On Mar 12 23:43, Achim Gratz wrote:
> --8<---cut here---start->8---
> --- cygwin-pkg-maint 2015-03-12 14:09:19.0 +0100
> +++ cygwin-pkg-maint.new 2015-03-12 23:35:15.735761203 +0100
> [...]
> --8<---cut here---end
On 3/12/2015 7:00 PM, Achim Gratz wrote:
Achim Gratz writes:
Ken, would you still know if the Log-Log4Perl and Text-BibTeX tests were
clean previously? I'm getting what looks like an encoding problem from
Text-BibTeX and an offset in some file sizes(?) for Log-Log4Perl.
No, sorry. I don't ev
As invited [1], I shall adopt the cygwin-doc package.
wget="wget -rxnH --cut-dirs=4
http://www.dronecode.org.uk/cygwin/x86_64/release/cygwin-doc/";
$wget/cygwin-doc-1.7.35-1.tar.xz
$wget/cygwin-doc-1.7.35-1-src.tar.xz
In this incarnation, it contains:
* newlib libc and libm .info documentati
Jon TURNEY wrote on March 13, 2015 10:29 AM
> As invited [1], I shall adopt the cygwin-doc package.
https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2015-02/msg00163.html
Thanks,
- Barry
Disclaimer: Statements made herein are not made on behalf of NIAID.
On 13/03/2015 06:12, Achim Gratz wrote:
Jon TURNEY writes:
Sure, no problem.
Thanks.
perl-Win32-GUI is only used by the startup shell script as a way to
retrieve GetSystemMetrics(SM_C(X|Y)VIRTUALSCREEN). I'm sure that can
be re-written another way.
So is that shell script just not working
On Mar 13 14:29, Jon TURNEY wrote:
>
> As invited [1], I shall adopt the cygwin-doc package.
That's definitely a pink plush hippo for you. I made you maintainer in
cygwin-pkg-maint.
Thanks,
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer
On 3/12/2015 2:43 AM, Achim Gratz wrote:
Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
My work was based on the tip of the upstream Mercurial repository, which
shows a version number of 2.49+ and is at revision 15623. So I was
thinking of using 2.49+hg15623 as the version number. Will upset be
happy with that? Or
On Thu, 2015-03-12 at 23:43 +0100, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Achim Gratz writes:
> > These four packages still install into the perl-5.10 directories on
> > 32bit and need to be updated for perl-5.14.
> >
> > I'll have to see what to do about the last two, because I'm pretty sure
> > that libwin32 doesn
Ken Brown writes:
>> Version numbers like the one Ken has proposed are becoming common in
>> Linux distributions, so we'd rather check that setup handles them
>> correctly. I think Jari already uses a bunch of them. The thing here
>> is that for all versioning schemes that use hashes you need to
On Tue, 2015-03-10 at 20:24 +0100, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Achim Gratz writes:
> > In order to get rid of perl_vendor on 32bit and update the packages to
> > the same versions on 64bit, I need to maintain the packages that were
> > formerly in perl_vendor plus another bunch that either are new
> > dep
Achim Gratz writes:
> As you wish. I still think his view is somewhat unique looking at the
> version numbers in several Linux distros that provide packages
> in-between-official-releases from several VCS. The only case that I
> know where the VCS revision tag was used in the relase part of the
>
Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> If you are using a new build, the proper way to handle this would be to
> bump RELEASE so that the distro package takes precedence; that way I
> don't have to remove the package from Ports the very instant it lands in
> the distro. The alternative would have been for me
Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
>> This is not a distribution anymore but became a bundle consiting of some
>> 40 distributions, of which 8 don't build. Yaakov, can you please
>> obsolete it as nothing depends on it anyway. I'll ITP the Win32-*
>> packages as I get them to compile later on.
>
> Obsolete
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 20:27 +0100, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Ken Brown writes:
> >> Version numbers like the one Ken has proposed are becoming common in
> >> Linux distributions, so we'd rather check that setup handles them
> >> correctly. I think Jari already uses a bunch of them. The thing here
> >>
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 14:42 -0500, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 20:27 +0100, Achim Gratz wrote:
> > Ken Brown writes:
> > >> Version numbers like the one Ken has proposed are becoming common in
> > >> Linux distributions, so we'd rather check that setup handles them
> > >> correc
Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning
The way I read this, there is no suggestion of putting these extra
version parts in or after the %dist and/or build number, which is what
we use the release field for.
Regards,
Achim.
--
+<[Q
On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 21:14 +0100, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning
>
> The way I read this, there is no suggestion of putting these extra
> version parts in or after the %dist and/or build number, which
Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> Obviously we don't have %dist, but did you continue reading to the
> "Non-Numeric Version in Release" section?
Yes. I can somewhat understand the rationale for putting this in the
release part, but I still like the openSUSE numbering better. The
central question is how
Ken Brown writes:
> The current upstream Biber depends on File-Slurp. But it also
> requires Perl 5.16 or later, so I won't be able to rebuild it and get
> rid of the dependency on File-Slurp-Unicode until you update Perl in
> May.
I've had a quick look. Of course they do use that one feature (u
19 matches
Mail list logo
