Jean-François Mertens wrote:
[]
> But if moving a file from unstable to stable, I've to be sure
> that all its deps and builddeps (and hence recursively so..)
> are in stable, and are IDENTICAL, or else I have to make
> sure that exactly the same deb and the same functionality
> obtains
Just a re
On 13 Nov 2006, at 06:51, William Scott wrote:
>
>
> Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>> Hi William,
>>
>> On 13 Nov 2006, at 05:28, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>>
>>> and you mean the recursive (b)deps
>>> g95, gmp, libmpfr1, odcctools, odcctools590 are all in stable ?
>>> identical to unstable ?)
I'm trying to get into contact with L. Rosengreen.
He seems quite active, despite having abandoned
a couple of pkgs. But trying to contact him with a
msg of nov 6 leads to :
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sorry, I wasn't able to establish an SMTP connection. (#4.4.1)
> I'm not going to try again; this me
Jean-François Mertens wrote:
> Hi William,
>
> On 13 Nov 2006, at 05:28, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
>> and you mean the recursive (b)deps
>> g95, gmp, libmpfr1, odcctools, odcctools590 are all in stable ?
>> identical to unstable ?)
> Don't take this negatively _ just that else I'm all in fav
Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
> On 13 Nov 2006, at 03:48, William Scott wrote:
>
>> I working on trying to move some stuff into stable, and rapidly came
>> up upon some dependency problems. So here is my wish list, FWIW:
>
>> fftw 2.1.5-1009 (currently there is no stable version of fftw in
>>
Jack,
Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Let me know you have any problems with the attached packaging.
Could you please install man pages in %p/share/man instead of
%p/lib/gcc4? In order to avoid a conflict with Apple ones, they could
be renamed as follow:
InstallScript:<<
[...]
mv gc
Hi William,
On 13 Nov 2006, at 05:28, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
> and you mean the recursive (b)deps
> g95, gmp, libmpfr1, odcctools, odcctools590 are all in stable ?
> identical to unstable ?)
Don't take this negatively _ just that else I'm all in favour of moving
all those pkgs to stable, in
On 13 Nov 2006, at 03:48, William Scott wrote:
> I working on trying to move some stuff into stable, and rapidly came
> up upon some dependency problems. So here is my wish list, FWIW:
> fftw 2.1.5-1009 (currently there is no stable version of fftw in
> intel/stable) I've made electron densit
Using
I found only 3 packages in stable that use glut instead of freeglut,
one of which (molmol) is mine and works fine with freeglut (molmol in
unstable uses freeglut, and is ready to move into stable as soon as
freeglut does).
The others are
x11/xplanet.info
Maintainer: James Gibbs
The main point is I need a gfortran in stable from gcc4 >=
2:4.1.99-20060515. Beyond that I don't really have a preference, as
long as it works.
| Bill,
| Moving the current gcc4 in unstable into stable is
| a really bad idea. It is based on a totally bogus
| snapshot from gcc trunk.
Bes
I working on trying to move some stuff into stable, and rapidly came
up upon some dependency problems. So here is my wish list, FWIW:
fftw 2.1.5-1009 (currently there is no stable version of fftw in
intel/stable) I've made electron density maps, done refinements, and
published stuff using
>I went to the web site and looked at the packages without .
>aintainers. It was 11 pages long, for a total of 503 packages out of
>6435 listed in my install. That is 7.8%, which on the face of it
>does not seem bad. However, this list is growing fast. The last
>time I looked, the list ha
Hi,I have encounter a runtime error. when i run 'gnucash' and i pick this option: Tools -> HBCI Setup -> Next -> Next -> AqHBCI Wizardi have this runtime error:list.c:522: failed assertion `l'Abort traphere are my gnucash version:OS: Mac OSX 10.4.8PPC G4gnucash-1.8.12-10: Personal finance tracking
On 11/12/06, Neil Tiffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 11, 2006, at 5:07 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>
> > Moreover the big reason to have the -shlibs and -dev splitoffs is
> > ideally to keep from breaking a metric ton of packages if you update a
> > shared library which happens to be bina
On 11/12/06, William Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In preparation for moving some of my stuff to stable, I just
> installed (on intel) the fink package (having moved aside my /sw).
>
> I've issued fink-selfupdate (rsync)
>
> fink scanpackages
>
> fink update-all
>
> and this is what I am (and
In preparation for moving some of my stuff to stable, I just
installed (on intel) the fink package (having moved aside my /sw).
I've issued fink-selfupdate (rsync)
fink scanpackages
fink update-all
and this is what I am (and presumably a new user is) greeted with:
% fink update-all
Informa
Bill,
Moving the current gcc4 in unstable into stable is
a really bad idea. It is based on a totally bogus
snapshot from gcc trunk. The libgfortran and java
shared libs have had their .so version numbers
bumped since. Frankly if we go that route someone
else will have to take over gcc4 because I
Jeff,
We may need to take this onto the gcc mailing list since
I don't have a Mac Intel machine to test with. However, my
understanding was that all of Sandro's patches were applied
to gcc 4.2 and did build libffi and libjava on MacIntel (but
not at -m64). Are you saying that libffi builds but o
Jack Howarth wrote:
> The attached packaging now properly allows multilib builds of the
> c, c++, objc, fortran and java languages on Darwin PPC for both
> 32-bit and 64-bit processor machines. It also will allow Darwin
> Intel to do a --disable-multilib build of the same (since the
> the x86_64 Da
Currently anything requiring gfortran is stuck in unstable due to the
absence of an intel gcc4 package in stable.
The gfortran from
gcc4 2:4.1.-200606
is working fine in my hands on intel (iMac).
Is anyone having troubles with it?
On Nov 11, 2006, at 5:07 PM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
> Moreover the big reason to have the -shlibs and -dev splitoffs is
> ideally to keep from breaking a metric ton of packages if you update a
> shared library which happens to be binary incompatible with the prior
> version. You can generate -s
On 2003-03-18, Benjamin Reed wrote:
[]
> I'm getting weird recursion in the master mirror list stuff (I've seen
> it go as many as 9 or 10 of them):
[]
> I'm using "ClosestFirst" for the mirror stuff, which I think is why this
> is happening:
While 3 years ago some of the bugs of the ClosestFirst
22 matches
Mail list logo
