On 27/1/02 9:38 AM, "Max Horn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please stop using the old obsolete way to specify multi line fields.
> For example, don't write
>
> PatchScript: sed 's|@PREFIX@|%p|g' < %a/%f.patch | patch -p1
> mkdir ldap
> ln -s %p/lib ldap/libraries
> ln -s %p/include ldap/include
Hi,
I just did:
%cvs co fink
%cd fink
%./inject.pl
fink selfupdate only gets the latest released package manager.
Peter
On Sunday, January 27, 2002, at 11:58 AM, Jeremy Higgs wrote:
>
> Is there a way to do this when using "fink selfupdate-cvs"? As
> far as I can
> tell, the changes that were
On 27/1/02 8:15 AM, "Max Horn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have just commited a bunch of changes. Nothing really fundamental,
> mainly updated the docs/man page, and implemented the --verbose/-v &
> --quiet/-q options. Also, --help and the man page now list & explain
> all available options.
>
At 18:00 Uhr -0500 26.01.2002, David R. Morrison wrote:
>Max Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> OK, it now doesn't warn for bundle package. it still warns for
>> nosource packages, though - the difference between those essentially
>> is that "bundle" works as an umbrella for other packages, h
Max Horn wrote:
> >for me '-v' (lowercase v) always gives --version, not --verbose. Don't
> >you lowercase the options sytematically somewhere?
>
> You are right, thanks. Will fix in CVS.
Thanks. Works.
--
Martin
___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
Max Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK, it now doesn't warn for bundle package. it still warns for
> nosource packages, though - the difference between those essentially
> is that "bundle" works as an umbrella for other packages, hence
> doesn't need a license field. But "nosource" means a s
Please stop using the old obsolete way to specify multi line fields.
For example, don't write
PatchScript: sed 's|@PREFIX@|%p|g' < %a/%f.patch | patch -p1
mkdir ldap
ln -s %p/lib ldap/libraries
ln -s %p/include ldap/include
but rather use
PatchScript: <<
sed 's|@PREFIX@|%p|g' < %a/%f.p
At 22:41 Uhr +0100 26.01.2002, Martin Costabel wrote:
>Max Horn wrote:
>>
>> I have just commited a bunch of changes. Nothing really fundamental,
>> mainly updated the docs/man page, and implemented the --verbose/-v &
>> --quiet/-q options. Also, --help and the man page now list & explain
>> a
At 23:12 Uhr +0100 26.01.2002, Max Horn wrote:
>At 17:04 Uhr -0500 26.01.2002, David R. Morrison wrote:
>>Thanks, Max, for doing all of this package validation stuff.
>>
>>I have one question though. For packages of type "nosource" or "bundle,"
>>do we really want a license field? If so, what sh
Max Horn wrote:
>
> I have just commited a bunch of changes. Nothing really fundamental,
> mainly updated the docs/man page, and implemented the --verbose/-v &
> --quiet/-q options. Also, --help and the man page now list & explain
> all available options.
Max,
for me '-v' (lowercase v) always g
At 17:12 Uhr -0500 26.01.2002, David R. Morrison wrote:
>Could I suggest adding "fink check" and/or "fink validate" to the list
>of commands that one sees when running "fink --help"? (Or else to the
>man page... or both!) That will help us remember where to find this
>later.
Hey hey, I am just
Sorry, should have mentioned this in the last post.
The validator can validate .info and .deb files (though .deb checking
isn't doing much currently). You have to specify a concret file. E.g.
fink check myfoo-1.0-1.info
or
fink validate /sw/fink/debs/myfoo-1.0-1_darwin-powerpc.deb
If y
At 17:04 Uhr -0500 26.01.2002, David R. Morrison wrote:
>Thanks, Max, for doing all of this package validation stuff.
>
>I have one question though. For packages of type "nosource" or "bundle,"
>do we really want a license field? If so, what should the rules be
>about that license field? Since
Could I suggest adding "fink check" and/or "fink validate" to the list
of commands that one sees when running "fink --help"? (Or else to the
man page... or both!) That will help us remember where to find this
later.
Thanks,
Dave
Max Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, should have me
Thanks, Max, for doing all of this package validation stuff.
I have one question though. For packages of type "nosource" or "bundle,"
do we really want a license field? If so, what should the rules be
about that license field? Since we are not really redistributing anything
with those packages
I have just commited a bunch of changes. Nothing really fundamental,
mainly updated the docs/man page, and implemented the --verbose/-v &
--quiet/-q options. Also, --help and the man page now list & explain
all available options.
Maybe most importanly, I greatly enhanced the package validator.
On Saturday, January 26, 2002, at 02:01 PM, Max Horn wrote:
> No, since the debian tools require root access. Debian solves this with
> the fakeroot tool, but you can't just recompile that for OS X, it has
> to be rewritten. Finlay and me were looking into it a bit, not sure if
> Finlay is st
On Saturday, January 26, 2002, at 01:42 PM, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 16, 2002, at 04:54 PM, Finlay Dobbie wrote:
>
>> And compare the number of Debian build servers, Debian donations, and
>> just resources in general.
>>
> SF provides a compile farm. Could those be used
Hi Martin. Yes, geomview depends on lesstif too, so presumably this is again
the same problem.
Has anybody had any trouble with any package other than those which depend
on lesstif? (I just compiled a list: ddd, nedit, geomview, grace, xephem,
mgv, amaya, xbae). Ultimately, it would be nice to
"David R. Morrison" wrote:
>
> If Martin's observation is correct, a concern arises: How was the binary
> being distributed by xfree86.org compiled, and is it still equivalent
> to fink's, for the purposes of installing other fink packages?
Dave,
I just wrote about this to the XonX users forum,
At 8:42 Uhr -0500 26.01.2002, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
>On Wednesday, January 16, 2002, at 04:54 PM, Finlay Dobbie wrote:
>
>>And compare the number of Debian build servers, Debian donations,
>>and just resources in general.
>>
>SF provides a compile farm. Could those be used as build servers?
On Wednesday, January 16, 2002, at 04:54 PM, Finlay Dobbie wrote:
> And compare the number of Debian build servers, Debian
> donations, and just resources in general.
>
SF provides a compile farm. Could those be used as build servers?
___
Fink-devel
On Friday, January 25, 2002, at 06:11 PM, Max Horn wrote:
> You mean, it is a reported bug in dpkg? Can you point me at
> some bugreport/old mail/whatever on this?
>
#76100: install-info: ignores section/title from .info file.
It is marked pending upload in the debian bts.
BTW: Take a look a
23 matches
Mail list logo
