[Package Update] zsh-4.1.1-1

[Peter A. Castro]

Hi!
  I've updated zsh to 4.1.1-1.  This is both an update to zsh and a build
based on Cygwin 1.5.5.  Additionally, zsh's editor, Zle, has been built
using ncurses instead of termcap.  The setup.hint has been tweak
appropriately.  Please upload at your earliest convenience.

URLs:
http://www.fruitbat.org/Cygwin/zsh/setup.hint
http://www.fruitbat.org/Cygwin/zsh/zsh-4.1.1-1.tar.bz2
http://www.fruitbat.org/Cygwin/zsh/zsh-4.1.1-1-src.tar.bz2
http://www.fruitbat.org/Cygwin/zsh/zsh.notes

My notes on setting up cygwin to use Zsh are here:
http://www.fruitbat.org/Cygwin/zsh/zsh.notes

General index of Cygwin packages I maintain:
http://www.fruitbat.org/Cygwin/index.html

If there are any problems with either the submission or the packages
themselves, please let me know.  The packaging process is still based on
Method Two as described in the "Cygwin Package Contributors Guide".

Thanks!

-- 
Peter A. Castro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Cats are just autistic Dogs" -- Dr. Tony Attwood

RE: [ITP] distcc - without company disclaimer

[John Morrison]

> From: Daniel Reed
>
> PROBLEM distcc
>
> On 2003-10-08T15:59+0100, John Morrison wrote:
>
> One thing I noticed is that the documentation appears to be primarily in
> usr/share/doc/distcc/, with copies of COPYING, INSTALL, README,
> and TODO in
> usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/. I believe all documentation is
> expected to be
> in usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/, but surely there should be no duplicates.

This was the standard behaviour with the method 2 script.  I know I
should customise it for the package, but I don't want to tweak it
too much - I might end up breaking it!

> Also, the package includes the *directory* usr/share/doc/Cygwin/,
> but there
> are no files in it. There should be a Cygwin-specific file either called
> distcc-2.11.1.README or distcc-2.11.1-1.README.

Again, the method 2 script created this directory.  I *really* would like
to question the requirement for a document in there - what am I going to
say that the original docs don't?  I think that that directory should be
for documents written about cygwin tools, for example cygserver/which.

I'll try and add something...

> The package also includes the directory etc/postinstall/, which is empty.
> Not a hold-up, but if you are re-packaging anyway feel free to zap it.

There will be, I plan to add a postinstall script to set it up with
(less) user intervention.

> The usr/bin/distccd.exe file has a library dependency on cygpopt-0.dll,
> which my test machine does not have. The only dependency listed in
> setup.hint is "gcc"; it looks like you might need to add either "popt" or
> "libpopt0".

Thanks, I missed that one.

> distcc.exe, distccd.exe, and distccmon-text.exe all have a dependency on
> cygwin1.dll, which should require an additional dependency on "cygwin". It
> might seem intuitive that a Cygwin package requires "cygwin", and that
> listing it is just a formality, but some packages truly might not
> depend on
> "cygwin" (such as pure-documentation packages or pure-script packages).

This has been raised before on the list, afaicr packages don't need to
list cygwin as a dependancy.  But I'll add it...

> So, in the binary package, the documentation needs to be consolidated into
> usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/, a Cygwin-specific README needs to be created
> in usr/share/doc/Cygwin/, and etc/postinstall/ should probably be killed.
> In setup.hint either "popt" or "libpopt0" should be required, and "cygwin"
> should also be required.
>
> I have not reviewed the functionality. (I am unfamiliar with the distcc
> utility, perhaps someone who voted for it? :)

Thanks for the review, it *is* appreciated, but don't let your new
position as package list maintainer bully you into reviewing all proposed
packages!  If people don't step-up to vote/review, it's going to be
quite obvious that the package shouldn't be part of the cygwin distro :)

I'll try and do the changes you recommend, but I'm away for the best
part of the next fortnight, so it might be after that I'm afraid.

Thanks again,

J.

Re: [ITP] distcc - without company disclaimer

[Lapo Luchini]

Daniel Reed wrote:

The package also includes the directory etc/postinstall/, which is empty.
Not a hold-up, but if you are re-packaging anyway feel free to zap it.
 

This is a generic patch to automatically solve that problem 0=)

--- generic-build-script2003-08-30 00:29:06.755245600 +0200
+++ generic-build-script.new2003-10-10 19:51:36.385342800 +0200
@@ -107,9 +107,6 @@
  if [ ! -d ${instdir}${prefix}/share/doc/Cygwin ]; then \
mkdir -p ${instdir}${prefix}/share/doc/Cygwin ; \
  fi && \
-  if [ ! -d ${instdir}${sysconfdir}/postinstall ]; then \
-mkdir -p ${instdir}${sysconfdir}/postinstall ; \
-  fi && \
  templist=""; \
  for f in ${srcdir}/ANNOUNCE ${srcdir}/CHANGES ${srcdir}/INSTALL \
   ${srcdir}/KNOWNBUG ${srcdir}/LICENSE ${srcdir}/README \
@@ -132,7 +129,10 @@
fi ;\
  fi ;\
  if [ -f ${srcdir}/CYGWIN-PATCHES/postinstall.sh ] ; then \
-  /usr/bin/install -m 755 ${srcdir}/CYGWIN-PATCHES/postinstall.sh \
+if [ ! -d ${instdir}${sysconfdir}/postinstall ]; then \
+  mkdir -p ${instdir}${sysconfdir}/postinstall ; \
+fi && \
+/usr/bin/install -m 755 ${srcdir}/CYGWIN-PATCHES/postinstall.sh \
  ${instdir}${sysconfdir}/postinstall/${PKG}.sh
  fi )
}
--
Lapo 'Raist' Luchini
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available)
http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)

Re: Updated: antiword-0.34-1 (was: Re: antiword-0.34)

[Daniel Reed]

On 2003-10-10T13:25+0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
) Daniel schrieb:
) > On 2003-10-08T12:33+0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
) ) >> Otherwise the package is good to go, IMO.
) ) >> Igor
) > Just went to push and the last check didn't find a Cygwin-specific README.
) I've updated the antiword package.  It includes a README now.
)  http://familiehaase.de/cywgin/antiword/antiword-0.34-1-src.tar.bz2
)  http://familiehaase.de/cywgin/antiword/antiword-0.34-1.tar.bz2
)  http://familiehaase.de/cywgin/antiword/setup.hint

Uploaded. Please send an announcement once the packages show up in your
local mirror and you have had a chance to verify correct installation with
setup.exe.

-rw-rw-r--1  192 2003-10-06 13:17:32 + antiword/setup.hint
-rw-rw-r--1   134737 2003-10-10 11:26:05 + antiword/antiword-0.34-1.tar.bz2
-rw-rw-r--1   274374 2003-10-10 11:26:19 + antiword/antiword-0.34-1-src.tar.bz2

Thanks,
-- 
Daniel Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://naim-users.org/nmlorg/   http://naim.n.ml.org/
It is so easy to miss pretty trivial solutions to problems deemed
complicated.  The goal of a scientist is to find an interesting problem,
and live off it for a while.  The goal of an engineer is to evade
interesting problems :) -- Vadim Antonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on NANOG

Re: Proposing TCM as a cygwin package

[Daniel Reed]

PROBLEM tcm

On 2003-01-27T12:16+0100, Daniel Bößwetter wrote:
) TCM 2.20 has been released last week (see
) http://wwwhome.cs.utwente.nl/~tcm/) and I have made source and binary
) packages for Cygwin now. At
)
) http://home.in.tum.de/~boesswet/tcm_cygwin.html

This package expands into usr/share/doc/Cygwin/tcm-2.20.README and then a
bunch of things under usr/X11R6/ (usr/X11R6/doc/tcm-2.20/*,
usr/X11R6/man/man1/*, usr/X11R6/bin/*, and usr/X11R6/share/tcm-2.20/*).

This package has been pending for a *long* time, but I think I should ask:
Should it be reviewed by cygwin-xfree instead of cygwin-apps?

http://cygwin.com/setup.html does not mention placing binaries in any
location other than usr/bin/*, and at least one package has been redirected
from the cygwin-apps track to cygwin-xfree recently:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-06/msg00043.html

If this does fall under cygwin-apps since it is not an "X package" but a
"package that requires X", should the package be recreated with prefix set
to /usr instead of /usr/X11R6?

Either way, should there be a section in setup.html about Cygwin packages
that depend on Cygwin/XFree86, but are not part of Cygwin/XFree86?

-- 
Daniel Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://naim-users.org/nmlorg/   http://naim.n.ml.org/
It is so easy to miss pretty trivial solutions to problems deemed
complicated.  The goal of a scientist is to find an interesting problem,
and live off it for a while.  The goal of an engineer is to evade
interesting problems :) -- Vadim Antonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on NANOG

Re: [ITP] distcc - without company disclaimer

[Daniel Reed]

PROBLEM distcc

On 2003-10-08T15:59+0100, John Morrison wrote:
) > sdesc: "A fast, free, distributed C/C++ compiler"
) > ldesc: "is a program to distribute builds of C, C++, Objective C or
) > Objective C++ code across several machines on a network" requires: gcc
) > category: Devel
) 

) 

) 

One thing I noticed is that the documentation appears to be primarily in
usr/share/doc/distcc/, with copies of COPYING, INSTALL, README, and TODO in
usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/. I believe all documentation is expected to be
in usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/, but surely there should be no duplicates.

Also, the package includes the *directory* usr/share/doc/Cygwin/, but there
are no files in it. There should be a Cygwin-specific file either called
distcc-2.11.1.README or distcc-2.11.1-1.README.

The package also includes the directory etc/postinstall/, which is empty.
Not a hold-up, but if you are re-packaging anyway feel free to zap it.

The usr/bin/distccd.exe file has a library dependency on cygpopt-0.dll,
which my test machine does not have. The only dependency listed in
setup.hint is "gcc"; it looks like you might need to add either "popt" or
"libpopt0".

distcc.exe, distccd.exe, and distccmon-text.exe all have a dependency on
cygwin1.dll, which should require an additional dependency on "cygwin". It
might seem intuitive that a Cygwin package requires "cygwin", and that
listing it is just a formality, but some packages truly might not depend on
"cygwin" (such as pure-documentation packages or pure-script packages).


So, in the binary package, the documentation needs to be consolidated into
usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/, a Cygwin-specific README needs to be created
in usr/share/doc/Cygwin/, and etc/postinstall/ should probably be killed.
In setup.hint either "popt" or "libpopt0" should be required, and "cygwin"
should also be required.

I have not reviewed the functionality. (I am unfamiliar with the distcc
utility, perhaps someone who voted for it? :)

-- 
Daniel Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://naim-users.org/nmlorg/   http://naim.n.ml.org/
"If you place a small value on yourself, rest assured, the world will
not raise your price."

Re: Updated: antiword-0.34-1 (was: Re: antiword-0.34)

[Gerrit P. Haase]

Igor schrieb:

> On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:

>> Daniel schrieb:
>> > Just went to push and the last check didn't find a Cygwin-specific README.

>> I've updated the antiword package.  It includes a README now.
>> I also tried to fix the problem Igor reported.  Igor, if you could try

> Unfortunately, I still get the warning (i.e., no change).  There is no
> need for a special document, even -- simply run "antiword -m cp1251"

I contacted the Author about this issue, hopefully he will fix it.


Gerrit
-- 
=^..^=

Re: Updated: antiword-0.34-1 (was: Re: antiword-0.34)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:

> Daniel schrieb:
>
> > On 2003-10-08T12:33+0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> ) >> Otherwise the package is good to go, IMO.
> ) >> Igor
> > ) Hey, Daniel, there were three votes and a positive review, lets push it
> > ) on the mirrors;-)
>
> > Just went to push and the last check didn't find a Cygwin-specific README.
>
> I've updated the antiword package.  It includes a README now.
> I also tried to fix the problem Igor reported.  Igor, if you could try
> again with your settings and your special text document, how does it
> acts now when hitting an undefined character?  Many thanks to Benny for
> the hint where and what to fix.

Gerrit,

Unfortunately, I still get the warning (i.e., no change).  There is no
need for a special document, even -- simply run "antiword -m cp1251"
(yes, with no document).  Apparently, the warning shows up while parsing
the mapping file, so I doubt it's particularly important, in any case...
Igor
-- 
http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
  |\  _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'   Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
'---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route
to the bathroom is a major career booster."  -- Patrick Naughton

Updated: antiword-0.34-1 (was: Re: antiword-0.34)

[Gerrit P. Haase]

Daniel schrieb:

> On 2003-10-08T12:33+0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
) >> Otherwise the package is good to go, IMO.
) >> Igor
> ) Hey, Daniel, there were three votes and a positive review, lets push it
> ) on the mirrors;-)

> Just went to push and the last check didn't find a Cygwin-specific README.

I've updated the antiword package.  It includes a README now.
I also tried to fix the problem Igor reported.  Igor, if you could try
again with your settings and your special text document, how does it
acts now when hitting an undefined character?  Many thanks to Benny for
the hint where and what to fix.

 http://familiehaase.de/cywgin/antiword/antiword-0.34-1-src.tar.bz2
 http://familiehaase.de/cywgin/antiword/antiword-0.34-1.tar.bz2
 http://familiehaase.de/cywgin/antiword/setup.hint


Gerrit
-- 
=^..^=