Re: [Fink-devel] Packaging policy

2004-02-17 Thread jfm
On Feb 13, 2004, at 8:48 PM, Remi Mommsen wrote: On Feb 13, 2004, at 9:15 AM, jfm wrote: Similarly, to get the set of pkgs that eg still depend on gd a simple egrep -rI '[, ]gd([, ]|$)' /sw/fink/dists/unstable|grep 'Depends:' suffices with the 1 line convention. (And as long as only a dozen pkgs

Re: [Fink-devel] Packaging policy

2004-02-13 Thread Remi Mommsen
Hi, On Feb 13, 2004, at 9:15 AM, jfm wrote: On Feb 13, 2004, at 9:39 AM, Remi Mommsen wrote: I prefer the here-doc structure for Depends and BuildDepends in fink packages, where each dependency (with possible alternatives) is on a separate line. For example Depends: << x11, giflib-shlibs |

Re: [Fink-devel] Packaging policy

2004-02-13 Thread jfm
On Feb 13, 2004, at 9:39 AM, Remi Mommsen wrote: I prefer the here-doc structure for Depends and BuildDepends in fink packages, where each dependency (with possible alternatives) is on a separate line. For example Depends: << x11, giflib-shlibs | libungif-shlibs << IMO this is much more rea

Re: [Fink-devel] Packaging policy

2004-02-13 Thread Daniel Macks
On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 12:39:37AM -0800, Remi Mommsen wrote: > > I prefer the here-doc structure for Depends and BuildDepends in fink > packages, where each dependency (with possible alternatives) is on a > separate line. For example > Depends: << > x11, > giflib-shlibs | libungif-shlibs >