On 28/05/2008, at 3:59 PM, Xavier wrote: > Oops, I forgot to do some communication. > When you started reporting macosx/bsd portability problems, I looked > back at an old mail which was taken a bit too seriously and turned > into a flamewar instead of something useful : > http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2007-October/009659.html > So it mentioned du and cp problems, which you already found again. > I don't understand the source vs . one because source is bash builtin, > but Dan mentioned this already back then.
I remember reading that thread, but I completely forgot about it. I didn't really understand it then, and I still don't understand it now - it just seems like a huge flamewar. Briefly looking at the pacman-g2 project, the whole thing (pacman vs pacman-g2) looks like a mess, but I won't get into that. It does look like there is interest in a BSD port. I have heard a lot of requests on IRC for "ArchBSD" and such, and at least a few BSD users would like pacman. As for OSX, I'm making a libalpm frontend, so we'll see if there's interest. Fortunately pacman seems to be working perfectly now, it's just the dev toolset (makepkg, repo-add, etc) that needs porting. I haven't found any problems with source, it seems to be working fine for me, so I don't understand that one either. > The last point was that chown problem so I patched it two days ago : > http://shining.toofishes.net/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=pacman.git;a=commitdiff;h=e10f9e0d79598a27d1e9c48ba0f063400537b2ef I was wondering where your repo was :P. -- Sebastian Nowicki _______________________________________________ pacman-dev mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
