Re: [Fink-devel] fatback in fink

2004-07-13 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Nicholas Harbour has sent me a tar with fatback-1.4 sporting a proper GPL in the COPYING file. Will this sort the problem out? cheers, martin - -- - -- Martin Langhoff http://nzl.com.ar/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4

Re: [Fink-devel] fatback in fink

2004-07-12 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim White wrote: | While it is correct to remove the package (DMCA and PATRIOT acts being | what they are), I think that the meaning of all this is that the | restriction stated in the fatback manual is a violation of GPL. Correct. And yet we have a

Re: [Fink-devel] fatback in fink

2004-07-12 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
the GPL. Subterfuge I know, but it worked. | | Nick. | | p.s. You're lucky, I haven't worked here for 2 years and just came back | and got my email account reactivated :) | | -Original Message- | From: Martin Langhoff (NZL) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 10:40 PM

Re: [Fink-devel] fatback in fink

2004-07-07 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Remi Mommsen wrote: | | * NOTICE: | * The following license applies only to the | * files getopt.c, getopt.h, and getopt1.c. | * these are borrowed from glibc. | * This licence does not in any way apply | *

Re: [Fink-devel] Patch and PatchScript ignored

2004-06-01 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
Alexander Strange wrote: What version of fink is it (fink --version)? Current stable and unstable both have 0.20.2-1 which supports this. Hmmm. This doesn't seem normal, then -- I have a very old fink even if I have current FINK: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~]$ fink --version Package manager version:

[Fink-devel] Doc bug - Bad heredoc syntax

2004-06-01 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
The CustomMirror example shows an incorrect heredoc syntax. It opens with and closes with . Should close with . This can be seen at http://fink.sourceforge.net/doc/packaging/reference.php?phpLang=en -- right under the Unpack Phase subtitle. regards, martin -- -- Martin Langhoff

Re: [Fink-devel] Patch and PatchScript ignored

2004-05-31 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
Ben Hines wrote: Works fine here, with those info files. (the patch fails, though) Perhaps you have an old version of your info file there somewhere. If all else fails try putting the revision on 2 and see if 'fink update' updates it to 2. Thanks! Bumping the revision helped. Is this a fink

[Fink-devel] Policy and apache 1.3.x modules

2004-05-31 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
The package I am building is libapache-mod-midgard. Now, the module is built against MacOSX's native Apache, using APXS. So far, I am patching the Makefile to have the module installed in /sw/lib. To allow integration with the OS X default Apache install I will provide a separate script that a

Re: [Fink-devel] Policy and apache 1.3.x modules

2004-05-31 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
David H. wrote: All of those _cannot_ run with the Apple supplied Apache, you have to build the Fink version and use it as well. That is a very strict rule we stick to, so it is highly unlikely your package would be accepted the way you are providing it now. I hope that helps :) Thanks! I was

[Fink-devel] Patch and PatchScript ignored

2004-05-30 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
Building my 1st fink packages and I cannot for the life of me get Patch or PatchScript entries to be observed. Is there any mechanism to debug this situation? If I prevent the builddir from being removed, I can apply the patch successfully, by hand. Doesn't help too much. The output of `sudo

[Fink-devel] Busted /etc due to a fink bug?

2004-05-29 Thread Martin Langhoff (NZL)
Debconf4 is in full rage, and I was cutting my teeth with Fink, trying to port a debian package to fink. Now, I had made a serious mistake passing --prefix explicitly as part of the configura parameters. Duh. After seeing the package install itself all over the place, I did apt-get --purge