On Mon, Sep 06, 2004 at 06:31:48PM -0600, TheSin wrote:
>
> so the description is true but the implementation isn't that difficult.
> and using the download only option in apt-get will fix the problem in
> your 2nd step/requirement.
As you can see in the patch, that is what it does. Uses the
David R. Morrison wrote:
Dear Fink developers,
A few of us were discussing the possibility of switching a number of
fink packages from the fink-provided openssl to the built-in openssl.
This would allow us to include ssl functionality even in the non-crypto
tree, and could cut down on potential
well this isn't 100% true. I made fink do this in the past.
This is what I did
1) use fink to get the list of depends including version and revision.
2) in the fink engine before the fetch, do an apt-get install on a
versioned version, if an error then continue, else set to installed and
continu
Something I have been toying with for a while now is fink being able
to use apt-get-able packages. Sometimes when building something large,
many of the dependency packages are already in a bindist somewhere, and
I'd rather not build each and every one, just the packages newer than
what is in the b
Martin Costabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> The first option uses the screen real estate better. The column headers
> that are somewhat too heavy could be made lighter by replacing the
> two-liners "stableversion" and "unstableversion" by just
> "stable" and "unstable". It is clear at this po
David R. Morrison wrote:
[]
Our ability to do this relies on the BuildConflicts functionality which
is now present in fink. By using "BuildConflicts: openssl-dev,
openssl097-dev", we prevent the packages from linking to the fink
versions, and they are forced to link to the system's version.
One
Dear Fink developers,
A few of us were discussing the possibility of switching a number of
fink packages from the fink-provided openssl to the built-in openssl.
This would allow us to include ssl functionality even in the non-crypto
tree, and could cut down on potential errors from mixing and m
On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 03:41:14PM -0400, Daniel Johnson wrote:
> On Sep 5, 2004, at 3:05 PM, Daniel Johnson wrote:
> >
> >I just noticed that openssl097-dev installs /sw/share/man/man3/err.3
> >(describing OpenSSL error codes) which conflicts with
> >/usr/share/man/man3/err.3 (describing the BSD
David H. wrote:
I, as a dummy Java user, would assume that Fink picks the latest JAVA
that Apple installed on my machine. Now if I happen to have 1.3., 1.4, 1.5
it would pick 1.5
I dunno if that is fatal ? (I guess I have installed 1.5 so it would be
my fault).
Just fooling around, I know little a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Benjamin Reed wrote:
| Darian Lanx wrote:
|
|> More of a philosophical question. Should the code not try to pick the
|> _latest_ JVM that is present,. Thus most likely the one with the most
|> features and the one a common user would be using?
|
|
Darian Lanx wrote:
More of a philosophical question. Should the code not try to pick the
_latest_ JVM that is present,. Thus most likely the one with the most
features and the one a common user would be using?
If they didn't ask for a specific JVM, wouldn't you want to make
bytecode that works w
Benjamin Reed wrote:
Update of /cvsroot/fink/fink/perlmod/Fink
In directory sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv4954/perlmod/Fink
Modified Files:
PkgVersion.pm
Log Message:
make sure we pick the lowest JVM found if the user doesn't specify they
wanted a specific version
More of a philosoph
12 matches
Mail list logo
