Richard Stallman [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*
*Someone pointed out that the statement of CPAN policy could be made
*more explicit by changing a couple of words. If you are one of the
*maintainers of CPAN, would you please raise the idea?
This has been on our FAQ for over a year now.
Richard Stallman [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*
*Someone pointed out that the statement of CPAN policy could be made
*more explicit by changing a couple of words. If you are one of the
*maintainers of CPAN, would you please raise the idea?
This has been on our FAQ for over a year now.
Akim Demaille wrote:
"Robert" == Robert Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Robert The project I'm converting to automake uses
Robert AC_CONFIG_AUX_DIR(cfgaux). The dependency cehcking code was
Robert looking for depend in the srcdir, not the srcdir/cfgaux. I'm
Robert using a cvs version
To answer my own question about bad dependency generation with the
combination of Red Hat 7.1beta, gcc 2.96, and autoconf/automake
released version. It is gcc 2.96 causing the problem, as it went
away after installing gcc 2.95.3.
I know you love this bleeding edge feedback :]
What could cause errors like
Automake::register_language() called too early to check prototype at
/bin/automake line 742.
(which is
register_language ('name' = 'c',
'ansi' = '1',
'autodep' = '',
- Original Message -
From: "Akim Demaille" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Robert Collins" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 1:06 AM
Subject: Re: problem: multiple definitions
"Robert" == Robert Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Robert 2)
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Collins" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 9:35 AM
Subject: More CVS head errors
I know you love this bleeding edge feedback :]
What could cause errors like
Automake::register_language() called too early to check
Richard Stallman [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*
*Does "no license changes" mean that the modified version is also
*released with notices saying "dual Artistic | GPL"?
*In that case, the situation seems perfectly explicit and clear.
Yes, and I'll quote from a message sent a week ago to the same
I removed cpan from the CC ilst.
rms Does "no license changes" mean that the modified version is also
rms released with notices saying "dual Artistic | GPL"? In that
rms case, the situation seems perfectly explicit and clear.
Akim, I'm satisfied that we're ok distributing our own
