Re: [Fink-devel] gmp-4.3.1-1000

2009-05-16 Thread Koen van der Drift
On May 16, 2009, at 6:37 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: > I haven't > tested on powerpc-apple-darwin yet but the initial 4.3.0 > release had no issues there. No problems on my iMac G5 with 10.5.7, Package manager version: 0.29.5 Distribution version: selfupdate-cvs Sat May 16 19:25:08 2009, 10.5, pow

Re: [Fink-devel] x86_64 architecture perl problems

2009-05-16 Thread Jack Howarth
David, I think the problem is that I am using '-m' constantly when installing perlmods and these are picking up on missing dependencies (shown as failures in the testsuite). For example when installing the intltool40-x86_64.info that I proposed using 'fink -m install intltool40', the failures in

[Fink-devel] gmp-4.3.1-1000

2009-05-16 Thread Jack Howarth
David, Upstream has released a new 4.3.1 gmp version which resolves all of the MacOS X issues in the initial 4.3.0 release. I have attached a gmp.info which builds this release (without the previous patch since the upstream developer disapproves of that change). I am able to build this gmp-4.3.1

Re: [Fink-devel] Is it possible to parse %f?

2009-05-16 Thread Monic Polynomial
On 16/05/2009, at 18:59, Benjamin Reed wrote: > On 5/16/09 1:31 PM, Daniel Macks wrote: > >> I think that would handle dependency formats ("foo (>= 1.0-2)") not >> %f. Maybe Engine::expand_packages? I think that's what processes the >> packages specified on fink commandline. > > I thought without a

Re: [Fink-devel] Is it possible to parse %f?

2009-05-16 Thread Monic Polynomial
On 16/05/2009, at 14:31, Daniel Macks wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 12:48:42PM -0400, Benjamin Reed wrote: >> On 5/16/09 12:07 PM, Monic Polynomial wrote: >>> I'm developing a Fink notification plugin and I need to parse the >>> list >>> of package names that the plugin receives from Fink. >>>

Re: [Fink-devel] Is it possible to parse %f?

2009-05-16 Thread Benjamin Reed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 5/16/09 1:31 PM, Daniel Macks wrote: > I think that would handle dependency formats ("foo (>= 1.0-2)") not > %f. Maybe Engine::expand_packages? I think that's what processes the > packages specified on fink commandline. I thought without a >= or w

Re: [Fink-devel] x86_64 architecture perl problems

2009-05-16 Thread David R. Morrison
Jack, Is there any chance that the environment you ran these commands under is "polluted" by an i386 copy of fink? -- Dave On May 16, 2009, at 9:46 AM, Jack Howarth wrote: > In an attempt to fix the missing dependency on the > intltool40 for building gnuplot under the new x86_64 > Leopa

Re: [Fink-devel] Is it possible to parse %f?

2009-05-16 Thread Daniel Macks
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 12:48:42PM -0400, Benjamin Reed wrote: > On 5/16/09 12:07 PM, Monic Polynomial wrote: > > I'm developing a Fink notification plugin and I need to parse the list > > of package names that the plugin receives from Fink. > > Fink::PkgVersion::phase_activate() sends a notifi

Re: [Fink-devel] Is it possible to parse %f?

2009-05-16 Thread Benjamin Reed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 5/16/09 12:07 PM, Monic Polynomial wrote: > I'm developing a Fink notification plugin and I need to parse the list > of package names that the plugin receives from Fink. > Fink::PkgVersion::phase_activate() sends a notification whose > descri

[Fink-devel] x86_64 architecture perl problems

2009-05-16 Thread Jack Howarth
In an attempt to fix the missing dependency on the intltool40 for building gnuplot under the new x86_64 Leopard support, I came up with the attached x86_64 variants for 10.5. These all pass fink validate but when I try... fink -m install intltool40 the build process ends prematurely due to tes

Re: [Fink-devel] Is it possible to parse %f?

2009-05-16 Thread Monic Polynomial
On 16/05/2009, at 12:21, Daniel Macks wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:35:29AM -0300, Monic Polynomial wrote: >> %f is the full package name (%n-%v-%r), where %n is the package name, >> %v is its version, and %r its revision. Is it possible to parse %f >> and >> split it into its three compone

Re: [Fink-devel] Is it possible to parse %f?

2009-05-16 Thread Daniel Macks
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:35:29AM -0300, Monic Polynomial wrote: > %f is the full package name (%n-%v-%r), where %n is the package name, > %v is its version, and %r its revision. Is it possible to parse %f and > split it into its three components? No. Not sure what you're trying to accomplis

[Fink-devel] Is it possible to parse %f?

2009-05-16 Thread Monic Polynomial
%f is the full package name (%n-%v-%r), where %n is the package name, %v is its version, and %r its revision. Is it possible to parse %f and split it into its three components? Cheers, -- monipol -- Crystal Reports