Let's just wait until it is out of beta. I'm not sure what you mean by
(3). Currently we get the sources from git and then strip the unneeded /
non-free stuff. If you release a dlr-languages tarball that would be
even better.
Again, #debian-cli @ OFTC is the best place to discuss this with us.
Ok, I will make a tar ball. Should I attach it here?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/831402
Title:
dlr-languages version 20090805+git.e6b28d27+dfsg-3 failed to build in
oneiric
To
It would be best if there were a proper upstream release, i.e.
distributed through your website.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/831402
Title:
dlr-languages version
Ok, I have a new version of the dlr-languages that builds the new
packages. Some notes and questions:
1) The new version removes Merlin and ndp, and replaces those with
IronLanguages.
2) Minimal changes made to 0.9 to make this work. I'm calling this 1.0.
3) How should I make this available?
If anyone wants to seriously work on this, please come to #debian-cli on
irc.oftc.net and work with the CLI libraries team there. As our snapshot
is from 2009, I don't know how possible it would be to extract patches
from git which fix the 2.10 compatibility issues, but people are more
than
Yes, there are a few unneeded .exe and .dll files in the original
source. I will look at that.
I think it would be easier to start with a new snapshot, as the old one
had some IronRuby-specific items (like using rake, which is no longer
needed, AFAIK).
The new snapshot would just use Mono's
Hey,
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 01:23:11PM -, Doug Blank wrote:
Yes, there are a few unneeded .exe and .dll files in the original
source. I will look at that.
I think it would be easier to start with a new snapshot, as the old one
had some IronRuby-specific items (like using rake, which is
Patches would be strongly preferable for now, and ideally this would get
fixed in Debian.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/831402
Title:
dlr-languages version
Currently dlr-languages builds successfully from git with Mono 2.10.2:
% git clone https://github.com/IronLanguages/main.git IronLanguages
% cd IronLanguages
% xbuild Solutions/Ruby.sln
% xbuild Solutions/IronPython.Mono.sln
Do we need to supply you with patches, or can just use the main
2011-09-21 21:03:59 INFORemoving candidates:
2011-09-21 21:03:59 INFOdlr-languages 20090805+git.e6b28d27+dfsg-4 in
oneiric
2011-09-21 21:03:59 INFORemoved-by: Matthias Klose
2011-09-21 21:03:59 INFOComment: FTFBS in oneiric, see LP: #831402, oneiric
has a newer mono than
(Since there are no reverse-depends.)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/831402
Title:
dlr-languages version 20090805+git.e6b28d27+dfsg-3 failed to build in
oneiric
To manage
Only the binaries, or the source as well? Either is fine with me though
- let me know what you want to do.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/831402
Title:
dlr-languages version
Only the binaries. I hope that someone will offer to fix it up in
Debian, but if not then we'll remove it (+ source) from both.
So yeah, please remove the binaries only. We'll revisit this for P.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed
It's not clear what we'll do with this in Debian yet. Apparently there
is a new upstream release which has 4.0 compatibility but nobody has
gotten around to DFSGing it. It might be best to remove the binaries
from Oneiric. Subscibing -archive for input. Is this a good idea?
--
You received this
14 matches
Mail list logo
