Re: [E-devel] about package files

2009-04-18 Thread Rodrigo Belem
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Jakob Haufe wrote: > On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 12:18:33 +1000 > Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > >> what i dont know is... will this break any package building for people? i >> don't know that. debian info not being in the base dir of the src is >> unusual - i

[E-devel] fixes to configure.ac

2009-04-22 Thread Rodrigo Belem
Hi all, I was getting some build fails, so I notice that the error was coming from configure.ac. The patch is attached, but I did not tested if the others libs need this fix too. Rodrigo Belem. diff --git a/trunk/edje/configure.ac b/trunk/edje/configure.ac index 750afcb..a5820fa 100644 --- a

Re: [E-devel] fixes to configure.ac

2009-04-23 Thread Rodrigo Belem
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 4:37 AM, Albin Tonnerre wrote: > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 04:36:18AM +0200, Vincent Torri wrote : > > >> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > >> > On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:29:18 -0400 Rodrigo Belem said: > >> &

[E-devel] CVS dependency on etk

2009-05-08 Thread Rodrigo Belem
Hi all, I was building etk so I saw that etk depends on cvs. This dependency comes from autopoint that lives in autogen.sh. rodr...@sculptor:/tmp/etk$ ./autogen.sh Running autopoint... autopoint: *** cvs program not found autopoint: *** Stop. Is it right? Do we need this? Rodrigo Belem

Re: [E-devel] CVS dependency on etk

2009-05-08 Thread Rodrigo Belem
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Albin Tonnerre wrote: > On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 02:27:28AM +0200, Peter Wehrfritz wrote : >> Yes, autopoint has cvs as dep. And yes we need autopoint. At least I >> don't know a better way to setup gettext support. And it isn't a hard >> limitation, on the long run

Re: [E-devel] E SVN: rbelem IN trunk/BINDINGS/python: python-e_dbus python-ecore python-edje python-emotion python-epsilon python-evas

2009-05-10 Thread Rodrigo Belem
What I've done! :-( Sorry for my mistake. I will fix right now. On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: > This is wrong, first with -p you don't need to check before, then you > do the wrong compare stmt, it should be 'if [ ! -d ...' > > On 5/8/09, Enlightenment SVN wrot