On 2013-04-23 05:20, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
But isn't that what noarch packages are about? Since they are
architecture-independent you can easily share them. Or do you have an
example where we must have different versions of a noarch package in the
i686 and the x86_64 release?
In general, we
On Apr 23 12:12, marco atzeri wrote:
> On 4/23/2013 10:37 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> >
> >I still think it would make sense to name the packages according to
> >their architecture in future:
> >
> > foo-1.0-1.i686.tar.bz2
> > bar-2.3-4.x86_64.tar.bz
> > baz-5.0-8.noarch.tar.bz2
>
> no
On 4/23/2013 10:37 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I still think it would make sense to name the packages according to
their architecture in future:
foo-1.0-1.i686.tar.bz2
bar-2.3-4.x86_64.tar.bz
baz-5.0-8.noarch.tar.bz2
no objection
We should also find a simply mechanism to share the
On Apr 22 23:14, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> Am 19.04.2013 12:45, schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> >Hi maintainers,
> >
> >
> >the 64 bit Cygwin seems to be quite stable now. We're still suffering
> >from a gcc problem which seems to affect C++ inline methods using
> >templates, so some C++ packages might no
Am 19.04.2013 12:45, schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
Hi maintainers,
the 64 bit Cygwin seems to be quite stable now. We're still suffering
from a gcc problem which seems to affect C++ inline methods using
templates, so some C++ packages might not be buildable yet(*), but other
than that it looks pre
On Apr 20 22:43, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2013-04-20 03:43, marco atzeri wrote:
> >for
> >> ImageMagick
> >
> >still missing:
> >libautotrace3 libfpx1 libgs9 libpango1.0_0 librsvg2_2
>
> librsvg deps pango which deps harfbuzz, so we need to fix the C++
> template issue first.
So it's
On 2013-04-20 03:43, marco atzeri wrote:
for
ImageMagick
still missing:
libautotrace3 libfpx1 libgs9 libpango1.0_0 librsvg2_2
librsvg deps pango which deps harfbuzz, so we need to fix the C++
template issue first.
Yaakov
On Apr 20 22:29, marco atzeri wrote:
> On 4/20/2013 8:29 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Hi Marco,
> >
> >On Apr 20 10:43, marco atzeri wrote:
> >>On 4/19/2013 12:45 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>>Hi maintainers,
> >>>
> >>
> >>>Right now, we have a couple of missing dependencies in the 64 bit
> >
Hi Achim,
On Apr 19 20:59, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
> > Strange that nobody did it so far.
>
> If it's any consolation, no 64bit formats are supported, not just PE+.
> Somebody's been rumoured to have worked (and then stopped working) on
> x86_64 support, but I haven't found
On 4/20/2013 8:29 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Hi Marco,
On Apr 20 10:43, marco atzeri wrote:
On 4/19/2013 12:45 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Hi maintainers,
Right now, we have a couple of missing dependencies in the 64 bit
distro. If one of the packages is yours, it would be nice if you co
On Apr 20 15:29, Bob Heckel wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > This entire ifdef CYGWIN32 block is in another block handling I386.
> > It needs to be copied verbatim to the X86_64 block. This header
> > file is a big mess!
>
> I couldn't agree more :) I thought
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> This entire ifdef CYGWIN32 block is in another block handling I386.
> It needs to be copied verbatim to the X86_64 block. This header
> file is a big mess!
I couldn't agree more :) I thought I had it figured out a few
times, adding CYGWIN
On Apr 20 20:28, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> And ask upstream if it's really necessary...
>
> # ifdef CYGWIN32
> # define OS_TYPE "CYGWIN32"
This entire ifdef CYGWIN32 block is in another block handling I386.
It needs to be copied verbatim to the X86_64 block. This header
file is a big
Hi Marco,
On Apr 20 10:43, marco atzeri wrote:
> On 4/19/2013 12:45 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Hi maintainers,
> >
>
> >Right now, we have a couple of missing dependencies in the 64 bit
> >distro. If one of the packages is yours, it would be nice if you could
> >try to build it. Here's the
On Apr 20 18:49, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Apr 20 11:24, Bob Heckel wrote:
> > I'm having trouble packaging 64-bit gc-7.2d "libgc" (upon which w3m
> > depends). There are extensive 32-bit Cygwin adaptations to the upstream
> > libgc code. After much trial and error it seems I lack the experienc
Hi Bob,
On Apr 20 11:24, Bob Heckel wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > ...
> > Right now, we have a couple of missing dependencies in the 64 bit
> > distro. If one of the packages is yours, it would be nice if you could
> > try to build it. Here's the list of m
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> ...
> Right now, we have a couple of missing dependencies in the 64 bit
> distro. If one of the packages is yours, it would be nice if you could
> try to build it. Here's the list of missing deps as of today:
> ...
> w3m
> ...
Hi,
I'm
On Apr 20 10:27, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need gperf for building libunistring.
I just uploaded a gperf package to the 64 bit release area.
HTH,
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin D
On 4/19/2013 12:45 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Hi maintainers,
Right now, we have a couple of missing dependencies in the 64 bit
distro. If one of the packages is yours, it would be nice if you could
try to build it. Here's the list of missing deps as of today:
for
ImageMagick
still
Op 19-4-2013 12:45, Corinna Vinschen schreef:
Hi maintainers,
the 64 bit Cygwin seems to be quite stable now. We're still suffering
from a gcc problem which seems to affect C++ inline methods using
templates, so some C++ packages might not be buildable yet(*), but other
than that it looks pret
Op 19-4-2013 12:45, Corinna Vinschen schreef:
Hi maintainers,
the 64 bit Cygwin seems to be quite stable now. We're still suffering
from a gcc problem which seems to affect C++ inline methods using
templates, so some C++ packages might not be buildable yet(*), but other
than that it looks pret
On Apr 19 22:27, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 4/19/2013 6:45 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > texlive
> > texlive-collection-bibtexextra
> > texlive-collection-binextra
> > texlive-collection-latexextra
> > texlive-collection-mathextra
>
> The 64-bit distro is still missing a few build dependenc
On 4/19/2013 6:45 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
texlive
texlive-collection-bibtexextra
texlive-collection-binextra
texlive-collection-latexextra
texlive-collection-mathextra
The 64-bit distro is still missing a few build dependencies for texlive:
clisp
libgd-devel
Corinna Vinschen writes:
> Strange that nobody did it so far.
If it's any consolation, no 64bit formats are supported, not just PE+.
Somebody's been rumoured to have worked (and then stopped working) on
x86_64 support, but I haven't found any traces of actual code yet.
> It should be rather triv
Hi Achim,
On Apr 19 20:00, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
> > the 64 bit Cygwin seems to be quite stable now. We're still suffering
> > from a gcc problem which seems to affect C++ inline methods using
> > templates, so some C++ packages might not be buildable yet(*), but other
> >
Corinna Vinschen writes:
> the 64 bit Cygwin seems to be quite stable now. We're still suffering
> from a gcc problem which seems to affect C++ inline methods using
> templates, so some C++ packages might not be buildable yet(*), but other
> than that it looks pretty good.
I'll update my 64bit in
Hi maintainers,
the 64 bit Cygwin seems to be quite stable now. We're still suffering
from a gcc problem which seems to affect C++ inline methods using
templates, so some C++ packages might not be buildable yet(*), but other
than that it looks pretty good.
I would like to ask those of you ownin
27 matches
Mail list logo
