[LinPrj] experiences with tzafrir's r2l-0.1.0

2001-09-11 Thread mulix
* first of all, the links in src/ are broken, which led to a spectacular make fork bomb :) * make clean does some very funky things (log attached) * compiling all of the plugins is not a good idea - on my system compilation barfs because i dont have the wm headers. perhaphs (if not autoconf then

Re: [LinPrj] experiences with tzafrir's r2l-0.1.0

2001-09-11 Thread Tzafrir Cohen
Hi On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, mulix wrote: > * first of all, the links in src/ are broken, which led to a spectacular > make fork bomb :) Hmmm... I was sure that the ln command always tries to create relative symlinks. even if I give full pathes for both the source and te target. But looking at the

Re: [LinPrj] experiences with tzafrir's r2l-0.1.0

2001-09-11 Thread Tzafrir Cohen
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > Hi > > On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, mulix wrote: > > > * first of all, the links in src/ are broken, which led to a spectacular > > make fork bomb :) > > Hmmm... I was sure that the ln command always tries to create relative > symlinks. even if I give full p

Re: [LinPrj] experiences with tzafrir's r2l-0.1.0

2001-09-11 Thread mulix
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > > * a rudimentary check of biditext shows that it works. a rudimentary > > check of r2llib didnt take place because i had no idea how to test it - > > emil? (my system has no hebrew specially set up, except maybe the > > turkish patch for netscape). [i

Re: [LinPrj] experiences with tzafrir's r2l-0.1.0

2001-09-11 Thread Tzafrir Cohen
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, mulix wrote: > On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > thanks. checknig with it - refreshd works :) > now i get a nice segmentation violation in 'r2l'. will you be acting as > the clearing house for all r2l patches (r2llib, biditext, r2l-plugins, > refreshd) or should we

Re: [LinPrj] experiences with tzafrir's r2l-0.1.0

2001-09-11 Thread mulix
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > I've updated only the r2l-package and r2l tarballs (the rpm managed to > build just fine anyway) > > http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/R2L/r2l-tarball/r2l-0.1.1.tar.gz > http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/R2L/r2l-tarball/r2l-package.0.1.1.tar.gz r2l-p

Re: [LinPrj] experiences with tzafrir's r2l-0.1.0

2001-09-11 Thread Tzafrir Cohen
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, mulix wrote: > On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > > > I've updated only the r2l-package and r2l tarballs (the rpm managed to > > build just fine anyway) > > > > http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/R2L/r2l-tarball/r2l-0.1.1.tar.gz > > http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir

Re: [LinPrj] experiences with tzafrir's r2l-0.1.0

2001-09-11 Thread Kohn Emil Dan
Hi muli, On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, mulix wrote: > On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > > > > BTW: emil: the only warning I saw was: > > > > g++ -g -D_REENTRANT -Wall -pedantic > > -I/home/tzafrir/projects/LinClub/BiditextGui/r2l-tarball/r2l-0.1.1/include > > -I/home/tzafrir/projects/LinC

[LinPrj] r2llib-0.34 and biditext-0.9.6 "wailing banshees" released

2001-09-11 Thread mulix
hi guys, http://www.pointer.co.il/~mulix/r2l/r2llib-0.34.tar.gz http://www.pointer.co.il/~mulix/r2l/biditext-0.9.6.tar.gz tiny releases, no reason to upgrade (until your name is tzafrir and you are building the r2l-all package). changes: * imported to cvs (cvs server running on my machine, i c

Re: [LinPrj] experiences with tzafrir's r2l-0.1.0

2001-09-11 Thread mulix
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Kohn Emil Dan wrote: > > i saw some other errors when compiling with gcc3.0. i'll make a patch > > later. > > Are those errors or just warnings? warnings, and none of them were in refreshd. i fixed the warnings in r2llib and biditext (missing #include ). in the plugins dir