I'm not sure why flex was installed on my system. I had a recent hard drive
crash, and had chosen not to backup /sw, so my Fink installation is less than
two weeks old. I didn't manually install flex - it was pulled in as a
dependency somewhere. It must have been a build dependency, as fink
To all package-maintainers (and interested parties):
I've just completed a build-all of the stable tree (pulled on
2009-12-30) on 10.5 Intel/32-bit. Out of almost 4000 debs that were
built, only 121 packages had build errors, so that's not too bad. Many
were missing dependencies, a few were
Hmmm... I'm sure I will hear objections about that, from people being forced to
install tetex-base just because some other package wants to use texinfo... I'm
cc-ing fink-devel to see if anybody has an ideas about working around this.
-- Dave
On Jan 11, 2010, at 3:11 PM, Schindler
This update has a potential problem with the revision numbers used: the stable
version was updated from .1 to .2, while the unstable version was updated from
.2 to .3, with the new stable .2 being different from the old unstable .2.
It's unlikely that this will cause any real trouble, but it
On 2010-01-11, at 10:24 , Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
To all package-maintainers (and interested parties):
I've just completed a build-all of the stable tree (pulled on
2009-12-30) on 10.5 Intel/32-bit. Out of almost 4000 debs that were
built, only 121 packages had build errors, so
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[following evil top-posting convention]
We could make them install texlive-base.
:-)
But, seriously, what I'd been doing for my own packages, e.g. octave and
gnuplot, was to pull out the documentation into a separate package if it
needed TeX to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 1/11/10 9:27 PM, Kevin Horton wrote:
On 2010-01-11, at 10:24 , Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
To all package-maintainers (and interested parties):
I've just completed a build-all of the stable tree (pulled on
2009-12-30) on 10.5
