All'incirca Tue, 06 May 2008 19:14:26 +0200, Julien BLACHE
[EMAIL PROTECTED] sembrerebbe aver scritto:
And moreover, I am afraid that sunpinyin-{le,ge}-data are not
architecture neutral. So is it okay to make these two packages
Arch:all?
Yes.
I'm not involved in sunpinyin, but out of
Thanks a lot, JB. Following your hints, I am almost there. :)
And sorry for the multi-post...
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 1:14 AM, Julien BLACHE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kov Chai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
best approach in my mind is to create two other data packages named
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
I am packaging [1] sunpinyin. Sunpinyin is a Chinese input method engine.
As you may know, this source package builds two binary packages for
two input method platform (SCIM and IIIMF) respectively. Both of these
binary packages contain a
Kov Chai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
best approach in my mind is to create two other data packages named
sunpinyin-le-data and sunpinyin-ge-data, and make the binary packages depend
on the data package by its endianness accordingly.
Is this solution feasible, or is there any better way to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
I am packaging [1] sunpinyin. Sunpinyin is a Chinese input method engine.
As you may know, this source package builds two binary packages for
two input method platform (SCIM and IIIMF) respectively. Both of these
binary packages contain a
5 matches
Mail list logo
