-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 5/28/10 9:29 PM, Daniel Johnson wrote:
On May 27, 2010, at 9:02 AM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
Besides gccXX (and local/libgmp seems to be the most common culprit
there), are there other packages that routinely suffer from /usr/local
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6/1/10 7:20 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote:
Another option might be to have Fink check for /usr/local and issue a
warning message that blocks further action without user intervention.
Some users will complain about that, of course.
I should
On May 27, 2010, at 9:02 AM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser wrote:
Besides gccXX (and local/libgmp seems to be the most common culprit
there), are there other packages that routinely suffer from /usr/local
interference? A CompileScript check for /usr/local in those packages
could similarly be
On 05/27/2010 12:37 AM, Daniel Macks wrote:
One of the side effects of fink-package-precedence is that /usr/local
becomes more of a visible problem. Well, it was always a problem, but
now it becomes a build-time crash rather than a silently-lurking
time-bomb). There are lots of legitimate
Daniel,
hidding /usr/local by temporarily moving it to another place sounds like a
super-evil and dangerous thing to me. It's pretty easy to imagine how this can
lead to data loss. Also, what if I want to build one of those super big
packages that take hours and hours -- am I simply not
One of the side effects of fink-package-precedence is that /usr/local
becomes more of a visible problem. Well, it was always a problem, but
now it becomes a build-time crash rather than a silently-lurking
time-bomb). There are lots of legitimate reasons users may have
/usr/local stuff, but no good
