Max,
no - you have not disqualified yourself in my eyes.
And therefore, you should be the new doxygen owner/maintainer if you want it
that badly.
I also think that we should put this issue finally to rest, stop pouting and
get on with life!
greets,
H.
Max Bowsher wrote:
Christopher Faylor
be doxygen maintainer if he
still wants to?
The least I want is to seed trouble among the cygwin core team and long-time
maintainers such as Max.
H.
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 12:35:19AM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
Hans W. Horn wrote:
Alright,
Max Bowsher wrote:
No, still wrong
Max Bowsher wrote:
Hans W. Horn wrote:
Max Bowsher wrote:
...
Having got the superficial naming problems out of the way, I took a
closer look at the source packaging.
Superficial? In your earlier complaints you made it sound as if those naming
issues were of utmost importance!
There were many
Max Bowsher wrote:
...
Having got the superficial naming problems out of the way, I took a
closer look at the source packaging.
There were many issues - the most serious being that the source
package did not even contain the Cygwin specific readme at all - and
hear - hear (you didn't look, did
I hereby withdraw my voluntary offer as bash maintainer!
H.
Alright,
Max Bowsher wrote:
No, still wrong. You didn't read what I said carefully enough.
You *need* to understand:
Filenames are expected to be EXACTLY:
NAME-VERSION-RELEASE.tar.bz2
NAME-VERSION-RELEASE-src.tar.bz2
I guess I never appreciated the subtle naming convention used for cygwin
wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 10:30:12AM -0700, Hans W. Horn wrote:
Max Bowsher wrote:
No, still wrong. You didn't read what I said carefully enough. You
*need* to understand:
Filenames are expected to be EXACTLY:
NAME-VERSION-RELEASE.tar.bz2
NAME-VERSION-RELEASE-src.tar.bz2
I guess I never
I've uploaded another cut of doxygen v142 src binary packages to
http://www.smithii.com/files/cygwin/hans/, addressing more
concerns/suggestions raised by Max Bowsher.
In particular:
1. removing pdf manual
2. including upstream source tarball
3. package naming issues
-rw-r--r-- 1 32237 ross
Max,
Max Bowsher wrote:
Hans W. Horn wrote:
I've uploaded another cut of doxygen v142 src binary packages to
http://www.smithii.com/files/cygwin/hans/, addressing more
concerns/suggestions raised by Max Bowsher.
In particular:
1. removing pdf manual
2. including upstream source tarball
3. package
Bowsher wrote:
Hans W. Horn wrote:
Hi Max,
Max Bowsher wrote:
One further suggestion: I think it would be appropriate to include
only the html version of the manual. Including the PDF format too
substantially increases the size of the package, for no real gain -
it's just duplication.
Actually, I just
Hi Max,
Max Bowsher wrote:
Thanks! Some further issues:
In setup.hint, the first letter of an sdesc is typically capitalized
- just run setup.exe and look at the descriptions visible in the
package picker to see what other packages do.
Will fix at the next turn of the crank (if that's ok)!
The
Hi Max,
Max Bowsher wrote:
One further suggestion: I think it would be appropriate to include
only the html version of the manual. Including the PDF format too
substantially increases the size of the package, for no real gain -
it's just duplication.
Actually, I just noticed that there are
Please upload the latest doxygen release for cygwin (v1.4.2-20050410)
Binaries, sources setup.hint files are located at
http://www.geocities.com/hannes_horn/cygwin/doxygen/
-rw-rw-rw- 1 hanshorn Power Users 1823811 Apr 11 23:44
doxygen-1.4.2-20050410-src.tar.bz2
-rw-rw-rw- 1 hanshorn Power
it?
H.
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 10:30:43AM -0700, Hans W. Horn wrote:
I've packaged tested the latest doxygen release (1.4.2-20050410)
after applying Max' latest patch
(http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=300204).
Since this is my first package contribution: how do I
Chris,
Christopher Faylor wrote:
...We usually use the pull model for
retrieving packages, which means you need to have a web site. Can't
you use one of the free web hosting facilities?
I already went through two free hosting providers. The first one I tried
(netfirms) had a limit of 256k on
Hi Brian Max,
Brian Dessent wrote:
The binaries in your package are still in /usr/local/bin. They need
to go in /usr/bin.
In http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2005-03/msg00067.html, you only
mentioned the manpages that would need to be in a new home.
Will fix.
Also, you included a manpage for
Please upload the latest doxygen release for cygwin (v1.4.2-20050410)
Binaries, sources setup.hint files are located at
http://www.smithii.com/files/cygwin/hans/
(thanks to Ross Smith II for providing web space).
-rw-r--r-- 1 32237 ross 2558933 Apr 12 20:18 doxygen-1.4.2-20050410.tar.bz2
heard anything from the doxygen maintainer? R.I.P?
On Mar 24 09:02, Hans Horn wrote:
Group,
I noticed that the vintage of doxygen that ships with cygwin (v1.2.18) is
more than two years old.
The current version of doxygen (1.4.1-20050315) builds ootb and appears to
be functioning properly; I ran
Will do! thanks, Max.
Max Bowsher wrote:
I've just filed this upstream:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=300204
[PATCH] Doxygen disobeys Cygwin 'text/binary mount mode'
please consider including until it gets applied upstream.
Also note that 1.4.2 has a nasty regression in member group
.
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Apr 11 07:12, Hans W. Horn wrote:
heard anything from the doxygen maintainer? R.I.P?
Nope. Go ahead.
Corinna
Max,
Max Bowsher wrote:
BTW, which platform did you tell doxygen's configure to use? I've been
building with linux-g++.
I was using win32-g++.
Also, did you build with the internal libpng, or use Cygwin's system
libpng? I used the system libpng (just removed the make -C libpng
command from the
Hi Max,
I take that you are suggesting to configure doxygen with linux-g++.
Will do, as well as builing using cygwin's libpng.
greets,
H.
Max Bowsher wrote:
Hans W. Horn wrote:
Max,
Max Bowsher wrote:
BTW, which platform did you tell doxygen's configure to use? I've
been building with linux-g++.
I
Corinna Igor,
Urgh! Bold hint: ./configure --prefix=/usr
I just (con-)figured that out myself. Thx anyways!
How do I go about Pierre's pid patch?
You'll need to see exactly what it changes in the 2.05 sources, find
and modify the corresponding places in the 3.0 sources, and then (the
hardest
Thanks Brian,
Brian Dessent wrote:
Hans W. Horn wrote:
This mysterious patch of Pierre: is it in that half-a-ton patch file
that comes with the bash-2.05b-17 sources?
If yes, hasn't anybody tried to get this patch back into bash
mainstream?
No, this is Pierre's patch:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com
24 matches
Mail list logo
