Status packaging GT.M? (Was: OpenVista for Ubuntu)

2010-02-02 Thread Andreas Tille
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 08:10:31AM -0500, K.S. Bhaskar wrote: > > [KSB] I found I needed to rework some of the user scripts in the GT.M > distribution first, which I will get into the GT.M packages. But it > appears that creating Debian friendly packages - not just binary packages > but Debia

Re: Status packaging GT.M? (Was: OpenVista for Ubuntu)

2010-02-02 Thread K.S. Bhaskar
Andreas -- Your e-mail is very timely - we just announced a major new GT.M release today (see http://fis-gtm.com)! This release includes the new scripting that makes GT.M easier to run out of the box. There is now a "gtm" script that sets up reasonable defaults for environment variables (the

Re: Status packaging GT.M? (Was: OpenVista for Ubuntu)

2010-02-02 Thread Andreas Tille
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 03:08:09PM -0500, K.S. Bhaskar wrote: > Your e-mail is very timely - we just announced a major new GT.M release > today (see http://fis-gtm.com)! :) Congratulations to this release. > Jon has set up an Ubuntu repository (see > https://medsphere.org/docs/DOC-1722) and h

Re: Status packaging GT.M? (Was: OpenVista for Ubuntu)

2010-02-02 Thread Jonathan Tai
The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or may be covered under the Privacy Act, 5 USC 552(a), and/or the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (PL 104-191) and its various implementing regulations and must be protected in accordance with those provisions..

Re: Status packaging GT.M? (Was: OpenVista for Ubuntu)

2010-02-02 Thread Andreas Tille
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 02:30:52PM -0800, Jonathan Tai wrote: > It's just another version of GT.M -- 5.3004 and 5.3004A are different > versions. (Debian packaging doesn't allow capital letters in the > version number, IIRC, so I lowercased it.) We support multiple versions > of GT.M simultaneous