Yes, well, I'm on Lion…
On Nov 23, 2015, at 9:28 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>
>> On Nov 23, 2015, at 08:06, Max Horn wrote:
>>
>> Hi Dave,
>> [CC: fink-devel],
>>
>>> On 22 Nov 2015, at 21:39, David R. Morrison wrote:
>>>
>>>
On May 6, 2013, at 9:32 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:02:34AM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote:
>>
>> On May 6, 2013, at 6:33 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, May 05, 2013 at 04:59:42PM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote:
>>>>
On May 6, 2013, at 6:33 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Sun, May 05, 2013 at 04:59:42PM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote:
>> Jack,
>>
>> I get errors building the latest versions of gcc44 and gcc45 on 10.6, i386 .
>> I have Xcode 3.2.6 but if that's too old, the pa
I started a new shell, to be on the safe side…
On May 5, 2013, at 6:11 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> Yeah, %p/opt has been around a while. :-)
>
> Did you start a new shell session or re-source /sw/bin/init.tcsh ?
>
> On 5/5/13 5:59 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
>> Yes, I
Yes, I use tcsh, and "which makeinfo" now gives me
/sw/opt/texinfo-legacy/bin/makeinfo (to which I say "opt???"), but
unfortunately the build failed just as before.
-- Dave
On May 5, 2013, at 5:46 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> On 5/5/13 4:59 PM, David R. Morrison w
Jack,
I get errors building the latest versions of gcc44 and gcc45 on 10.6, i386 . I
have Xcode 3.2.6 but if that's too old, the packages should tell me so. I
reproduce the error msg from gcc44 below; the one from gcc45 was similar.
Based on the error msg, I guessed that maybe I needed to in
Yes, please go ahead and commit the new version.
-- Dave
On Feb 25, 2013, at 8:55 AM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
> Dave,
>
> I'm packaging the latest libtiff that bumps libN (to libtiff5), and taking
> the opportunity to update our existing libtiff to the last of that line.
> Here's t
On Sep 1, 2012, at 1:38 PM, Alexander Hansen
wrote:
> On 9/1/12 1:07 PM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
>> On 9/1/2012 10:32 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>>> On 8/31/12 5:36 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
Why exactly are we building the entirety of gettext-tools at -O0
in 10.7 branch when
Sounds like a good idea to me.
-- Dave
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 13, 2012, at 1:46 PM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser
wrote:
> Currently, if a new passwd-package is created, passwd-core gets a new
> version and so all the other passwd-* packages need to be rebuilt and
> reinstalled (which incl
he current OS version.
>
> On 7/6/12 6:59 AM, David R. Morrison wrote:
>> Good point. The reason this was done is documented in the perlXXX.info
>> file, but you are right that it creates potential upgrade problems.
>>
>> I guess what we need is a package called p
Good point. The reason this was done is documented in the perlXXX.info file,
but you are right that it creates potential upgrade problems.
I guess what we need is a package called perlXXX-upgrade which is a bundle that
depends on all these non-core pm's. Would that solve it, or am I overlookin
On Jul 2, 2012, at 11:55 AM, Daniel Macks wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 21:59:43 +0200, Sjors Gielen wrote:
> Op 01-07-12 21:54, TheSin schreef:
>>> would we rather it silently do it or with a warning but still pass?
>> I assume no warning but thought I'd show an example.
justin@tracer [/s
My recollection is that we hacked the dpkg code to allow unversioned virtuals
at the time we introduced virtual pkgs.
-- Dave
On Jun 29, 2012, at 2:01 PM, TheSin wrote:
> So I'm not sure how but the old dpkg seemed to not check version of
> fink-virtuals, the patch I'm using is pretty much i
On Jun 29, 2012, at 12:40 PM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
> On 6/29/2012 1:13 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 29, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>
>>>> Dear Fink developers,
>>>>
>>>> At the time of the upgrade
On Jun 29, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>> Dear Fink developers,
>>
>> At the time of the upgrade to 10.7, many fink -pm5123 packages were limited
>> to Distribution: 10.7 only.
>> Since we will make perl 5.1.23 available in 10.8, that restriction is no
>> longer necessary or approp
Is there any possibility that we can just disable the need for Tex by telling
some package with a configure option that it should build it's Tex docs?
-- Dave
On Jun 29, 2012, at 9:50 AM, TheSin wrote:
> I already thought of these options, the problem would be the same problem I
> see wit
Dear Fink developers,
At the time of the upgrade to 10.7, many fink -pm5123 packages were limited to
Distribution: 10.7 only. Since we will make perl 5.1.23 available in 10.8,
that restriction is no longer necessary or appropriate. On behalf of the
fink-core team, I plan to alter such package
/usr/bin/readlink is present on both 10.6 and 10.5.
-- Dave
On Jun 27, 2012, at 7:44 AM, TheSin wrote:
> it turns out that Lion have /usr/bin/readlink as well, can anyone confirm
> this on 10.6/10.5 if so then it won't matter if I replace debianutils.
> ---
> TS
> http://www.southofheaven.org
On Jun 24, 2012, at 10:17 AM, David Lowe wrote:
> On 2012 Jun 22, at 2:35 PM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
>
>> Buildworlds and dist-wide package roundups (like unstable->stable
>> or multi-package dep upgrades) need a lot of overlapping local
>> modifications and VCS-updating steps, and I
On Jun 22, 2012, at 10:59 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> Any thoughts about moving dists/ over to github?
>
> Even though sourceforge isn't going to close down CVS access, it'd be
> nice to move to a more modern system. Plus, for users behind firewalls,
> github allows files to be accessed via h
On Jun 15, 2012, at 8:53 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> On 6/15/12 6:08 AM, Sébastien Maret wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I spent most of this morning trying to install Fink on one of my colleague
>> computer. This made me realize how complicated it is for the end-user.
>> Pretty much everything that
On May 13, 2012, at 3:14 PM, Merle Reinhart wrote:
> One possibility would be make the id static or dynamic based upon a
> configuration setting in fink.conf. I think you'll wind up with a lot less
> push-back from IT admins.
>
We've done things like this in the past. We can store the desir
installed instead of the the fink build process it will
> have the wrong perms, unless things have changed since then.
> ---
> TS
> http://www.southofheaven.org/
> Life begins and ends with chaos, live between the chaos!
>
> On 2012-05-10, at 6:33 AM, David R. Morrison wr
I think Dustin's approach is a good one -- less intrusive to users' systems.
-- Dave
On May 10, 2012, at 4:32 AM, Dustin Cartwright wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Alexander Hansen
> wrote:
> We're approaching the May 16 planned deadline for a new Fink (0.33.0)
> release. The cu
On May 4, 2012, at 10:56 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> On 5/4/2012 8:54 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>> My biggest concern with the 10.8 support is the situation with the perlmod
>> packages.
>> Specifically whether we could adjust fink to automatically handle the newer
>> perl in each OS
>> releas
On Apr 29, 2012, at 10:57 AM, Daniel Macks wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 09:43:33 -0700, Alexander Hansen
> wrote:
> We've got some maintainers (J. Howarth, H. Todd that I know of) who
> have
>> access to Mountain Lion. Jack, in particular has been doing build
>> tests. To help expedite updat
atic-only libraries and maybe some executables, and
> especially if also executables other packages tend to Depends on them.
> That makes it difficult to upgrade them to be shared or for
> backward-incompatible new libversions even if still static-only.
>
> dan
>
> On T
My recollection of the original idea was that there might be a package with
binaries, static libs, and headers all together. I dont know if there are any
such left, but if there are, they will need to be splitoffized to separate the
binaries (should this change be made).
-- Dave
Sent from m
I'm curious where you are putting the dylibs? (haven't had a chance to look at
the packages)
-- Dave
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 21, 2012, at 5:24 PM, Sjors Gielen wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> Op 22-01-12 00:17, Alexander Hansen schreef:
>
>> Let's try to stay close to our established nomen
The dependent packages not yet in 10.7 are: farsight2, libnice, and
silc-toolkit.
All three of these, and pidgin itself, built for me on 10.7 this evening.
-- Dave
On Jan 4, 2012, at 6:07 PM, David Fang wrote:
>> Hi, sorry to bother you, I was just wondering when there might be a fink
>> p
Thanks, I'll try 3.3.1.
-- Dave
On Nov 28, 2011, at 2:16 PM, Merle Reinhart wrote:
> Dave,
>
> I just noticed your post about libgeos not working in 10.7 with XCode
> compilers.
>
> I do know that libgeos 3.3.1 WILL successfully build in 10.7 with the XCode
> 4.2 clang compiler. I'm us
There is a problem with libgeos on 10.7.
The most recent XCode will not compile it, even using llvm-gcc-4.2.
The MacPorts project is also aware of this; they actually have a package called
"apple-gcc-4.2" which provides the now-missing gcc-4.2 from apple for people
who have upgraded XCode. Tha
Thanks for noticing that. I did the update.
-- Dave
On Nov 26, 2011, at 3:16 PM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
> Dave,
>
> Is it possible to update Fink's fribidi to the latest upstream? A package
> I'm trying needs fribidi > 0.19. According to the fribidi page, 0.19 is
> API/ABI compa
I wonder if we should put a test for Xcode version into the bootstrap, so that
people get an error message which tells them what is wrong and suggests how to
fix it?
-- Dave
On Nov 23, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 11/23/1
On Oct 24, 2011, at 7:49 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 09:01:58AM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 21, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 08:05:38AM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote:
>>>>
On Oct 21, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 08:05:38AM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote:
>> So at the very least, we should put a news item on the fink webpage warning
>> users that fink on 10.6 is currently incompatible with Xcode 4.2, and
So at the very least, we should put a news item on the fink webpage warning
users that fink on 10.6 is currently incompatible with Xcode 4.2, and
suggesting a downgrade to Xcode 3.2.6.
Another short-term measure would be to put a test into fink to check for Xcode
4.2 on 10.6, and warn users tha
On Sep 15, 2011, at 7:05 AM, Sébastien Maret wrote:
>
> Le 15 sept. 2011 à 15:51, Alexander Hansen a écrit :
>
>> We probably don't want just to dump packages into stable without doing a
>> little testing to make sure they all actually work. ;-) One option would
>> be something like the followi
OK, gc has been added to 10.7.
-- Dave
On Sep 9, 2011, at 8:19 PM, Martin Costabel wrote:
> On 22/07/11 23:38, Jack Howarth wrote:
>> Dave,
>> FYI, David Fang asked me to test gc under Lion so that he can push guile20
>> into 10.7.
>
> Almost 2 months have passed since this request. Is th
ve
On Jul 21, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Daniel Macks wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2011 11:00:03 -0700, "David R. Morrison" wrote:
> In a discussion on irc this morning, there was a general consensus to
> bring Python 2.6 and 2.7 forward to 10.7, but not to bring Python 2.5
> forward.
In a discussion on irc this morning, there was a general consensus to bring
Python 2.6 and 2.7 forward to 10.7, but not to bring Python 2.5 forward. I
subsequently put the python26 and python27 packages into the 10.7 tree.
What about perl? Should we bring perl 5.8.8 forward, or leave it out?
ote:
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 09:45:05AM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote:
>> Jack,
>>
>> Many of our package maintainers will now be faced with trying to
>> maintain a package across several distributions, and in cases where
>> there doesn't need to be a d
Jack,
Many of our package maintainers will now be faced with trying to
maintain a package across several distributions, and in cases where
there doesn't need to be a difference, the maintenance is easier if
the foo.info files are identical.
So generally, copying the same version, revision,
Jeffery: please see the question at the bottom:
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Alexander Hansen
> Date: July 19, 2011 1:01:21 PM PDT
> To: "David R. Morrison"
> Cc: Fink fink-devel , j...@lanl.gov
> Subject: Re: [Fink-devel] flag-sort
> Reply-To: Fink Developers M
There was a recent revision to the transfig package which introduced the use of
fink's flag-sort package. However, it seems to have a problem on 10.6: see
below. Anybody have any advice about it?
-- Dave
Begin forwarded message:
> From: "Densmore, Jeffery D"
> Date: July 19, 2011 10:50:59
Hi Max, my apologies. This only got half-implmented last night and I was going
to send out an email after it was finished, but I can explain it now.
Our strategy for handling EOL for 10.4 is to place copies of all .info/.patch
files into this 10.4-EOL subdirectory of finkinfo, and then to modif
Sounds good to me.
-- Dave
On Apr 20, 2011, at 12:16 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 3.7 Source Policy
>
> Sources should normally be downloaded from the location(s) that the
> upstream developer(s) use, and any modifications for Fink should
The problem with this approach is that it short-circuits one of Fink's security
features (the checking of MD5sum for source files) and it also short-circuits
Fink's storage of source files in its own archive to guard against the day when
the source file is no longer available from the original d
Hello fink-devel.
This user has 10.6 + Xquartz and -- in spite of the builddepends on xmkmf --
has the build fail due to Imake issues, namely
> Imake.tmpl: No such file or directory
Anybody have any suggestions here?
-- Dave
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Mattia Vaccari
> Date: March
The original poster showed us a transcript, in which fink tried to do
the swapping, but failed, delivering the dreaded "circular
dependencies" error message.
-- Dave
On Feb 18, 2011, at 10:01 AM, Daniel Macks wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 17:13:37 0100, Martin Costabel wrote:
> Alexa
conTeXt is already present in both fink's tetex and texlive packages.
The dependency issues with tetex and texlive are very complex, and I
do not believe we should accept a separate conTeXt package into fink.
-- Dave
On Feb 7, 2011, at 8:57 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SI
(switching to fink-devel)
On Oct 25, 2010, at 9:43 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>>
>>
>> Start by downloading the Java Developer Package from connect.apple.com,
>> which now contains the headers. If that doesn't work, then cmake is
>> going to need to be updated further to cope with the new st
On Sep 30, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 9/29/10 5:08 PM, Ebrahim Mayat wrote:
>> Hello list
>>
>> With reference to my submission (#3074237) for fluidsynth-1.1.2, I have
>> come across a compatibility version issue.
>>
>> As
Anyway, I suspect from your error message that you are using 10.6-i386. The R
environment, on the other hand, is making calls to gcc with no arch flag so it
defaults to x86_64, and your libraries are not compatible with that...
-- Dave
On Sep 27, 2010, at 9:43 PM, David R. Morrison wrote
Are you using the i386 or x86_64 architecture of fink?
On Sep 27, 2010, at 9:35 PM, BABA Yoshihiko wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I installed r-base, then tried to install its packages inside R environment,
> with the error below. The binary version of R didn't have such error. Would
> it be Fink's prob
This sounds like something which should be added to the FAQ if its not there
already.
Also, I'm wondering if we should maybe enhance that validator test so that if
it finds a Shlibs with an incomplete pathname, it gives additional advice (such
as what Ben wrote in this email...)
-- Dave
On
On Aug 23, 2010, at 12:21 PM, Kees Bakker wrote:
> PS and BTW. If the Fink packages were build as "fat binaries" for i386 and ppc
> I would never have tried to use my own framework.
Let me comment about why we don't do this. For a large percentage of open
source packages (the figure 80% is ban
On Aug 18, 2010, at 12:14 PM, Sjors Gielen wrote:
> Op 18 aug 2010, om 17:47 heeft Benjamin Reed het volgende geschreven:
>
>> I'm obviously a supporter of Fink, being one of the core maintainers
>> and all, but I think trying to package fink with a frontend would be a
>> nightmare. First, what
ook for gcc45-10.4.patch
> copy the extant gcc45.patch to gcc45-10.4.patch
> commit the 10.5 and 10.6-relevant files (gcc45.patch, gcc45.info,
> gcc45-x86_64.info) from the tracker
>
> ?
>
> That way we will have the updated gcc45 in 10.5 and 10.6, with the
> option to update it
If I could make a small suggestion on this thread. Fink's support for 10.4
will end fairly soon, so it would not be such a bad thing if gcc 4.5.1 only
runs on 10.5 and 10.6.
-- Dave
On Aug 11, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 07:48:45PM -0400, Alexander Hanse
As Martin Costabel pointed out, both your fink installation and that libpng
package are 6 years out of date. The FAQ should help you figure out how to
update, or if not, people on the fink-users mailing list can help.
-- Dave
On Aug 8, 2010, at 9:19 AM, John Davison wrote:
> I noticed the
Has anybody seen this error before?
Begin forwarded message:
> From: John Davison
> Date: August 7, 2010 2:20:59 PM PDT
> To: dmr...@users.sourceforge.net
> Subject: libpng3-1:1.2.5-2
>
> Feedback: not good
>
> --
> Package manager version: 0.21.3
> Distribution version:
> 0.7.1
> Mac OS X ver
The only resolution that I see is to move texlive* and ptex* to stable. Are
they ready?
-- Dave
On Jul 9, 2010, at 1:37 PM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
> On 7/9/10 11:58 AM, Tomoaki Okayama wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> At Fri, 9 Jul 2010 08:07:03 -0600,
>&
On Jul 9, 2010, at 7:31 AM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
>
> [1] Why the buildworld is building the ptex-base from stable is a whole
> other issue, and I have no idea as to why it's doing this. It does
> build ptex-base/unstable, but likes to build and use anew
> ptex-base/stable in the m
Anyway, the new revision xfig-3.2.5-1013 should fix this for you.
-- Dave
On Jul 5, 2010, at 4:31 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
>
> On Jul 5, 2010, at 4:08 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>>
>> OK. That explains the issue: The Xquartz release candidate that you're
&
On Jul 5, 2010, at 4:08 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>
> OK. That explains the issue: The Xquartz release candidate that you're
> using libpng14 rather than libpng12, and xfig isn't building against
> fink's libpng3 as it should.
As you pointed out, xfig is actually linking to libpng from X11 r
Anybody have any ideas about this one? The "missing" symbol appears to be
present in /sw/lib/libpng.dylib (the one installed by fink's libpng3 package).
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Peter Dyballa
> Date: July 5, 2010 1:33:10 PM MDT
> To: d...@finkproject.org
> Subject: Failure building xfi
Dear fink developers,
Fink's cryptographic directory "crypto" has been moved to become a subdirectory
of "main", in both the stable and unstable trees.
It is no longer necessary to put something into the crypto directory just
because it depends on something else in the crypto directory. The cr
I'm pretty sure its just %p/bin/g++-4 (without the .N)
-- Dave
On Jun 29, 2010, at 12:53 PM, Koen van der Drift wrote:
> And then I guess I use
>
> SetCXX=%p/bin/g++-4.N (or whatever the name of the excecutable is), correct?
>
> - Koen.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Koen van
ring_for_10.5
>
> My reading of that was that py23 variants should be depreciated.
>Jack
>
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 09:33:39AM -0600, David R. Morrison wrote:
>> Jack,
>>
>> Actually, leaving the old variants of python in place is perfectly OK.
>>
Jack,
Actually, leaving the old variants of python in place is perfectly OK. There
may be people still using old versions of python (on 10.4 or 10.5) and leaving
these variants for them is fine. Of course, if a maintainer stops being able
to test new versions of the package with old versions
On Jun 24, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The experimental apt-shlibs violates the Shlibs policy.
>
> Experimental:
> $ dpkg -L apt-shlibs
> /.
> /sw
> /sw/lib
> /sw/lib/libapt-inst.1.1.0.dylib
> /sw/lib/libapt-pkg.4.8.0.dylib
> /
On Jun 24, 2010, at 8:21 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>
>
> And why are you marking it as BuildDependsOnly: true? That's normally
> reserved for header packages.
He probably did that to get rid of a validator warning, since he does have
header files in his package.
-- Dave
--
Peter,
Let me refer you to a section of the Fink Packaging Manual
http://www.finkproject.org/doc/packaging/policy.php?phpLang=en#sharedlibs which
explains how shared libraries are packaged in fink. Basically, you need to use
fink's Splitoff mechanism to divide your package into a few others.
Dear Sjors,
I'm not convinced that you have correctly diagnosed the crashes you have seen.
The shared libraries of libjpeg and libjpeg8 have different names, and the
dynamic linker cannot possibly confuse them. There is a remote possibility
that some other library is confusing symbols between l
Dear Fink developers,
A side-effect of the way in which we updated to 10.6 was that a number of
packages have existed both in the stable and unstable trees, which were
completely identical other than a restriction on Distribution or Architecture.
This is against Fink policy, since it has the p
Jack,
If you read the *previous* comment, which JF made, you will see that
he was talking about taking over as the fink committer who was
helping to evaluate your package. Taking over from Peter O'Gorman,
in fact, not from you.
-- Dave
On May 2, 2010, at 4:27 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
On May 1, 2010, at 6:13 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 5/1/10 7:07 AM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
>> libnessus3-ssl is marked as Restrictive (links to OpenSSL) and the
>> source is now unavailable upstream (license change for newer versio
Anybody have any ideas about this one? Looks like libtool weirdness of some
kind to me...
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Kow KURODA
> Date: January 19, 2010 6:53:32 AM PST
> To: Dave Morrison
> Subject: installation of gd2 under Fink 0.29.10 failed
>
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for maintaining gd
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 cou
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 Karl-Mich
It's generally a good idea to move /usr/local/lib out of the way (e.g.
temporarily change its name) when compiling things with fink. Fink
has no way of preventing things in /usr/local/lib from overriding
things which fink is trying to find within its own distribution area,
and the results
There are incompatibilities between perl 5.10.0 (which is /usr/bin/
perl in 10.6) and perl 5.8.8. To call bioperl-pm588 in other scripts,
you will have to modify their starting lines to #!/sw/bin/perl5.8.8
Better for you, probably, would be to have bioperl-pm updated to a
5.10.0 version (bio
On Nov 9, 2009, at 9:54 AM, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
>
> This is the problem fink now has with its Update* fields. Updating
> the files that will be copied may fix some things, but may break
> others.
>
Maybe we should introduce new fields for the new updates? With names
like ModernizeConfig
On Nov 9, 2009, at 9:33 AM, Daniel Macks wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 09:19:14AM -0600, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
>> On 11/09/2009 03:11 AM, Martin Costabel wrote:
>>
>>> On 10.6/64bit, the 'Update' fields could have a renewed interest,
>>> because many packages have config.guess versions that gu
On Oct 11, 2009, at 11:47 PM, Tomoaki Okayama wrote:
> Thanks for your suggestion. I think the following way
>
>> You could have texlive-texmf *just*
>> "Replaces" it, and then supply an updated tetex-texmf that is empty
>> and just specifies "Depends:texlive-texmf".
>
> is a good solution, if Fi
Bill,
Writing to the maintainer (in this case "None") was the correct course
of action.
I've just moved the unstable version to stable.
-- Dave
On Oct 3, 2009, at 12:34 PM, William G. Scott wrote:
> I've "inherited" pymol and just got email from a user who I surmise is
> trying to install
Fink cannot possibly support compiling in all situations,
particularly ones where Fink has no control over what has been
installed where (such as MacPorts).
I'm happy to learn that you see no compiling errors when you
uninstall MacPorts.
-- Dave
On Sep 26, 2009, at 7:46 AM, Norman MacI
On Sep 23, 2009, at 3:04 AM, Max Horn wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> unlike my usual custom (which includes never packaging pre-release
> software), I am currently planning to package a SVN snapshot of SDL
> 1.2.14 (well, "pre"). The main reason is that this version should
> compile across 10.4 to 10.6,
2009 at 12:30:38PM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote:
>> Jack,
>>
>> Fink uses the scripts /sw/bin/init.csh (for tcsh/csh) and /sw/bin/
>> init.sh (for bash) to initialize various things, so you may find what
>> you are looking for there.
>>
>> -- Dave
>>
Jack,
Fink uses the scripts /sw/bin/init.csh (for tcsh/csh) and /sw/bin/
init.sh (for bash) to initialize various things, so you may find what
you are looking for there.
-- Dave
On Sep 20, 2009, at 10:48 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>Do we have any special treatment for tcsh or csh under
On Sep 18, 2009, at 10:06 AM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> 2009/9/18 Martin Costabel :
>> David R. Morrison wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sep 18, 2009, at 7:23 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>>
>>>> Martin,
>>>>I don't follow your last statem
On Sep 18, 2009, at 7:23 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Martin,
>I don't follow your last statement. My understanding is that X11
> in Snow Leopard is already preconfigured to hand off to an X11 in /opt
> if present (remember that Jeremy Huddleston is both X11 maintainer at
> Apple as well as the
Under the circumstances, it is reasonable for you to take over.
Please do so.
-- Dave
On Sep 13, 2009, at 1:54 PM, Corey Halpin wrote:
> I just put current versions of silc-client and silc-toolkit into my
> experimental.
>
> http://fink.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/fink/experimental/crhal
Bill,
fftw and swig are now in stable, but as Dan discussed earlier, the
gnome prerequisites for pygtk2-gtk-py26 are going to have to wait a
while longer.
-- Dave
On Sep 5, 2009, at 2:39 PM, William G. Scott wrote:
> I'm trying to migrate coot to stable, but several dependencies are in
>
On Sep 11, 2009, at 8:49 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Martin Costabel wrote:
>> Jack Howarth wrote:
>>> Daniel and Benjamin,
>>> I've been pondering switching my efforts over to
>>> MacPorts for awhile now since it is obvious that the
>>>
The time wasn't wasted. You did many good things here, and you will
be missed.
-- Dave
On Sep 11, 2009, at 8:52 AM, Jack Howarth
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 08:16:55AM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2009, at 7:52 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
&g
On Sep 11, 2009, at 7:52 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
> 2) At least one core maintainer had no objections to the
> concept of upgrading those.
Jack,
Perhaps you misread the message in question, but in fact there WAS an
objection to the upgrade you proposed, but you went ahead and did it
anyway
Dear Jack,
We are grateful for your many contributions to fink, and sorry to see
you go. Best wishes for the future.
Yours,
Dave
On Sep 10, 2009, at 2:14 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Daniel and Benjamin,
> I've been pondering switching my efforts over to
> MacPorts for awhile now sin
Bill,
Isn't that going to break on powerpc?
-- Dave
On Sep 6, 2009, at 11:09 PM, William Scott wrote:
> Update of /cvsroot/fink/dists/10.4/unstable/main/finkinfo/sci
> In directory fdv4jf1.ch3.sourceforge.com:/tmp/cvs-serv9438
>
> Modified Files:
> mosflm.info
> Log Message:
> fix to
1 - 100 of 1507 matches
Mail list logo
