[Fink-users] SuiteSparse.patch
Alex, I just noticed my unstable version of suitesparse.patch is actually a copy of suitesparse.info. I tried verifying the problem isn't local to my machine, but the package database is apparently down. Can you/someone confirm that suitesparse.patch in the database is correct? Ben - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Fink-users mailing list Fink-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
Re: [Fink-users] SuiteSparse.patch
On Nov 23, 2007, at 7:01 PM, Martin Costabel wrote: Alex, I just noticed my unstable version of suitesparse.patch is actually a copy of suitesparse.info. I tried verifying the problem isn't local to my machine, but the package database is apparently down. Can you/someone confirm that suitesparse.patch in the database is correct? It isn't. It seems that the same file got committed both as info and as patch. On the tracker there are two versions of suitesparse.patch. They differ ony by one line: -+CFLAGS = -O3 -fno-common -fstrict-aliasing -fexceptions ++CFLAGS = -O3 -fno-common -no-cpp-precomp -fexceptions I suppose the one with -fstrict-aliasing is the right one? Yes, that is my understanding. Ben - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Fink-users mailing list Fink-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
Re: [Fink-users] SuiteSparse.patch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ben Abbott wrote: On Nov 23, 2007, at 7:01 PM, Martin Costabel wrote: Alex, I just noticed my unstable version of suitesparse.patch is actually a copy of suitesparse.info. I tried verifying the problem isn't local to my machine, but the package database is apparently down. Can you/someone confirm that suitesparse.patch in the database is correct? It isn't. It seems that the same file got committed both as info and as patch. On the tracker there are two versions of suitesparse.patch. They differ ony by one line: -+CFLAGS = -O3 -fno-common -fstrict-aliasing -fexceptions ++CFLAGS = -O3 -fno-common -no-cpp-precomp -fexceptions I suppose the one with -fstrict-aliasing is the right one? Yes, that is my understanding. Ben OK, I've committed the actual patch from the tracker. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHR3IIB8UpO3rKjQ8RAnQoAJ9xwYFgJnOMw0tihIbT4trYJoQBTwCgnrTz 177/Q7cfhQBsdRQKK9NLnNQ= =XG12 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Fink-users mailing list Fink-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
Re: [Fink-users] SuiteSparse.patch
Alex, I just noticed my unstable version of suitesparse.patch is actually a copy of suitesparse.info. I tried verifying the problem isn't local to my machine, but the package database is apparently down. Can you/someone confirm that suitesparse.patch in the database is correct? It isn't. It seems that the same file got committed both as info and as patch. On the tracker there are two versions of suitesparse.patch. They differ ony by one line: -+CFLAGS = -O3 -fno-common -fstrict-aliasing -fexceptions ++CFLAGS = -O3 -fno-common -no-cpp-precomp -fexceptions I suppose the one with -fstrict-aliasing is the right one? -- Martin - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Fink-users mailing list Fink-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
