Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

2005-11-05 Thread Dave Vasilevsky
On Nov 5, 2005, at 1:01 AM, Philip Lamb wrote: Originally, I was under the impression that there was a machine autobuilding packages and uploading the binaries. However this is obviously untrue. Does the fink project have the resources to have such an autobuild system established? Ideally,

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

2005-11-05 Thread Alexander K. Hansen
On 11/5/05, Dave Vasilevsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 5, 2005, at 1:01 AM, Philip Lamb wrote: > > Originally, I was under the impression that there was a machine > > autobuilding packages and uploading the binaries. However this is > > obviously untrue. Does the fink project have the re

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

2005-11-05 Thread Trevor Harmon
On Nov 5, 2005, at 2:55 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote: Aside from hacking on buildfink, the best way to help is testing packages. Maybe we should have a 'Test Week', when we ask all developers to NOT write new packages, and instead test various packages out and move them into stable? I vote f

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

2005-11-05 Thread Chris Dolan
On Nov 5, 2005, at 4:55 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote: When it comes to a system to perform the builds on, we don't really have anything at this point. A build box should ideally be a very clean system, since we don't want any .debs to be accidentally polluted. Also, we'd have to be careful it'

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

2005-11-05 Thread Doug Ransom
To me the voting process seems unweildy.  I propose a freeze the third thursday of every month on .info files (i.e. any new ones are ignored until next month).  One person or team dishes out packages to volunteers in their perceived order of value.  Each package is only tested by one volunteer that

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

2005-11-05 Thread Alexander K. Hansen
On 11/5/05, Chris Dolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 5, 2005, at 4:55 AM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote: > > > When it comes to a system to perform the builds on, we don't really > > have anything at this point. A build box should ideally be a very > > clean system, since we don't want any .debs to

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: Fink binary distributions

2005-11-05 Thread Chris Dolan
On Nov 5, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: A problem opposite to the one that you mentioned also occurs: building on different machines with different packages that solve the same virtual dependency (e.g. Xorg vs. Apple's X11) will generally result in more than one MD5 for the same p