On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 08:42:33AM +0200, Martin Costabel wrote:
> Martin Costabel wrote:
> []
> >The real test with BuildDepends will have to wait until I have finished
> >reconstructing my X11 installation :(
>
> OK, thanks to rsync and a fast DSL connection, this was not too painful..
Oo, sor
Martin Costabel wrote:
Have xfree86 Depend or BuildDepend (it is too late in the evening now
for me to see clearly which one would be better) on a new package
"xfree86-check" which does nothing than running the current Pre- and
PostInstScripts from the xfree86 package. If this package is endowed
Martin Costabel wrote:
[]
The real test with BuildDepends will have to wait until I have finished
reconstructing my X11 installation :(
OK, thanks to rsync and a fast DSL connection, this was not too painful..
Next try: Moved /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xlib.h away. This removes
x11-dev, but leaves ev
Daniel Macks wrote:
[]
Just rename one of the critical files system-xfree86* checks for and
see what happens when a pkg BuildDepends:x11-dev.
What happened is that I clobbered my X11 installation. Well, like any
luser, I didn't read your message in detail, thought it would work also
for Depends a
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 12:42:33AM +0200, Martin Costabel wrote:
[...]
>
> 2. Users are right in experiencing some hard feelings when Fink
> downloads 100MB of sources, compiles for 5 hours and then says "Well,
> you probably didn't want this anyway, just throw it away". We should
> find a way
After having answered again 3 times today the most FAQ of all times, I
would like to ask the maintainer or others to spend a little time
thinking about an improvement of the situation. I suggest the following:
1. The xfree86 package itself has obsolete error messages:
You have an existing X11
