Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerome BENOIT) writes:
I will try to rebuild the tetex-beta package this week-end.
To avoid any confusion, I plan to rename it `tetex-bin' as suggested
in a previous email.
Very nice.
Be sure to also create a new 'tetex-beta' package that
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 04:30:12PM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Some people promised to have a look at my cross build scripts package
so I've made some fixes. It should generate fully Cygwin compliant
binary and source packages now, I hope.
I wonder if these
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 12:31:28AM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
__ _ ___ _ _ _ _(_) |_
/ _` / -_) '_| '_| | _|
\__, \___|_| |_| |_|\__|
|___/
Was there something you wanted to say, here? Just quoting
Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Ummm...they are not broken. You just dislike some stylistic choices...
Well, setup.exe barfs on the. Quoting from inilex.l:
sdesc: return SDESC;
ldesc: return LDESC;
category:return CATEGORY;
requires:
I've put three new packages here:
http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/testing/
I am not yet ready to even ask for official inclusion. This is just a
kind of here, heads up, what do you think? message.
There's
libtool-20010531-rc6.tar.bz2
Sort of. The problem though is that I'm nearing the completion of some
pretty extensive changes to the GUI code, so if there's problems with
that in the cvs stuff I might not even know about it. I did however
run across a problem in the INI-parsing code that does prevent it from
working.
Robert Collins wrote:
The -x is the binary API compatability index. See the libtool
documentation.
Actually, I don't think the libtool docs explain DLL versioning on
windows (the 'c - a' thing). They DO explain about libtool's versioning
scheme on UNIX, and if you read that and think about
Jason Tishler wrote:
I would like to contribute my rebase utility. Should it be a stand-alone
package? Be added to another package (i.e., cygutils -- sorry to suggest
this Chuck...)? Or, be added to winsup/utils?
I think it should go in winsup/utils, but I've no objections to putting
it
I believe the commercial restrictions are problematic. If we're going
to include an emacs, I'd prefer one that is completely free (speech)
like FSF Emacs or XEmacs.
However, with the soon-to-be-released features in setup.exe, there's no
reason why Jon can't provide a cygwin-friendly download
Okay, I've uploaded and announced the new gettext packages:
gettext-0.10.40-1
libintl1-0.10.40-1
libintl-0.10.38-3
I also updated the setup.hint files on the server for the following
packages:
wget mutt nano vim sharutils
The maintainers of those packages should make a note
Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
What is the problem here? libintl and libintl1 are two different packages
with different names.
But there's only one nano. (sounds like an ad campaign) So, nano's
setup.hint has a line like:
requires: foo bar libintl
Later, the (then-)current nano will
Morrison, John wrote:
Thats not what the help file says...
Note that category names may be multi-word, e.g., ASCII Games but,
currently all categories are only a single word.
I know that.
category: Shell Utils
is two categories.
category: Shell Utils
is one category. (Earnie's
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I'd like to pour fuel into the fire of `usefulness' of a package.
I'd like to contribute the NetBSD fortune package to Cygwin and
therefore I'd even like to propose to add a Games section *gasp*.
setup.hint:
---
sdesc: Print a random, hopefully
Robert Collins wrote:
Chuck,
lovely wrapper scripts, they work beautifully (its what I used for
libxml2 and libxslt - which I did so I could give you feedback).
That's good to hear. So you exercised the whole
automake/autoconf/libtool chain? If so, then how did you put together
your
Earnie Boyd wrote:
I'm confused. What's all this talk about needing new binutils?
Yep, I'd say. My guess is that Stipe is using a cross buiold platform
that doesn't include your change. Therefore he has to hard code the
prefix in filename translations in the Makefile.in or what ever
I'd like to put in a vote for NOT treating '_' and '-' identically.
While it is easy to use apache1 and apache2 instead of apache_1
and apache_2 -- it isn't so easy for packages (like bzip2) that
already end with a numeral. I'm specifically thinking of: splitting
bzip2 into a bzip2 and
Robert Collins wrote:
Okay, I've renamed the devel package:
libtool-devel-20010531-6
that should be libtool_devel-20010531-6 shouldn't it?
(devel is a flavour and thus part of the name).
I _think_ that the current upset and setup.exe logic actually starts at
the right and owrks left,
Robert Collins wrote:
Of getting automake 1.5b pacakged? Perhaps as a test version?
It's got a key fix in it that drops som Makefile.in's down from Mb's to
just Kb's.
I forward ported the current patch, and rebuilt automake-devel from
1.5b. That seemed to go okay; I'm waiting for make
Robert Collins wrote:
Correct -- it does work from R to L. If we cannot depend on this
behavior, then we must rename the following packages:
Which is one of the implications of the thread where you said
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2002-01/msg00208.html.
Well, consider it a thinko
Robert Collins wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Charles Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I forward ported the current patch, and rebuilt automake-devel from
1.5b. That seemed to go okay; I'm waiting for make check to complete.
If successful, I'll post the packages for Corinna to do
Robert Collins wrote:
AH yes - thus showcasing the point at hand:
tetex - beta-20001218 - cygver is parsed as
tetex-beta - 20001218 - cygver!
Hmmm...I must spend too much time with computers. My human brain parsed
tetex-beta-20001218-2 as tetex-beta 20001218 2.
You have been using
How big are they? If they are only a single .c file each (killall.c,
utmpdump.c, last.c) then they are candidates for addition to the
cygutils package, if you'd prefer./.
One of these days I'll get around to creating a sourceware-based CVS
tree for cygutils...Chris, how do I do that?
Mark Bradshaw wrote:
Very small. All source combined is 33KB. Executables are 23.5KB. This is
just last and utmpdump.
You want 'em?
Dunno yet. I'm not really concerned about # kilobytes. My rule for
cygutils is one .c file per application -- I want to limit cygutils to
very
It looks pretty good to me -- I rebuilt it from source right now and it
seems okay. The *only* quibble I have is that the binary package
contains this file:
/etc/wgetrc
Since it is just a copy of /usr/doc/wget-1.7.1/sample.wgetrc, you should
probably just add some logic to your postinstall
Christopher Faylor wrote:
I've just added you to the cygwin-apps group on sources.redhat.com:
cvs -d :ext:sources.redhat.com:/cvs/cygwin-apps co .
Feel free to add a cygutils directory.
Okay -- I've added it and imported v0.9.7. Also, I've added Mark's last
implementation and the
Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert Collins
I need a few testers:
I've fixed the fault Corinna reported with in use files and upgrades.
I'd like to know that it works on 9x (not tested properly just
Earnie Boyd wrote:
Hmm... OOTB? Did you take care to test it? In the past there've been
issues with the way files are left opened while the temp files are being
copied over them. That doesn't work with Win32 and therefore Cygwin.
With CVS already working do we need RCS?
Sure -- let a
Release early and often. Go ahead and publish what you have, against
current CVS. You only need to #ifdef stuff out if it will actually
BREAK something that is currently working. If it's, say, the handler
for an incompletely implemented commandline option, then it won't break
anything
Robert Collins wrote:
IIRC this is reproducible for you Chuck, can you shoot me some logs
please.
Okay, this is from setup 2.188 (compiled just now) and I am trying to do
a local install from //polgara/private/software/windows/cygwin-new/
which contains a standard tree structure and the
Charles Wilson wrote:
Robert Collins wrote:
IIRC this is reproducible for you Chuck, can you shoot me some logs
please.
Okay, this is from setup 2.188 (compiled just now) and I am trying to do
a local install from //polgara/private/software/windows/cygwin-new/
which contains
Charles Wilson wrote:
After applying the attached patch to setup 2.188, I got a clue that the
problem was that my 'local' repository was on a remote share
'//polgara/private/'.
Forgot to include the setup.log.full data that gave me this clue:
setup.exe is really trying to iostream
Earnie Boyd wrote:
Charles Wilson wrote:
file:/Polgara/private/software/windows/cygwin-new/setup.ini
file:Polgara/private/software/windows/cygwin-new/setup.ini
This makes sense. You need two // after file: and two // before
Polgara. The extra fifth / was just ignored.
Sure
Michael A Chase wrote:
Shouldn't this be part of the ash package? Now that it's part of the Base
category, there shouldn't be any problem creating /etc/profile when ash is
installed.
No. ash provides ash. base-files provides the data for a purely
data-driven setup.exe. That is, the
Christopher Faylor wrote:
Can we concentrate on releasing a new version of setup.exe, please?
I'd like to eliminate the confusion that the current version of setup.exe
is causing. It seems like we are in a standard add one more thing mode
when people are experiencing real problems and
Prentis Brooks wrote:
Alright,
finally read over the setup.html file and built up the src and binary
packages. Writing up the setup.hint file now. I have the following:
# TCP Wrappers
@ tcp_wrappers_7.6
This line is not necessary -- it is created in setup.ini by the upset
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:42:28PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
*please* make sure that the '-' vs. '_' fix is in before releasing the
new setup. I've been sitting on the bzip2 update waiting on this...
(Also, the localdir-is-on-remote-share fix would be nice
upset2 seems to work okay for me, on a few locally-constructed trees.
In fact, discounting the tarball listings in html that upset generated,
the output is identical to upset's...nice job.
--Chuck
Christopher Faylor wrote:
I've moved 'upset' to a new home and have begun modularizing the
Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
OK, here is a new util:
Usage mkshortcut.exe [OPTION]... TARGET
NOTE: All filename arguments must be in unix (POSIX) format
-a|--arguments=ARGS use arguments ARGS
-h|--help output usage information and exit
-i|--icon icon file for
I've got pkgconfig ready for contribution to the cygwin distribution.
Since we're starting to get a few packages that include .pc files
(libxslt, libxml-2.0) we probably ought to have this. I've got version
0.10.0 (released 2002-02-02) ready to.
I think it should go in latest/pkgconfig/
Robert Collins wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Charles Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2002 6:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: ITP: pkgconfig
I've got pkgconfig ready for contribution to the cygwin distribution.
Since we're starting to get a few
Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
OK, c file and man page attached. The copyright is updated and the
version now reads 1.01. I assume you would rather mess with
the Makefile since you're already familiar with the cygutils source;
let me know if I need to provide patches for anything.
This'll
Jason Tishler wrote:
(Or do you rebase cygwin1.dll as well :]]).
Yes, I can rebase cygwin1.dll too. This is why I converted the
stand-alone rebase to a Mingw app.
Urk. If we follow Earnie's suggestion to include the output of 'objdump
-S1' with cygwin1.dlll snapshots and the
Robert Collins wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
However, I agree that rebasing shouldn't be the default
behavior. In fact, I wonder if I should make cygwin
non-rebaseable. It would load faster if I did that.
Yes, and it would
Dario Alcocer wrote:
I've finished testing and packaging the latest release of Ghostscript;
the new release uses the libpng and zlib shared libraries, as
suggested by Chuck Wilson. I've put the packages and MD5 sum file at:
http://members.cox.net/dalcocer/gs
If someone has upload
Anybody else want to weigh in, here? So far I've got one 'yay' vote
from Robert (but putting pkgconfig into contrib instead of latest)
Fine by me Any other votes?
--Chuck
Charles Wilson wrote:
I've got pkgconfig ready for contribution to the cygwin distribution
Since we're starting
Pavel Tsekov wrote:
Hey, there! :)
Does the attached patch make any sense ? It prevents an infinite loop
if either automake-devel or automake-stable is missing.
Yes, it does -- of course, setup enforces that automake depends on
automake-devel and automake-stable, so if you see this
Hmmm...there's a line in ltmain.sh that says:
-allow-undefined)
# FIXME: remove this flag sometime in the future.
$echo $modename: \`-allow-undefined' is deprecated because it
is the default 12
continue
;;
Actually, libtool.m4 is an original file.
Christopher Faylor wrote:
If someone wants to contribute, I think it should just be a standard
package.
Chuck, I hate to say this, but I don't see a real reason for growing
cygutils. The more packages we add to cygutils, the more we go back to
the old way of installing cygwin packages
Robert Collins wrote:
2) It seems that when uninstalling (or upgrading), if the uninstalled
package leaves behing a directory that is empty, the directory is not
removed. Not a big deal, and certainly not a showstopper.
Hmm, has that behaviour changed? I'll add a TODO for it.
Actually,
Prentis Brooks wrote:
Hmm. I wonder if it would be worthwhile to make the wrapper library a
DLL.
I would rather we didn't, primarily because the modification to make tcp
wrappers work with Cygwin was simplistic. In fact, at this point the
modification is only to the Makefile, plus a
Prentis Brooks wrote:
Hrmmm I will look into it, I am sure there is some efficiency gained
from making it a DLL. Would packages that are built against libwrap
automatically use the DLL if it is available, or would they need to be
tweaked as well (ie sshd is compiled such that if
Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
Did you see the 'more' source code I posted the other day -- it came
from the util-linux distribution (http://freshmeat.net/releases/72929/)
--Chuck
Yes, I already had the util-linux source on my HD from looking at the
source to kill. The problem is that it
Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
That's because I didn't use this list. I had another criteria which,
if you are looking in the email archives, you should be able to see
mentioned a few times. I used the 'base' category from debian. Hopefully
we haven't drifted from that too much.
I remember
, that last one is an exagerration. Actually, the ncftp code has a
special cygwin hack so that on cygwin, ncftp uses less by default.
Other platforms use more by default. But you get the idea.)
--Chuck
Charles Wilson wrote:
In my previous post, I didn't mean to argue against 'more' as a package
Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
requires: ash cygwin libintl1 ncurses pcre
almost nothing actually depends on the ncurses package. the dependency
is probably on the libncurses6 and/or terminfo packages.
--Chuck
Michael's script works for me. One caveat:
I had to manually run 'clean_lst.pl ./a*.lst' 26 times (using different
starting letters). However, that was because I got a BSOD when running
it fullbore -- where it tried to fixup all files.
Now, a perl script should never ever be able to cause a
there were two things I was going to do:
1) move gettext from the contrib directory to the latest directory --
and see if anybody barfs.
2) update bzip2 to the latest release -- which involves the grand
library split thing (bzip2 - bzip2 + libbz2_0). However, the name
libbz2_0 is
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 03:15:53PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
I think we've done it. So Chuck, feel free to break everyone who's
lagging behind :}..
Shouldn't we wait a day or two and let the new setup.exe work its
way through the system?
don't worry -- I
Charles Wilson wrote:
I suggest that the ksh-specific binaries should just go into
/usr/bin/ksh/
or maybe /usr/libexec/ksh/
--Chuck
Hack Kampbjørn wrote:
Note this doesn't happen for wget. I've just checked.
texinfo.
Should be in base (IMHO).
No! Anything that has info pages should depend on texinfo. That's what
dependencies ARE FOR.
Anything that installs .info files should have texinfo in its dependency
list.
First, read my other message (sent immediately prior to this one)
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 11:21:22AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
Would other executables that are not stub executables but alternative
version to existing commands go there, too? ATT have own
Robert Collins wrote:
Can we remove more from base?
More is what? 3k? I'd love to have had it in the base install when
I installed my cygwin -
I support having a pager in the default install (which !=
base!!!)
Base: cygwin is non-functional and completely broken(*) unless
Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Hi,
As tetex-beta-20001218-4 (now in curr) and texmf-*-2804-2 seem to
work well together, can we remove the test marker from texmf?
You are the maintainer; it is your decision.
I
thought there was a three weeks period for test; who's keeping track
of
Earnie Boyd wrote:
Also, the way that things are coded for choosing
multiple mirror sites I could have the same file in more than one
directory in the cache. Ouch, that bites.
I don't think that will happen. Of all of the versions of project 'bob'
on all of the download sites, only the
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Also, the name should be 'tcp_wrappers-7.6-REL...'; the package release
version is missing.
Agh! I'm sorry. I'm still not really back from vacation, apparently.
Can I remove the package and keep the directory and setup.exe is still
happy?
Sure -- I've
I've whipped up a repackaged version of your -src, that follows the
approved conventions. Also, it uses a shell script to control building,
and installs the man pages, header file, has a postinstall script to
create /etc/hosts.allow/deny if they dont already exist, etc.
I'll mail it to you
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
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
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
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.
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
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
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:07:45PM +0200, Stipe Tolj wrote:
Corinna,
what about the announcement I posted to cygwin-announce ?
It hasn't yet passed to the main lists, or have I missed it?
Maybe you are peaking at me to take as long as I did for the package
Robert Collins wrote:
sitecopy is worth a look as a mirroring tool..
Sitecopy is intended for keeping a remote site in sync with the local
master version (e.g. uploading your personal website to a server on
which you have ftp access). It's isn't great for keeping a local mirror
of a
Stipe Tolj wrote:
Ok, should I CC to cygwin by hand now?!
No need to panic?!
For the short term, yes. Once Chris fixes the gateway (or gets
cygwin-announce out of spamassisin's black hole), then you can stop.
For my part, I will wait a reasonable amount of time (15 mins?) after
each of
So I just updated my local mirror and discovered that somebody unpacked
the entire w32api package onto sourceware:
cygwin/latest/w32api/hold/w32api-1.3-2/*
What's that all about? Shouldn't that stuff be kept out of the mirrored
anonftp area?
--Chuck
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 03:05:04PM -0400, Earnie Boyd wrote:
Charles Wilson wrote:
So I just updated my local mirror and discovered that somebody unpacked
the entire w32api package onto sourceware:
cygwin/latest/w32api/hold/w32api-1.3-2/*
What's that all about
Eduardo Chappa wrote:
Hello,
I am sending this message, because I have built Pine for cygwin, and I
would like to know if the cygwin community is interested in distributing
this package. I would maintain the package, that's not a problem at all.
The Pine developers team also approves
AFAIK, setup doesn't handle buildRequires. What I've been doing is to
only list runtime dependencies for the binary package in the Requires:
line, and then just mention the buildtime requirements in the readme.
e.g. you don't list gcc/binutils in the Requires: line of every package.
--Chuck
Robert Collins wrote:
Line 4476 of libtool.m4 setups allow_undefined to 'unsupported' for
Cygwin. With --auto-import this is incorrect. It should set it to ...='
I *think* that's all I had to do to get the auto-import magic back on
track :}.
Chuck,
I hate to be a bother, but is this
Robert Collins wrote:
What Ralfs patch does is change
allow_undefined_flag to no (as opposed to unsupported) and
?? what's the difference between ...=unsupported and ...=no and
...=? Shouldn't the SAME answer be given in all sections, with
respect to whether allow_undefined_flag is a
Ralf Habacker wrote:
must be some way to prevent ld outputting the imported
symbols as
well as the exported symbols...
I'm using a special patched ld (based on the recent official
ld) which rejects exporting of all imported libs with a one
line patch
binutils/ld/pe-dll.c:234
/* Do
Stipe Tolj wrote:
(i) package each module to an apache-mod_foobar-X-Y.tar.bz2 binary
package and distribute through the standard Cygwin setup.exe (setting
setup.hint to require the apache-1.3.x base package)
This one. That's the way linux distros do it -- they have
Christopher Faylor wrote:
The affected subdirectories were readline/*,
texmf/*, libpng/* .
And probably ncurses/* bzip2/*.
Anyway, I've checked the following:
release/libpng/*
release/readline/*
release/ncurses/*
release/bzip2/*
and they all look fine. However,
Gerrit --
configuration files should be handled in a nondestructive manner.
Rather than including /etc/enscript.cfg in the tarball, instead modify
your postinstall script to do something like:
if [ -f /etc/enscript.cfg ] ; then
OUTFILE=/etc/enscript.cfg.new
else
I can do this -- but what was the outcome of the package name argument?
Was it xfree-foo-4.2.0-1.tar.bz2 or xfree86-... or XFree86-...?
I'll need to modify the znark script accordingly.
--Chuck
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:22:52PM -0700, Ian Burrell wrote:
Currently, there are three dominant -src packaging standards.
1. As detailed on
http://cygwin.com/setup.html#package_contents
foo-VER-REL-src.tar.bz2 unpacks thus:
foo-VER[-REL]/
foo-VER[-REL]/source files
foo-VER[-REL]/subdirs
foo-VER[-REL]/subdirs/source files
Lapo Luchini wrote:
PS: I can see at least a motivation for using exact original package now: so
that people can use md5sum and get convinced that the included file is really
exactly the original...
Bingo.
--Chuck
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 06:58:55PM +0200, Lapo Luchini wrote:
Why the wget-1.8.1-1-src.tar.bz2 package does contain wget-1.8.1.tar.gz
?
That would be what is called in the software community a mistake.
Can this be corrected, asap, Hack?
???
Chris, are you
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2001-11/msg00510.html
Wow. Insightful email.
as usual...
Well, I guess I haven't been paying much attention to your and Robert's
packages. I'd forgotten that I'd suggested that we package as we see
fit and foolishly looked to what I supposed was the
What about modules that do change/patch Apache's source tree to hook on
certain structures that can not be accessed using the normal API?
I'm thinking espacially about mod_ssl and mod_snmp, which both need to
patch Apache's core to be applied?
Well, you can run an mod_ssl-modified apache
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I'm talking about style 2. I'm using it for my packages. I don't
see a need that the Cygwin package needs the patch from the original
version. The pristine source is available elsewhere. We're
responsible for the Cygwin version. In the long run the maintainer
Robert Collins wrote:
And the GPL requires us to document the changes made - if we have the
patch pre-applied, with no reverse patch, then this isn't the case.
Asking folk to go elsewhere to get that 'pristine' source puts the onus
on the upstream to make that available, which we can't do -
Robert Collins wrote:
we have to make XFree86-base-src the package that contained the full
source archive.
Hmm. Yes. I think this would work. That might be the best solution.
In fact, it may be a nice trend setter.
I think setup.exe needs a little work before doing this, but it's a
Robert Collins wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Charles Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 12:59 PM
Also, setup must do the following (even without new 'views'
and whatnot)
Setup should already do that, why not make a test setup.ini and see what
On 3/25, I uploaded new versions of autoconf-devel and automake-devel,
but I didn't mark them current because Corinna was on vacation.
Corinna, any objections to removing the 'test' designation from
autoconf-devel-2.53-1 and automake-1.6-1 ? (Be sure to read the
previously posted
Charles Wilson wrote:
Actually, if there's no opposition (hah!) I'll update the documentation to
reflect the current situation (e.g. 3 styles) -- but I'd like to mark one of
them as the preferred style for new packages. Hopefully mine and robert's
style. ;-)
Okay, as promised
Can we get a diff for the HTML page?
Okay
--- setup-old.html Sun Apr 21 03:03:18 2002
+++ setup.html Sun Apr 21 03:01:44 2002
@@ -21,9 +21,9 @@
border=0 usemap=#topbar alt=/a/center
!-- == --
-!--
Robert Collins wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Charles Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 8:33 AM
if you select the source for more than one of [bob|bobx|boby], then it
is downloaded only once (good) but is unpacked three times. This isn't
1 - 100 of 1202 matches
Mail list logo
