On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 09:09:50PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
On 2927T182035+0100, Colin Watson wrote:
configuration system should probably be patched so that you can. Anybody
should be able to install all the build-dependencies, build the package,
and get the same result as
On 2928T092438+1200, Michael Beattie wrote:
But, if the user has something *extra* installed, that the configure script
picks up and uses, because it is optional for the package build... you do
the math.
That's what Build-Conflicts is for. Or one can hack the configure script.
--
%%%
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2927T182035+0100, Colin Watson wrote:
configuration system should probably be patched so that you can. Anybody
should be able to install all the build-dependencies, build the package,
and get the same result as before (assuming they have
A few days ago I had to rebuild gimp1.1 from source to fix a little
bug that was stalling my work. I noticed that since I have LPRng
installed on my system, ./configure came up with different settings
than the gimp binary in the archive was compiled with (specifically,
lpstat support was enabled
Hi,
It is safe to remove this from sawfish postinst ?
if [ -x /usr/sbin/register-window-manager ]; then
/usr/sbin/register-window-manager --add /usr/bin/sawfish
fi
Christian
I have a question regarding adopting a package. If a package has been
marked RFA against WNPP, how do I re-title that bug with ITA to show
that I intend to adopt it? The info at
http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp explains that this is what you should
do until you have uploaded a package with you as
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_Dahlqvist?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do I simply submit a new bug against WNPP with ITA: package_name as
the subject line? Will that rename the already existing RFA bug? It
doesn't seam like the right thing to do, so I'm asking here for
advice first.
No, see
A few days ago I had to rebuild gimp1.1 from source to fix a little
bug that was stalling my work. I noticed that since I have LPRng
installed on my system, ./configure came up with different settings
than the gimp binary in the archive was compiled with (specifically,
lpstat support was enabled
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 12:39:36PM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote:
It is safe to remove this from sawfish postinst ?
if [ -x /usr/sbin/register-window-manager ]; then
/usr/sbin/register-window-manager --add /usr/bin/sawfish
fi
From X changelog:
xfree86-1 (3.3.5-2) unstable;
Itai Zukerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A few days ago I had to rebuild gimp1.1 from source to fix a little
bug that was stalling my work. I noticed that since I have LPRng
installed on my system, ./configure came up with different settings
than the gimp binary in the archive was compiled with
On 2927T182035+0100, Colin Watson wrote:
configuration system should probably be patched so that you can. Anybody
should be able to install all the build-dependencies, build the package,
and get the same result as before (assuming they have the same version
of all the build-dependencies as
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 09:09:50PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
On 2927T182035+0100, Colin Watson wrote:
configuration system should probably be patched so that you can. Anybody
should be able to install all the build-dependencies, build the package,
and get the same result as
On 2928T092438+1200, Michael Beattie wrote:
But, if the user has something *extra* installed, that the configure script
picks up and uses, because it is optional for the package build... you do
the math.
That's what Build-Conflicts is for. Or one can hack the configure script.
--
%%%
Anybody should be able to build a package when its build-time dependencies
are satisfied and end up with the same result as anyone else. This is
a policy recommendation.
But, if the user has something *extra* installed, that the configure script
picks up and uses, because it is optional
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2927T182035+0100, Colin Watson wrote:
configuration system should probably be patched so that you can. Anybody
should be able to install all the build-dependencies, build the package,
and get the same result as before (assuming they have
In January, you wrote:
I'm sure many of you noticed the release of CMU's Speech to Text as 'Open
Source' today on slashdot. after carefull inspection of the license, i found
that it isn't exactly free. howerver, it's quite close, and uses gnu
autoconf, so i decided that it surely needs to be
16 matches
Mail list logo
