On Oct 4, 2004, at 9:21 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
Well, there doesn't appear to be a consensus amongst the audio experts
on the 3.93.1 versus 3.96.1. Here are some threads on this:
3.96 was the choice for the last major listening test. In any case, we
should be trusting the LAME developers to know
Anthony Agelastos wrote:
Hello all. I forwarded an email I sent to a package maintainer regarding
the LAME port in Fink; I have not had a reply (perhaps I was seen as
Junk mail). So, I thought I'd post on Fink-devel about it. I have
noticed that the current version of LAME supported by Fink (in
As we all know, g++-3.3 in XCode 1.5 is broken. I had expected a fix
by now, but since it hasn't shown up, I believe we should warn users
about this while they are running fink itself.
I propose adding a check for the bad build, checking only the file
/usr/libexec/gcc/darwin/ppc/3.3/cc1plus wh
On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 11:17:00AM +0200, Christian Schaffner wrote:
>
> On 29.09.2004, at 11:57, Michal 'hramrach' Suchanek wrote:
>
> >Hello
> >
> >I tried to download a package with versions 5 and 8 of the patch but it
> >is hard to find one that would download form the binary distribution.
>
Hello
I upgraded to XFree86 4.4 recently and the xkb extension is not present
in the package.
Since I was using that to get some sane keyboard layout (get meta and alt
at known position to make windowmanagers behave the same as other
platforms, possibly switch to non-english keyboard layout) I mi
Hello all. I forwarded an email I sent to a package maintainer regarding the LAME port in Fink; I have not had a reply (perhaps I was seen as Junk mail). So, I thought I'd post on Fink-devel about it. I have noticed that the current version of LAME supported by Fink (in stable & unstable) is 3.93.1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Daniel Macks wrote:
| I've seen some packages slip in lately that are C++, but do not
| declare GCC:3.3 in the .info. Is this requirement still necessary?
|
yes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBYWWQPMoaMn4kKR4RA7
On Oct 3, 2004, at 3:50 PM, Martin Costabel wrote:
Kevin Horton wrote:
[]
I agree 100% that the default behavior should be to not touch
/usr/local. But, if I understand correctly, none of the Apple
supplied software should be in /usr/local. This would only be other
user installed software. If
I've seen some packages slip in lately that are C++, but do not
declare GCC:3.3 in the .info. Is this requirement still necessary?
dan
--
Daniel Macks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: I
