[Fink-devel] Version problem: yyyymmdd format -> M.m format

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Postfix 1.1 was just released, and I want to update the postfix package, but it is currently at 20011226. I haven't tested this, but I have a feeling that Fink thinks 20011226 > 1.1. Postfix snapshots are still being released using something simila

Re: [Fink-devel] Basic XML Processor for .info Files is Done!

On Saturday, January 19, 2002, at 05:50 , Daniel Parks wrote: > I meant that I didn't understand the syntax; that /I/ should learn XML > "for real." The "ugh" was because I thought it looked ugly... I like > entities better, but that's because I'm used to HTML. This is certainly > easier to r

Re: [Fink-devel] Processing *.texi files

Ken Williams wrote: [] > install-info: deleting entry `* Libbow: (libbow) ...' > install-info: no entry for file `rainbow'. > Unpacking replacement bow ... > Setting up bow (20010926-1) ... > * Libbow: (libbow).Bag-Of-Words Library > install-info: no section specified for new entry, placin

Re: [Fink-devel] Basic XML Processor for .info Files is Done!

At 14:50 Uhr -0800 19.01.2002, Daniel Parks wrote: >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >Hash: SHA1 > > >OK, so it's proof of concept. That clears things up for me. > >On Saturday, January 19, 2002, at 02:22 AM, Max Horn wrote: > >>At 1:30 Uhr -0800 19.01.2002, Daniel Parks wrote: >[ . . . ] >>>On

Re: [Fink-devel] Basic XML Processor for .info Files is Done!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 OK, so it's proof of concept. That clears things up for me. On Saturday, January 19, 2002, at 02:22 AM, Max Horn wrote: > At 1:30 Uhr -0800 19.01.2002, Daniel Parks wrote: [ . . . ] >> On Friday, January 18, 2002, at 07:06 PM, Kyle Moffett wrote:

Re: [Fink-devel] Processing *.texi files

On Saturday, January 19, 2002, at 06:43 AM, Martin Costabel wrote: > Ken Williams wrote: > >> No `START-INFO-DIR-ENTRY' and no `This file documents'. >> install-info: unable to determine description for `dir' entry - giving >> up > [] >> Does this mean there are errors in the .texi files themse

Re: [Fink-devel] Support for java

Le samedi 19 janvier 2002, à 02:13 PM, Sylvain Cuaz a écrit : >> Le vendredi 11 janvier 2002, à 04:05 PM, Max Horn a écrit : >> >> At 9:07 Uhr -0500 11.01.2002, Bill Bumgarner wrote: >>> xerces-j depends on ant... as it should. >>> >>> ant sets JAVA_HOME in profile.d... as it should. >>> >>> The

Re: [Fink-devel] Processing *.texi files

Ken Williams wrote: > No `START-INFO-DIR-ENTRY' and no `This file documents'. > install-info: unable to determine description for `dir' entry - giving up [] > Does this mean there are errors in the .texi files themselves, or what's > going on? Is there somewhere I can read about this? Did you l

[Fink-devel] Support for java

Hi, As Max suggested it, I think we should add support for Java in fink. The first thing to do (because many packages require it) is to set JAVA_HOME (to /Library/Java/Home) currently it's only set (AFAIK) in the proflie.d scripts of ant which is kind of odd ! To solve this the

Re: [Fink-devel] Basic XML Processor for .info Files is Done!

On Saturday, January 19, 2002, at 05:22 , Max Horn wrote: > At 1:30 Uhr -0800 19.01.2002, Daniel Parks wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> >> On Friday, January 18, 2002, at 07:06 PM, Kyle Moffett wrote: >> >>> >> >> Why name="foo", etc, but no maintainer="John Doe

[Fink-devel] lesstif

Hm... shouldn't lesstif depend on X11 ? Max -- --- Max Horn Software Developer email: phone: (+49) 6151-494890 ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourcef

Re: [Fink-devel] How to represent package variants

At 1:37 Uhr -0800 19.01.2002, Daniel Parks wrote: >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >Hash: SHA1 > > >On Friday, January 18, 2002, at 11:48 AM, Max Horn wrote: >>2) Allow "options" that can be combined at will: >> * the base settings, no options >> * "ssl" - will enable ssl support >> * "nox"

Re: [Fink-devel] Basic XML Processor for .info Files is Done!

At 1:30 Uhr -0800 19.01.2002, Daniel Parks wrote: >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >Hash: SHA1 > > >On Friday, January 18, 2002, at 07:06 PM, Kyle Moffett wrote: > >> > >Why name="foo", etc, but no maintainer="John Doe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"? Well, as you realize, this was more a proof-of-conce

Re: [Fink-devel] How to represent package variants

At 9:42 Uhr + 19.01.2002, Finlay Dobbie wrote: >On Saturday, January 19, 2002, at 04:27 am, Alexander Strange wrote: > >>What do we do about apt-get? > >Nothing? Exact. As I said previously in the thread, the new system would be completly transparent to dpkg, and hence also to apt-get and d

Re: [Fink-users] Re: [Fink-devel] How to represent packagevariants

Why was this moved to fink-users? I am moving it back now. At 9:06 Uhr +0100 19.01.2002, Martin Costabel wrote: >Alexander Strange wrote: >> >> Hey, this is a perfect example of why we should have this new .info >> format :) > >I rather think your answer an example for some misunderstanding th

Re: [Fink-devel] Basic XML Processor for .info Files is Done!

At 22:06 Uhr -0500 18.01.2002, Kyle Moffett wrote: >I have completed a basic processor that allows you to take .info >files such as: >Package: foo >Version: 1.0.1 >Revision: 2 >Depends: bar, x11 >Maintainer: John Doe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >and convert them to .xinfo files like: > > bar, x11

Re: [Fink-devel] How to represent package variants

On Saturday, January 19, 2002, at 04:27 am, Alexander Strange wrote: > What do we do about apt-get? Nothing? -- Finlay ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Re: [Fink-devel] How to represent package variants

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday, January 18, 2002, at 11:48 AM, Max Horn wrote: > 2) Allow "options" that can be combined at will: > * the base settings, no options > * "ssl" - will enable ssl support > * "nox" - will build without X11 > * "nognome" - will build wiht

Re: [Fink-devel] Basic XML Processor for .info Files is Done!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday, January 18, 2002, at 07:06 PM, Kyle Moffett wrote: > Why name="foo", etc, but no maintainer="John Doe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"? > bar, x11 That comma syntax seems a bit un-XML. > Ugh. Time to learn XML "for real." > > >