P.S. You need XCode 2.2.1 in order to bootstrap into the 10.4 tree.
On Jan 28, 2006, at 10:57 AM, David R. Morrison wrote:
Dear Fink developers,
As many of you are aware, the 10.4 tree is under construction and
will be made available within a week or so. Currently, if you
bootstrap fink
Dear Fink developers,
As many of you are aware, the 10.4 tree is under construction and
will be made available within a week or so. Currently, if you
bootstrap fink from either CVS HEAD or branch_0_24, the *default* is
to bootstrap you into the new tree. You can affect this behavior by
I am imposing a "chill" on CVS, for the 10.4-transitional tree (both
stable and unstable). During the "chill", I ask that people only
make urgent commits, and that they try to avoid changing packages
which have a GCC tag. (Of course, bug fixes are always welcome,
particularly if they invo
On Jan 15, 2006, at 10:02 PM, Michèle Garoche wrote:
And another question fully unrelated to doc, but maybe to package.
I've found fully per mere chance today the following line in
python24.patch in 10.4-transitional unstable:
+inc_dirs = self.compiler.include_dirs + ['@PREFIX/
i
On Jan 15, 2006, at 10:02 PM, Michèle Garoche wrote:
Le 16 janv. 2006 à 00:06, David R. Morrison a écrit :
I intend to declare a CVS freeze for both 10.4-transitional/
unstable and 10.4-transitional/stable, sometime within the next
week. Once the freeze is implemented, it will be in
On Jan 15, 2006, at 4:17 PM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
Hi,
Will libgettext3 be moved to stable before the freeze?
Hanspeter
No. There are some problems with moving libgettext3 to stable, and
given the urgency of creating a 10.4 tree so that fink will work on
Intel hardware, solvi
I intend to declare a CVS freeze for both 10.4-transitional/unstable
and 10.4-transitional/stable, sometime within the next week. Once
the freeze is implemented, it will be in effect for at least several
days, possibly longer, as I construct the 10.4 tree. Anyone who
ignores the freeze ca
On Jan 10, 2006, at 10:05 PM, Lars Rosengreen wrote:
On 1/10/06, David R. Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 1:44 PM, Asko Kauppi wrote:
I have a package for Fink that is completely CPU ignorant; how
should I mark it such in the .info file?
That's
On Jan 6, 2006, at 1:44 PM, Asko Kauppi wrote:
I have a package for Fink that is completely CPU ignorant; how
should I mark it such in the .info file?
That's the default behavior; no need to mark anything.
Also, what is the generic approach taken towards PowerPC/Intel
issue, which now
On Jan 4, 2006, at 9:30 AM, Christian Schaffner wrote:
hi Charlie
On 03.01.2006, at 17:28, Charles Curry wrote:
I assume there is nothing wrong with compiling neon24 with gcc 4.0.1,
but the current package being distributed through Fink mirrors
seems to
prevent this. Might you be able to s
I agree. It should be foo-py%type_pkg[python]-doc or something similar.
-- Dave
On Dec 29, 2005, at 12:09 PM, Daniel Macks wrote:
Okay, let's resolve this...
Package: foo-py%type_pkg[python]
Version: 1
Revision: 1
Type: python (2.3 2.4)
SplitOff: <<
Package: foo-doc
<<
Sp
On Dec 28, 2005, at 3:53 PM, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
GNU libtool will behave differently should libtool-2.0 ever be
released (there will be libfoo.dylib and libfoo.X.dylib, removing a
redundant symlink, and libraries will, by default, link -
single_module).
Hooray!!
-- Dave
he dynamic library, not the static one. So we have to use either
openssl-dev or openssl097-dev, and the latter, of course, is more
modern.
-- Dave
On Dec 28, 2005, at 9:55 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
Update of /cvsroot/fink/dists/10.4-transitional/unstable/crypto/
finkinfo
In direct
On Nov 28, 2005, at 12:30 PM, TheSin wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
So what needs to get done before we can start a 10.4 (gcc4) tree,
as the rumors that x86 will be out in Jan and it will REQUIRE gcc4
only. I'm willing to help where I can to help speed this up.
- --
On Nov 27, 2005, at 1:51 AM, Max Horn wrote:
Hi folks,
the ethereal 0.10.9-11 package in the bindist used to be broken (in
several ways). Hence I replaced it in stable by version 0.10.12,
and somebody (I think drm) updated the bindist with a new .deb made
from that version.
From this p
e for that: libmpfr1.
-- Dave
On Nov 13, 2005, at 10:59 AM, David R. Morrison wrote:
On Nov 13, 2005, at 1:56 PM, Martin Costabel wrote:
Andrea Riciputi wrote:
[]
[]
g++ -g -O2 -mpowerpc -no-cpp-precomp -mcpu=7450 -o .libs/t-
locale t-locale.o -L/sw/lib ../../tests/.libs/
libtests.a .
On Nov 13, 2005, at 1:56 PM, Martin Costabel wrote:
Andrea Riciputi wrote:
[]
[]
g++ -g -O2 -mpowerpc -no-cpp-precomp -mcpu=7450 -o .libs/t-locale
t-locale.o -L/sw/lib ../../tests/.libs/libtests.a ../../.libs/
libgmpxx.dylib /sw/src/fink.bui
ld/gmp-4.1.4-13/gmp-4.1.4/.libs/libgmp.dylib -L/u
On Nov 8, 2005, at 9:33 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
Do we have an implicit "epoch" for distributions, so that a package
built under 10.3 will be implicitly a lower version than the same
package version and revision number under 10.4-t?
This would be handy, as we wouldn't have to deal with havin
On Nov 6, 2005, at 12:47 PM, Max Horn wrote:
Hi folks,
once again a university colleague of mine attempted to install Fink
on his OS X machine (and iBook with OS X 10.4.3), and once again,
an issue occurred.
This time, the installer refused to work with this error message:
"Fink Insta
On Nov 1, 2005, at 7:58 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
Blair Zajac wrote:
Hi Peter,
I'm a Fink committer and am working on getting Ruby up to date so
it can support the new popular Ruby on Rails web development
platform.
One of the databases it supports is sqlite. I'm looking at it and
have sev
On Oct 5, 2005, at 9:41 AM, Daniel Macks wrote:
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 09:18:12AM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote:
How about if instead we actually try to make it work without the dev
tools? Things were originally designed that way... And particularly
if we ever get the project of more
On Oct 5, 2005, at 6:55 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
On Oct 5, 2005, at 2:56 AM, Martin Costabel wrote:
If you only use apt-get, you don't need the dev tools. The new --
use-binary-dist flag in fink rather muddies the waters here,
because it seems to promise that you can use the binary dist
On Oct 4, 2005, at 3:09 PM, Max Horn wrote:
Yo folks,
in the following I'd like to tell you a little story that happened
to me today... it is, unfortunately, kind of a sad story, but I
hope we can turn it into one with a happy ending eventually :-)
[snip]
Hi Max.
I've been aware for
On Sep 21, 2005, at 8:57 PM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
On Sep 21, 2005, at 10:37 PM, TheSin wrote:
The following errors remain:
Unsatisfied dependency in gettext-tools: gettext (= 0.10.40-19)
To fix manually, run:
sudo apt-get install gettext-dev=0.10.40-24 gettext=0.10.40-24
Hmm, why
On Sep 21, 2005, at 1:46 PM, Daniel Macks wrote:
Currently, DocFiles takes a list of filenames (including shell
globbing), and allows renaming ("DocFiles:foo:bar" installs the file
"foo" from the source dir as "bar" in the doc dir). A fairly common
(in gnome at least) situation is that there is
Note that I moved freetype219 to stable in the 10.4-transitional
tree, because it was needed by something I was trying to get ready
for the move to a 10.4 tree. However, it seems that I did not move
it to stable in the 10.3 tree.
-- Dave
---
On Sep 6, 2005, at 11:04 AM, AIDA Shinra wrote:
I want --enable-extra-encodings.
Can you explain this, please? I do not understand your request.
The libiconv supports some extra encodings which are disabled by
default. The /usr/lib/libiconv.2.2.0.dylib is configured with
--enable-extra-e
On Sep 6, 2005, at 10:25 AM, AIDA Shinra wrote:
I want --enable-extra-encodings.
Can you explain this, please? I do not understand your request.
-- Dave
---
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
Septembe
On Sep 3, 2005, at 10:11 AM, Koen van der Drift wrote:
On Sep 3, 2005, at 12:19 AM, David R. Morrison wrote:
Somehow, you got the wrong version. libiconv-1.10-3 should compile.
Hmmm, I put the files in /sw/fink/dists/local/main/finkinfo/base (I
try to keep a similar hierarchy in
Somehow, you got the wrong version. libiconv-1.10-3 should compile.
-- Dave
On Sep 2, 2005, at 6:49 PM, Koen van der Drift wrote:
On Sep 2, 2005, at 7:44 PM, David R. Morrison wrote:
You would need to do a cvs checkout of "experimental/dmrrsn" (or
all of "experimenta
A new version of libiconv is now ready for testing in /experimental/
dmrrsn/base
---
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-
Early testing has revealed some problems with libiconv. When fixed, I'll post a new version and notify the list. -- Dave
Dear Fink developers,
I have updated the gettext and libiconv packages: the new versions
are currently in experimental/dmrrsn/base if anybody would like to
help test.
For gettext, in addition to bringing the program to the latest
version, the division into splitoffs has been refactored to
On Aug 24, 2005, at 12:26 AM, Martin Costabel wrote:
Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
[]
I wouldn't object to synchronizing the version numbers of the GCC
3.1 virtual package and the real package. Currently the virtual
one is at version '3.1' and the real one uses the build number
'1175', it
On Aug 23, 2005, at 5:46 PM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:On Aug 23, 2005, at 6:21 PM, Daniel Johnson wrote: An XCode Legacy Tools package is now available on ADC which provides, among other things, gcc 2.95.2 and gcc 3.1 for Tiger (and Panther). If a Tiger user installs this, fink will want to install it
On Aug 8, 2005, at 9:28 AM, Daniel Macks wrote:
Our current policy is that one should not rely on implicit
dependencies on Essential packages. Given that %p/etc/profile.d
scriptlets are loaded by %p/bin/init.*sh that that many packages that
install profile.d scriptlets won't work if the profile
On Aug 14, 2005, at 1:45 AM, Ben Willmore wrote:2. Building aqua software reliably requires the ability to detect the version of XCode that's being used. Is there any way to do this in a .info file?I'm not sure which differences you have in mind, but one solution to XCode changes which has been us
On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:48 AM, Max Horn wrote:
Am 14.08.2005 um 10:17 schrieb Martin Costabel:
Max Horn wrote:
Am 14.08.2005 um 07:45 schrieb Ben Willmore:
[Sorry if these are FAQs. Gmane archive search seems to be broken]
1. Some of my favourite unix programs ((x)emacs, unison) no
On Aug 8, 2005, at 10:44 AM, Martin Costabel wrote:
Lacking instructions on how to run my own 10.4 tree
Instructions have now been added to the wiki, at
http://ldx3.psfc.mit.edu:2500/akhfinkwiki/published/The+10.4+tree
Please let me know if these need clarification or correction.
-- Dave
On Aug 8, 2005, at 10:44 AM, Martin Costabel wrote:
Lacking instructions on how to run my own 10.4 tree and therefore
how to find real problems with it,
Martin: I am making some instructions, but will have to wait until SF
finishes their scheduled upgrade of CVS services.
I am at the st
Max Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In addition to the 10.3 binary being broken (thanks to Alexander K.
> Hansen for verifying this), it seems that the 0.10.9-11 binary has
> some missing dependencies. All of those are fixed in the current
> stable version. So if possible it would be nice
On Jul 26, 2005, at 12:43 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
Peter,
You may have point regarding the 4.1 branch, but I would say that
the 4.0.2 branch is highly unlikely to be much less stable for
gfortran
than the 4.0.1 release is. Again the question really is what is the
purpose of the gcc4 packa
On Jul 24, 2005, at 6:34 PM, Max Horn wrote:Hi there,I got some reports which indicate that the ethereal binary in the 10.3 bindist is broken (the .deb is missing the ethereal binary itself). I haven't confirmed this yet, but despite this, I wonder: What exactly would be the process these days to g
On Jul 22, 2005, at 6:36 PM, Emily Jackson wrote:
Builds but can't be installed:
/bin/mv /sw/src/fink.build/root-pilot-link9-0.11.8-32/sw/lib/
python2.3 /
sw/src/fink.build/root-pilot-link9-py23-0.11.8-32/sw/lib/
mv: rename /sw/src/fink.build/root-pilot-link9-0.11.8-32/sw/lib/
python2.3 to
Begin forwarded message:From: "David R. Morrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Date: July 18, 2005 9:59:23 AM EDTTo: Kyle Moffett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Subject: Re: [Fink-devel] Fwd: Compiling pwlib on 10.4 (Tiger) Kyle:The last errors you are getting look like a problem with mixin
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"
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
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
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
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
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
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, then
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"? (taken down beca
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,
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
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
301 - 400 of 1507 matches
Mail list logo
