--- Earnie Boyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote:
Hi Markus,
I am using these distributions in my propriatory software:
Your proprietary software will need to have a GPL license if it uses any
library compiled with Cygwin1.dll dependencies. Your proprietary
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:39:18AM -0400, Harold Hunt wrote:
Chris,
Did we ever get meta packages enabled in Cygwin setup that are essentially
file-less packages (e.g. XFree86 Minimum Install, XFree86 Standard Install,
etc.) that depend on other packages?
Yep, as Robert indicated, this has been
Gerrit P. Haase writes:
I don't think that there is missing s.th, I can bunzip it without
error and then untar it without error, just getting this error from
tar when using tar xjf tei...tar.bz2
I repackaged it and it is the same then... probably a bug in tar?
It is only the one
Christopher Faylor writes:
Can you point me to a place in the cygwin package documentation which
indicates that p4-1 is a valid version number? It isn't as far as
my understanding is concerned and I'd lke to rectify that. I don't
see any way to unambiguously parse something like that.
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Package? Persion? Ok, ok...
In OpenSSH-3.2p1 it means portable to delimit from the plain
OpenBSD version, perhaps here it's something similar...
The TEI homepage says about an older version of the DTD:
The TEI's Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and
Charles Wilson wrote:
1) move gettext from the contrib directory to the latest directory --
and see if anybody barfs.
I did this. It's been many moons and many point releases (and a major
release) since the last time we moved a package directory (ncurses, I
think) from contrib to
I'm shooting for the end of the week.
Earnie.
Christopher Faylor wrote:
We really need a new w32api release soon.
Are there any plans to release one? The last release seems to have been
in December of 2001 and there have been many changes since then.
cgf
Hallo Christopher,
Could it be that setup cannot handle the version string p4-1? This
should be legal as far as I understand the Cygwin package
documentation, but then I might have misunderstood something. Should I
change the version string or should the setup maintainers look at
their parser
Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
It is still dubious for me.
Setup was able to fetch it from the server during 'Download only' with
version number '1'. But when doing an install from local directory it
wasn't offered anymore in the chooser.
IIRC Setup is able to install packages even if there is
Hi,
Markus wrote:
I fixed the path error in the tei-xml package. Could you please update
the package in your repository.
I've updated the version on http://www.toomanysecrets.net/~foster/cygwin/
Blue skies,
Jon
--
The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at
the ground and
Okay, it's been a week -- and nobody seems to have noticed. That's
promising. So, I'll go out on a limb here, and predict that cgf's
massive reorg of the sourceware/cygwin dir structure won't
upset setup
(no pun intended).
Urrgh.
However, it may upset people who are anal
about
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:05:19AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
But those are social problems, not technical ones.
And ones I have little sympathy for. Setup is a technical tool, not a
social one. It's not aimed at being the best downloader, only the best
installer. Mirroring that handles
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 10:10 AM
The only thing I can think of to do is to get rid of
latest/contrib and move to something else, like 'release',
with all of the current directories located
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:53:28AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 10:10 AM
The only thing I can think of to do is to get rid of
latest/contrib and move to something else, like
Well it shouldn't. There is definitely something wrong with setup and
downloads at the moment, but I haven't tracked it down yet.
What about the this page intentionally left blank report? Is that
on your list?
My patch of ~ a week ago puts that one out of our misery permanently.
--
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:16:32PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
Well it shouldn't. There is definitely something wrong with setup and
downloads at the moment, but I haven't tracked it down yet.
What about the this page intentionally left blank report? Is that on
your list?
My patch of ~ a
Christopher Faylor wrote:
Yep, as Robert indicated, this has been possible for a while.
For Cygwin/XFree86, what I'd like to do is have you all come up with
a few .tar.bz2 files which install into a /usr/X11R6,
/etc/X11, etc.
I repackaged the current .tgz files as .tar.bz2 files. I
-Original Message-
From: Ian Burrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 9:49 AM
Is it possible to have multiple packages in a subdirectory and
setup.hint file? Or does each package needs its own directory?
Each package needs it's own directory.
For a
-Original Message-
From: Ian Burrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 10:57 AM
That is a list of subdirectories. But it won't work since the each
package needs its own subdirectory. A better hiearchy would use the
components from the package names.
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:56:36PM -0700, Ian Burrell wrote:
Robert Collins wrote:
I'm not clear not the hierarchy there - that reads like a list to me.
You've got two clauses you can independently use to make a hierarchy and
package dependencies - category:(i.e. the devel tarball belongs in
Ian Burrell wrote:
That is a list of subdirectories. But it won't work since the each
package needs its own subdirectory. A better hiearchy would use the
components from the package names. Hopefully, multiple levels of
subdirectories will work.
Yep. Subdirs work fine. For instance,
Robert Collins wrote:
They were simple changes to the script I wrote to repackage the
distributed archives. I'll try to write proper setup.hint
files for all
the packages.
Cool.
I'm unclear about how the -src packages (are/should be) handled, since
there are a great many binary
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:22:30PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
Now, this works, and upset/setup are happy (every binary package has a
src package) but it is hackish, ugly, and a pain to maintain. Is
there a better solution? (Or can we discard the psuedo-src packages
without repurcussion?
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:16:32PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
Well it shouldn't. There is definitely something wrong with setup and
downloads at the moment, but I haven't tracked it down yet.
What about the this page intentionally left blank report? Is that on
your list?
My
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:05:19AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
But those are social problems, not technical ones.
And ones I have little sympathy for. Setup is a technical tool, not a
social one. It's not aimed at being the best downloader, only the best
installer.
Could you maybe put it back and just randomly display it? I kind of
like the whimsy of such a thing.
Whaddaya think's going in the big white box?
Some part of this:
http://www.msu.edu/~huntharo/xwin/logo-ideas/mclean-20020221-0940.png
maybe?
I like the cygwin C part.
cgf
Could you maybe put it back and just randomly display it? I kind of
like the whimsy of such a thing.
Whaddaya think's going in the big white box?
Some part of this:
http://www.msu.edu/~huntharo/xwin/logo-ideas/mclean-20020221-0940.png
maybe?
I like the cygwin C part.
cgf
Ooh,
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:31:17PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
The only thing I can think of to do is to get rid of latest/contrib and
move to something else, like 'release', with all of the current
directories located underneath.
You mean like:
cygwin/latest/zlib
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:40:06PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
Ooh, that's kinda cool. The C kinda looks like a staple though, maybe a
little less pointiness.
Do you want to edit it? I doubt that the author (artist?) would mind.
Maybe rounding the corners would help.
cgf
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:40:06PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
Ooh, that's kinda cool. The C kinda looks like a staple though, maybe a
little less pointiness.
Do you want to edit it? I doubt that the author (artist?) would mind.
Maybe rounding the corners would help.
Well, I do
Is the script for building setup.ini files from a directory hierarchy
available anywhere? I want to setup a test install directory with the
full hierarchy and setup.hint files.
Also, I ran into a problem with the xfree-fonts-100dpi and
xfree-fonts-75dpi packages. With a hand-generated
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:43:54PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
If it is upset I'll be upset.
It should be acceptable to have bin without source.
If it causes a problem, I'll fix it.
That's great. (I'm not planning on needlessly changing my packages, but
perhaps the next time they must be
Robert Collins wrote:
2) update bzip2 to the latest release -- which involves the grand
library split thing (bzip2 - bzip2 + libbz2_0).
However, the name
libbz2_0 is incompatible with the old setup, and even
'cygcheck -c'
gets confused prior to the cygwin-1.3.8 release.
But I didn't
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:53:17PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
Once that box is deployed we should have some excess capacity for things
like rsync and maybe we can even allow downloads from
sources.redhat.com again.
But I thought the problem with sourceware has been (a) processing load
AND (b)
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:01:30PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
Okay -- I'll upload it once I get home. (Especially as Chris is
advocating that the xfree folks use '_' in the names of their font
packages, as a NONseparator --- it's that '_' which causes the
incompatibility with the old
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:44 AM
I also have a friend who's working on and off on a web based
install, fwiw.
Is this to supplant/work with setup.exe, or is it unrelated? I'd look at
wrapping
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 12:13:33PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
I also have a friend who's working on and off on a web based
install, fwiw.
Is this to supplant/work with setup.exe, or is it unrelated?
It's unrelated. It was an exercise in
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 12:13 PM
That won't help setup.ini-less installs much but, er...
... who cares?
Lol,
Rob
-Original Message-
From: Charles Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 12:19 PM
I don't think it's that big a deal to require cygwin packages
to follow
a parseable naming scheme; ours is pretty lenient...when it
fails, it's
not a terrible
Oooo, NOW I get it. I didn't understand that verpat: was a new
field in setup.hint, PARSED by upset. It's perfectly clear in hindsight.
Nevermind my earlier comments. Time for some sleep.
--Chuck
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:24:18PM -0400, Charles Wilson
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:42:04PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
Oooo, NOW I get it. I didn't understand that verpat: was a new
field in setup.hint, PARSED by upset. It's perfectly clear in hindsight.
That's probably because, on rereading, my description didn't make that
clear.
Nevermind
Christopher Faylor wrote:
Name? Do you mean version? If you put a version in setup.hint it
is currently ignored.
The name from the @ line and the version header could be used to
override the parsing of file names into name and version.
- Ian
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:50:04PM -0700, Ian Burrell wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
Name? Do you mean version? If you put a version in setup.hint it is
currently ignored.
The name from the line and the version header could be used to
override the parsing of file names into name and
I finished making some xfree packages. They are distributed binary
archives repackaged as cygwin packages. I made a package directory that
can be used with setup.exe from a local directory and over the network.
I changed my mind about the division of the packages I proposed. I got
rid of the
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:40:46PM -0700, Ian Burrell wrote:
I finished making some xfree packages. They are distributed binary
archives repackaged as cygwin packages. I made a package directory that
can be used with setup.exe from a local directory and over the network.
I changed my mind
45 matches
Mail list logo
