On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
Lapo Luchini wrote:
PS: AFAIR the g-b-s' deps target lists them all, but cygport's dep
does not.
The g-b-s deps check was based on cygcheck, which shows the entire
dependency tree, where cygport uses objdump, which lists only those that
Lapo Luchini wrote:
Hi Gareth,
just a quick question: do you plan to support the current nano-2.0.x
branch in your Cygwin package relases?
Gareth replied privately to me that's ok with him if I adopt the package.
Should anyone take a look at the packaging?
Lapo Luchini wrote:
Lapo Luchini wrote:
Hi Gareth,
just a quick question: do you plan to support the current nano-2.0.x
branch in your Cygwin package relases?
Gareth replied privately to me that's ok with him if I adopt the package.
Should anyone take a look at the packaging?
On Dec 17 12:50, Lapo Luchini wrote:
http://cyberx.lapo.it/cygwin/nano/nano-2.0.6-1.tar.bz2
http://cyberx.lapo.it/cygwin/nano/nano-2.0.6-1-src.tar.bz2
Looks good, uploaded.
Thanks for taking over,
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Dec 17 12:50, Lapo Luchini wrote:
http://cyberx.lapo.it/cygwin/nano/nano-2.0.6-1.tar.bz2
http://cyberx.lapo.it/cygwin/nano/nano-2.0.6-1-src.tar.bz2
Looks good, uploaded.
Thanks for taking over,
Corinna
http://cygwin.com/goldstars/#JAa.
Corinna Vinschen writes:
On Dec 17 12:50, Lapo Luchini wrote:
http://cyberx.lapo.it/cygwin/nano/nano-2.0.6-1.tar.bz2
http://cyberx.lapo.it/cygwin/nano/nano-2.0.6-1-src.tar.bz2
Looks good, uploaded.
setup.hint should only include direct dependencies:
cygport
Igor Peshansky wrote:
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Dec 17 12:50, Lapo Luchini wrote:
http://cyberx.lapo.it/cygwin/nano/nano-2.0.6-1.tar.bz2
http://cyberx.lapo.it/cygwin/nano/nano-2.0.6-1-src.tar.bz2
Looks good, uploaded.
Thanks for taking over,
Corinna
Igor Peshansky wrote:
http://cygwin.com/goldstars/#JAa.
Doh? ;-)
Sort of. Just making sure this time things don't get buried in the TODO
list... :-)
Uh.. not exactly: I was dohing to the fact that that I'm not quite as
active as Jari is, in adopting packages 0=)
(second hint: #JAa vs #LL
Dr. Volker Zell wrote:
setup.hint should only include direct dependencies
OK, noted (for next revision).
PS: AFAIR the g-b-s' deps target lists them all, but cygport's dep
does not.
--
Lapo Luchini
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (OpenPGP X.509)
www.lapo.it (Jabber, ICQ, MSN)
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Lapo Luchini wrote:
Igor Peshansky wrote:
http://cygwin.com/goldstars/#JAa.
Doh? ;-)
Sort of. Just making sure this time things don't get buried in the TODO
list... :-)
Uh.. not exactly: I was dohing to the fact that that I'm not quite as
active as Jari is, in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Lapo Luchini wrote:
PS: AFAIR the g-b-s' deps target lists them all, but cygport's dep
does not.
The g-b-s deps check was based on cygcheck, which shows the entire
dependency tree, where cygport uses objdump, which lists only those that
the
11 matches
Mail list logo