[Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

There is a problem with the two pseudo packages darwin and macosx - they don't work for the binary distro. Reason: these pseudo packages are only visible to Fink, not to dpkg. The first simple solution would be to make them visible by inserting fake descriptions into dpkg's database, but that

[Fink-devel] xfree86 4.2.0 yet stable?

What do you guys think, should we move the new xfree86 to stable, or better wait a bit longer? Max -- --- Max Horn Software Developer email: phone: (+49) 6151-494890 ___ Fink-de

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

How about if the package installs a shell script in %i/bin which detects the version number, and then this shell script is called in post-install? -- Dave ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink

Re: [Fink-devel] xfree86 4.2.0 yet stable?

Do we have a mechanism for specifying that 4.2 is installed, not 4.1? Even if the user has installed system-xfree86? The reason I ask is that there are several changes in xfree86 which we are either relying on, or could rely on. 4.2 includes libGL, for example. (It is not clear what the role of

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

I personally think that this package should provide libSystem, Carbon, Cocoa and so on, each with the installed version. Packages should then depend on the OS features that they need, rather than the operating system version. Fink builds a package for itself using the injext.pl script. A dpkg

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

well debian has pseudo packages as you call them, they are -task packages, maybe we should see how they are made?? [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >There is a problem with the two pseudo packages darwin and macosx - >they don't work for the binary distro. > >Reason: these pseudo packages are only visi

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

this is an idea with merit, what do you think the script should look like or return as a value? [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >How about if the package installs a shell script in %i/bin which detects >the version number, and then this shell script is called in post-install? ¸.·´^`·.,][JFH][`·.,¸¸.·´

[Fink-devel] re: evolution's db3 dependency

> >>Did you put the mutexes back into 3.1.17? (just curious). > >In general it would be nice to know what exactly makes them require >that version of db... do their docs mention that? I don't think it's explicitly discussed, but from reading around in the source code and makefiles, it looks like

[Fink-devel] Recode 3.5 and Pybliographer

Title: Recode 3.5 and Pybliographer I don’t know if Recode 3.5 was ever a fink package, I think it was (3.6 is the current version).  In any case, a package I am trying to port called “Pybliographer” (pybliographer.sourceforge.net) that depends on recode will only work with recode 3.5 (apparentl

Re: [Fink-devel] xfree86 4.2.0 yet stable?

At 8:48 Uhr -0500 08.02.2002, David R. Morrison wrote: >Do we have a mechanism for specifying that 4.2 is installed, not 4.1? >Even if the user has installed system-xfree86? There is no easy way to do this. The system-xfree86 package just can't reflect the version of XFree86 actually installed.

[Fink-devel] Re: zlib and freetype2 (was Re: Link problems with bonobo)

At 16:18 Uhr -0500 05.02.2002, David R. Morrison wrote: >Max, along these lines, I noticed that freetype2 is included in xfree86-4.2. >Like in the case of zlib, there is a version mismatch between fink's >version and xfree86's version, so we can't simply drop the fink freetype2. > > /usr/X

[Fink-devel] Pybliographer 1.0.11 (LONG)

Title: Pybliographer 1.0.11 (LONG) Here is the full transcript of my attempt to build pybliographer.  Sorry for the length, just not sure what parts are super important (told you I was a newbie).  After this transcript I have included my .info files and .patch files.  Anyone see anything obvious

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

Uhm, it seems I made myself not at all clear, almost all of the replies I have read so far have at least in one point not understood what I meant, so I assume it was my fault :) Let me reply to all in this single mail: At 8:37 Uhr -0500 08.02.2002, David R. Morrison wrote: >How about if the p

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

okay so we need to determ the system versions, so make a configure file that will fail if no >= a certain version then of course the sucky part we need a Darwin1.3, 1.4 and 5.2 etc etc and the user has to install the pkg...that is off the top of my head i know sucks but it's a starting point so t

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

package darwin52 checks in post-install (by running script) if it is darwin 5.2 which is on the system. If not, it gives an error and the package doesn't install. (with an informative message suggesting to install darwin51 or whatever) we would need to give users advice, separately, that whenev

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

unless we add this in fink it's self with a fink base-upgrade which will run the checks and find the closest pkgs. That could be done, but then we have the dpkg problem. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >package darwin52 checks in post-install (by running script) if it is >darwin 5.2 which is on the sy

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

> > That won't work with a shared fink folder. I pointed that out > in my original mail I believe :) Yes, I really ought to learn to read... Fink could write to /sw/var/lib/dpkg/available directly (this isn't going to be shared). Changing dpkg doesn't seem like the "right thing". Peter

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

At 18:34 Uhr -0500 08.02.2002, David R. Morrison wrote: >package darwin52 checks in post-install (by running script) if it is >darwin 5.2 which is on the system. If not, it gives an error and >the package doesn't install. > >(with an informative message suggesting to install darwin51 or whatever)

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

OK, how about if the script runs when the user sources /sw/bin/init.csh . It is silent if the test passes, otherwise it warns you that the system has changed and things should be upgraded. -- Dave ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https:/

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

I don't understand this shared install thing?? one HD multisystems. This should never be in finks intressed anyhow, debian couldn't even do that. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >That still doesn't work in an install that is shared between multiple >systems. Plus it requires the user to do a change

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

one again no good for bind dist. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >OK, how about if the script runs when the user sources /sw/bin/init.csh . >It is silent if the test passes, otherwise it warns you that the system >has changed and things should be upgraded. ¸.·´^`·.,][JFH][`·.,¸¸.·´][JFH][¸.·´^`·.,

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

Actually, Justin, it is just fine for the binary distribution. The script in question will get installed by a package like darwin52 I mentioned before; other things can depend on it; so even users using apt-get will have this package. They are *all* instructed to put "source /sw/bin/init.csh" in

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

but this is assuming that the user knows to install darwin52 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >Actually, Justin, it is just fine for the binary distribution. The script >in question will get installed by a package like darwin52 I mentioned >before; other things can depend on it; so even users using apt

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

If some package which the user wants depends on (darwin51 | darwin52), the user will be forced to install one or the other. -- Dave ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

At 8:45 Uhr +0900 09.02.2002, Peter O'Gorman wrote: >>That won't work with a shared fink folder. I pointed that out in my >>original mail I believe :) >Yes, I really ought to learn to read... > >Fink could write to /sw/var/lib/dpkg/available directly (this isn't >going to be shared). >Changing d

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

On Saturday, February 9, 2002, at 10:45 AM, Peter O'Gorman wrote: >> >> That won't work with a shared fink folder. I pointed that out in my >> original mail I believe :) > Yes, I really ought to learn to read... > > Fink could write to /sw/var/lib/dpkg/available directly (this isn't > going t

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

At 11:24 Uhr +1100 09.02.2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >On Saturday, February 9, 2002, at 10:45 AM, Peter O'Gorman wrote: > >>> >>>That won't work with a shared fink folder. I pointed that out in >>>my original mail I believe :) >>Yes, I really ought to learn to read... >> >>Fink could write to

Re: [Fink-devel] ideas on pseudo packages

*looks ashamed* Err, I do that. But only because there isn't any room left on my internal disk. On Friday, February 8, 2002, at 06:48 PM, Justin Hallett wrote: > I don't understand this shared install thing?? one HD multisystems. > This > should never be in finks intressed anyhow, debian coul

Re: [Fink-devel] xfree86 4.2.0 yet stable?

Max Horn wrote: > If you need libgl, you should have a "Depends: libgl". Period. > -rootless has this. Not true. -rootless has Provides: libgl and Conflicts: libgl. I think the libgl stuff (mesa package and system-libgl) were band-aids invented to paper over deficiencies of older versions of x