Re: [Fink-devel] packaging request

2007-02-02 Thread Kasper Peeters
Or one asks the author to provide a true compatibility_version. This only requires changing one line in src/Makefile: In the definition of LPHASE, instead of -release ${RELEASE}, one would put -version-info 1:0:0 or something. But it would also mean that the author would need to think

[Fink-devel] gcc42 deps

2007-02-02 Thread Robert T Wyatt
Apparently fink (dpkg ?) doesn't notice this error: Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies: gcc42: Depends: gcc42-shlibs (= 0:4.1.-20070124) but 4.1.-20070124 is to be installed But apt-get does. Fink shows: i gcc42 4.1.-20070124 i gcc42-shlibs

Re: [Fink-devel] gcc42 deps

2007-02-02 Thread Robert T Wyatt
I see now that this is coming from the %e expansion in gcc42.info, but I don't know how to fix it without breaking something else. Robert T Wyatt wrote: Apparently fink (dpkg ?) doesn't notice this error: Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies: gcc42: Depends:

Re: [Fink-devel] gcc42 deps

2007-02-02 Thread Alexander Hansen
On 2/2/07, Robert T Wyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see now that this is coming from the %e expansion in gcc42.info, but I don't know how to fix it without breaking something else. Robert T Wyatt wrote: Apparently fink (dpkg ?) doesn't notice this error: Sorry, but the following

Re: [Fink-devel] gcc42 deps

2007-02-02 Thread Robert T Wyatt
Since this version of gcc42 doesn't have a declared Epoch, the %e should be removed from the dependency on gcc42-shlibs (carryover from the prior version, perhaps). Okay, so if I remove %e: from gcc42.info, how do I get apt to see the change? I've tried fink scanpackages, fink index, and sudo

Re: [Fink-devel] gcc42 deps

2007-02-02 Thread Alexander Hansen
On 2/2/07, Robert T Wyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since this version of gcc42 doesn't have a declared Epoch, the %e should be removed from the dependency on gcc42-shlibs (carryover from the prior version, perhaps). Okay, so if I remove %e: from gcc42.info, how do I get apt to see the

Re: [Fink-devel] gcc42 deps

2007-02-02 Thread Robert T Wyatt
Alexander Hansen wrote: You'd have to rebuild the package--the Depends information is coded into the .deb file. (or you could manually unpack the .deb file, edit the control file, and repack it). The issue is that fink treats 0:x.y.z = x.y.z, but apt thinks 0:x.y.z x.y.z Thanks! I

Re: [Fink-devel] gcc42 deps

2007-02-02 Thread Alexander Hansen
On 2/2/07, Robert T Wyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alexander Hansen wrote: You'd have to rebuild the package--the Depends information is coded into the .deb file. (or you could manually unpack the .deb file, edit the control file, and repack it). The issue is that fink treats 0:x.y.z =