On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Csaba Raduly wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Jun 24 07:03, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Using another build system doesn't mean you can't switch to the better
>>>
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jun 24 07:03, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >
>> > Using another build system doesn't mean you can't switch to the better
>> > one.
>>
>> That depends on one's view of better and Chris
On Jun 24 07:03, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >
> > Using another build system doesn't mean you can't switch to the better
> > one.
>
> That depends on one's view of better and Chris already believes he
> uses the better one. That is why is refus
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> Using another build system doesn't mean you can't switch to the better
> one.
That depends on one's view of better and Chris already believes he
uses the better one. That is why is refuses to use something else.
--
Earnie
-- https://s
On Jun 21 13:50, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2013-06-21 13:10, Warren Young wrote:
> >On 6/21/2013 12:05, Warren Young wrote:
> >>With cygport, you wouldn't even need to provide sources. We could email
> >>in the new cygport file instead of an RFU.
> >
> >...and patches.
> >
> >...and customized
On Jun 21 10:34, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 09:49:34AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Jun 20 22:38, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> >> > If every maintainer would use cygport, it would allow us to change
> >> > the build method to one along the lines of most Linux distro
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 04:03:46PM -0400, Andrew Schulman wrote:
>>On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 09:49:34AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>On Jun 20 22:38, Andrew Schulman wrote:
>If every maintainer would use cygport, it would allow us to change the
>build method to one along the lines of mos
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 09:49:34AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Jun 20 22:38, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> >> > If every maintainer would use cygport, it would allow us to change
> >> > the build method to one along the lines of most Linux distros.
> >> > In Linux distros, the maintaine
On 2013-06-21 13:10, Warren Young wrote:
On 6/21/2013 12:05, Warren Young wrote:
With cygport, you wouldn't even need to provide sources. We could email
in the new cygport file instead of an RFU.
...and patches.
...and customized .hint files, if needed.
Yeah, I guess sending the .src.tar.bz
On 6/21/2013 12:05, Warren Young wrote:
On 6/20/2013 12:10, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
If every maintainer would use cygport, it would allow us to change
the build method to one along the lines of most Linux distros.
In Linux distros, the maintainer provides only the spec file and
the s
On 6/20/2013 12:10, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
If every maintainer would use cygport, it would allow us to change
the build method to one along the lines of most Linux distros.
In Linux distros, the maintainer provides only the spec file and
the source archive. The actual build for all
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 09:49:34AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Jun 20 22:38, Andrew Schulman wrote:
>> > If every maintainer would use cygport, it would allow us to change
>> > the build method to one along the lines of most Linux distros.
>> > In Linux distros, the maintainer provides
On Jun 20 22:38, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> > If every maintainer would use cygport, it would allow us to change
> > the build method to one along the lines of most Linux distros.
> > In Linux distros, the maintainer provides only the spec file and
> > the source archive. The actual build fo
On 6/20/2013 12:44, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
There should NEVER be a reason that you can't use cygport for your
packages. If you're having an issue, just provide your (draft)
cygport(5) and ask.
Thanks for the offer. I've left myself a note to try this again for the
next ctags release.
I
> If every maintainer would use cygport, it would allow us to change
> the build method to one along the lines of most Linux distros.
> In Linux distros, the maintainer provides only the spec file and
> the source archive. The actual build for all supported platforms
> could be done on
On 20/06/13 18:43, Warren Young wrote:
The last doxygen package I shipped was a good example of this:
1. I had to pass "--platform linux-g++" to configure to get it to
build correctly. (It might have been one of those cases where it saw
#if WINDOWS == true and did the wrong thing.) I don't k
On 2013-06-20 12:43, Warren Young wrote:
I'm assuming everyone is using cygport now to create packages, or can't
because of one of these violated expectations.
My ctags package is one of the latter, because although it ships with a
configure script, it isn't an autoconf configure script. When I
On Jun 20 11:43, Warren Young wrote:
> On 6/19/2013 12:38, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> >On 2013-06-19 12:57, Warren Young wrote:
> >>You're not talking about anything different than the sort of thing
> >>Cygwin package maintainers go through, sometimes needing to arm-twist
> >>odd build systems to b
On 6/19/2013 12:38, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On 2013-06-19 12:57, Warren Young wrote:
You're not talking about anything different than the sort of thing
Cygwin package maintainers go through, sometimes needing to arm-twist
odd build systems to behave according to cygport's expectations?
I thin
19 matches
Mail list logo
