Re: [Fink-devel] Fink Build Status; QA Proposal

2005-06-01 Thread D. Höhn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Matthew Sachs wrote: snip This would let us validate submissions and automate the maintenance of the bindist (and even provide a bindist for unstable.) While I like that very much, there is a trust/security issue here which we have failed

[Fink-devel] Fink Build Status; QA Proposal

2005-05-31 Thread Matthew Sachs
I finished another Fink build over the weekend. A system configuration error caused a lot of things to build with 3.3 instead of 4.0, which introduced a lot of failures due to trying to link 3.3 against 4.0, so I won't be releasing a report on these results. The good news is that this

Re: [Fink-devel] Fink Build Status; QA Proposal

2005-05-31 Thread Dave Vasilevsky
On May 31, 2005, at 10:55 PM, Michèle Garoche wrote:Le 31 mai 2005 à 23:48, Matthew Sachs a écrit :The second build will use 10.4-transitional and not try to force 4.0, and will build the packages as 'nobody' instead of 'root'.That would be good, because I've begun on 27th May and only 1120

Re: [Fink-devel] Fink Build Status; QA Proposal

2005-05-31 Thread Michèle Garoche
Le 1 juin 2005 à 06:52, Dave Vasilevsky a écrit :On May 31, 2005, at 10:55 PM, Michèle Garoche wrote:Le 31 mai 2005 à 23:48, Matthew Sachs a écrit :The second build will use 10.4-transitional and not try to force 4.0, and will build the packages as 'nobody' instead of 'root'.That would be good,