Daniel Macks wrote:
[]
Is this the correct course of action? I was under the impression that
the 10.4-transitional tree was supposed to use gcc-3.3.
No, by default (i.e. if the package itself doesn't do anything special),
the 10.4-transitional tree uses g++-3.3 for C++ code and gcc-4.0 for C
Hi folks,
Some of you have already noticed Spotlight indexing /sw/src, which
makes builds slow. For various reasons the solutions suggested so far
aren't ideal[1], but msachs found out for us that directories with
the *.build do not have anything inside them indexed.
So we're going to try
Jack,
Just to be sure, I want to build the package first (on 10.3). However,
I cannot d/l the source code, both mirrors are not responsive. I will
try again later.
- Koen.
On May 24, 2005, at 7:25 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
Koen,
As requested by Daniel, I have reverted the molmol 2k.2.
Koen,
Well in the case of glut and freeglut, I have verified that the
builds aren't leaky. The glut build never looks in /sw/lib or
/sw/include for headers or libraries. The freeglut build is safe
with glut installed since it uses the freeglut basename for its
headers and libraries and thus will
Koen,
As requested by Daniel, I have reverted the molmol 2k.2.0-19
package to build with gcc-3.3 once again rather than gcc-4.0.
This version will be okay for both 10.3 and 10.4-transitional
unstable. It is uploaded into the tracker...
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1
I think he was just making a note that when the package gets committed
it needs to go into the crypto tree for whomever commits the package.
On May 24, 2005, at 7:01 PM, Victor Seva Lopez wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have submitted a new rdesktop package to the trak
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have submitted a new rdesktop package to the traker [0] where crhis01
( Christian Schaffner ) had helped me a lot. But I am waiting for any
news about what's next.
Who has to check this? do I have to do anything more? I am doing
something wrong?
T
On May 24, 2005, at 11:09 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
> I have uploaded a new molmol.info file (2k.2.0-19) for the unstable
> branch of 10.4-transitional. This version builds against gcc-4.0
[...]
Is this the correct course of action? I was under the impression that
the 10.4-transitional tree was su
On May 24, 2005, at 11:09 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
I
have uploaded a new molmol.info file (2k.2.0-19) for the unstable
branch of 10.4-transitional. This version builds against gcc-4.0
and freeglut. It passes fink validate both as the info file and
the resulting debs.
I don't have Tiger, so can
On May 23, 2005, at 10:55 PM, Daniel Macks wrote:
The goal is clean build first and foremost; *then* worry about
avoiding buildlock deadlock. If there's leakage from an installed pkg
into the build, please do specify the BuildConflicts...that's why we
created the field no?
If both packages s
Koen,
Thanks for getting the modified freeglut and glut packages in
10.3 and 10.4-transitional unstable. I have one last request. I
have uploaded a new molmol.info file (2k.2.0-19) for the unstable
branch of 10.4-transitional. This version builds against gcc-4.0
and freeglut. It passes fink val
11 matches
Mail list logo
