The way I see it: tls was as a seperate download because amsn was tcl/tk, so doing it this way required no compiling.. Now we have parts in c, so we have to compile anyway. What is the use of not including it?
Sander
On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 16:24 -0400, Youness Alaoui wrote:
> Well, tls has no problems with SELInux, right ?
> problem is in TkCximage.. so how about dynamic builds for the FC distros,
> since those distros are the ones using SELinux..
> also have in the list of packages "your package didn't work, download this
> and read the INSTALL file"
> We should also change the message that's outputed when tkxmage is not
> found, now it says to read the INSTALL file, but the file doesn't exist in
> distro packages.. so mabye change it into
> if { [file exists INSTALL] } {
> ...
> else
> error "Please download the source package from http://.. and compile it."
> }
>
> KKRT
>
> On Fri, 26 May 2006 15:38:44 -0400, Vivia Nikolaidou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Good idea,
> >
> > btw, conclusion about SELinux and tls 1.5 ? We can:
> >
> > a) let SELinux users install Sander's RPM and offer the static build
> > instead
> > b) have two options: Linux (static build) and Linux (dynamic build) or
> > something similar
> >
> > or... any better ideas?
> >
> > PS: am I slowly getting active again? :)
> >
> > On 5/26/06, Youness Alaoui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hi there,
> >> as you probably know, the tls autodownloader isn't working for some time
> >> now because the URL for the download is to a mirror which is not working
> >> anymore...
> >> So.. if we change the mirror, we might get the same problem some other
> >> time, so how about we do this instead
> >> http://amsn.sf.net/download-tls.php?platform=win32
> >> and it will automatically choose a different mirror each time and
> >> redirect
> >> to it.
> >> in case this one fails (because SF web servers are down more often than
> >> sf
> >> file releases mirrors), then use a hardcoded URL for a mirror (or random
> >> between a few hardcoded ones).
> >> Advantage is that if we had done this in the first time, then we
> >> probably
> >> would have been able to make amsn users download tls 1.5 without
> >> releasing
> >> a new version nor having the users update their amsn version.
> >> What do you think? shall it be done ?
> >>
> >> --
> >> KaKaRoTo
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Amsn-devel mailing list
> >> Amsn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amsn-devel
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Amsn-devel mailing list Amsn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amsn-devel
