What should package maintainers be doing about this?
I maintain the cmake package, and although I am subscribed
to this list, I rarely follow it closely. I post updates
to cmake, but that is about it. However, I just noticed
this thread. Should package maintainers being
building stuff for
On 2003.07.17 09:16, Charles Wilson wrote:
1) already recompiled for 1.5.0
2) non-binary
3) binary, but not for new use (e.g. could be recompiled, but why?)
4) empty compatibility packages (newlib-man, texmf?)
5) need to be recompiled 1.5.0
NEED TO BE RECOMPILED FOR 1.5.0
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 03:16:41AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
Well, you can cross these off your list...
bzip2 + libbz2_1
gdbm + libgdbm-devel, libgdbm3
Note that the following do not have any compiled portions, and are
therefore ready for 1.5.0
autoconf
automake
libtool
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Charles Wilson wrote:
Well, you can cross these off your list...
bzip2 + libbz2_1
gdbm + libgdbm-devel, libgdbm3
Note that the following do not have any compiled portions, and are
therefore ready for 1.5.0
autoconf
automake
libtool
autoconf-devel
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Move crypt to category 1 and regex to category 3.
Crypt is not using any call which would change due to 1.5.0. The package
would be 100% identical on a binary level.
Regex is the POSIX regex functionality which is only kept for backward
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Elfyn McBratney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Missed termcap
Ok [... going over my dependencies again] and what about XFree86-bin?
The Cygwin/XFree people manage their own releases and will (most likely) be
performing tests after this period.
