From: Adam H. Pendleton
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 November 2003
15:10To: Dave PageCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Andreas Pflug;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers]
wxGTK2ud BuildRequires dependencies
Dave Page wrote:
No. They cannot retroactively change
Dave Page wrote:
No. They cannot retroactively change the licence on what we already
have.
I was thinking more in terms of future wxWindows snapshots. Are we
going to be stuck with what we currently have, or will we be able to
integrate future wxWindows code?
ahp
> -Original Message-
> From: Adam H. Pendleton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 18 November 2003 13:30
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Dave Page; Andreas Pflug; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxGTK2ud BuildRequires dependencies
>
>
Le Mardi 18 Novembre 2003 14:29, Adam H. Pendleton a écrit :
> This sounds quite ominous considering that we do exactly that:
> distribute a private port of wxWindows. Also, depending on the license
> they choose to distribute wxWindows under, could it cause problems with
> our product (i.e. GPL v
Jean-Michel POURE wrote:
- Contributions to the wxWindows project will not be licensed under a license
(such as the "BSD-style" license) that allows private ports to be
distributed.
This sounds quite ominous considering that we do exactly that:
distribute a private port of wxWindows. Also,
> -Original Message-
> From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 18 November 2003 09:53
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxGTK2ud BuildRequires dependencies
>
> I'm very tired of discussing anything with
Dave Page wrote:
Still absolutely no, there's not a haze of work in committing
my patches, not even commenting on it.
Are you going to bother submitting more now they will probably reject
them out of hand anyway?
I'll still post patches, if I believe they are necessary. The last
mess
Le Mardi 18 Novembre 2003 09:08, Dave Page a écrit :
> For those that don't know, the wx team want all patch submitters to
> sign over copyright etc. on their code - this is at request of Borland
Dear all,
To summarise what Andreas wrote on the wx list (from memory): the individual
contributors
Le Lundi 17 Novembre 2003 21:55, Raphaël Enrici a écrit :
> I think Adam is right regarding dependencies, it's not usefull (and can
> get you to mistake if packages change) to specify all these
> dependencies. FYI Debian's dependencies I use are these (I cut debian
> specific things)
>
> Build-Depe
> -Original Message-
> From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 17 November 2003 23:23
> To: Adam H. Pendleton
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxGTK2ud BuildRequires dependencies
>
> Adam H. Pendleton
Adam H. Pendleton wrote:
Jean-Michel POURE wrote:
A lot more. A least, expat-devel, pango-devel, zlib-devel, X11-foo-devel,
iconv-devel, etc... See the list below. Under SuSE and Mandrake, many of
these libraries have different naming schemes.
I may be wrong on this one, but I don't think th
Adam H. Pendleton wrote:
So are we going to be using the official wxWindows RPMs from now on?
Are we going to run into any problems since we currently use a build of
wxWindows that differs from the "official" build?
Still absolutely no, there's not a haze of work in committing my
patches, n
Hi Adam,
Thanks for your explainations. The gtk-devel seems convincing. But there are
other libraries. Feel free to submit a patch and I will integrate it
immediately.
> What do you mean by automatic binary dependencies? I thought that RPM
> dependencies were enforced by the "Requires:" line i
Jean-Michel POURE wrote:
A lot more. A least, expat-devel, pango-devel, zlib-devel, X11-foo-devel,
iconv-devel, etc... See the list below. Under SuSE and Mandrake, many of
these libraries have different naming schemes.
I may be wrong on this one, but I don't think there's any need to l
Dear Adam,
> Really? Am I missing something, or would this line suffice (granted,
> this is the RH line, but...):
> BuildRequires: gtk2-devel, libjpeg-devel, libpng-devel, libtiff-devel
A lot more. A least, expat-devel, pango-devel, zlib-devel, X11-foo-devel,
iconv-devel, etc... See the list be
Jean-Michel POURE wrote:
Yes, it is perfectly possible. But, there are so many-many build-time
depencies in wxWindows. Listing them all is quite difficult.
Really? Am I missing something, or would this line suffice (granted,
this is the RH line, but...):
BuildRequires: gtk2-devel, lib
Le Lundi 17 Novembre 2003 19:44, vous avez écrit :
> I realize it's a pain, but is it not possible to work the different sets
> of BuildRequires into the spec file, using distribution-dependent
> conditional statements?
Yes, it is perfectly possible. But, there are so many-many build-time
depenci
Jean-Michel POURE wrote:
Dear Devrim,
Finally, I commented out the BuildRequires dependencies for wxGTK2ud in CVS.
It appears that library names needed at build time are not the same under
RedHat, Mandrake and SuSE. So, my 'stupid' recommended way is:
rpmbuild --rebuild wxGTK2ud-2.5-.src.r
Le Dimanche 16 Novembre 2003 12:52, Devrim GUNDUZ a écrit :
> So: I'll begin building tomorrow and send the URLs to you.
> I'm glad that I found another chance to contribute the project, after
> translation.
Thanks. For sure, it is easier than sending an email. Cheers, J-Michel
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Jean-Michel,
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003, Jean-Michel POURE wrote:
> Do not hesitate to send me by email the wxGTK2ud (with 'sys' libraries) and
> pgAdmin3 (S)RPMs and I will publish them in a new Fedora section. Do not
> hesitate to sign your email
Dear Devrim,
Finally, I commented out the BuildRequires dependencies for wxGTK2ud in CVS.
It appears that library names needed at build time are not the same under
RedHat, Mandrake and SuSE. So, my 'stupid' recommended way is:
rpmbuild --rebuild wxGTK2ud-2.5-.src.rpm 2>&1 | tee
wxGTK2ud-2
21 matches
Mail list logo
