-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 1, 2005, at 5:47 PM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
Martin,
I'm sorry if we came off as brash and inconsiderate. I definitely
was not advising that we shouldn't package gfortran 4.1-CVS out of
ideology, or blindly following rules. Hopefully my
Martin,
I'm sorry if we came off as brash and inconsiderate. I definitely was
not advising that we shouldn't package gfortran 4.1-CVS out of
ideology, or blindly following rules. Hopefully my explanations here
can allay your concerns.
First, I agree with you that every package should ha
Max Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In addition to the 10.3 binary being broken (thanks to Alexander K.
> Hansen for verifying this), it seems that the 0.10.9-11 binary has
> some missing dependencies. All of those are fixed in the current
> stable version. So if possible it would be nice
Jean-François Mertens wrote:
On 31 Jul 2005, at 22:14, Martin Costabel wrote:
Several packages (at least libgnomeprint2, vte, librsvg2) have
recently been reported not to build because of the error mentioned in
the subject. This is caused by a bug in gtk-doc version 1.3. I have
[]
I'm p
On 31 Jul 2005, at 22:14, Martin Costabel wrote:
Several packages (at least libgnomeprint2, vte, librsvg2) have
recently been reported not to build because of the error mentioned
in the subject. This is caused by a bug in gtk-doc version 1.3. I
have committed a fix to cvs and mention this
Daniel Macks wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 08:59:40AM -0400, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
On Jul 30, 2005, at 7:21 AM, Max Horn wrote:
Fink is not (!) supposed to be a test-bed for an unreleased
compiler. It is easy enough to build gcc from cvs.
Yes, exactly. Fink is a distribution, not a test
