On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:30:32AM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:17:44AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > >I hate to do this at this late point (and I *really* hate it when people
> > >do it to me) but I didn't notice the slightly nonstandard practice of
> > >naming the binary 'aspell-bin'. I'd like to change that. Otherwise
> > >we have a base package which only contains source, which is also
> > >unusual. I'd prefer to "mv aspell-{bin-,}0.50.3-1.tar.bz2" and
> > >put it at the top level of the aspell directory and move everything else
> > >underneath it.
> > >
> > >Gareth, do you have a problem with that?
> >
> > And another point -- I'd like to make aspell depend on aspell-en.
> > Otherwise, I suspect that the cygwin mailing list will be constantly
> > complaining about aspell not working.
> >
> > cgf
>
> There's no setup.hint for the aspell-en package (which, I assume, will
> depend on aspell).
OK, OK, it's a long while ago, but there actually was one in
http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-06/msg00161.html:
@ aspell-en
sdesc: "Aspell english dictionary"
requires: cygwin aspell
category: Utils
> BTW, beware of circular dependences -- if both aspell
> and aspell-en have postinstall scripts, and the one in aspell-en uses
> aspell, it might be run before aspell's postinstall script runs, so aspell
> may be in an inconsistent state. I don't think this is a problem, but the
> maintainers should both be aware of this and coordinate the postinstall
> scripts.
Aspell-en doesn't have a post-install script.
rlc
--
DeVries' Dilemma:
If you hit two keys on the typewriter, the one you don't want
hits the paper.
