Re: [Fink-devel] fvp changes
Okay now it works, standalone, --apt and --dpkg all tested, hopefully declaring $config as a global isn't bad ;) fvp.patch Description: Binary data --- TS http://www.southofheaven.org/ Life begins and ends with chaos, live between the chaos! On 2013-06-22, at 7:30 PM, TheSin wrote: > I take it back it only worked with out --apt :\ > > Fetched 1072 kB in 4s (222 kB/s) > Can't locate Fink/Config.pm in @INC (@INC contains: > /Library/Perl/5.12/darwin-th > > I'll keep working on this :\ > --- > TS > http://www.southofheaven.org/ > Life begins and ends with chaos, live between the chaos! > > On 2013-06-22, at 7:27 PM, TheSin wrote: > >> okay now that I have inet back and hopefully stable, I fixed it so that I >> get the right arch now. >> >> Package: 64bit-cpu >> Status: install ok installed >> Priority: optional >> Architecture: darwin-x86_64 >> Version: 0-1 >> Maintainer: Fink Devel >> Description: [virtual package representing the 64bit capability of the CPU] >> The presence of the 64bit-cpu package indicates that the CPU on which we >> are running is 64bit capable. >> . >> Web site: http://www.finkproject.org/faq/usage-general.php#virtpackage >> . >> Maintainer: Fink Devel >> >> >> >> Here is the new patch, hopefully I did it right I couldn't figure out what >> or why UseFinkModules() was for or did since it returns and exports nothing. >> If this is wrong please let me know. >> >> >> --- >> TS >> http://www.southofheaven.org/ >> Life begins and ends with chaos, live between the chaos! >> >> On 2013-06-21, at 11:56 PM, Daniel Macks wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 22:11:20 -0600, TheSin wrote: >>> The new apt is much more strict on the fields in status files, to get >>> it to work I need to make a few minor changes to f-v-p, I spent lots of >>> time working on apt 0.9.82 trying to figure out why girts weren't >>> working and it turns out the parser was considering them invalid due to >>> missing fields like arch and priority. So I made a quick patch which >>> is in my pull request and i'll attach it here as well. I'd add it >>> myself but I'm not sure which branch and if it'll affect anything else >>> that uses f-v-p the current output looks like Package: 64bit-cpu Status: install ok installed Version: 0-1 description: [virtual package representing the 64bit capability of the CPU] I'd like to change it to look like Package: 64bit-cpu Status: install ok installed Priority: optional Architecture: all Version: 0-1 Maintainer: Fink Devel Description: [virtual package representing the 64bit capability of the CPU] The presence of the 64bit-cpu package indicates that the CPU on which we are running is 64bit capable. . Web site: http://www.finkproject.org/faq/usage-general.php#virtpackage . Maintainer: Fink Devel >>> >>> This change to --apt output looks reasonable to me. I talked to TheSin >>> in #fink yesterday, who confirmed that old apt would also accept it, so >>> I don't see harm in sending this to master now (rather than later as >>> part of the large apt upgrade work) (would also benefit anyone who's >>> experimenting with new debian tools of any sort). >>> >>> Technical question: Is this really Architecture:all, given that it's >>> generated by a fink that is single-arch? >>> >>> dan >>> >>> -- >>> Daniel Macks >>> dma...@netspace.org >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: >>> >>> Build for Windows Store. >>> >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev >>> ___ >>> Fink-devel mailing list >>> Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> List archive: >>> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel >>> Subscription management: >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel >> > -- This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] openmpi-1.7.1-1 for 10.9
FYI, I have added an openmpi-10.9.info in the 10.7 tree for 10.9 to use. The rational for a separate file for 10.9 is that the 1.7.x feature release of openmpi replaces the old libmpi_f77.1.dylib and libmpi_f90.1.dylib libraries previously linked by mpif77 and mpif90 with libmpi_mpifh.2.dylib and libmpi_usempi.1.dylib libraries. While I could have created a openmpi2 package, my belief is that will be confusing to users who will assume that 'fink install openmpi' is sufficient to install the current openmpi release. Also, due to limitations in the ability of the openmpi build to relocate all of its files and maintain functionality, an openmpi2-1.7.1-1 for 10.7/10.8 would have to at least Conflicts on the existing openmpi package. While both openmpi-shlibs and openmpi2-shlibs could co-exist, this is of limited functionality since you really should be using the utilities from the same openmpi package that the executables were built on. The net result will still be that maintainers will want to all transition to the newer openmpi2 resulting in an unused openmpi package in 10.7/10.8. A far more sensible approach would be update openmpi to 1.7.1 in 10.7/10.8 while simultaneously doing a revision bump with a BuildDepends/Depends of (>= 1.7.1-1) for openmpi/openmpi-shlibs on all of the effected packages. The dirty little secret is that we already do this for openmpi when updating it to the newer gcc4x releases as it would be insane to create new openmpiN packages everytime gcc4x got upgraded. For now 1.7.1 only exists on 10.9, but if the maintainers using openmpi agree, I would be happy to update 10.7/10.8 to the new release as well in concert with a revision bump and dependency update on all of the impacted packages. Jack -- This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fvp changes
the arch was the only thing I was a little on the fence about, I used all cause i knew it'd work and give the least amount of grief but really I think it should be the system's arch, but I wanted to talk to you about that, what is the best fink function to return x86_64? Sorry I haven't been reachable this flood in AB is affecting my internet, I'm tethered at the moment to check email. --- TS http://www.southofheaven.org/ Life begins and ends with chaos, live between the chaos! On 2013-06-21, at 11:56 PM, Daniel Macks wrote: > On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 22:11:20 -0600, TheSin wrote: > The new apt is much more strict on the fields in status files, to get > it to work I need to make a few minor changes to f-v-p, I spent lots of > time working on apt 0.9.82 trying to figure out why girts weren't > working and it turns out the parser was considering them invalid due to > missing fields like arch and priority. So I made a quick patch which > is in my pull request and i'll attach it here as well. I'd add it > myself but I'm not sure which branch and if it'll affect anything else > that uses f-v-p >> >> the current output looks like >> >> Package: 64bit-cpu >> Status: install ok installed >> Version: 0-1 >> description: [virtual package representing the 64bit capability of the CPU] >> >> I'd like to change it to look like >> >> Package: 64bit-cpu >> Status: install ok installed >> Priority: optional >> Architecture: all >> Version: 0-1 >> Maintainer: Fink Devel >> Description: [virtual package representing the 64bit capability of the CPU] >> The presence of the 64bit-cpu package indicates that the CPU on which we >> are running is 64bit capable. >> . >> Web site: http://www.finkproject.org/faq/usage-general.php#virtpackage >> . >> Maintainer: Fink Devel > > This change to --apt output looks reasonable to me. I talked to TheSin > in #fink yesterday, who confirmed that old apt would also accept it, so > I don't see harm in sending this to master now (rather than later as > part of the large apt upgrade work) (would also benefit anyone who's > experimenting with new debian tools of any sort). > > Technical question: Is this really Architecture:all, given that it's > generated by a fink that is single-arch? > > dan > > -- > Daniel Macks > dma...@netspace.org > > > > -- > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > ___ > Fink-devel mailing list > Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > List archive: > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel > Subscription management: > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel -- This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
