David R. Morrison wrote: [] > Now it is true that there hasn't been a bindist in two years, and > there has never been one for 10.5.
I want to add an argument to this discussion that I haven't heard recently, although it has (or should have) been staring us in the face for a long time: There *is* actually a bindist, although labelled "unofficial". I mean the one at the university of Tokyo. This is, as far as I understand from the little information they transmit to the rest of the Fink community, - created by a fully automatic procedure, - it is up-to-date, - it has log files that can be seen by everyone but are currently largely ignored, (see for example <http://fink.sodan.ecc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/build-10.4-i386/2008-06-13/>) - and it even has a pangocairo branch. Note that I am not proposing to "officialize" their bindist. But I think the wealth of information contained in particular in their log files (which show at least which packages build and which don't and why) could at least be used as a basis for assessing the difficulties of creating an "official" bindist. Their bindist is, of course, based on the unstable tree... In the long run, their automatic build system might be worth looking at as a model, if Fink ever gets its hands on hardware able to support such a thing. -- Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
