On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 08:55:35 -0400, Alexander Hansen wrote: > Even though the "6" seems unnecessary, there's no reason _not_ to > continue using it--anybody who wants to test this can avoid > collisions simply by using their local tree. Moreover, since it has > a -shlibs splitoff and the libraries look to be identical to those
I was more offering the packaging as a proof of concept that the latest version of ipe doesn't seem to have any technical build problems (although obviously I'm on 10.4). I'd fix it up if I was maintaining it for the official tree, which I assume is the subtext in: > If the listed maintainer doesn't respond within a reasonable > interval, we should assume that he no longer has any interest in > maintaining the package. At which time I should send an ITP? -- Dean ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [email protected] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
