On 09:23 Wed 19 Dec , Justin wrote: > > Donnie Berkholz schrieb: > > On 19:18 Mon 17 Dec , Justin wrote: > > > > Since that bug shows that a header wasn't found at > > /usr/include/gtkgl/gtkglarea.h, it might be worth checking whether that > > file exists. > > > This file belongs to x11-libs/gtkglarea-1.2.3-r1. So this package must > be emerged for coot.
That's not quite what I was asking. Does the file physically exist on the filesystem? > > I've got some newer ebuilds around for 0.4 prereleases that I could add > > to the tree masked, if that would help. I just added 0.4_pre2-r549. Unfortunately I couldn't find a better way to deal with the upstream revision number than using ours for it. > I thought for myself writing an ebuild for that, but I didn't found > the sources. But I will be a happy tester if you need. The same, if > you need help maintaining packages, i offer my help. The science thing > should enlarge in gentoo. I wrote a couple of ebuild for my > private-overlay, which work fine for me. Perhaps there is some need > for that. Some packages are Arpwarp, xds, cara, and i'm working on > phaser or rewriting the ccp4 ebuild so that it could emerge phaser as > a dep. The only thing which im not sure about is the legal thing with > those ebuilds. So if you could teach me which license the writing of > ebuild alows and which, I publish them. I'd love to see those ebuilds. Could you get access to the science overlay so you could commit them? Regarding Phaser, my basic plan was to get a separate cctbx ebuild, then separate ebuilds for Phaser, Chooch, etc., rather than make the ccp4 ebuild any more disgusting than it already is. The ebuilds themselves are perfectly legal since they're just recipes. If the source-code license is restrictive, we can add various types of RESTRICT settings to the ebuilds to prevent redistribution on Gentoo mirrors (RESTRICT=mirror) or to force people to manually download it (RESTRICT=fetch and pkg_nofetch() function). Thanks, Donnie -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
