RE: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Pavel Fedin
Hello! NAME=onc-rpc-devel VERSION=2.19_20140211 RELEASE=1 CATEGORY=Devel # for instance SUMMARY=This is the sdesc text for setup.hint DESCRIPTION=This is the ldesc text for setup.hint The setup.hint file will get auto-generated then, you don't have to maintain it outside

Re: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Marco Atzeri
On 14/08/2014 08:11, Pavel Fedin wrote: Hello! NAME=onc-rpc-devel VERSION=2.19_20140211 RELEASE=1 CATEGORY=Devel # for instance SUMMARY=This is the sdesc text for setup.hint DESCRIPTION=This is the ldesc text for setup.hint The setup.hint file will get auto-generated

RE: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Pavel Fedin
Hello! I have worked around the problem with Ruby gem just by renaming 'gem' script. Looks like gem is broken on Cygwin. I have updated my Dropbox folder, and here is forgotten setup.hint. Kind regards, Pavel Fedin Expert Engineer Samsung Electronics Research center Russia setup.hint

RE: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Pavel Fedin
Hello! can you share the onc-rpc-devel.cygport ? I assume you already have the inherit ruby command in it, correct ? No, i don't. Here it is. Kind regards, Pavel Fedin Expert Engineer Samsung Electronics Research center Russia onc-rpc-devel.cygport Description: Binary data

Re: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
Hi Pavel, On Aug 14 10:54, Pavel Fedin wrote: Hello! I have worked around the problem with Ruby gem just by renaming 'gem' script. Looks like gem is broken on Cygwin. I have updated my Dropbox folder, and here is forgotten setup.hint. Your build has a tiny problem: rpcgen -C -h

Re: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 14 11:26, Corinna Vinschen wrote: Hi Pavel, On Aug 14 10:54, Pavel Fedin wrote: Hello! I have worked around the problem with Ruby gem just by renaming 'gem' script. Looks like gem is broken on Cygwin. I have updated my Dropbox folder, and here is forgotten setup.hint.

Re: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 14 15:06, Pavel Fedin wrote: Hello! Your build has a tiny problem: rpcgen -C -h rpcsvc/bootparam_prot.x -o rpcsvc/bootparam_prot.h make: rpcgen: Command not found The Makefile apparently expects that rpcgen can be found in $PATH, Thank you, fixed. Now it just

RE: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Pavel Fedin
Hello! No, I have ruby and gem installed. Works still fine for me. Just installed i386 version of Ruby, indeed works fine. Perhaps this happens because i use older cygwin1.dll. If you remember, i reported about memory trashing with newer DLL, but nobody could reproduce it, and i could not

Re: cygwin-pkg-maint maintance [gold star]

2014-08-14 Thread Andrew Schulman
On 2014-08-11 17:03, Marco Atzeri wrote: attached 2 files. The first is basically what should be the new cygwin-pkg-maint that cover all the active package in both 32bit and 64 bit. This was great, thank you. After rearranging the release areas, I was able to get a more reliable list

Re: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Yaakov Selkowitz
On Thu, 2014-08-14 at 18:35 +0400, Pavel Fedin wrote: No, I have ruby and gem installed. Works still fine for me. Just installed i386 version of Ruby, indeed works fine. The Cygwin gem command itself is working just fine. Are you, or were you, trying to use a Windows version of ruby, or

Re: cygwin-pkg-maint maintance

2014-08-14 Thread Achim Gratz
Yaakov Selkowitz writes: […] Yes, these are obvious fixes. […] I've looked at the file today. It seems that perl_vendor has been removed, but not all Perl distributions that were bundled are listed. I'll prepare a list of those over the weekend. Given the purpose of the file and that it's

Re: cygwin-pkg-maint maintance

2014-08-14 Thread Yaakov Selkowitz
On Thu, 2014-08-14 at 19:55 +0200, Achim Gratz wrote: I've looked at the file today. It seems that perl_vendor has been removed, but not all Perl distributions that were bundled are listed. I'll prepare a list of those over the weekend. perl_vendor was a subpackage of the perl source package

[ITA] Procmail 3.22

2014-08-14 Thread D. Boland
Hi group, I intend to adopt the Cygwin package for the procmail program, version 3.22. The original maintainer, Jason Tishler has given me permission to do so. The difference with previous Cygwin releases is that the procmail program has been made 'multiple root' aware and suid/guid, provided

[ITP] Sendmail 8.14.9

2014-08-14 Thread D. Boland
Hi group, I intend to package the Cygwin version of Sendmail, version 8.14.9. sdesc: The Mail Transfer Agent ldesc: General purpose internetwork email routing facility that supports many kinds of mail-transfer and delivery methods, including SMTP, SMTPS (STARTTLS), SMTPA (AUTH) used for

Re: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Pavel Fedin
Hello! I have uploaded the package. Hopefully i've done everything right, and it will appear on the list. If so, what should i do in order to tell that it supersedes rpcgen ? IIRC something has to be done manually ? Or should i upload -rpcgen* file ? -- Kind regards, Pavel

Re: cygwin-pkg-maint maintance

2014-08-14 Thread Achim Gratz
Yaakov Selkowitz writes: This is a package ownership database, not a package information database. What additional information do you think would be useful here? Whether the package is available for both architectures and if it's already converted to cygport for instance. From that database

Re: [ITP] Sendmail 8.14.9

2014-08-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 14 21:05, D. Boland wrote: Hi group, I intend to package the Cygwin version of Sendmail, version 8.14.9. sdesc: The Mail Transfer Agent ldesc: General purpose internetwork email routing facility that supports many kinds of mail-transfer and delivery methods, including SMTP,

Re: cygwin-pkg-maint maintance

2014-08-14 Thread Marco Atzeri
On 14/08/2014 21:21, Achim Gratz wrote: Yaakov Selkowitz writes: This is a package ownership database, not a package information database. What additional information do you think would be useful here? Whether the package is available for both architectures Wrong expectation. It is in both

Re: cygwin-pkg-maint maintance

2014-08-14 Thread Achim Gratz
Marco Atzeri writes: Whether the package is available for both architectures Wrong expectation. So what? I get how things are right now, that doesn't mean it has to stay forever that way. It is in both architectures if it appears in both setup.ini; any other solution will create duplicated

Re: cygwin-pkg-maint maintance

2014-08-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 14 22:28, Marco Atzeri wrote: On 14/08/2014 21:21, Achim Gratz wrote: Yaakov Selkowitz writes: This is a package ownership database, not a package information database. What additional information do you think would be useful here? Whether the package is available for both

Re: cygwin-pkg-maint maintance

2014-08-14 Thread Marco Atzeri
On 14/08/2014 22:51, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Aug 14 22:28, Marco Atzeri wrote: The build methods is maintainer choice. I use cygport but I don't see a reason to mandate it. Tiny correction: New packages should use cygport. We should really all use the same packaging system. After all,

Re: [ITP] onc-rpc-devel-2.19_20140211-1

2014-08-14 Thread Yaakov Selkowitz
On Thu, 2014-08-14 at 23:14 +0400, Pavel Fedin wrote: I have uploaded the package. Hopefully i've done everything right, and it will appear on the list. If so, what should i do in order to tell that it supersedes rpcgen ? IIRC something has to be done manually ? Or should i upload

Re: [ITA] Git et al

2014-08-14 Thread Eric Blake
On 08/13/2014 01:37 PM, Eric Blake wrote: The packages and setup.hint files are all ready to use and/or upload from http://tastycake.net/~adam/cygwin/. Before I can go ahead and release, I think I need to be added to cygwin-pkg-maint so I can send in an SSH key, and I possibly need a GTG

Re: [ITA] Git et al

2014-08-14 Thread Marco Atzeri
On 15/08/2014 06:24, Eric Blake wrote: On 08/13/2014 01:37 PM, Eric Blake wrote: Packaging isn't quite right. After unpacking the -src tarball, I see a file git-2.0.4-1.src.patch, with contents: Binary files origsrc/git/t/lib-gpg/random_seed and src/git/t/lib-gpg/random_seed differ Binary