Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink's Package LAME
On Oct 4, 2004, at 9:21 PM, Blair Zajac wrote: Well, there doesn't appear to be a consensus amongst the audio experts on the 3.93.1 versus 3.96.1. Here are some threads on this: 3.96 was the choice for the last major listening test. In any case, we should be trusting the LAME developers to know when to release things and when not to. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Re: Fink's Package LAME
Anthony Agelastos wrote: Hello all. I forwarded an email I sent to a package maintainer regarding the LAME port in Fink; I have not had a reply (perhaps I was seen as Junk mail). So, I thought I'd post on Fink-devel about it. I have noticed that the current version of LAME supported by Fink (in stable & unstable) is 3.93.1-11, which was released on 11/30/2002 (per lame.sf.net), while the current version of LAME is at 3.96.1. Well, there doesn't appear to be a consensus amongst the audio experts on the 3.93.1 versus 3.96.1. Here are some threads on this: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=27650 http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=27870 http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=24002&hl=3\.90\.3+vs\.+3\.96 I would state that until there's a consensus from hydrogenaudio.org, then we don't upgrade. The other solution is to create a lame3.96 package which conflicts with lame. Regards, Blair -- Blair Zajac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Plots of your system's performance - http://www.orcaware.com/orca/ --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] warning users about broken g++-3.3
As we all know, g++-3.3 in XCode 1.5 is broken. I had expected a fix by now, but since it hasn't shown up, I believe we should warn users about this while they are running fink itself. I propose adding a check for the bad build, checking only the file /usr/libexec/gcc/darwin/ppc/3.3/cc1plus which is the one Martin Costabel has identified as causing the problem. "Build 1666" is the bad one for this file. RangerRick indicated on IRC that it would not be too hard to create a "broken-gcc" package in VirtPackages.pm which shows up if the offending file has the offending build number. We could then test for this elsewhere in the code; for example, any time you are going to build or rebuild something with fink, you might receive a warning about a bad build of g++-3.3 if this broken-gcc package is present. Or, maybe someone else would like to suggest a different place to insert this? -- Dave --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink using apt-get [with patch rev. 7 & 8]
On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 11:17:00AM +0200, Christian Schaffner wrote: > > On 29.09.2004, at 11:57, Michal 'hramrach' Suchanek wrote: > > >Hello > > > >I tried to download a package with versions 5 and 8 of the patch but it > >is hard to find one that would download form the binary distribution. > > Well, you could try svn-client-ssl-1.0.6-11. And others... :) Well, I removed xfree86 because it broke and I got quite a few candidates :) > > >Is there also support for downloading dependencies that are older in > >the > >apt repository than in fink but should suffice for the requested > >package? > > Not as it is now. And it would probably be a little bit more > complicated. I see. But I think the current implementation solves the most annoying case anyway. Thanks Michal Suchanek --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] No XKB in XFree86 4.4
Hello I upgraded to XFree86 4.4 recently and the xkb extension is not present in the package. Since I was using that to get some sane keyboard layout (get meta and alt at known position to make windowmanagers behave the same as other platforms, possibly switch to non-english keyboard layout) I miss this extension. I think it is not too large as the supporting programs are still there, the missing parts are the layout descriptions and the extension itself. Thanks Michal Suchanek --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Fink's Package LAME
Hello all. I forwarded an email I sent to a package maintainer regarding the LAME port in Fink; I have not had a reply (perhaps I was seen as Junk mail). So, I thought I'd post on Fink-devel about it. I have noticed that the current version of LAME supported by Fink (in stable & unstable) is 3.93.1-11, which was released on 11/30/2002 (per lame.sf.net), while the current version of LAME is at 3.96.1. Begin forwarded message: From: Anthony Agelastos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: September 23, 2004 5:13:02 PM MST To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Fink's Lame Hello and thank you for all of your wonderful work for Fink. I have noticed that the current version of LAME supported by Fink is 3.93.1-11, which was released on 11/30/2002. I was wondering, now that they are at 3.96.1, if you were going to update LAME. Thanks. -Anthony
Re: [Fink-devel] Still care about GCC field?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Daniel Macks wrote: | I've seen some packages slip in lately that are C++, but do not | declare GCC:3.3 in the .info. Is this requirement still necessary? | yes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin) iD8DBQFBYWWQPMoaMn4kKR4RA7YpAJ99lxoCvUMmv9BCIpyD2mw7+7WkPQCfYDUG uv7ePgisOwSN1elFRAJdFhA= =sZlg -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] ignoring /usr/local, was: Re: [Fink-users] Problems compiling libwmf-0.2.8.2-4
On Oct 3, 2004, at 3:50 PM, Martin Costabel wrote: Kevin Horton wrote: [] I agree 100% that the default behavior should be to not touch /usr/local. But, if I understand correctly, none of the Apple supplied software should be in /usr/local. This would only be other user installed software. If the fink team can't find a way to make Fink ignore /usr/local when building things, then an optional, user selectable behavior to automatically temporarily move /usr/local out of the way appears to be better than the current situation. It seems a shame to throw out a potentially useful improvement purely on philosophical grounds. If this change truly could cause serious problems, then it is a bad idea. But let's at least discuss what those problems could be before we throw the idea out. There is no simple solution to this problem. Maybe none at all. Moving /usr/local is a very bad solution for me, since that would break GPGMail while fink is running. Plus, /usr/local/ is not the only problem. User-installed files in /Library/Perl has similar issues since some Makefile.PL scripts check if modules are installed. Could chroot help us out in this situation? Could we mount /sw and /usr (and others?) somewhere and just access those dirs? I'm sure this must have been discussed on fink-devel before... Chris -- Chris Dolan, Software Developer, Clotho Advanced Media Inc. 608-294-7900, 313 W Beltline Hwy Suite 41, Madison WI 53713 PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[Fink-devel] Still care about GCC field?
I've seen some packages slip in lately that are C++, but do not declare GCC:3.3 in the .info. Is this requirement still necessary? dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
