Jack Howarth wrote:
In order to work around the conflicts over ffi.3,
ffi_call.3 and ffi_prep_cif.3 between the libffi and
gcc45 package, I am looking at adding the calls to
update-alternatives to gcc45. Looking at the openmotif4.info
as an example, I see...
PostInstScript:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 05:53:57AM +0200, Jean-François Mertens
wrote:
Hi Jack,
I just updated libffi to check on that;
I guess the same conflict will remain,
so _ either the 2 manpages are essentiially equivalent,
ad then a mutual Replaces would suffice,
or else update-alternatives
On 16 Apr 2010, at 15:04, Jack Howarth wrote:
Jean-Francois,
Are you testing with the gcc45 packaging I posted last night
that now uses update-alternatives for the offending man pages?
No _this was with the previous version (parallel builds (both
on 32bit and 64bit fink) of gcc take some
Currently binutils is installing itself directly
into %p. This is causing at least some configure
scripts to automatically use binutils instead of cctools.
I doubt that fink wants to silently build packages
against an experimental binutils rather than cctools.
The binutils package should be
On 16 Apr 2010, at 19:09, Jack Howarth wrote:
Currently binutils is installing itself directly
into %p. This is causing at least some configure
scripts to automatically use binutils instead of cctools.
In this case, it was not instead of : the only
command objdump I have on my machine is
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 07:22:25PM +0200, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
On 16 Apr 2010, at 19:09, Jack Howarth wrote:
Currently binutils is installing itself directly
into %p. This is causing at least some configure
scripts to automatically use binutils instead of cctools.
In this case,
Martin,
So what is the recommended method for resolving conflicts over
manpages if update-alternatives is the wrong approach?
Jack
ps Regarding my leaving the update-alternatives in the info file,
I didn't remove it because my approach was not to randomly
prune things from the info
