Re: Maintainer searched
Dave Korn wrote: On 13 June 2006 11:37, Corinna Vinschen wrote: have (i.e. GCC, Perl). gcc* Dave Korn? I'd like to ask Yaakov, Max, Dave and Yitzchak, are you taking over, or are you still considering to take over? It would be nice to have that sorted out. I've got a release ready to go on a pen drive here at work with me. It'll have to be an experimental release initially because there's some unexplained regressions in the testsuite (branch probability .gcda file generation) but it ought to help the people with the std::string-vs-dlls problem. On my lunch hour this afternoon I'll find a bit of webspace somewhere that I can dump it to for upload and post back. Hmm, reading between the lines I could assume that this is a yay, I'm taking over maintainership, but I'm born with a certain amount of stubbornness, so I'm still missing a clear answer. Are you taking over, yay or nay? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
Re: Maintainer searched
Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote: check Yaakov S? libxml2* Yaakov S? libxslt Yaakov S? [...] I am taking those packages and already have newer versions ready [...] Thanks, I changed the maintainer of these packages in my secret maintainers file accordingly. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
Re: Maintainer searched
Max Bowsher wrote: Corinna Vinschen wrote: libdb* Not sourceful: built by db*. libgnutls11 Not sourceful: built by gnutls. libopencdk8 Not sourceful: built by opencdk. Yeah, I guessed so. Previously, I said I'd look at db*/expat after I was done with PHP - PHP is now in final stages of ITP, so I'm clear to proceed. I'll take db* and expat if Gerrit still wants to pass them on (they were on his maybe-keep list). So we still need Gerrit's confirmation. Gerrit? You there? After I'm done with db* and expat, I could possibly consider gnutls if it remains unclaimed at that time. I'm asking for definitive statements only. This is for my maintainers file, which I don't change without definitive statements. I'm not sure if my maintainers file is still correct, anyway. I think I'll send the list again at one point so people can have a look if it's more or less ok. Btw., maybe we should start to enforce the maintainer comment line in the setup.hint files. This way the maintainer documentation would be inline with the packages and couldn't get lost by catastrphies or sheer laziness. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
RE: Maintainer searched
On 14 June 2006 14:19, Corinna Vinschen wrote: Dave Korn wrote: On 13 June 2006 11:37, Corinna Vinschen wrote: have (i.e. GCC, Perl). gcc* Dave Korn? I'd like to ask Yaakov, Max, Dave and Yitzchak, are you taking over, or are you still considering to take over? It would be nice to have that sorted out. I've got a release ready to go on a pen drive here at work with me. It'll have to be an experimental release initially because there's some unexplained regressions in the testsuite (branch probability .gcda file generation) but it ought to help the people with the std::string-vs-dlls problem. On my lunch hour this afternoon I'll find a bit of webspace somewhere that I can dump it to for upload and post back. Hmm, reading between the lines I could assume that this is a yay, I'm taking over maintainership, but I'm born with a certain amount of stubbornness, so I'm still missing a clear answer. Are you taking over, yay or nay? Yes, absolutely so. Your reading between the lines was correct: I wouldn't be preparing releases if I wasn't willing to do so! cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today
Re: Maintainer searched
On Jun 14 14:42, Dave Korn wrote: On 14 June 2006 14:19, Corinna Vinschen wrote: Dave Korn wrote: I've got a release ready to go on a pen drive here at work with me. It'll have to be an experimental release initially because there's some unexplained regressions in the testsuite (branch probability .gcda file generation) but it ought to help the people with the std::string-vs-dlls problem. On my lunch hour this afternoon I'll find a bit of webspace somewhere that I can dump it to for upload and post back. Hmm, reading between the lines I could assume that this is a yay, I'm taking over maintainership, but I'm born with a certain amount of stubbornness, so I'm still missing a clear answer. Are you taking over, yay or nay? Yes, absolutely so. Your reading between the lines was correct: I wouldn't be preparing releases if I wasn't willing to do so! Cool, thanks. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
Re: Maintainer searched
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 12:36:46PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On May 4 18:06, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:24:19PM +0200, wrote: Hello, there is not enough time to maintain all my packages. Who wants to maintain one or more of my packages, maybe Yaakov wants to take over some of the GTK+ related packages? Then there are some more major packages which really require a maintainer with more time than I have (i.e. GCC, Perl). If it's ok with you, I'll take perl. Since there hasn't been much movement lately, I tracked which of Gerrit's packages have been actually taken over. As I see it now, the following packages remain to be taken over, please correct me if I missed something: antiword check Yaakov S? db* Max Bowsher? enscript exif expat Max Bowsher? freeglut gcc*Dave Korn? gconf2 gnutls* indent jasper libdb* libexif* libfpx libgnutls11 libmng libopencdk8 libtasn1 libwmf libxml2*Yaakov S? libxslt Yaakov S? opencdk openjade opensp perl,perl_manpages Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes? I'd like to ask Yaakov, Max, Dave and Yitzchak, are you taking over, or are you still considering to take over? It would be nice to have that sorted out. Unless Gerrit objects (and he seems to have stopped responding to mail, so that seems unlikely) I'm taking over. I should have a release of perl 5.8.8 ready soon.
Re: Maintainer searched
On May 4 18:06, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:24:19PM +0200, wrote: Hello, there is not enough time to maintain all my packages. Who wants to maintain one or more of my packages, maybe Yaakov wants to take over some of the GTK+ related packages? Then there are some more major packages which really require a maintainer with more time than I have (i.e. GCC, Perl). If it's ok with you, I'll take perl. Since there hasn't been much movement lately, I tracked which of Gerrit's packages have been actually taken over. As I see it now, the following packages remain to be taken over, please correct me if I missed something: antiword check Yaakov S? db* Max Bowsher? enscript exif expat Max Bowsher? freeglut gcc* Dave Korn? gconf2 gnutls* indent jasper libdb* libexif* libfpx libgnutls11 libmng libopencdk8 libtasn1 libwmf libxml2* Yaakov S? libxslt Yaakov S? opencdk openjade opensp perl,perl_manpagesYitzchak Scott-Thoennes? I'd like to ask Yaakov, Max, Dave and Yitzchak, are you taking over, or are you still considering to take over? It would be nice to have that sorted out. Anybody opting for the remaining packages? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
RE: Maintainer searched
On 13 June 2006 11:37, Corinna Vinschen wrote: have (i.e. GCC, Perl). gcc*Dave Korn? I'd like to ask Yaakov, Max, Dave and Yitzchak, are you taking over, or are you still considering to take over? It would be nice to have that sorted out. I've got a release ready to go on a pen drive here at work with me. It'll have to be an experimental release initially because there's some unexplained regressions in the testsuite (branch probability .gcda file generation) but it ought to help the people with the std::string-vs-dlls problem. On my lunch hour this afternoon I'll find a bit of webspace somewhere that I can dump it to for upload and post back. cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today
Re: Maintainer searched
Corinna Vinschen wrote: On May 4 18:06, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:24:19PM +0200, wrote: Hello, there is not enough time to maintain all my packages. Who wants to maintain one or more of my packages, maybe Yaakov wants to take over some of the GTK+ related packages? Then there are some more major packages which really require a maintainer with more time than I have (i.e. GCC, Perl). If it's ok with you, I'll take perl. Since there hasn't been much movement lately, I tracked which of Gerrit's packages have been actually taken over. As I see it now, the following packages remain to be taken over, please correct me if I missed something: libdb* Not sourceful: built by db*. libgnutls11 Not sourceful: built by gnutls. libopencdk8 Not sourceful: built by opencdk. (And is missing an external-source: hint to declare this!) db* Max Bowsher? expat Max Bowsher? libxml2*Yaakov S? libxslt Yaakov S? I'd like to ask Yaakov, Max, Dave and Yitzchak, are you taking over, or are you still considering to take over? It would be nice to have that sorted out. Previously, I said I'd look at db*/expat after I was done with PHP - PHP is now in final stages of ITP, so I'm clear to proceed. I'll take db* and expat if Gerrit still wants to pass them on (they were on his maybe-keep list). I could take libxml2* and libxslt if Yaakov didn't want them. Anybody opting for the remaining packages? After I'm done with db* and expat, I could possibly consider gnutls if it remains unclaimed at that time. Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Maintainer searched
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Corinna Vinschen wrote: Since there hasn't been much movement lately, I tracked which of Gerrit's packages have been actually taken over. As I see it now, the following packages remain to be taken over, please correct me if I missed something: check Yaakov S? libxml2*Yaakov S? libxslt Yaakov S? I'd like to ask Yaakov, Max, Dave and Yitzchak, are you taking over, or are you still considering to take over? It would be nice to have that sorted out. I am taking those packages and already have newer versions ready, but as I've been using snapshots as of late, I can't guarantee that the new versions work with 1.5.19-4. Yaakov -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (Cygwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEju/tpiWmPGlmQSMRAmJJAJ9IRN/7r3vpYPD7Cqj6sRcJPN47yQCcD76Q NtO8Q0foPGEHX3737XLNvV0= =Zumg -END PGP SIGNATURE-
New gmp and mfpr (was RE: Maintainer searched)
From: Dave Korn I'm wondering if Dave Korn or Brian Dessent would consider maintaining gcc? Well I didn't finish rolling the lot over the weekend owing to reasons I'll explain on the talk list, but I'm saying yes anyway. First thing I'll do will be reroll a 3.4.4-2 with the fix for PR-whateveritis about the C++ strings-vs-dlls problem. Once that's done and seems ok, I'll look at making an experimental package from one of the gcc 4 series. (Anyone got any preferences?) I am tempted to punt for 4.2 as a test release. It is now in stage 3, so by the time we shake out any bugs it will be released. gmp and mfpr are required for gfortran. I have packages of gmp-4.2 and mfpr-2.2.0 built and almost ready to go, and am using them for gcc-4.2 test builds I have discussed this off list with Lapo and he is happy for me take over as maintainer. I will try and get something out for review over the weekend. David NOTICE This e-mail and any attachments are private and confidential and may contain privileged information. If you are not an authorised recipient, the copying or distribution of this e-mail and any attachments is prohibited and you must not read, print or act in reliance on this e-mail or attachments. This notice should not be removed.
RE: Maintainer searched
On 04 May 2006 10:22, Dave Korn wrote: On 03 May 2006 21:43, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:24:19PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: there is not enough time to maintain all my packages. Who wants to maintain one or more of my packages, maybe Yaakov wants to take over some of the GTK+ related packages? Then there are some more major packages which really require a maintainer with more time than I have (i.e. GCC, Perl). Hi Gerrit, I completely understand. I'm wondering if Dave Korn or Brian Dessent would consider maintaining gcc? cgf I will definitely consider this quite seriously. I'm always a little stretched for time but gcc is just one thing to take care of (albeit several packages) and I do have a lot of compiler experience. I'll spend some time at the weekend reading all the gbs and packaging-related docs and rolling a set of releasable gcc packages so I can get a feel for the amount of workload it's likely to place on me and come back to the list with a definite answer Monday. Well I didn't finish rolling the lot over the weekend owing to reasons I'll explain on the talk list, but I'm saying yes anyway. First thing I'll do will be reroll a 3.4.4-2 with the fix for PR-whateveritis about the C++ strings-vs-dlls problem. Once that's done and seems ok, I'll look at making an experimental package from one of the gcc 4 series. (Anyone got any preferences?) cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today
Re: Maintainer searched
Dave Korn wrote:
Well I didn't finish rolling the lot over the weekend owing to reasons I'll
explain on the talk list, but I'm saying yes anyway. First thing I'll do will
be reroll a 3.4.4-2 with the fix for PR-whateveritis about the C++
24196
It also fixes this specific problem on 4.1.0 (mingw; haven't tried
cygwin but I assume it'll work in 4.1.0 on our platform too)
strings-vs-dlls problem. Once that's done and seems ok, I'll look at making
an experimental package from one of the gcc 4 series. (Anyone got any
preferences?)
Either 4.1.[0,1] or the 4.2.0 devel branch. The mingw guys decided to
wait out the 4.0.x series because, as of last May, there were just too
many issues on windows with that series. It's an open question whether
that is also true of 4.1.x or even 4.2.devel.
I built 4.1.0 (on mingw), c/c++/fortran, and it seemed to work okay --
of course, for fortran, I needed gmp and mpfr. However, there are a few
issues:
=
(1) libjava is hopelessly broken, according to Danny Smith. I have to
concur -- I was not able to get it to build at all, so I gave up
including the java compiler in my 4.1.0 build. According to Danny, the
java compiler requires a shared libjava (and shared libgcc) -- but see
below about DLLs. (According to Danny, it takes over 1G RAM to
successfully turn a libjava.a into a DLL+implib ; I never even got
libjava.a to build so I can't verify).
Note that the autoconfigury of gcc STILL does not support
--enable-shared for cygwin or mingw, so people are still creating DLLs
from their .a's -- a dangerous and flaky procedure at best, and it did
NOT work for me.
=
(2) bootstrapping ADA requires the gnat tool from the ADAcore project --
but that, in turn, requires the build to use Dwarf2 exceptions.
However, switching to dwarf2 has significant consequences:
(a) breaks backwards compatibility for exception handling -- this
probably only affects C++ libraries currently in the cygwin
distribution, plus any other users' private C++ stuff
(b) dwarf2 means that any exceptions throw by functions passed as
callbacks to the w32api will NOT be caught. Unfortunately, this is a
common paradigm for win32 GUI applications...
(c) You can't have C/C++/Fortran be sjlj, while ada is dwarf2 -- at
least not in the same build.
=
(3) The patch by Danny Smith to allow throwing exceptions across DLL
boundaries has NOT been ported to any 4.x series -- nor will it be.
According to Danny, I've finally convinced myself
that the patch is more trouble than its worth. Libstdc++/libgcc as
dll's is how I work it in my own trre. So you are on your own.
(a) unfortunately, when I tried to make DLLs post-build out of
libgcc.a, libsupc++.a, and libstdc++.a, I couldn't get them to work --
every app I compiled died a horrible death before main() -- while they
worked if I linked against static runtime libraries.
Supposedly, this is the correct procedure, at least until the
autotoolization of the libgcc/libsupc++/libstdc++/libgfortran/etc is
upgraded to support shared-lib-building on cygwin/mingw: AFTER
completing the static build,
dlltool --output.def libstdc++.def --export-all libstdc++.a
gcc -shared -o libstdc++.dll -Wl,--out-implib,libstdc++.dll.a \
libstdc++.def libstdc++.a
(Actually, I have a slightly more complicated recipe that uses version
numbers and also munges the .la files appropriately, I'll send that
later). Not that it actually gave me a working build, mind you, but...
(b) there was a reported issue with exporting vtables and type_info
with the shared libgcc/libstdc++/libsupc++ DLLs that, according to
Danny, has not yet been worked out.
Not being able to catch an exception thrown from a DLL is a huge
restriction. It *must* be fixed before a 4.x C++ compiler is released
-- and there are two options:
(1) forward port Danny's old patch -- against his wishes, or
(2) get @#^@@#$ shared libgcc/libsupc++/libstdc++ to work
Neither is trivial.
=
There are a number of patches to the our 3.4.x packages that are
cygwin-specific but have never made it in to the 4.x CVS. I don't
know what they are, but here's a for instance:
class declspec(dllimport) MyForwardDeclaration;
is necessary if you want to import MyForwardDeclaration from a DLL using
the MSVC++ compiler. On gcc, however, you don't need to include the
declspec on forward declarations -- only at the point of actual definition:
class declspec(dllimport) MyActualDefinition
{
}
If you put an attribute marker like declspec(dllimport) in a forward
declaration, by default gcc (3.4.x unpatched, 4.x) generates a warning
like attribute valid only at point of definition; attribute ignored.
Because MSVC++ needs it in both places, compiler-neutral code for
windows tends to includes the declspec at forward declearations, and
cygming-special-gcc-3.4.x has a patch to suppress the warning. That
patch needs to be
Re: Maintainer searched
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:46:22AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: Well I didn't finish rolling the lot over the weekend owing to reasons I'll explain on the talk list, but I'm saying yes anyway. First thing I'll do will be reroll a 3.4.4-2 with the fix for PR-whateveritis about the C++ strings-vs-dlls problem. Once that's done and seems ok, I'll look at making an experimental package from one of the gcc 4 series. (Anyone got any preferences?) You may want to drop Danny Smith a line and see what he's planning so that you can coordinate between gcc and mingw. cgf
RE: Maintainer searched
--- Dave Korn wrote: Well I didn't finish rolling the lot over the weekend owing to reasons I'll explain on the talk list, but I'm saying yes anyway. First thing I'll do will be reroll a 3.4.4-2 with the fix for PR-whateveritis about the C++ strings-vs-dlls problem. Once that's done and seems ok, I'll look at making an experimental package from one of the gcc 4 series. (Anyone got any preferences?) Dave, The octave and octave-forge packages will greatly benefit from the first bug fix. I'll produce new releases ASAP following a gcc 3.4.4-2 bug-fix release. Thanks for signing on to this important maintenance responsibility. Do you suppose there is any chance of releasing libstdc++ as a dll for gcc 3.4.4-2 ? This would greatly reduce the size of the octave and octave-forge packages. There is also some consensus that octave performance is hampered by the sjlj exception handling scheme. I wonder if it is necessary that mingw and cygwin use the same method - perhaps mingw could carry sjlj forward as it is more important for win32 programming, while cygwin could plan a transition to dwarf2, which perhaps aligns better with the paradigm of porting linux apps. Just a thought. Jim Phillips [Dave, sorry I sent the first copy to you instead of the ML]
gcj --- Was: (RE: Maintainer searched)
I didn't get the whole thread of this. Is someone going to try and fix the gcj? I have 3 applications that I would like to submit (Apache Tomcat, Apache Ant, and Servsys) that I can not get to build using gcj (core dump). I am really not sure what to do. They build perfectly using Suns jdk. Anyone have any suggestions? -Chris (1) libjava is hopelessly broken, according to Danny Smith. I have to concur -- I was not able to get it to build at all, so I gave up including the java compiler in my 4.1.0 build. According to Danny, the java compiler requires a shared libjava (and shared libgcc) -- but see below about DLLs. (According to Danny, it takes over 1G RAM to successfully turn a libjava.a into a DLL+implib ; I never even got libjava.a to build so I can't verify).
Re: gcj --- Was: (RE: Maintainer searched)
[top posting. Reformatted] Christopher Molnar wrote: Charles Wilson wrote: (1) libjava is hopelessly broken, according to Danny Smith. I have to concur -- I was not able to get it to build at all, so I gave up including the java compiler in my 4.1.0 build. According to Danny, the java compiler requires a shared libjava (and shared libgcc) -- but see below about DLLs. (According to Danny, it takes over 1G RAM to successfully turn a libjava.a into a DLL+implib ; I never even got libjava.a to build so I can't verify). I didn't get the whole thread of this. The section you quoted was refering to 4.x exclusively. I have no knowledge, nor make any claim of working or non-working, for the gcj shipped as part of gcc-3.4.4 on cygwin. Is someone going to try and fix the gcj? I have 3 applications that I would like to submit (Apache Tomcat, Apache Ant, and Servsys) that I can not get to build using gcj (core dump). I am really not sure what to do. They build perfectly using Suns jdk. So, this is a bug report for gcj-3.4.4 on cygwin? If so, I'd suggest just waiting until the new maintainer releases his own version of 3.4.x. (It probably won't contain any new fixes, but that'll give the new maintainer a fighting chance). Anyway, after that version is released, try it again, and then raise a bug report. And, as always Anyone have any suggestions? PTC, I'm sure. -- Chuck
Re: Maintainer searched
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote: Gerrit P. Haase wrote: I'll keep maintaining the following if there is no interest: antiword db*/libdb* check indent enscript exif/libexif expat freeglut jasper libfpx libmng libwmf libxml2 libxslt openjade OpenSP And TLS related: gnutls, libtasn1, opencdk I've built already check, libxml2, and libxslt for my own purposes, so I could take those too if you want. After I've finished wrangling PHP into a releasable state, I'd be willing to pick up db and expat. Max. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (Cygwin) iD8DBQFEXephfFNSmcDyxYARApBzAJ9D4iqMmLm/tTndtG+pgcxt6MIrqQCgy45a kYuGDQOF1fDp2qPrxHqTjTs= =b8aH -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Maintainer searched
Yaakov schrieb: Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Who wants to maintain one or more of my packages, maybe Yaakov wants to take over some of the GTK+ related packages? Then there are some more major packages which really require a maintainer with more time than I have (i.e. GCC, Perl). I'll take everything of yours GNOME-related, namely: atk* glib2* gtk-doc gtk2-x11* intltool libart_lgpl2 libcroco* pango* Wow, fine with me, you are probably the best candidate :-) Are these yours already? gnome-vfs2 libbonobo2 libbonoboui2 libgnome2 libgnomeui2 AFAICS, that leaves: check gcc* indent lcms libexif libfpx libmng libwmf libxml2 libxslt perl I'll consider a few more of the above (no, gcc is definitely NOT among them), but I really won't be offended if someone else wants them. lcms is not mine. However, there was no update since I dropped the package IIRC. And it is quite stable. I'll keep maintaining the following if there is no interest: antiword db*/libdb* check indent enscript exif/libexif expat freeglut jasper libfpx libmng libwmf libxml2 libxslt openjade OpenSP And TLS related: gnutls, libtasn1, opencdk Gerrit -- =^..^=
Re: Maintainer searched
Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Wow, fine with me, you are probably the best candidate :-) I already have updated packages ready for GNOME 2.14. Are these yours already? gnome-vfs2 libbonobo2 libbonoboui2 libgnome2 libgnomeui2 Yes, I took those for GNOME 2.10. lcms is not mine. However, there was no update since I dropped the package IIRC. And it is quite stable. True. I'll keep maintaining the following if there is no interest: antiword db*/libdb* check indent enscript exif/libexif expat freeglut jasper libfpx libmng libwmf libxml2 libxslt openjade OpenSP And TLS related: gnutls, libtasn1, opencdk I've built already check, libxml2, and libxslt for my own purposes, so I could take those too if you want. Yaakov
RE: Maintainer searched
On 03 May 2006 21:43, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:24:19PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: there is not enough time to maintain all my packages. Who wants to maintain one or more of my packages, maybe Yaakov wants to take over some of the GTK+ related packages? Then there are some more major packages which really require a maintainer with more time than I have (i.e. GCC, Perl). Hi Gerrit, I completely understand. I'm wondering if Dave Korn or Brian Dessent would consider maintaining gcc? cgf I will definitely consider this quite seriously. I'm always a little stretched for time but gcc is just one thing to take care of (albeit several packages) and I do have a lot of compiler experience. I'll spend some time at the weekend reading all the gbs and packaging-related docs and rolling a set of releasable gcc packages so I can get a feel for the amount of workload it's likely to place on me and come back to the list with a definite answer Monday. cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today
Re: Maintainer searched
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 10:22:16AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: On 03 May 2006 21:43, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:24:19PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: there is not enough time to maintain all my packages. Who wants to maintain one or more of my packages, maybe Yaakov wants to take over some of the GTK+ related packages? Then there are some more major packages which really require a maintainer with more time than I have (i.e. GCC, Perl). Hi Gerrit, I completely understand. I'm wondering if Dave Korn or Brian Dessent would consider maintaining gcc? I will definitely consider this quite seriously. I'm always a little stretched for time but gcc is just one thing to take care of (albeit several packages) and I do have a lot of compiler experience. I'll spend some time at the weekend reading all the gbs and packaging-related docs and rolling a set of releasable gcc packages so I can get a feel for the amount of workload it's likely to place on me and come back to the list with a definite answer Monday. Thanks for considering this, Dave. cgf
Re: Maintainer searched
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:24:19PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Hello, there is not enough time to maintain all my packages. Who wants to maintain one or more of my packages, maybe Yaakov wants to take over some of the GTK+ related packages? Then there are some more major packages which really require a maintainer with more time than I have (i.e. GCC, Perl). If it's ok with you, I'll take perl.
Maintainer searched
Hello, there is not enough time to maintain all my packages. Who wants to maintain one or more of my packages, maybe Yaakov wants to take over some of the GTK+ related packages? Then there are some more major packages which really require a maintainer with more time than I have (i.e. GCC, Perl). Gerrit -- =^..^=
