I followed Jack's suggestion, moving /sw out of the way, making a new
one, with unstable activated, and tried to compile gcc42 so that I
could move the deb files back into my original /sw
Unfortunately, the nightmare persists:
dpkg-deb: building package `gcc42' in
So if I understand all of the comments so far, the problem may
be avoidable with an older tar but even that produces warnings in
fink. If the hypothesis of Spotlight indexing blocking files
is correct, perhaps the answer is for the fink developers to add
code to fink that stops and starts the
So if I understand all of the comments so far, the problem may
be avoidable with an older tar but even that produces warnings in
fink. If the hypothesis of Spotlight indexing blocking files
is correct, perhaps the answer is for the fink developers to add
code to fink that stops and starts
Dear Fink developers
In order to make the 'dump' script of the pdb working with the new
ideas layed out at
http://wiki.finkproject.org/index.php/Fink:PDB
and started in the 'redesign_pdb' branch, I would like to commit the
attached path to fink. It introduces two new methods
David Fang wrote:
[]
Perhaps something about Spotlight disabling could be added to the
FAQ? It makes a somewhat noticeable improvement on slow machines. I'd
recommend disabling for at least the src/fink.build directories.
Spotlight does not touch *.build directories. That's why
Spotlight does not touch *.build directories. That's why fink.build was
introduced in the first place. Maybe the people who have this weird
error changed their build directory to something other than fink.build?
Martin,
Ahhh... [me: starts renaming all his project build directories]
My
I just want to re-emphasize that what I said before was that
Spotlight was NOT the problem (I guessed wrongly that it might be,
and instructed it to stay out of /sw, and that did not help).
I also found creating a new /sw did not solve the problem.
The tar explanation strikes me as more
It would appear that using tar 1.16 in fink is a really bad idea...
http://www.mail-archive.com/amanda-users@amanda.org/msg37008.html
I would also note that Fedora development is still using 1.15.1 for
tar.
Jack
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
A while ago I had suggested updating pcre to something not so
prehistoric, but at the time concerns were raised about library
compatibility. Recently. I looked closely at the current version,
7.0, and compared it to Fink's 4.5. I can't find any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 28, 2007, at 4:12 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
It would appear that using tar 1.16 in fink is a really bad idea...
http://www.mail-archive.com/amanda-users@amanda.org/msg37008.html
I would also note that Fedora development is still using
I repeated the process (complete with the latest tar) and this time
it worked.
On Jan 28, 2007, at 10:32 AM, William Scott wrote:
I followed Jack's suggestion, moving /sw out of the way, making a
new one, with unstable activated, and tried to compile gcc42 so
that I could move the deb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Johnson wrote:
While upstream hasn't rigorously followed libtool versioning
guidelines, even if they had, the install_name would still not have
changed since 4.5 since CURRENT and AGE would still be the same.
I've done some testing
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 01:38:37PM -0600, Christian Schaffner wrote:
Dear Fink developers
In order to make the 'dump' script of the pdb working with the new
ideas layed out at
http://wiki.finkproject.org/index.php/Fink:PDB
and started in the 'redesign_pdb' branch, I would like to
13 matches
Mail list logo
