en
on my system? Do I need to rebuild/reinstall anything?
Thanks in advance,
David Fang
---
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
info
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Sachs wrote:
> On Jul 2, 2005, at 07:26, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
>
Apart from all this, will Apple gift us the necessary infrastructure to do
this? I doubt it. That means we will have to focus a lot on getting the
necessary environment setup p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kevin Horton wrote:
> On 2 Jul 2005, at 10:26, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Kevin Horton wrote:
>> |
>> | I don't know what to call the new tree - I originally thought that
>> | "testing" could work
On Jun 28, 2005, at 8:28 AM, Chris Dolan wrote:
Koen,
The /sw/bin files should go in a -bin splitoff. See spreadsheet-
writeexcel-pm.info for a simple example. Note that there should
perhaps also be a -man splitoff.
-man splitoffs are not needed very often any more, due to the "new"
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Matthew Sachs wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2005, Daniel Macks wrote:
>
>>
>> There's a bug in ./configure or libtool that causes a fork-bomb with
>> fort77.
>
>
> I sent a patch to the fort77 maintainer on June 3rd. I haven't
> received a reply ye
On Jun 21, 2005, at 3:07 AM, Jeremy Higgs wrote:On 20/06/2005, at 3:04, Martin Costabel wrote:OTOH, it is perhaps a good idea to get rid of the package altogether. On Panther already fink's version was older than the system one.Would anyone have any objections to this? I would tend to agree with Ma
On Jun 17, 2005, at 6:34 PM, Martin Costabel wrote:
Micha Mutschler wrote:
[]
mlib.c: In function 'buffer_write':
mlib.c:179: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 1 of
'sprintf' differ
in signedness
mlib.c:192: error: invalid lvalue in assignment
[]
Failed: phase compiling:
On Jun 14, 2005, at 4:03 PM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:On Jun 14, 2005, at 4:51 AM, Daniel Macks wrote: OTOH, we could generalize the solution away from "fink's openssllinkage policy" and just add a new Restrictive/Source-Distributablelicense type. I have no doubt that some of the other Restrictivepack
I believe that if you patch glui.h with these changes --298,299c298,299< friend struct GLUI_Rollout;< friend struct GLUI_Main;---> friend GLUI_Rollout;> friend GLUI_Main;562,566c562,566< friend struct GLUI_Control;< friend struct GLUI_Rotation;< friend struct GLUI_Translation;< frie
On Jun 8, 2005, at 1:48 PM, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
The arguments were :
1) It represents a loss in the language: the new behaviour was trivial
to obtain under the old semantics by 'fink build foo; fink
reinstall foo',
while I see no way to reimplement the old semantics currently...
2)
Here are some first thoughts about how to use "universal" (aka "fat")
binaries with fink.
By default, we would assume that most packages will work with both
architectures. A new flag would let a package specify that it is
only suitable for a single architecture. Perhaps we will need to us
One of the items on Matthew Sachs' build list which fails with gcc 4.0 is
the old version of python, python 2.2.
We already removed python 2.1 from fink when moving to the 10.4-transitional
tree: I'm going to propose that the easiest way to "solve" the gcc 4.0
problem with python 2.2 is to not inc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
hehe :)
Generating notification message...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/cvsroot/fink/CVSROOT/syncmail", line 433, in ?
main()
File "/cvsroot/fink/CVSROOT/syncmail", line 426, in main
contextlines, fromhost, replyto)
File "/c
The test versions of the installer have been revised, and I'd appreciate
testing reports.
http://www.cgtp.duke.edu/~drm/Fink-0.7.2-Installer.dmg
http://www.cgtp.duke.edu/~drm/Fink-0.8.0-Installer.dmg
Thanks,
Dave
---
This SF.Net email is s
On Jun 1, 2005, at 1:40 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
On Jun 1, 2005, at 1:27 AM, William Scott wrote:
I have do have separate repositories. So for this example ccp4
revision
200 is in 10.4 and revision 100 is in 10.3, and was built with 10.3.
For whatever reason, the 10.3 user is only seei
Bill,
I'm not sure how old those instructions are, but a few things have changed.
First, be sure that people trying to use this are putting their modifications
either at the very top or very bottom of the /sw/etc/apt/sources.list file.
(The middle sections of this file get rewritten from time to
merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote:
> >>>>> "David" == David R Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> David> You appear to be running fink on 10.4, but using the 10.3 distribution.
> David> To correct this, execute "/sw/lib
merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote:
> >>>>> "David" == David R Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> David> You appear to be running fink on 10.4, but using the 10.3 distribution.
> David> To correct this, execute "/sw/lib/
Randal,
You appear to be running fink on 10.4, but using the 10.3 distribution.
To correct this, execute "/sw/lib/fink/postinstall.pl".
-- Dave
merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote:
> > "Christian" == Christian Schaffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Christian> Seriously:
On May 27, 2005, at 6:44 AM, Koen van der Drift wrote:
Jack,
building fails (on 10.3):
[snip]
cp ../makedef.gz .
This is the offending line. It assumes that the src directory is one
level up from the build directory (which is not the case if you are
using a custom build directory).
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jack Howarth) wrote:
[snip]
> but it would be
> best if fink knew how to properly cope with BuildConflicts.
Sadly, fink doesn't know how to "properly" cope with BuildConflicts, nor
is this likely to change without a complete rewrite of fink's dependency
engine. (This rewrite
There will be an initial binary distribution for 10.4 quite soon. If any
of the fixes which folks have been making in the 10.4-transitional/unstable
tree are appropriate to be moved to stable, please do so within the next
few days.
Thanks,
Dave
-
BABA Yoshihiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When making a package (foo) that depends on another package in crypto tree,
> should it always be in crypto tree?
>
> For example, if foo depends either on postgresql80 or postgresql80-ssl, I
> should make variants: foo and foo-ssl? What if t
> drm: Does this mean the bindist contains a snapshot of this buggy file?
I'm afraid so. I'll fix it before we officially release this (although my
travel schedule will delay the fix for a few days).
-- Dave
---
This SF.Net email is sponsor
I hope a few people will be willing to help test some new binary Installers
for fink (under 10.2 and 10.3) before they are released to the user
community. The files are at:
http://www.cgtp.duke.edu/~drm/Fink-0.6.4-Installer.dmg (for 10.2)
http://www.cgtp.duke.edu/~drm/Fink-0.7.2-Installer.dmg
Murali Vadivelu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it possible to replace the requirements for libjpeg, libpng,
> libtiff, etc with ImageIO.framework in Tiger? Could avoid potential
> and happening conflicts between libJPEG and libjpeg, say for example.
>
The libJPEG/libjpeg problem happens whe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
FranÃois Giron wrote:
> Hello,
> I transmit here the detail concerning the failure of the
> installation of zsh.
>
>
>utils.c: In function 'adjustwinsize':
>utils.c:1000: warning: implicit declaration of function 'ioctl'
>utils.c: At top level:
>util
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Sachs wrote:
> Apple has released the scripts I've been using for my Fink builds under
> the GPL. It's in CVS under the 'scripts' module. Announcement below.
> Enjoy!
>
>
> A system for performing builds of the entire Fink system and an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello guys.
Could we lock during a selfupdate?
When a slow CVS selfupdate runs and you try to install "fink install fink",
you will get errors like these:
"Reading package info...can't open
/sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/finkinfo/sci/nco.info: No such
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Zanker wrote:
> Fresh install of Tiger, Xcode 2.0, latest fink. gnupg fails to build
> with the following error:
>
>
>>if gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I.. -I../include -I../intl
>>-no-cpp-precomp -I/sw/include -g -O2 -Wall -MT ttyio.o -M
Murali Karthick Vadivelu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Link (dyld) error:
>
> Symbol not found: __cg_jpeg_resync_to_restart
>Referenced from: /System/Library/Frameworks/
> ApplicationServices.framework/Versions/A/Frameworks/ImageIO.framework/
> Versions/A/ImageIO
>Expected in: /sw/lib/li
Yeah, the problem is that tiger has a very new texi2html which is incompatible
with the older version assumed by a few packages.
OTOH, fink's texi2html package has deliberately not been updated to this
newest version. So "BuildDepends: texi2html" should cure the problem
for now.
-- Dave
Dear Fink developers,
The 10.4-transitional tree has now been created; the code which lets fink
access it is present in cvs HEAD and will soon be part of the package
manager 0.24.5 release.
This new tree has been populated with packages from the 10.3 tree, with
the following modifications:
1) we
I believe that g77 (based on gcc-3.4.3) will still be available under 10.4
-- Dave
---
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live
As soon as a new version of the fink-mirrors package propagates throught the
system, you can cure this by moving away from sourceforge as your apt-get
repository.
After updating to fink-mirrors-0.24.4.1 (and either fink-0.24.4 or fink-0.23.8)
-- being sure to allow the switch to the new apt mirror
Dave Vasilevsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok guys, I've talked with msachs some and apparently this actually
> works for him:
>
> (Panther) make clean; make CC_LIB=g++ libbreak.dylib(Tiger) make
> CC=g++-3.3
>
> Previously drm said this didn't work, so I'd like some more testing.
> H
On Apr 18, 2005, at 5:47 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
On Apr 18, 2005, at 4:52 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
On Apr 18, 2005, at 2:53 PM, Matthew Sachs wrote:
I got word that the default for -fabi-version in 3.3 is -1, for
compatibility with 3.1. So that explains why you can't link
-fabi-ve
On Apr 18, 2005, at 4:52 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
On Apr 18, 2005, at 2:53 PM, Matthew Sachs wrote:
I got word that the default for -fabi-version in 3.3 is -1, for
compatibility with 3.1. So that explains why you can't link
-fabi-version=1 packages with 3.3-built default ABI packages.
On Apr 18, 2005, at 2:53 PM, Matthew Sachs wrote:
I got word that the default for -fabi-version in 3.3 is -1, for
compatibility with 3.1. So that explains why you can't link
-fabi-version=1 packages with 3.3-built default ABI packages.
It's really infuriating that this wasn't documented. The m
I don't think the SDK compatibility things are the way to go for us. If
we do this, we'll be stuck with 10.3 compatibility mode forever, right?
We may just have to make a clean break; perhaps we can put something like
Conflicts: macos (<< 10.4)
into fink itself on 10.4? This would stop people
Let me explain the situation as I understand it.
First, we cannot mix g++ compiles between gcc-3.3 and gcc-4.0 because
of the ABI difference.
We thought (following the documentation) that setting -fabi-version=1
would solve this. In fact, it does solve it quite nicely: if you build
everything
Hi Martin.
I had been very puzzled by those missing symbol problems, so I'm glad
you figured it out. The timing is excellent, because we haven't pushed
-fabi-version=1 into stable yet, or fully committed ourselves to the
Tiger upgrade strategy which uses it.
However, this discovery leaves us c
I've got a modified version of "fink configure" in branch_0_24, and could use
another pair or two of eyes to help test. The main change happens if you
have an entry among your mirror choices which is not (any longer) on the
list of mirror sites.
Let me know if you have any feedback on this. I pl
Corey Halpin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2005-04-13, David R. Morrison wrote:
> > The recommended way to disable -fabi-version=1 would be
> > NoSetCXXFLAGS: true
>
> Ok.
> I've noticed that -fabi-version=1 appears in the CPPFLAGS too.
> Would
The recommended way to disable -fabi-version=1 would be
NoSetCXXFLAGS: true
Although as Peter pointed out, with g++-3.3 -fabi-version=1 should have
absolutely no effect (since by default the abi-version *is* 1).
-- Dave
Corey Halpin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Update of /cvsroot/fink/dist
1: http://fink.sourceforge.net/doc/quick-start-pkg/index.php
2: http://fink.sourceforge.net/doc/packaging/index.php
Cheers,
--
David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://www.damog.net/
Life is too short for traffic.
GPG: C671257D - 6E
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David R. Morrison wrote:
> I've begun the implementation of the new license policy by re-licensing
> all of the packages that Lars listed in the stable/crypto category,
> re-licensing them in all four active trees. (I made them a
I've begun the implementation of the new license policy by re-licensing
all of the packages that Lars listed in the stable/crypto category,
re-licensing them in all four active trees. (I made them all Restrictive,
but put a note in DescPackaging to indicate the original license.) I'll
work on t
On Apr 4, 2005, at 12:20 AM, Daniel E. Macks wrote:
David R. Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
One open question is whether to implement a new G++-ABI field in fink
packages (which would override the default version number) or whether
to stick with the existing GCC field as the signal for w
Martin and Jean-Francois:
-fabi_version=2 is not available under gcc 3.3.
What you get when you compile using gcc 4.0 and -fabi_version=1 is all of the
new features of gcc 4.0 *except* the change in ABI.
Libraries compiled with abi_version=1 are not compatible with libraries
compiled with abi_ve
Dear fink developers,
This is a revised proposal for how to handle the g++ ABI change, and
represents a compromise between Peter and myself about how to proceed.
I believe that he and I are in agreement about the broad outlines here, but
some details may still need to be discussed.
The basic stra
On Mar 30, 2005, at 6:48 AM, Daniel E. Macks wrote:
David R. Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
In that spirit, it makes sense to me that we would say that the
patch files inherited the same license their project was released
under.
By "their project", do you mean Fink or each
Here's my take on this licensing issue, for what it's worth.
I think we should explicitly indicate that authors of .info files are
*contributing* those files to the fink project when they submit them for
inclusion in the fink trees. As contributed parts of the whole, these
files may be modified
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David R. Morrison wrote:
>
> On Mar 28, 2005, at 10:08 AM, David H. wrote:
>
>> And yes, I also think that we should not adopt a policy or attitude
>> where we
>> try to go out of our way just because there "
On Mar 28, 2005, at 10:08 AM, David H. wrote:
Benjamin Reed wrote:
And where is Fink incorporated again?
That does not matter when it comes to copy right. Not at all.
Actually, what matters for copyright is the country in which the item
was published. If there are conflicting copyright laws
On Mar 28, 2005, at 10:08 AM, David H. wrote:
And yes, I also think that we should not adopt a policy or attitude
where we
try to go out of our way just because there "might" be legal
implications.
In this spirit, can we have our old slogan back? "Unix software for
your Mac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Benjamin Reed wrote:
> David H. wrote:
>
>> no, I am not. That are exactly the words that they told me. The
>> likelyhood
>> that we will end up in court because we "violate" the GPL is about 0.
>> Not to
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Macks wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 04:48:04PM -0800, Trevor Harmon wrote:
>
>>On Mar 27, 2005, at 6:22 AM, David H. wrote:
>>
>>>Yes, ignoring this bullshit licensing issue all together. Four
>>>highly p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
>
> On Mar 16, 2005, at 2:39 PM, Lars Rosengreen wrote:
>
>> Yes, I think we do. I'll try to construct a list of packages that may
>> be affected.
>
>
> Thanks Lars.
>
> I guess once we have this, for each package we'll nee
Yesterday's post about the licensing restrictions for fink's .patch files
raises an interesting set of questions.
We've never stated any licensing rules for our .info or .patch files,
although we have received contributions from hundreds of people. This
was probably a mistake.
It seemed evident
Anthony,
Thanks very much for this very helpful message.
I'm curious of there is any difference for software released under the
LGPL instead of the GPL. Can it legally link to openSSL?
-- Dave
Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As one of the regular participants on debian-lega
Benny Siegert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> fink has a patch for the bzip2 Makefile that enables it to build a shared
> library. I would like to incorporate this patch into our tree. Can I do
> this? Under which licence are the patches in fink?
>
Fink joined the metapkg project a few years ago,
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 04:15:21PM -0500, Benjamin Reed wrote:
> To me, it would seem kind of arbitrary for openssl 0.9.6 to be allowed,
> but 0.9.7 to not be just because we're building our own copy of it.
> When Apple releases some future OS release with 0.9.7 on it, is it
> magically OK suddenl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David R. Morrison wrote:
| Lars,
|
| Thanks for raising this issue. It has come up before, but it has perhaps
| not received the attention it deserves.
|
| My reading of the links you provided suggests that you are correct: we may
| not link GPL&#
Lars,
Thanks for raising this issue. It has come up before, but it has perhaps
not received the attention it deserves.
My reading of the links you provided suggests that you are correct: we may
not link GPL'd software against fink's openssl package unless the license
explictly permits linking to
Thanks for the report. It turns out that the problem is actually
text-autoformat-pm which causes the tests to crash if it is installed.
I've just added "BuildConflicts: text-autoformat-pm" to the template-pm581
package, which should fix the problem.
-- Dave
--
On Mar 5, 2005, at 10:01 PM, Tony Arnold wrote:
Hi All,
Peter O'Gorman wrote:
| I really wish I could propose some magic that would make everyone
happy in
| the upgrade process, but I can not.
Is package refactoring something that's planned for the future? I've
hit this a couple of times before, a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Peter O'Gorman wrote:
| Chris Zubrzycki wrote:
|
| | Any thoughts/suggestions?
|
| Well, we need the new gettext, I agree, but we also need for users to be
| able to run a successful selfupdate and update-all. It does not seem that
| the package wh
Michèle Garoche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Update of /cvsroot/fink/dists/10.3/stable/main/finkinfo/text
> In directory sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv18270
>
> Added Files:
> docbook-dtd.info docbook-dtd.patch
> Log Message:
> New maintainer, updated version
>
> --- NEW FILE:
I'm sorry that I haven't had a chance to look into this yet.
I've added the previous version of pybliographer back into fink. You can
install it with "fink install pybliographer-1.2.4-1" (although I'm afraid
that every time you run "fink update-all" after that, it will attempt to
update to the n
2004-11-16) on
augustus.math.duke.edu
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
version=3.0.2
On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 03:21:30PM -0500, David R. Morrison wrote:
> Actually, Justin, buildconflicts *had* been working recently.
Daniel Macks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 03:21:30PM -0500, David R. Morrison wrote:
> > Actually, Justin, buildconflicts *had* been working recently. But as Martin
> > points out, the buildlock system has now broken it.
>
> That seems strange.
Dave Vasilevsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2005, at 6:08 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
> > OK, in my opinion, this behavior as reported by Robert indicates that
> > the
> > buildlock system is not yet working as it should.
>
> It's working f
Robert T Wyatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> two cents from a beginner:
>
> At 3:55 PM -0500 2/26/05, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
> >Buildlocks solves several problems.
> >
> >Fink's dep engine isn't always smart. [snip] 'fink install
> >bundle-gnome' [is] very likely to run into this problem.
>
> Go
Actually, Justin, buildconflicts *had* been working recently. But as Martin
points out, the buildlock system has now broken it.
-- Dave
---
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Produc
Daniel Macks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Update of /cvsroot/fink/fink/perlmod/Fink
> In directory sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv29536
>
> Modified Files:
> Package.pm ChangeLog
> Log Message:
> perl-5.6 compatibiility fix for open() syntax.
>
I'm thinking of back-porting this
I like this idea.
-- Dave
> To: fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> From: "Daniel E. Macks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [Fink-devel] Re: Validation change
> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 04:42:51 + (UTC)
>
> How about having 'fink validate' by default always display all
> warnings (regardless o
> From: Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Fink-devel] sdl
> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 18:23:29 -0800
>
> I moved sdl from 10.3/unstable/main into my local directory, to get
> 1.2.8 over 1.2.7 but when I install this I get:
>
> /sw/build/sdl-1.2.8-1/SDL-1
> From: "Bradshaw, Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net'"
> Subject: [Fink-devel] Volunteering to maintain some of the orphaned fink
> packages
> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:53:39 -0600
>
> Hello,
>
> I'd be interested in picking up a handful of packages that lack
Ashley Yakeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Could someone give me access to the unstable part of the
> tree?
You now have CVS access.
-- Dave
---
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of
Sorry to be so slow to respond here: I've only just begun to track down
what's happening.
When I compile this, I have no problem because the python setup script
does not find a value for DISPLAY in the environment, and so reports
"cannot test gtk [no DISPLAY]". My first guess was that this
> From: Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Fink-devel] gtk+2
> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 02:46:42 -0800
>
> Ok, now I have a new error. I installed a fresh copy of XDarwin,
> figuring that it was something I did to that directory, now the package
> build
On Feb 19, 2005, at 5:02 PM, Michael wrote:
[snip]
Then before that, I get:
/.libs/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.dylib /sw/lib/libintl.dylib -install_name
/sw/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.0.dylib -compatibility_version 601
-current_version 601.2
ld: warning -dylib_install_name /sw/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.0.dylib not
fo
I've added these to the 10.2-gcc3.3/unstable tree, except for libxml2
and gdbm3, which were already at the versions you requested.
-- Dave
On Feb 19, 2005, at 1:58 PM, Michael wrote:
David R. Morrison wrote:
Mike,
If you will post a list of the precise packages (with version and
rev
Folks,
Here's a policy question.
The libjpeg package, like many packages, uses a number of header files during
compilation which are considered "internal," and only installs the "external"
ones at install time. The external header files end up in the libjpeg
package, but the internal ones don't.
Mike,
If you will post a list of the precise packages (with version and revision
number) which you have "brought over" from 10.3 and tested under
10.2-gcc3.3, I will add them to the 10.2-gcc3.3 tree.
The main issue here is that most maintainers are only keeping up with the
10.3 tree now, and prob
Dear Mike,
I think its great that you're interested in getting more modern
versions of the gnome packages working on 10.2. Most of the fink
developers are now working on 10.3 or beyond, but I'm hoping you'll get
some help from the readers of this list in your quest.
Yours,
Dave
On Feb 16,
Hi Chris. You've raised an important issue which I've been meaning to address.
There are a couple of different philosophies about the choice of perl
Types, and I think we need to discuss this and settle on a common policy.
Let me break this into two questions: what Types should be used, and
shoul
> From: "Daniel Henninger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Martin Costabel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Fink-devel] Re: dists/10.3/unstable/main/finkinfo/sci
> singular.info,NONE,1.1
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 09:11:35 -0500 (EST)
>
>
> Also
> Also, would such a package (freeware without source code and with
> restrictions on redistribution) be allowed in Fink?
Our general policy has been not to allow this -- we insist on source code
which can be compiled by the user (even when there are redistribution
restrictions).
If this softwa
No, you should make a fink package called date-calc-pm. If you look in
libs/perlmods/ you will see lots of these that you can follow as
examples.
-- Dave
On Jan 19, 2005, at 9:03 AM, Manuel Hendel wrote:
Shell I just add a line to the description which says that you have to
install Date::Cal
One more thing: you are required to document the license arrangement in
the directory %p/share/doc/%n . This could be as simple as
mkdir -p %p/share/doc/%n
cp COPYING %p/share/doc/%n
(assuming that the standard GPL COPYING file is included in your package).
-- Dave
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Kurt Schwehr wrote:
| Looks like my emails are not getting through to the
| fink lists. Maybe these two links will get through.
| I would like to get some discussion going about what
| is the best way to deploy fink to a large number of
| machines
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Becky Bendick wrote:
| Thanks for the advice.
You are most welcome.
Please note that -fabi-version=0 is just a shortcut which means "select the
latest G++ ABI version that is present". Currently there are ABI version 1 and
ABI version 2. You should
On Jan 9, 2005, at 12:47 PM, Michèle Garoche wrote:
Dear David,
Le 9 janv. 2005, à 18:27, David R. Morrison a écrit :
I can't explain why certain packages aren't compiling with a post
gcc-3.3
compiler and other ones are. I'm only adding the flags when my beta
testing reveals a pro
Dear Michele,
I can't explain why certain packages aren't compiling with a post gcc-3.3
compiler and other ones are. I'm only adding the flags when my beta
testing reveals a problem.
However, unlike the situation between gcc 3.1 and gcc 3.3, there is NO
binary compatibility issue between gcc 3.3
Dear Fink developers,
Several of you have noticed the recent changes which I've made to a number
of packages. Most of these changes ensure that the package in question
compiles using the gcc 3.3 compiler. (The changes involve adding gcc3.3
to BuildDepends, and then either modifying the CompileSc
Jeff, this seems to be missing a patch file (ncl.patch).
-- Dave
---
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almosthttp:/
Presumably you are trying to build postgis using the postgresql74 source tree
as well as the postgis tree. Unfortunately, after postgresql74 was built,
its source tree was erased (unless the user took special action to prevent
this). So what you'll need to do is to have
Version: 0.9.1
Source: pa
Thanks, Koen, well-spotted.
I believe that the package was Restrictive because of some patent issue
or something... we'll have to check it out.
-- Dave
On Dec 31, 2004, at 2:11 PM, Koen van der Drift wrote:
On Dec 31, 2004, at 2:02 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
Well, it shouldn't be
701 - 800 of 2147 matches
Mail list logo
