[Fink-devel] Again problems with ghostscript.
Hi, the system-foo issue is getting intriguing. I'm trying to install PyX that depends on ghostscript and tetex. I've installed system-ghostscript8 (that I've adapted from 10.2-gcc3.3 tree without any problem) and system-tetex (since I've installed Gerben Wierda's teTeX distro). Now when I try to install PyX I get the following error message: Failed: Internal error: node for system-tetex already exists What's going on here?? I really don't understand it! Thanks in advance, Andrea. P.S.: As suggested by someone answering my previous post, I think this situation should be fixed as soon as possible. At the moment dealing with packages that depends on ghostscript and tetex could be a nightmare. --- Andrea Riciputi Science is like sex: sometimes something useful comes out, but that is not the reason we are doing it -- (Richard Feynman) --- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Again problems with ghostscript.
The usual fix for the node exists error is to remove the package and have it be reinstalled by a dependency: http://fink.sourceforge.net/faq/comp-general.php#node-exists -- Alexander Hansen Levitated Dipole Experiment http://www.psfc.mit.edu/LDX On Jan 22, 2004, at 4:47 PM, Andrea Riciputi wrote: Hi, the system-foo issue is getting intriguing. I'm trying to install PyX that depends on ghostscript and tetex. I've installed system-ghostscript8 (that I've adapted from 10.2-gcc3.3 tree without any problem) and system-tetex (since I've installed Gerben Wierda's teTeX distro). Now when I try to install PyX I get the following error message: Failed: Internal error: node for system-tetex already exists What's going on here?? I really don't understand it! Thanks in advance, Andrea. P.S.: As suggested by someone answering my previous post, I think this situation should be fixed as soon as possible. At the moment dealing with packages that depends on ghostscript and tetex could be a nightmare. --- Andrea Riciputi Science is like sex: sometimes something useful comes out, but that is not the reason we are doing it -- (Richard Feynman) --- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel --- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Re: dists/10.3/unstable/main/finkinfo/x11 gimp-freefonts-0.10-2.info,NONE,1.1 gimp-sharefonts-0.10-2.info,NONE,1.1
On Jan 21, 2004, at 11:49 PM, Alexander Strange wrote: install -d -m 755 %d`%p/bin/xfontpath basedir`/freefont install -c -m 644 * %d`%p/bin/xfontpath basedir`/freefont I don't think this is legal.. it will make different .debs for different people. It'll be luck of the draw to work in the bindist. -Ben --- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Re: dists/10.3/unstable/main/finkinfo/x11 gimp-freefonts-0.10-2.info,NONE,1.1 gimp-sharefonts-0.10-2.info,NONE,1.1
On Jan 22, 2004, at 10:54 PM, Ben Hines wrote: On Jan 21, 2004, at 11:49 PM, Alexander Strange wrote: install -d -m 755 %d`%p/bin/xfontpath basedir`/freefont install -c -m 644 * %d`%p/bin/xfontpath basedir`/freefont I don't think this is legal.. it will make different .debs for different people. It'll be luck of the draw to work in the bindist. -Ben Have there been any problems with applesystemfonts and msttcorefonts? I copied those lines from them. --- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Re: dists/10.3/unstable/main/finkinfo/x11 gimp-freefonts-0.10-2.info,NONE,1.1 gimp-sharefonts-0.10-2.info,NONE,1.1
Alexander Strange wrote: On Jan 22, 2004, at 10:54 PM, Ben Hines wrote: On Jan 21, 2004, at 11:49 PM, Alexander Strange wrote: install -d -m 755 %d`%p/bin/xfontpath basedir`/freefont install -c -m 644 * %d`%p/bin/xfontpath basedir`/freefont I don't think this is legal.. it will make different .debs for different people. It'll be luck of the draw to work in the bindist. Have there been any problems with applesystemfonts and msttcorefonts? I copied those lines from them. Isn't `%p/bin/xfontpath basedir` just a complicated way for saying %p/lib/X11/fonts? What's wrong with it? -- Martin --- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Re: dists/10.3/unstable/main/finkinfo/x11 gimp-freefonts-0.10-2.info,NONE,1.1 gimp-sharefonts-0.10-2.info,NONE,1.1
Alexander Strange [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Update of /cvsroot/fink/dists/10.3/unstable/main/finkinfo/x11 Added Files: gimp-freefonts-0.10-2.info gimp-sharefonts-0.10-2.info --- NEW FILE: gimp-freefonts-0.10-2.info --- Package: gimp-freefonts Version: 0.10 Revision: 2 Depends: xfontpath PostInstScript: #!/bin/sh if test -x %p/bin/xfontpath; then %p/bin/xfontpath --silent install freefont fi if test -f /etc/X11/XftConfig; then if grep -v -q `%p/bin/xfontpath basedir`/freefont /etc/X11/XftConfig; then echo dir \`%p/bin/xfontpath basedir`/freefont\ /etc/X11/XftConfig fi fi echo All done. You may need to restart X to get antialiased fonts echo in some applications. I'm going kinda cross-eyed looking at all this, so I might have some fundamental misunderstand here, but... Why do you only sometimes do a -x test for xfontpath before calling it? If it's not present but XftXConfig is, this script will crash. I don't know much about xfontpath, but it appears that its presence affects the installation footprint of gimp-freefonts, which isn't right. I see you have a Depends:xfontpath, but I don't know if fink and dpkg have a deterministic order when installing multiple packages at once. Maybe you should first do a -x test and then crash with a you must have xfontpath installed before attempting to install gimp-freefonts message. You do the same thing in the PostRmScript, but now there's an even weirder dependency/ordering problem: you must have xfontpath installed in order to uninstall gimp-freefonts. dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks --- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
