Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread David R. Morrison
> In fact, bzip2 should be split off since it has a > dylib and header... Yes, and a similar remark applies to several other "essential" packages like gettext and ncurses. However, making changes to essential packages without breaking things is tricky, to put it mildly, and I've yet to hear anyon

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Ben Hines
On Tuesday, November 5, 2002, at 02:10 PM, Max Horn wrote: You are making the incorrect assumption that packages will depend on bzip2 / curl / cvs. They don't (or shouldn't). bzip2 has a header and a dylib, so things may need to depend on it. The system bzip2 does not have the dylib (as t

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Max Horn
At 17:02 Uhr -0500 05.11.2002, Jason Deraleau wrote: > None of these should be replaced. Not only are the versions in Fink in most cases newer, but having them as seperate packages also allows us to provide fixes etc. at all times. OTOH there is nothing to be gained by providing place holders

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Jason Deraleau
> None of these should be replaced. Not only are the versions in Fink > in most cases newer, but having them as seperate packages also allows > us to provide fixes etc. at all times. OTOH there is nothing to be > gained by providing place holders for these, with the possible > exception of the bind

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Benjamin Reed
On Tuesday, November 5, 2002, at 04:45 PM, Max Horn wrote: As I stated on IRC. It's fine by me to put in such a package, however, the name "system-cups" is IMO not appropriate. Rather it should be called "cups-headers" or "cups-dev". Figures, I see this e-mail *after* I commit system-cups. =)

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Jason Deraleau
> On Tuesday, November 5, 2002, at 04:40 PM, Jason Deraleau wrote: > > bzip2Virtual package for the install of bzip2 included with > > Jaguar > > (/usr/bin/bzip2, v.1.0.2) > > Not sure about the others, but this one still exists because bzip2 on > the system is static-only. > Bah, I don't

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Max Horn
At 16:40 Uhr -0500 05.11.2002, Jason Deraleau wrote: > >> I think we still need to deal with our 'cups' package. We should just >> use >> Apple's libraries and binaries, but provide the headers ourselves. (I >> think >> there is a package in experimental/rangerrick/). > > If no one has any

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Benjamin Reed
On Tuesday, November 5, 2002, at 04:40 PM, Jason Deraleau wrote: bzip2Virtual package for the install of bzip2 included with Jaguar (/usr/bin/bzip2, v.1.0.2) Not sure about the others, but this one still exists because bzip2 on the system is static-only.

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Max Horn
At 13:35 Uhr -0500 05.11.2002, Alexander Strange wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 05 November 2002 10:30 am, David R. Morrison wrote: I'd like to propose that the 0.5.0 release can be made in the near future, even though the number of packages in the stable tree

Re: [Fink-devel] -isystem and LIBRARY_PATH problems

2002-11-05 Thread Max Horn
At 15:11 Uhr +0100 05.11.2002, jfm wrote: On Tuesday, Nov 5, 2002, at 01:54 Europe/Brussels, Ben Hines wrote: On Monday, November 4, 2002, at 02:18 PM, Max Horn wrote: The fix that should be applied for now (if possible) is to make the package *not* use -Werror. After all, the source is the

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Jason Deraleau
> >> I think we still need to deal with our 'cups' package. We should just > >> use > >> Apple's libraries and binaries, but provide the headers ourselves. (I > >> think > >> there is a package in experimental/rangerrick/). > > > > If no one has any objections, I can put the package in unstable. I

Re: [Fink-devel] help needed testing replacement fink 0.4.1 binaryinstaller

2002-11-05 Thread Martin Costabel
David R. Morrison wrote: [] Martin, were you "root" when you created this? Or else how did you get everything to be owned by root in the .pax.gz file? That is perhaps an important step when creating future binary installers... Yes. I had tried a "sudo chown -R root.admin", but then PackageMa

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Matt Stephenson
Benjamin Reed wrote: On Tue, 2002-11-05 at 13:35, Alexander Strange wrote: I think we still need to deal with our 'cups' package. We should just use Apple's libraries and binaries, but provide the headers ourselves. (I think there is a package in experimental/rangerrick/). If no one has any

Re: [Fink-devel] help needed testing replacement fink 0.4.1 binary installer

2002-11-05 Thread David R. Morrison
Martin Costabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > David R. Morrison wrote: > > > Maybe somebody > > else can make a new 0.4.1 installer? I'll be happy to talk you through > > the process... > > In case this is still needed, I made one. It looks OK to me, but since I > had never touched PackageMake

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Benjamin Reed
On Tue, 2002-11-05 at 13:35, Alexander Strange wrote: > I think we still need to deal with our 'cups' package. We should just use > Apple's libraries and binaries, but provide the headers ourselves. (I think > there is a package in experimental/rangerrick/). If no one has any objections, I can

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Alexander Strange
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 05 November 2002 10:30 am, David R. Morrison wrote: > I'd like to propose that the 0.5.0 release can be made in the near future, > even though the number of packages in the stable tree is still small. > I think we will have a better chance c

Re: [Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread Kyle Moffett
On Tuesday, November 5, 2002, at 10:30 AM, David R. Morrison wrote: The one thing which I see a critical for this release is the recent xfree86-base-4.2.1.1-1 package. (It's critical because it fixes a problem in XFree86 which has been reported for the next update of OS X.) So I hope that many

[Fink-devel] 0.5.0 timetable

2002-11-05 Thread David R. Morrison
I'd like to propose that the 0.5.0 release can be made in the near future, even though the number of packages in the stable tree is still small. I think we will have a better chance communicating to our users the need for feedback about package stability after we've made this initial Jaguar release

Re: [Fink-devel] -isystem and LIBRARY_PATH problems

2002-11-05 Thread jfm
On Tuesday, Nov 5, 2002, at 01:54 Europe/Brussels, Ben Hines wrote: On Monday, November 4, 2002, at 02:18 PM, Max Horn wrote: The fix that should be applied for now (if possible) is to make the package *not* use -Werror. After all, the source is the same everywhere and known to work (at le

Re: [Fink-devel] How to deal with multiple configuration packages

2002-11-05 Thread Benjamin Reed
On Tue, 2002-11-05 at 09:18, Jose' Cruanyes wrote: > it's mostly a general question: > how have a collection of packages, say postgresql-complete, > postgresql-javaonly ecc so that they behave as expected with > splits,conflicts ecc I build them all because each part gets split off into separate

Re: [Fink-devel] How to deal with multiple configuration packages

2002-11-05 Thread Jose' Cruanyes
Martedì, 5 nov 2002, alle 14:49 Europe/Rome, Benjamin Reed ha scritto: On Tue, 2002-11-05 at 08:09, Jose' Cruanyes wrote: Hi I,ve installed the postgresql package from the 1.2/unstable tree, but unfortunately the configuration choose by the package maintainer doesn't match my needs I need Jav

Re: [Fink-devel] How to deal with multiple configuration packages

2002-11-05 Thread Benjamin Reed
On Tue, 2002-11-05 at 08:09, Jose' Cruanyes wrote: > Hi > > I,ve installed the postgresql package from the 1.2/unstable tree, but > unfortunately the configuration choose by the package maintainer > doesn't match my needs > > I need Java, and I don't want a bunch of other options there included

[Fink-devel] Jon Dugan - maintainer of cidr and calc mail bounces

2002-11-05 Thread Peter O'Gorman
I tried to mail the maintainer [EMAIL PROTECTED] about a bug in his package (well they both have bugs, one hardcoded /sw in the patch, the other has missing source), but he obviously never paid for mac.com (I don't blame him for this, I never paid either). I am going to update one of them, shou

[Fink-devel] How to deal with multiple configuration packages

2002-11-05 Thread Jose' Cruanyes
Hi I,ve installed the postgresql package from the 1.2/unstable tree, but unfortunately the configuration choose by the package maintainer doesn't match my needs I need Java, and I don't want a bunch of other options there included (tlc ecc) that have also really deep dependencies, I've to inst

Re: [Fink-devel] "...Fink 0.5.0. which is targeted for October, will be geared towards 10.2..."

2002-11-05 Thread Ben Hines
On Tuesday, November 5, 2002, at 01:11 AM, Olivier M. wrote: (quote from http://fink.sourceforge.net/) Well well, we're now in November... may I ask you what is the current situation ? :) There are also some macslash readers wondering when 0.5 will be out, or if you need some beta testers. Ri

[Fink-devel] "...Fink 0.5.0. which is targeted for October, will be geared towards 10.2..."

2002-11-05 Thread Olivier M.
(quote from http://fink.sourceforge.net/) Well well, we're now in November... may I ask you what is the current situation ? :) There are also some macslash readers wondering when 0.5 will be out, or if you need some beta testers. Tried to find an answer by browsing the cvs, but haven't found r