[Fink-devel] debconf: UpdatePOD should be removed

2006-03-20 Thread AIDA Shinra
Hello, Your package debconf has UpdatePOD: true, but does not have *.pod in fact. UpdatePOD is unnecessary. Worse, if no other pod file exist in %p/share/podfiles, PostInstScript fails at a wildcard expansion. Please remove it. --- This SF.Net

[Fink-devel] gnupg-idea

2006-03-20 Thread Benjamin Reed
I've updated gnupg-idea to 1.4.2.2 to complement gnupg. Any objections to me updating it and/or taking over maintainership? -- Benjamin Reed a.k.a. Ranger Rick http://ranger.befunk.com/ --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a

[Fink-devel] Maintainership issues

2006-03-20 Thread Alexander K. Hansen
I've started drafting up some documents on the wiki that pertain to package maintainership. Please look at them, expand on them, rip the text up... http://wiki.opendarwin.org/index.php/Fink:Updating_Another%27s_Package

Re: [Fink-devel] Maintainers (was: FYI: SDL change)

2006-03-20 Thread Trevor Harmon
On Mar 19, 2006, at 6:26 PM, Dave Vasilevsky wrote: However, I must disagree about how wonderful collaborative packaging could be. Once upon a time, somebody had the great idea that rather than individual maintainers for each of the Gnome packages, Fink should have a Gnome Team which

Re: [Fink-devel] Maintainership issues

2006-03-20 Thread Trevor Harmon
On Mar 20, 2006, at 9:50 AM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: I've started drafting up some documents on the wiki that pertain to package maintainership. Please look at them, expand on them, rip the text up... Looks good; that's exactly the kind of clarification I was hoping we could add. A

Re: [Fink-devel] Maintainership issues

2006-03-20 Thread Trevor Harmon
On Mar 20, 2006, at 12:22 PM, Alexander K. Hansen wrote: 1. Could we put citations to this page in the packaging tutorial and manual? Sure. It's on the wiki, so anybody can make add any edits they want. :-) I mean the reverse. I'd like the packaging tutorial and manual to reference

[Fink-devel] Machine readable package list?

2006-03-20 Thread Chris Dolan
Is there a machine-readable list of all packages and versions provided by current Fink? The data obviously exists in a database on pdb.finkproject.org but short of scraping HTML or fetching CVS, I can't figure out how to access that list. Background: There's a Perl library called

Re: [Fink-devel] Machine readable package list?

2006-03-20 Thread Daniel Macks
How all packages and versions do you mean? For example, I can do fink list -t \*-pm\* | cut -f2,3 to get a list of the highest available version of all perlmodule packages, or just 'cut -f2' it and feed it to fink dumpinfo -fpackage,allversions to get a list of all versions of each of them

Re: [Fink-devel] Machine readable package list?

2006-03-20 Thread Chris Dolan
On Mar 20, 2006, at 3:50 PM, Daniel Macks wrote: How all packages and versions do you mean? For example, I can do fink list -t \*-pm\* | cut -f2,3 to get a list of the highest available version of all perlmodule packages, or just 'cut -f2' it and feed it to fink dumpinfo

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: FYI: SDL change

2006-03-20 Thread Max Horn
Am 19.03.2006 um 23:10 schrieb Trevor Harmon: On Mar 19, 2006, at 1:04 PM, Benjamin Reed wrote: [...] It makes sense to, by default, defer to the person who understands that software well enough to package it, when questions arise. But this can still be the default in the model I

Re: [Fink-devel] Machine readable package list?

2006-03-20 Thread Dave Vasilevsky
On Mar 20, 2006, at 5:14 PM, Chris Dolan wrote: Yes, fink list data are indeed exactly what I'm seeking, but the numbers need to be accessible to a non-Mac and Macs that don't have Fink installed. I can do fink list or the equivalent on my own machine and upload the data to my own website

Re: [Fink-devel] Machine readable package list?

2006-03-20 Thread Daniel Macks
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 04:14:46PM -0600, Chris Dolan wrote: By all packages and versions, I probably overstated. I'm really just looking for the most current state (meaning probably 10.4/ {stable,unstable}) but if 10.3, etc. is trivially accessible I'll use that too. Yes, fink list

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: FYI: SDL change

2006-03-20 Thread Alexander K. Hansen
On 3/20/06, Max Horn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am 19.03.2006 um 23:10 schrieb Trevor Harmon: On Mar 19, 2006, at 1:04 PM, Benjamin Reed wrote: [...] It makes sense to, by default, defer to the person who understands that software well enough to package it, when questions arise.

Re: [Fink-devel] Machine readable package list?

2006-03-20 Thread Chris Dolan
On Mar 20, 2006, at 5:50 PM, Daniel Macks wrote: In order to 'fink list', the only things you need are the pure perl parts...don't need a full local fink installation or compiled dpkg and other support binaries. Until recently, the web PDB database update script was running on a linux box on

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: FYI: SDL change

2006-03-20 Thread Koen van der Drift
Sometimes one of the core maintainers is doing a batch update of many packages. Would it be required in such a situation to contact the maintainers first? That could take many weeks in the worst case. And mostly it is a change that is not really an improvement for a particular package, but

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: FYI: SDL change

2006-03-20 Thread Max Horn
Am 21.03.2006 um 02:45 schrieb Alexander K. Hansen: [...] I think we can all agree that fixing typos requires no particular expertise with the package in question (and saves the maintainer from being inundated with messages about the problem). Indeed, fully agreed. That is, as long as the