Re: ITP: Guile 1.5.6

2002-07-06 Thread Jan Nieuwenhuizen
Nicholas Wourms [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're actually *developing* on Windows? Amazing. Yes, developing under Cygwin is a pleasure, a far cry from using command.com. It is almost to the point of being transparent from a linux developer's perspective. As we speak, I am currently

Re: ITP: Guile 1.5.6

2002-07-06 Thread Jan Nieuwenhuizen
Charles Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, ordinarily you would be correct (just like you were earlier today vis a vis netpbm g). However, the gettext package was split up in a weird way, based on suggestions from Bruno Haible, the real GNU gettext maintainer. Ok. [Snip very useful

Binutils alignment and libjava

2002-07-06 Thread Billinghurst, David (CRTS)
Sorry for not commenting on this earlier, but I have been travelling with work - building and commissioning plant rather than computing. It is now possible to build libjava with 4 byte alignment on cygwin, as hash synchronization has been disabled for cygwin (in libjava/configure.host). I

Re: Binutils alignment and libjava

2002-07-06 Thread Nicholas Wourms
Billinghurst, David (CRTS) wrote: Sorry for not commenting on this earlier, but I have been travelling with work - building and commissioning plant rather than computing. It is now possible to build libjava with 4 byte alignment on cygwin, as hash synchronization has been disabled for cygwin

RE: Binutils alignment and libjava

2002-07-06 Thread Billinghurst, David (CRTS)
I don't know. I don't really know much about java and I didn't make the change. It didn't change the testsuite results. There may have been some discussion on [EMAIL PROTECTED] when the change went in. -Original Message- From: Nicholas Wourms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent:

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Nicholas Wourms
Dario Alcocer wrote: Are there any guidelines or suggestions regarding packaging source, patches and binaries for programs (like Ghostscript) that can be built for either Cygwin or Cygwin/XFree86? Unless I hear a very compelling reason to do otherwise, I'm planning on releasing three binary

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Dario Alcocer
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 10:14:09AM -0400, Nicholas Wourms wrote: Dario Alcocer wrote: Are there any guidelines or suggestions regarding packaging source, patches and binaries for programs (like Ghostscript) that can be built for either Cygwin or Cygwin/XFree86? Unless I hear a very

Re: Binutils alignment and libjava

2002-07-06 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 10:29:33PM +1000, Billinghurst, David (CRTS) wrote: Sorry for not commenting on this earlier, but I have been travelling with work - building and commissioning plant rather than computing. It is now possible to build libjava with 4 byte alignment on cygwin, as hash

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 12:47:28PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: Of course, then there is my other rule that X apps live in the release/XFree86 hierarchy. I guess I should amend this rule to mean strictly X apps. It wouldn't make sense to scatter your distribution into different directories

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Charles Wilson
Dario Alcocer wrote: Are there any guidelines or suggestions regarding packaging source, patches and binaries for programs (like Ghostscript) that can be built for either Cygwin or Cygwin/XFree86? Not yet... Unless I hear a very compelling reason to do otherwise, I'm planning on

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Charles Wilson
Charles Wilson wrote: for non-x: prefix = /usr sysconfdir = /etc CFLAGS=${MY_CFLAGS} LDFLAGS=${MY_LDFLAGS} \ ${srcdir}/configure \ --srcdir=${srcdir} --prefix=${prefix} \ --exec-prefix=${prefix} --sysconfdir=${sysconfdir} \ --libdir=${prefix}/lib

RE: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread John Morrison
I would go ahead and allow ALL of the scripts and man pages to be duplicated (bdftops, font2c, gslj, etc) into both /usr/bin/|/usr/man and /usr/X11R6/bin|/usr/X11R6/man -- without any renaming. Or have a ghostscript-docs-x.y.z which just contains documents... J. --- Outgoing mail is

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 07:02:31PM +0100, John Morrison wrote: I would go ahead and allow ALL of the scripts and man pages to be duplicated (bdftops, font2c, gslj, etc) into both /usr/bin/|/usr/man and /usr/X11R6/bin|/usr/X11R6/man -- without any renaming. Or have a ghostscript-docs-x.y.z

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Charles Wilson
Christopher Faylor wrote: On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 07:02:31PM +0100, John Morrison wrote: I would go ahead and allow ALL of the scripts and man pages to be duplicated (bdftops, font2c, gslj, etc) into both /usr/bin/|/usr/man and /usr/X11R6/bin|/usr/X11R6/man -- without any renaming. Or

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Dario Alcocer
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 07:02:31PM +0100, John Morrison wrote: I would go ahead and allow ALL of the scripts and man pages to be duplicated (bdftops, font2c, gslj, etc) into both /usr/bin/|/usr/man and /usr/X11R6/bin|/usr/X11R6/man -- without any renaming. Or have a

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Dario Alcocer
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 12:47:28PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 06:57:23AM -0700, Dario Alcocer wrote: Are there any guidelines or suggestions regarding packaging source, patches and binaries for programs (like Ghostscript) that can be built for either Cygwin or

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Dario Alcocer
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 02:12:29PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 07:02:31PM +0100, John Morrison wrote: I would go ahead and allow ALL of the scripts and man pages to be duplicated (bdftops, font2c, gslj, etc) into both /usr/bin/|/usr/man and

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Dario Alcocer
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 02:38:13PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 07:02:31PM +0100, John Morrison wrote: I would go ahead and allow ALL of the scripts and man pages to be duplicated (bdftops, font2c, gslj, etc) into both /usr/bin/|/usr/man

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 04:02:21PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 02:38:13PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 07:02:31PM +0100, John Morrison wrote: I would go ahead and allow ALL of the scripts and man pages to be

Re: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread Charles Wilson
Dario Alcocer wrote: For X: prefix = /usr/X11R6 sysconfdir = /etc CFLAGS=${MY_CFLAGS} LDFLAGS=${MY_LDFLAGS} \ ${srcdir}/configure \ --srcdir=${srcdir} --prefix=${prefix} \ --exec-prefix=${prefix} --sysconfdir=${sysconfdir} \ --libdir=${prefix}/lib

RE: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread John Morrison
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 07:02:31PM +0100, John Morrison wrote: I would go ahead and allow ALL of the scripts and man pages to be duplicated (bdftops, font2c, gslj, etc) into both /usr/bin/|/usr/man and /usr/X11R6/bin|/usr/X11R6/man -- without any renaming.

RE: Ghostscript packaging for X11, non-X11 versions

2002-07-06 Thread John Morrison
Nicholas Wourms Dario Alcocer wrote: Well, my personal preference has always been to include whatever documentation a package has, whether it be man pages or supplementary HTML documentation. I figure if space is really an issue for a particular user, they can delete the documentation if