So if I understand all of the comments so far, the problem may
be avoidable with an older tar but even that produces warnings in
fink. If the hypothesis of Spotlight indexing blocking files
is correct, perhaps the answer is for the fink developers to add
code to fink that stops and starts the
So if I understand all of the comments so far, the problem may
be avoidable with an older tar but even that produces warnings in
fink. If the hypothesis of Spotlight indexing blocking files
is correct, perhaps the answer is for the fink developers to add
code to fink that stops and starts
David Fang wrote:
[]
Perhaps something about Spotlight disabling could be added to the
FAQ? It makes a somewhat noticeable improvement on slow machines. I'd
recommend disabling for at least the src/fink.build directories.
Spotlight does not touch *.build directories. That's why
Spotlight does not touch *.build directories. That's why fink.build was
introduced in the first place. Maybe the people who have this weird
error changed their build directory to something other than fink.build?
Martin,
Ahhh... [me: starts renaming all his project build directories]
My
I just want to re-emphasize that what I said before was that
Spotlight was NOT the problem (I guessed wrongly that it might be,
and instructed it to stay out of /sw, and that did not help).
I also found creating a new /sw did not solve the problem.
The tar explanation strikes me as more
It would appear that using tar 1.16 in fink is a really bad idea...
http://www.mail-archive.com/amanda-users@amanda.org/msg37008.html
I would also note that Fedora development is still using 1.15.1 for
tar.
Jack
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 28, 2007, at 4:12 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
It would appear that using tar 1.16 in fink is a really bad idea...
http://www.mail-archive.com/amanda-users@amanda.org/msg37008.html
I would also note that Fedora development is still using
Hi,
First of all, thank you again, Jack, for putting forth an
unrelenting effort in packaging up gcc-4.2 (prerelease), I've been
following along for months now. I have some good news and bad news to
report. The good news first:
On 10.4, a dual G4, 0.5 GHz:
% fink install gcc42
... 6.5
David,
I ran into the same problem a month or so back and
had to nuke my fink installation to resolve it. It may
be that the gcc42 packaging is exposing some latent bug
in fink. I've built the same packaging almost daily for
the last couple of months and the problem hasn't come
back. Hopefully
Hi,
On Jan 27, 2007, at 10:10 PM, David Fang wrote:
Hi,
First of all, thank you again, Jack, for putting forth an
unrelenting effort in packaging up gcc-4.2 (prerelease), I've been
following along for months now. I have some good news and bad news to
report. The good news first:
dpkg-deb -b root-gcc42-4.1.-20070124
/sw/fink/10.4/unstable/main/binary-darwin-i386/languages
dpkg-deb: building package `gcc42' in
`/sw/fink/10.4/unstable/main/binary-darwin-i386/languages/
gcc42_4.1.-20070124_darwin-i386.deb'.
tar:
On 1/27/07, Jack Howarth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David,
I ran into the same problem a month or so back and
had to nuke my fink installation to resolve it.
In case you run into this again, all you have to do is delete the
partially-created .deb file and rebuild. (I have seen this a few
.
Bill
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 23:38:02 -0500
From: Jack Howarth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Fink-devel] gcc42 mixed result
To: David Fang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
David,
I ran
dpkg-deb -b root-gcc42-4.1.-20070124
/sw/fink/10.4/unstable/main/binary-darwin-i386/languages
dpkg-deb: building package `gcc42' in
`/sw/fink/10.4/unstable/main/binary-darwin-i386/languages/
gcc42_4.1.-20070124_darwin-i386.deb'.
tar:
14 matches
Mail list logo
