Am 17.08.2004 um 23:45 schrieb Martin Costabel:
Benjamin Reed wrote:
It appears that Apple no longer offers the August 2003 updater for
GCC 3.3 on ADC any more. Does anyone have a copy, and know whether
it's still distributable? Otherwise, we might have to offer a gcc3.3
package (ugh) or stop
Hi
The current fink (0.21.1) can't cope with the validation of Info2 info
files. It shows:
'Error: Package name may only contain lowercase letters, numbers,'.',
'+' and '-' (svn-mirror-pm.info)'
But the real problem is: it fails to validate the rest of the info
file. That means that packagers t
Benjamin Reed wrote:
It appears that Apple no longer offers the August 2003 updater for GCC
3.3 on ADC any more. Does anyone have a copy, and know whether it's
still distributable? Otherwise, we might have to offer a gcc3.3 package
(ugh) or stop supporting 10.2 altogether.
Has anyone ever done
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can successfully report that i reproduced that error.
When you got db42-ssl-shlibs and db3 installed and you try to update
(build/rebuild) something depens on db42-ssl-shlibs the error occurs.
Hmm, could you give an example of a package that "depends on
db42-ssl-shlibs"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I discovert the the error when i tried to update "libpng3 libpng3-shlibs
python python23 python23-shlibs python23-socket"
It happens on install (if not updated) and rebuild.
Yes, very nice ;-) I get it now too. What is weird is that this is not
symmetric between db42 and
I discovert the the error when i tried to update "libpng3
libpng3-shlibs python python23 python23-shlibs python23-socket"
It happens on install (if not updated) and rebuild.
Am 17.08.2004 um 15:20 schrieb Martin Costabel:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can successfully report that i reproduced that e
I can successfully report that i reproduced that error.
When you got db42-ssl-shlibs and db3 installed and you try to update
(build/rebuild) something depens on db42-ssl-shlibs the error occurs.
Installing db42-ssl with dpkg whitch removes db3 the error will be gone.
Only this db* are installed (
I would recommend the following headings for end-users:
System
Binary distribution: Fink version; package version
(Now: Point Distribution: bindist; Package)
Source distribution: Stable version; Unstable version
(Now: Current: Stable package; unstable package)
I don't think the terms "point
Le 17 août 2004, à 10:42, Daniel Macks a écrit :
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 10:15:36AM +0200, Martin Costabel wrote:
Daniel Macks wrote:
http://fink.sourceforge.net/pdb/passwd.html
Thoughts on concept? Improvements on details of the new layout?
The concept is good, but I find the optical layout confu
At 4:42 -0400 17/8/04, Daniel Macks wrote:
Good point about the different types of numbers. I just added
subheadings to clarify what is what.
The "Point Distribution" heading may be confusing, as the rest of the
documentation would call that the Binary Distribution. We should use
consistent nome
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 10:15:36AM +0200, Martin Costabel wrote:
> Daniel Macks wrote:
>
> > http://fink.sourceforge.net/pdb/passwd.html
> >
> >Thoughts on concept? Improvements on details of the new layout?
>
> The concept is good, but I find the optical layout confusing. "What do
> all those
Daniel Macks wrote:
http://fink.sourceforge.net/pdb/passwd.html
Thoughts on concept? Improvements on details of the new layout?
The concept is good, but I find the optical layout confusing. "What do
all those numbers mean?"
Could you perhaps print the version numbers in some color, red or so?
O
On 17.08.2004, at 08:46, Daniel Macks wrote:
The version availability table on the page for an individual package
seems confusing. Consider
http://fink.sourceforge.net/pdb/package.php/passwd
It's not clear what a 0.7.0 tree is, or how the point distribution
trees relate to stable and unstable bra
13 matches
Mail list logo
