At 20:14 Uhr +0100 12.01.2003, Michel Schinz wrote:
"David R. Morrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Just to clarify the situation a bit more:
If the software you are packaging makes use of the Fink package foo
whenever foo is present, and if you have no way to disable it from making
use of
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 10:59 AM, Michel Schinz wrote:
think I should correct and re-submit the current package, I will do
so. Or maybe someone with CVS access can add the dependency on
dlcompat for me and increment the revision.
I'll add it for you.
-Ben
-
I am creating rev. 2 of your package with the dependency on dlcompat.
-- Dave
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
__
Just to clarify the situation a bit more:
If the software you are packaging makes use of the Fink package foo
whenever foo is present, and if you have no way to disable it from making
use of foo, then you must list foo as a dependency.
This is the only way we have of guaranteeing that every Fink
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 10:17 AM, Ben Hines wrote:
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 10:02 AM, Michel Schinz wrote:
Scsh does *not* depend on dlcompat, it works perfectly well without
it. However, if dlcompat is installed, and if it can be found by
configure when scsh is built, then i
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 10:02 AM, Michel Schinz wrote:
Scsh does *not* depend on dlcompat, it works perfectly well without
it. However, if dlcompat is installed, and if it can be found by
configure when scsh is built, then it's used.
It does "depend" on dlcompat, because of our poli
Ben Hines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> Well, the real problem is your fault, you missed a dependency when
> making the package, and we missed it when verifying. :)
Well, I do not view it that way, of course :-).
Scsh does *not* depend on dlcompat, it works perfectly well without
it. Howe
