> "Martin" == Martin Costabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Martin> Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>> Is 0.5.4 known broken? Is there a newer version?
Martin> Works OK here.
>> Or is it something peculiar to me that keeps it saying "updating
>> the table data" with a barber pole forever?
Martin>
Some Fink packages exist solely for backward compatibility. For
instance, there is a db3 as well as a db4 package because certain
programs depend on version 3, while others depend on version 4.
Normally, this isn't such a big deal because the older package simply
embeds its version number i
You need to delete line 11 in the info file, the one that
introduces -lcc_dynamic
That was needed by g77 in 10.3 but not 10.4. Somebody hopefully will
fix this properly.
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep th
You also need to delete -lcc_dynamic from line 46 of the patch
script. Then it builds.
Is it ok with the core people if I update these files in cvs?
Bill
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
fo
Trevor Harmon wrote:
One way of solving this is to provide two packages, saxon and saxon811.
Each package can reference the other in its Conflicts field. However,
this means that packages depending on *any* version of Saxon must
specify "Depends: saxon | saxon811". Otherwise (if they only spec
On Dec 7, 2005, at 8:54 PM, Benjamin Reed wrote:
Why not make saxon81 and saxon82, and have them both Provide: saxon
Ah, I forgot about Provides. However, I don't see a reason to make
separate packages for saxon82, saxon83, saxon84, etc. I think I'll
just do a saxon811 and a saxon8, both o
