/tmux - strange behaviour with new versi 98. Jun 25 Richard Gallamore USE_GCC usage 99. Jun 26 Jov Re: USE_GCC usage 100. Jun 26 Mathieu Arnold Re: USE_GCC usage
101. Jul 1 Jos Chrispijn Re: Vulnerability 102. Jul 1 Jos Chrispijn Re: Vulnerability 103. Jun 30 Jos Chrispijn Vulnerability 104. Jun 30 Adam Weinberger Re: Vulnerability 105. Jun 30 Carlos Jacobo Puga Re: Vulnerability 106. Jun 29 Yuri What to do when the port fails in poudriere with "To 107. Jun 29 Matt Smith Re: What to do when the port fails in poudriere with 108. Jun 25 Matthias Fechner Which license should be used for as-id


Up | Home | Archive Sorted by: Subject | Author | Date | Reverse Date
Contact us
Last update: Sun Jul 2 3:50:08 2017
Created by mailindex 1.1
Copyright © 1995-2017 FreeBSD Project.
All rights reserved.