On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 10:55, H.Fagard wrote: > At 9:51 -0400 25/06/03, Alexander Hansen wrote: > >Probably the best way is by asking on the list. > > OK, what about this one (that Fink is also asking when trying to > install Sketch): > > fink needs help picking an alternative to satisfy a virtual dependency. The > candidates: > > (1) freetype2-shlibs: TrueType font rendering library, version > 2, shared libs > (2) freetype2-hinting-shlibs: TrueType font rendering library, > version 2, shared libs > > I answered (1), was this OK? > It should be.
> >Here are a few things > >I've seen (for the benefit of all newbies): > > OK, noted. > > >No, it's still right. The problem is just that your system's package > >description's are out of date--all the package manager knows is that it > >needs the most recent version of gimp, according to what's on your > >system. > > This is a bit strange as far as gimp an gimp-dev are concerned. > FinkCommanders says that the current "stable" version is 1.2.3-11, > whereas the current "binary" is 1.2.4-1. Shouldn't the stable (i.e. > source) version number be greater than or equal to the binary one, > since binaries are compiled from sources (and not always available)? > Not necessarily: there are separate methods to keep track of binary and source packages; if you've done the binary updates but never updated your source descriptions then the binary version may well be later than what's listed for stable source. > >I was surprised that sodipodi brought gimp in; it looks like the culprit > >is frontline, which has a splitoff (frontline-gimp-plugin) that in turn > >requires "gimp-dev". You may be able to install just gimp-dev from > >binary. > > Sodipodi keeps on asking for gimp in its list of 127 packages (!) to > be downloaded. > Did you try installing gimp-dev alone from binary? If that didn't work there may be some other dependency that I didn't find. > >Otherwise go with sketch. > > OK, it requires far less packages (only 27), and doesn't ask for gimp. > I got the following message: > "WARNING: While resolving dependency "python23-socket-ssl" for > package "python23-2.3a2-2", package "python23-socket-ssl" was not > found." > Is this OK? > It's probably no big deal: you may not have the crypto tree enabled. If you just pick python23-socket (without -ssl) everything should be happy. > Herv� -- Alexander K. Hansen Associate Research Scientist, Columbia University, visiting MIT PSFC Levitated Dipole Experiment http://www.psfc.mit.edu/LDX ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php _______________________________________________ Fink-beginners mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-beginners
