Re: [Fink-devel] unacceptable behavior
Hi, Jack, I am sure that Jean-Francois was trying to be helpful, and was doing a task that I basically asked him to do, as I did not feel that I had the time for it. I do however understand your reaction, you have good reason to be wary, but he was only taking over ownership of the ticket, not the package. As for effort, I don't know if the rest of the people on this list know quite how much effort you have put into GCC. It's pretty simple - without Jack's efforts* it is extremely likely that gcc-4.5 would not work on Mac OS X. There would be no argument about packaging the damn thing for Fink, there would be nothing worth packaging. Jack has put in more time and effort to the GCC project than I have ever put into an unpaid project. Should Jack have commit to Fink's CVS? My honest opinion is yes, but I think he'd either have to be restricted by technical means (cvs acls?) to committing to only his packages, or he could be asked to make that commitment himself. Even that restriction should be removed after some period, so that he can be in an equal position to other maintainers with commit privileges. Every probationary period must have some end. I am lucky, however, in that I don't get to make that decision. I was ready to commit whatever package Jack had last time I looked at it, but Jack decided to look again to see if he could have the various GCC packages installable simultaneously, and asked me to wait. This is not the action of some irresponsible maintainer who cares little for users having to rebuild a huge package again and again. Jack, I see from the ticket that Jean-Francois offered to do the update-alternatives work for you if you wanted, personally, I would have taken that offer :-) Also, remember that you are not being forced into doing anything, I am confident that Jean-Francois would accept and test any package that you declare final, even if you decide to disregard his advice. Similarly, I am sure that he would commit any such GCC package that is not obviously broken or worse than current GCC packages. He's only trying to help and offer advice - just as I asked him to do, he deserves no part of any blame here. Thanks, Peter * Ok, so others worked on it too, including Iain and Dominique, but I think it'd be a pretty sad compiler without Jack. -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] unacceptable behavior
On Sun, May 02, 2010 at 04:31:52PM -0700, David R. Morrison wrote: > Jack, > > If you read the *previous* comment, which JF made, you will see that he > was talking about taking over as the fink committer who was helping to > evaluate your package. Taking over from Peter O'Gorman, in fact, not > from you. > > -- Dave > Dave, All this all still comes back to the fact that I no longer have commit access. My original packaging from earlier today provided the info files in the conflicting gcc4x packages under the original names. I have wasted an entire evening attempting into implement the requested approach of installing these info files into %p/lib/gcc4.x/info (to be contained in the gcc4x-compiler package) and then providing them at %p/share/info via update-alternative in the gcc4x package only to discover that we will also have to manually call install-info from the post install script in order to index them. These hurculean efforts being demanded for the info files is both absurd and extremely annoying. It is nice to know that my time is valued so little. Jack -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] problems installing autoconf2.6-2.65-2
On May 2, 2010, at 8:17 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote: > The fundamental problem here, as I see it, is that by rights autoconf* > should be BuildDependsOnly-style packages which can be swapped out > freely, but since automake* carry a Depends: on autoconf, this > behavior > is defeated. > > The only way around it that I know of is to build packages one (or a > few) at a time. Yeah, I tried that. I am trying to install gnome-python2-py26, and manually installed all of it's dependencies. And now it's moving forward. Thanks, - Koen. -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] problems installing autoconf2.6-2.65-2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 5/2/10 8:03 PM, Koen van der Drift wrote: > I can't seem to get past installing autoconf2.6-2.65-2, see below. I > ran the commands at the end, installed autoconf2.6-2.65-2 manually, > but then I keep getting the same output about the inconsistent > dependencies. > > Any suggestions? > > Thanks, > > - Koen. > > > ... > The following 3 packages will be installed or updated: > gnome-python2-py26 graphviz pysqlite2-py26 > The following 38 additional packages will be installed: > autoconf automake1.11 automake1.9 gnome-keyring-dev gnome-keyring- > shlibs graphviz-shlibs gtkglext1 > gtkglext1-shlibs gts75 gts75-shlibs guile18 guile18-dev guile18-libs > guile18-shlibs libbonobo2 > libbonobo2-dev libbonoboui2 libbonoboui2-dev libbonoboui2-shlibs > libcroco3 libcroco3-shlibs libgcrypt > libgcrypt-shlibs libgettext3-dev libgnome2 libgnome2-dev libgnome2- > shlibs libgnomeui2-dev libgnomeui2-shlibs > libgpg-error libgpg-error-shlibs libgsf1.114-dev libgsf1.114-shlibs > libming1-dev libming1-shlibs librsvg2 > librsvg2-shlibs libtool14 > Do you want to continue? [Y/n] > Reading buildlock packages... > All buildlocks accounted for. > /sw/bin/dpkg-lockwait -i /sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin- > powerpc/devel/autoconf_2.63-3_darwin-powerpc.deb > Selecting previously deselected package autoconf. > dpkg: considering removing autoconf2.6 in favour of autoconf ... > dpkg: yes, will remove autoconf2.6 in favour of autoconf. > (Reading database ... 120979 files and directories currently installed.) > Unpacking autoconf (from .../autoconf_2.63-3_darwin-powerpc.deb) ... > install-info(autoconf.info): deleting entry `* Autoconf: (autoconf) ...' > install-info(standards.info): deleting entry `* Standards: > (standards) ...' > install-info(standards.info): deleting empty section `GNU organization' > Setting up autoconf (2.63-3) ... > * Autoconf: (autoconf). Create source code configuration scripts. > * Standards: (standards). GNU coding standards. > install-info(/sw/share/info/standards.info): creating new section `GNU > organization' > > Reading buildlock packages... > All buildlocks accounted for. > /sw/bin/dpkg-lockwait -i /sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin- > powerpc/devel/autoconf2.6_2.65-2_darwin-powerpc.deb > Selecting previously deselected package autoconf2.6. > dpkg: considering removing autoconf in favour of autoconf2.6 ... > dpkg: yes, will remove autoconf in favour of autoconf2.6. > (Reading database ... 120985 files and directories currently installed.) > Unpacking autoconf2.6 (from .../autoconf2.6_2.65-2_darwin- > powerpc.deb) ... > install-info(autoconf.info): deleting entry `* Autoconf: (autoconf) ...' > install-info(standards.info): deleting entry `* Standards: > (standards) ...' > install-info(standards.info): deleting empty section `GNU organization' > Setting up autoconf2.6 (2.65-2) ... > * Autoconf: (autoconf). Create source code configuration scripts. > * Standards: (standards). GNU coding standards. > install-info(/sw/share/info/standards.info): creating new section `GNU > organization' > > Reading buildlock packages... > All buildlocks accounted for. > /sw/bin/dpkg-lockwait -i /sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin- > powerpc/devel/automake1.11_1.11.1-1_darwin-powerpc.deb > Selecting previously deselected package automake1.11. > (Reading database ... 120979 files and directories currently installed.) > Unpacking automake1.11 (from .../automake1.11_1.11.1-1_darwin- > powerpc.deb) ... > Setting up automake1.11 (1.11.1-1) ... > * Automake: (automake). Making GNU standards-compliant Makefiles. > > Reading buildlock packages... > All buildlocks accounted for. > /sw/bin/dpkg-lockwait -i /sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin- > powerpc/devel/autoconf_2.63-3_darwin-powerpc.deb > Selecting previously deselected package autoconf. > dpkg: considering removing autoconf2.6 in favour of autoconf ... > dpkg: yes, will remove autoconf2.6 in favour of autoconf. > (Reading database ... 121119 files and directories currently installed.) > Unpacking autoconf (from .../autoconf_2.63-3_darwin-powerpc.deb) ... > install-info(autoconf.info): deleting entry `* Autoconf: (autoconf) ...' > install-info(standards.info): deleting entry `* Standards: > (standards) ...' > install-info(standards.info): deleting empty section `GNU organization' > Setting up autoconf (2.63-3) ... > * Autoconf: (autoconf). Create source code configuration scripts. > * Standards: (standards). GNU coding standards. > install-info(/sw/share/info/standards.info): creating new section `GNU > organization' > > Reading buildlock packages... > All buildlocks accounted for. > /sw/bin/dpkg-lockwait -i /sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin- > powerpc/devel/automake1.9_1.9.6-5_darwin-powerpc.deb > Selecting previously deselected package automake1.9. > dpkg: considering removing automake1.11 in favour of au
Re: [Fink-devel] unacceptable behavior
On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 01:34:51AM +0200, Max Horn wrote: > > Am 03.05.2010 um 01:27 schrieb Jack Howarth: > > > Max, > > How am I supported to interpret the sudden appearance > > of... > > > > Taking over > > > > JF > > > > in > > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2994489&group_id=17203&atid=414256 > > immediately after I make the wrong choice (in JF's eyes) of the two > > alernatives > > for packaging the info files that Daniel Macks gave me? Am I to expect > > the packages to be seized whenever a particular reviewer disagrees > > with documentation packaging issues. I would note that even debian > > doesn't package the info files for gcc-4.4 at all. > >Jack > > The "taking over" is usual jargon when somebody assigns a ticket to himself, > to mark the event. I.e. JFM has taken over responsibility for handling your > submission ticker, and thus declared that he will work with you on getting > this into Fink. Or, even more bluntly, he promised to spend his spare time to > help you. > > He is in particular nor "taking over" your *package*. Max, Okay. I read them out of order then. At first I was uncertain from the message in the gcc44-4.4.4-1000 entry, but coupled with the interest in maintainership shown in the message in the gcc45-4.5.0-1000 and the impact of your telling me that I'll get back commit access when I prove myself... you do the math. It appears that some maintainers are expected to take far more crap than others. Jack > > Bye, > Max -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] problems installing autoconf2.6-2.65-2
I can't seem to get past installing autoconf2.6-2.65-2, see below. I ran the commands at the end, installed autoconf2.6-2.65-2 manually, but then I keep getting the same output about the inconsistent dependencies. Any suggestions? Thanks, - Koen. ... The following 3 packages will be installed or updated: gnome-python2-py26 graphviz pysqlite2-py26 The following 38 additional packages will be installed: autoconf automake1.11 automake1.9 gnome-keyring-dev gnome-keyring- shlibs graphviz-shlibs gtkglext1 gtkglext1-shlibs gts75 gts75-shlibs guile18 guile18-dev guile18-libs guile18-shlibs libbonobo2 libbonobo2-dev libbonoboui2 libbonoboui2-dev libbonoboui2-shlibs libcroco3 libcroco3-shlibs libgcrypt libgcrypt-shlibs libgettext3-dev libgnome2 libgnome2-dev libgnome2- shlibs libgnomeui2-dev libgnomeui2-shlibs libgpg-error libgpg-error-shlibs libgsf1.114-dev libgsf1.114-shlibs libming1-dev libming1-shlibs librsvg2 librsvg2-shlibs libtool14 Do you want to continue? [Y/n] Reading buildlock packages... All buildlocks accounted for. /sw/bin/dpkg-lockwait -i /sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin- powerpc/devel/autoconf_2.63-3_darwin-powerpc.deb Selecting previously deselected package autoconf. dpkg: considering removing autoconf2.6 in favour of autoconf ... dpkg: yes, will remove autoconf2.6 in favour of autoconf. (Reading database ... 120979 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking autoconf (from .../autoconf_2.63-3_darwin-powerpc.deb) ... install-info(autoconf.info): deleting entry `* Autoconf: (autoconf) ...' install-info(standards.info): deleting entry `* Standards: (standards) ...' install-info(standards.info): deleting empty section `GNU organization' Setting up autoconf (2.63-3) ... * Autoconf: (autoconf). Create source code configuration scripts. * Standards: (standards). GNU coding standards. install-info(/sw/share/info/standards.info): creating new section `GNU organization' Reading buildlock packages... All buildlocks accounted for. /sw/bin/dpkg-lockwait -i /sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin- powerpc/devel/autoconf2.6_2.65-2_darwin-powerpc.deb Selecting previously deselected package autoconf2.6. dpkg: considering removing autoconf in favour of autoconf2.6 ... dpkg: yes, will remove autoconf in favour of autoconf2.6. (Reading database ... 120985 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking autoconf2.6 (from .../autoconf2.6_2.65-2_darwin- powerpc.deb) ... install-info(autoconf.info): deleting entry `* Autoconf: (autoconf) ...' install-info(standards.info): deleting entry `* Standards: (standards) ...' install-info(standards.info): deleting empty section `GNU organization' Setting up autoconf2.6 (2.65-2) ... * Autoconf: (autoconf). Create source code configuration scripts. * Standards: (standards). GNU coding standards. install-info(/sw/share/info/standards.info): creating new section `GNU organization' Reading buildlock packages... All buildlocks accounted for. /sw/bin/dpkg-lockwait -i /sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin- powerpc/devel/automake1.11_1.11.1-1_darwin-powerpc.deb Selecting previously deselected package automake1.11. (Reading database ... 120979 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking automake1.11 (from .../automake1.11_1.11.1-1_darwin- powerpc.deb) ... Setting up automake1.11 (1.11.1-1) ... * Automake: (automake). Making GNU standards-compliant Makefiles. Reading buildlock packages... All buildlocks accounted for. /sw/bin/dpkg-lockwait -i /sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin- powerpc/devel/autoconf_2.63-3_darwin-powerpc.deb Selecting previously deselected package autoconf. dpkg: considering removing autoconf2.6 in favour of autoconf ... dpkg: yes, will remove autoconf2.6 in favour of autoconf. (Reading database ... 121119 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking autoconf (from .../autoconf_2.63-3_darwin-powerpc.deb) ... install-info(autoconf.info): deleting entry `* Autoconf: (autoconf) ...' install-info(standards.info): deleting entry `* Standards: (standards) ...' install-info(standards.info): deleting empty section `GNU organization' Setting up autoconf (2.63-3) ... * Autoconf: (autoconf). Create source code configuration scripts. * Standards: (standards). GNU coding standards. install-info(/sw/share/info/standards.info): creating new section `GNU organization' Reading buildlock packages... All buildlocks accounted for. /sw/bin/dpkg-lockwait -i /sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin- powerpc/devel/automake1.9_1.9.6-5_darwin-powerpc.deb Selecting previously deselected package automake1.9. dpkg: considering removing automake1.11 in favour of automake1.9 ... dpkg: yes, will remove automake1.11 in favour of automake1.9. (Reading database ... 121125 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking automake1.9 (from .../automake1.9_1.9.6-5_darwin- powerpc.deb) ... install-info(automake.info): deleting entry `* Automake: (aut
Re: [Fink-devel] unacceptable behavior
Am 03.05.2010 um 01:27 schrieb Jack Howarth: > Max, > How am I supported to interpret the sudden appearance > of... > > Taking over > > JF > > in > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2994489&group_id=17203&atid=414256 > immediately after I make the wrong choice (in JF's eyes) of the two > alernatives > for packaging the info files that Daniel Macks gave me? Am I to expect > the packages to be seized whenever a particular reviewer disagrees > with documentation packaging issues. I would note that even debian > doesn't package the info files for gcc-4.4 at all. >Jack The "taking over" is usual jargon when somebody assigns a ticket to himself, to mark the event. I.e. JFM has taken over responsibility for handling your submission ticker, and thus declared that he will work with you on getting this into Fink. Or, even more bluntly, he promised to spend his spare time to help you. He is in particular nor "taking over" your *package*. Bye, Max -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] unacceptable behavior
Jack, If you read the *previous* comment, which JF made, you will see that he was talking about taking over as the fink committer who was helping to evaluate your package. Taking over from Peter O'Gorman, in fact, not from you. -- Dave On May 2, 2010, at 4:27 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: > Max, >How am I supported to interpret the sudden appearance > of... > > Taking over > > JF > > in https://sourceforge.net/tracker/? > func=detail&aid=2994489&group_id=17203&atid=414256 > immediately after I make the wrong choice (in JF's eyes) of the two > alernatives > for packaging the info files that Daniel Macks gave me? Am I to expect > the packages to be seized whenever a particular reviewer disagrees > with documentation packaging issues. I would note that even debian > doesn't package the info files for gcc-4.4 at all. > Jack > > On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 01:00:43AM +0200, Max Horn wrote: >> Hi Jack, >> >> could you please elaborate what went wrong here, which package >> exactly was modified when by whom in which way that you take offense? >> >> Thanks for the clarification, >> Max >> >> Am 03.05.2010 um 00:42 schrieb Jack Howarth: >> >>> Can someone explain to me at what point did it >>> become acceptable behavior here to make random >>> package grabs when another developer has a >>> disagreement over packaging. After spending >>> literally months upstream submitting patches >>> and testresults to keep the FSF gcc 4.5 release >>> in decent shape on fink, it is obscence that someone >>> thinks nothing of grabbing the package grab >>> over documentation issues. >>> I should have known better than expect any >>> different behaviors here than I have been subjected >>> to in the past. Trully disgraceful. >>> Jack >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ___ >>> Fink-devel mailing list >>> Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel >>> Subscription management: >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel >>> -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] unacceptable behavior
Max, How am I supported to interpret the sudden appearance of... Taking over JF in https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2994489&group_id=17203&atid=414256 immediately after I make the wrong choice (in JF's eyes) of the two alernatives for packaging the info files that Daniel Macks gave me? Am I to expect the packages to be seized whenever a particular reviewer disagrees with documentation packaging issues. I would note that even debian doesn't package the info files for gcc-4.4 at all. Jack On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 01:00:43AM +0200, Max Horn wrote: > Hi Jack, > > could you please elaborate what went wrong here, which package exactly was > modified when by whom in which way that you take offense? > > Thanks for the clarification, > Max > > Am 03.05.2010 um 00:42 schrieb Jack Howarth: > > > Can someone explain to me at what point did it > > become acceptable behavior here to make random > > package grabs when another developer has a > > disagreement over packaging. After spending > > literally months upstream submitting patches > > and testresults to keep the FSF gcc 4.5 release > > in decent shape on fink, it is obscence that someone > > thinks nothing of grabbing the package grab > > over documentation issues. > > I should have known better than expect any > > different behaviors here than I have been subjected > > to in the past. Trully disgraceful. > > Jack > > > > -- > > ___ > > Fink-devel mailing list > > Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel > > Subscription management: > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel > > -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] cvs commit access
Am 03.05.2010 um 00:36 schrieb Jack Howarth: [... ] > > Max, > No need to worry about that since JF Mertens > just unilaterally seized control of the gcc4x > packages because he doesn't agree with the info > packaging approach. And *I* am the one who > has to prove myself to *you*? I should have known > better than to expect the behaviors to improve > around here. Jack, I have no idea what is going on between you / JFM / gcc4x right now (just returned from a trip, and have not yet caught up with any CVS logs, so I cannot comment on that). Let me just say this: If anybody does something bad, that will not go unnoticed, no matter whether it is me, JFM, or you. Whether *you* regain your commit bit is independent of whether we take away /return the commit bit of any other person. If JFM did something wrong (once again, I have no idea yet whether that is the case or not), it'll be looked into. However, please note that (a) I was not asking you to "prove yourself", and (b) your email and tone certainly do not help you regain that bit. Please try to play with the team; if others in the team kick you where it hurts, rest assured that you will receive the same protection from that as everybody else. > David Morrison is MIA in exerting > any level of control here. > Jack Dave is one of several project leads, and not a dictator or single leader of the project, so he he is neither required to supposed to "exert control" over every single individual :-). Cheers, Max -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] unacceptable behavior
Hi Jack, could you please elaborate what went wrong here, which package exactly was modified when by whom in which way that you take offense? Thanks for the clarification, Max Am 03.05.2010 um 00:42 schrieb Jack Howarth: > Can someone explain to me at what point did it > become acceptable behavior here to make random > package grabs when another developer has a > disagreement over packaging. After spending > literally months upstream submitting patches > and testresults to keep the FSF gcc 4.5 release > in decent shape on fink, it is obscence that someone > thinks nothing of grabbing the package grab > over documentation issues. > I should have known better than expect any > different behaviors here than I have been subjected > to in the past. Trully disgraceful. > Jack > > -- > ___ > Fink-devel mailing list > Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel > Subscription management: > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel > -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] initial darwin LTO testresults
In case, anyone is interested, I posted some initial testsuite results... http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-05/msg00185.html using the proposed patch for Mach-O LTO... http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-05/msg00185.html Jack -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] unacceptable behavior
Can someone explain to me at what point did it become acceptable behavior here to make random package grabs when another developer has a disagreement over packaging. After spending literally months upstream submitting patches and testresults to keep the FSF gcc 4.5 release in decent shape on fink, it is obscence that someone thinks nothing of grabbing the package grab over documentation issues. I should have known better than expect any different behaviors here than I have been subjected to in the past. Trully disgraceful. Jack -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] cvs commit access
On Sun, May 02, 2010 at 11:16:51PM +0200, Max Horn wrote: > > Am 01.05.2010 um 21:15 schrieb Jack Howarth: > > > David, > > Any chance I can get back my cvs commit access > > for checking in the gcc4x and llvm related packages? > > I think Peter is getting tried of having to do all > > of my checkins. > > Hi Jack, > > no worries, we still have plenty of people to take care of checkins for you, > although you may have to wait a couple days at time. > > And rest assured that we are aware of your contributions and that we will > re-evaluate whether to restore your commit rights as time progresses. > > Bye, > Max > Max, No need to worry about that since JF Mertens just unilaterally seized control of the gcc4x packages because he doesn't agree with the info packaging approach. And *I* am the one who has to prove myself to *you*? I should have known better than to expect the behaviors to improve around here. David Morrison is MIA in exerting any level of control here. Jack > > >Jack > > ps I'll see if I can get clean backports of the > > new Mach-O Link Time Optimization patches for > > gcc-4_5-branch and update the gcc45 package to use > > them. It looks as if Steve may have the patches > > for gcc trunk finished by the end of this weekend. > > > > > > -- > > ___ > > Fink-devel mailing list > > Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel > > Subscription management: > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel > > -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] cvs commit access
Am 01.05.2010 um 21:15 schrieb Jack Howarth: > David, > Any chance I can get back my cvs commit access > for checking in the gcc4x and llvm related packages? > I think Peter is getting tried of having to do all > of my checkins. Hi Jack, no worries, we still have plenty of people to take care of checkins for you, although you may have to wait a couple days at time. And rest assured that we are aware of your contributions and that we will re-evaluate whether to restore your commit rights as time progresses. Bye, Max >Jack > ps I'll see if I can get clean backports of the > new Mach-O Link Time Optimization patches for > gcc-4_5-branch and update the gcc45 package to use > them. It looks as if Steve may have the patches > for gcc trunk finished by the end of this weekend. > > > -- > ___ > Fink-devel mailing list > Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel > Subscription management: > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel > -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Jack Howarth's submissions
On 02 May 2010, at 19:46, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Sun, May 02, 2010 at 07:26:16PM +0200, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>>
>> On 02 May 2010, at 17:56, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>
>>> JF,
>>> I don't believe the currently posted packaging improperly links
>>> them at all.
>>
>> Do
>> # info gcc-4
>> The first para shows at the end :
>> *Note Introduction: (gccint)Top
>>
>> Click on it : the link indeed works; and now the first para
>> that you see ends with :
>> *Note Introduction: (gcc)Top
>>
>> Click on it : the link is broken !
>>
>> JF
>
> JF,
> You should take a look at what Debian unstable
> currently does. ...
>If we had the resources that Debian has, it
> would be one thing, but there are rational limits
> to what we can achieve here considering that the
> fink developer pool seems to be shrinking.
What Dan Macks suggested solved completely this issue,
and \emph{simplified} the pkg !
(And you could still add if you want a profile.d script
that adds to INFOPATH the info dir of the currently
installed gcc4X pkg _ or let that pkg install symlinks
in %p/share/info)
JF
--
___
Fink-devel mailing list
Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Jack Howarth's submissions
On Sun, May 02, 2010 at 07:26:16PM +0200, Jean-François Mertens wrote: > > On 02 May 2010, at 17:56, Jack Howarth wrote: > >> JF, >> I don't believe the currently posted packaging improperly links >> them at all. > > Do > # info gcc-4 > The first para shows at the end : > *Note Introduction: (gccint)Top > > Click on it : the link indeed works; and now the first para > that you see ends with : > *Note Introduction: (gcc)Top > > Click on it : the link is broken ! > > JF JF, You should take a look at what Debian unstable currently does. A glance at their packaging shows that only the default system compiler has the info files under their original names (in gcc-4.3-doc) and that the other versions of gcc have the -4.x suffix added in their gcc-4.x-doc packages. They also seem to be bundling together their own gcc-4.x doc tarballs and crafting their own Makefiles. If we had the resources that Debian has, it would be one thing, but there are rational limits to what we can achieve here considering that the fink developer pool seems to be shrinking. Jack ps Look at... http://packages.debian.org/sid/gcc-4.2-doc http://packages.debian.org/sid/gcc-4.3-doc I notice that they don't even have a gcc-4.4-doc package to go with their gcc-4.4 package. -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Jack Howarth's submissions
On 02 May 2010, at 17:56, Jack Howarth wrote: > JF, > I don't believe the currently posted packaging improperly links > them at all. Do # info gcc-4 The first para shows at the end : *Note Introduction: (gccint)Top Click on it : the link indeed works; and now the first para that you see ends with : *Note Introduction: (gcc)Top Click on it : the link is broken ! JF -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] libffi build failure
On May 2, 2010, at 12:54 PM, Jean-François Mertens wrote: > Koen, in the meantime could you check that > libffi-3.0.5.info yields correct self-tests for you ? That fails too (using fink --tests=on rebuild libffi-3.0.5): ... WARNING: Couldn't find the global config file. WARNING: Couldn't find tool init file Test Run By root on Sun May 2 13:12:04 2010 Native configuration is powerpc-apple-darwin9.8.0 === libffi tests === Schedule of variations: unix Running target unix Using /sw/share/dejagnu/baseboards/unix.exp as board description file for target. Using /sw/share/dejagnu/config/unix.exp as generic interface file for target. Using /sw/src/fink.build/libffi-3.0.5-3/libffi-3.0.5/testsuite/config/ default.exp as tool-and-target-specific interface file. Running /sw/src/fink.build/libffi-3.0.5-3/libffi-3.0.5/testsuite/ libffi.call/call.exp ... FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -O0 -W -Wall execution test FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -O2 execution test FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -Os execution test FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test Running /sw/src/fink.build/libffi-3.0.5-3/libffi-3.0.5/testsuite/ libffi.special/special.exp ... === libffi Summary === # of expected passes1381 # of unexpected failures4 # of unsupported tests 15 make[2]: *** [check-DEJAGNU] Error 1 make[1]: *** [check-am] Error 2 make[1]: Target `check' not remade because of errors. -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] libffi build failure
On 02 May 2010, at 17:34, Koen van der Drift wrote: > 10.5, powerpc Not identical, but close enough to dmacks' failure on 10.4 ppc. Maybe libffi needs an Arch restriction rather than a Distribution restriction.. Would still need some evidence of building well on 10.4 intel, and of failing on 10.6 ppc ... Koen, in the meantime could you check that libffi-3.0.5.info yields correct self-tests for you ? JF -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] libffi build failure
On May 2, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Jean-François Mertens wrote: > > On 02 May 2010, at 17:52, Koen van der Drift wrote: > >> Update: this only happens when building in maintainer mode > > You mean, 'fink --tests=on rebuild libffi' goes without errors ? > > No, that fails. As well as 'fink -l -m --build-as-nobody rebuild libffi' Just a 'fink rebuild libffi' works fine. - Koen. -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] libffi build failure
On 02 May 2010, at 17:52, Koen van der Drift wrote: > Update: this only happens when building in maintainer mode You mean, 'fink --tests=on rebuild libffi' goes without errors ? Jean-Francois -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] libffi build failure
Update: this only happens when building in maintainer mode (which I
was using for another package that needs libffi).
- Koen.
On May 2, 2010, at 11:34 AM, Koen van der Drift wrote:
> This is on Package manager version: 0.29.99.cvs
> Distribution version: selfupdate-cvs Sun May 2 10:42:27 2010, 10.5,
> powerpc
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Koen.
>
>
> Making a new site.exp file...
> srcdir=`CDPATH="${ZSH_VERSION+.}:" && cd . && pwd`; export srcdir; \
> EXPECT=`if [ -f ../../expect/expect ] ; then echo ../../expect/
> expect ; else echo expect ; fi`; export EXPECT; \
> runtest=`if [ -f ../../dejagnu/runtest ] ; then echo ../../dejagnu/
> runtest ; else echo runtest; fi`; \
> if /bin/sh -c "$runtest --version" > /dev/null 2>&1; then \
> exit_status=0; l='libffi'; for tool in $l; do \
> if $runtest --tool $tool --srcdir $srcdir ; \
> then :; else exit_status=1; fi; \
> done; \
> else echo "WARNING: could not find \`runtest'" 1>&2; :;\
> fi; \
> exit $exit_status
> WARNING: Couldn't find the global config file.
> WARNING: Couldn't find tool init file
> Test Run By fink-bld on Sun May 2 11:27:42 2010
> Native configuration is powerpc-apple-darwin9.8.0
>
> === libffi tests ===
>
> Schedule of variations:
>unix
>
> Running target unix
> Using /sw/share/dejagnu/baseboards/unix.exp as board description
> file for target.
> Using /sw/share/dejagnu/config/unix.exp as generic interface file
> for target.
> Using /sw/src/fink.build/libffi-3.0.9-3/libffi-3.0.9/testsuite/
> config/default.exp as tool-and-target-specific interface file.
> Running /sw/src/fink.build/libffi-3.0.9-3/libffi-3.0.9/testsuite/
> libffi.call/call.exp ...
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -O0 -W -Wall output pattern test,
> is -0.0
> res: 5
> 7.0
> res: 4
> ? should match 7.0
> ?es: 4
> ?.0
> res: 4
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -O0 -W -Wall output pattern
> test, is -0.0
> res: 5
> 7.0
> res: 4
> ? should match 7.0
> ?es: 4
> ?.0
> res: 4
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -O0 -W -Wall execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -O2 output pattern test, is -0.0
> res: 5
> 7.0
> res: 4
> ? should match 7.0
> ?es: 4
> ?.0
> res: 4
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -O2 output pattern test, is -0.0
> res: 5
> 7.0
> res: 4
> ? should match 7.0
> ?es: 4
> ?.0
> res: 4
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -O2 execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -O3 output pattern test, is -0.0
> res: 5
> 7.0
> res: 4
> ? should match 7.0
> ?es: 4
> ?.0
> res: 4
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -O3 output pattern test, is -0.0
> res: 5
> 7.0
> res: 4
> ? should match 7.0
> ?es: 4
> ?.0
> res: 4
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -Os output pattern test, is -0.0
> res: 5
> 7.0
> res: 4
> ? should match 7.0
> ?es: 4
> ?.0
> res: 4
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -Os output pattern test, is -0.0
> res: 5
> 7.0
> res: 4
> ? should match 7.0
> ?es: 4
> ?.0
> res: 4
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -Os execution test
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer output
> pattern test, is -0.0
> res: 5
> 7.0
> res: 4
> ? should match 7.0
> ?es: 4
> ?.0
> res: 4
> FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer
> output pattern test, is -0.0
> res: 5
> 7.0
> res: 4
> ? should match 7.0
> ?es: 4
> ?.0
> res: 4
> FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer
> execution test
> Running /sw/src/fink.build/libffi-3.0.9-3/libffi-3.0.9/testsuite/
> libffi.special/special.exp ...
>
> === libffi Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 1606
> # of unexpected failures 14
> # of expected failures10
> # of unsupported tests15
> make[2]: *** [check-DEJAGNU] Error 1
> make[1]: *** [check-am] Error 2
> make[1]: Target `check' not remade because of errors.
> Making check in man
> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `check'.
> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `check-am'.
> make: *** [check-recursive] Error 1
> make: Target `check' not remade because of errors.
>
--
___
Fink-devel mailing list
Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Jack Howarth's submissions
On 30 Apr 2010, at 15:23, Jack Howarth wrote: > I believe the submissions for gcc45-4.5.0-1001 and gcc44-4.4.4-1000 > are basically done. While I realize that JF wants to always have the > info files present under their original names (sans suffix) when the > main > gcc4x package is deinstalled, I don't think this is 1) easy to do and > 2) worth holding up the packages. We should assume that the users > aren't > total idiots and will realize that, like the programs and man pages, > the > info files are also suffixed. If Daniel wants to update the packages > later with some more elegant approach to retaining the info files with > their original names, he is welcome to do so. My only concern about > the > merit of that approach is the following. It is entirely unclear to me > how (except by resorting to an explicit path to the info file) that > the user would know exactly which info file he is looking at. So for > example, if you wanted information on the new LTO features in gcc > 4.6.0, > how would you know that you aren't actually looking at the older info > file from gcc 4.5.0. It almost seems like the solution (co-existing > info files under the original names) would be as bad as the original > problem (having to use the -fsf-4.x suffix). Just wanted you to give some serious consideration to dmacks's suggestion, and maybe discuss it (privately) with him. It IS important that info pages be correctly linked. Jean-Francois -- ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] libffi build failure
This is on Package manager version: 0.29.99.cvs
Distribution version: selfupdate-cvs Sun May 2 10:42:27 2010, 10.5,
powerpc
Thanks,
- Koen.
Making a new site.exp file...
srcdir=`CDPATH="${ZSH_VERSION+.}:" && cd . && pwd`; export srcdir; \
EXPECT=`if [ -f ../../expect/expect ] ; then echo ../../expect/
expect ; else echo expect ; fi`; export EXPECT; \
runtest=`if [ -f ../../dejagnu/runtest ] ; then echo ../../dejagnu/
runtest ; else echo runtest; fi`; \
if /bin/sh -c "$runtest --version" > /dev/null 2>&1; then \
exit_status=0; l='libffi'; for tool in $l; do \
if $runtest --tool $tool --srcdir $srcdir ; \
then :; else exit_status=1; fi; \
done; \
else echo "WARNING: could not find \`runtest'" 1>&2; :;\
fi; \
exit $exit_status
WARNING: Couldn't find the global config file.
WARNING: Couldn't find tool init file
Test Run By fink-bld on Sun May 2 11:27:42 2010
Native configuration is powerpc-apple-darwin9.8.0
=== libffi tests ===
Schedule of variations:
unix
Running target unix
Using /sw/share/dejagnu/baseboards/unix.exp as board description file
for target.
Using /sw/share/dejagnu/config/unix.exp as generic interface file for
target.
Using /sw/src/fink.build/libffi-3.0.9-3/libffi-3.0.9/testsuite/config/
default.exp as tool-and-target-specific interface file.
Running /sw/src/fink.build/libffi-3.0.9-3/libffi-3.0.9/testsuite/
libffi.call/call.exp ...
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -O0 -W -Wall output pattern test, is
-0.0
res: 5
7.0
res: 4
? should match 7.0
?es: 4
?.0
res: 4
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -O0 -W -Wall output pattern
test, is -0.0
res: 5
7.0
res: 4
? should match 7.0
?es: 4
?.0
res: 4
FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -O0 -W -Wall execution test
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -O2 output pattern test, is -0.0
res: 5
7.0
res: 4
? should match 7.0
?es: 4
?.0
res: 4
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -O2 output pattern test, is -0.0
res: 5
7.0
res: 4
? should match 7.0
?es: 4
?.0
res: 4
FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -O2 execution test
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -O3 output pattern test, is -0.0
res: 5
7.0
res: 4
? should match 7.0
?es: 4
?.0
res: 4
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -O3 output pattern test, is -0.0
res: 5
7.0
res: 4
? should match 7.0
?es: 4
?.0
res: 4
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -Os output pattern test, is -0.0
res: 5
7.0
res: 4
? should match 7.0
?es: 4
?.0
res: 4
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -Os output pattern test, is -0.0
res: 5
7.0
res: 4
? should match 7.0
?es: 4
?.0
res: 4
FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -Os execution test
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer output
pattern test, is -0.0
res: 5
7.0
res: 4
? should match 7.0
?es: 4
?.0
res: 4
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer output
pattern test, is -0.0
res: 5
7.0
res: 4
? should match 7.0
?es: 4
?.0
res: 4
FAIL: libffi.call/nested_struct5.c -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer execution
test
Running /sw/src/fink.build/libffi-3.0.9-3/libffi-3.0.9/testsuite/
libffi.special/special.exp ...
=== libffi Summary ===
# of expected passes1606
# of unexpected failures14
# of expected failures 10
# of unsupported tests 15
make[2]: *** [check-DEJAGNU] Error 1
make[1]: *** [check-am] Error 2
make[1]: Target `check' not remade because of errors.
Making check in man
make[1]: Nothing to be done for `check'.
make[1]: Nothing to be done for `check-am'.
make: *** [check-recursive] Error 1
make: Target `check' not remade because of errors.
--
___
Fink-devel mailing list
Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
