In Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:52:43 +0700 Bambang cum veritate scripsit :
> Dear list,
>
> Is there anybody who can point me to the (something like) HOWTO make a
> multiple binary package?
>
I think I looked at esound source package for reference.
It was a small package which builds several binary v
In Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:01:19 +0200 Eduard cum veritate scripsit :
> I guess too, but the foo-i686 would cause Grave-Bugs soon. But there is
> another issue: I considered to create a special optimisation branches
> for specific CPU types using the following concept:
>
> - Packages are recompiled
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 10:52:43PM +0700, Bambang Purnomosidi D. P. wrote:
> Is there anybody who can point me to the (something like) HOWTO make a
> multiple binary package?
The easiest thing to do is probably to look at the examples in the dh-make
package and refer to the New Maintainer's Guide
Martin Sj|gren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[filing for removal of old gap packages]
> That is probably a good course of action, but I think it would be a
> bad idea to do it before the new gap4 packages have hit unstable,
> which they haven't done yet.
>
> So, should I wait, or "re-orphan" it in
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 01:38:35PM +0200, Philipp Frauenfelder wrote:
> Hi Eduard
> I guess he wants to build a
> foo
> package and a
> foo-i686
> package as it was done with libc6 some time ago.
Yes, you're right.
> Viral, you need to build the whole package twice but this can be
> done using
Dear list,
Is there anybody who can point me to the (something like) HOWTO make a
multiple binary package?
TIA
--
b
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 10:52:43PM +0700, Bambang Purnomosidi D. P. wrote:
> Is there anybody who can point me to the (something like) HOWTO make a
> multiple binary package?
The easiest thing to do is probably to look at the examples in the dh-make
package and refer to the New Maintainer's Guid
Martin Sj|gren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[filing for removal of old gap packages]
> That is probably a good course of action, but I think it would be a
> bad idea to do it before the new gap4 packages have hit unstable,
> which they haven't done yet.
>
> So, should I wait, or "re-orphan" it in
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 01:38:35PM +0200, Philipp Frauenfelder wrote:
> Hi Eduard
> I guess he wants to build a
> foo
> package and a
> foo-i686
> package as it was done with libc6 some time ago.
Yes, you're right.
> Viral, you need to build the whole package twice but this can be
> done using
Dear list,
Is there anybody who can point me to the (something like) HOWTO make a
multiple binary package?
TIA
--
b
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#include
Philipp Frauenfelder wrote on Tue Aug 21, 2001 um 01:38:35PM:
> I guess he wants to build a
> foo
> package and a
> foo-i686
> package as it was done with libc6 some time ago.
I guess too, but the foo-i686 would cause Grave-Bugs soon. But there is
another issue: I considered to create a
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 08:12:28PM +1000, Chanop Silpa-Anan wrote:
> After trying to get some dv software running, I have noticed that a few
> packages have mmx code in it, e.g. quicktime4linux, libdv, libjpeg-mmx.
> I wonder if there is any policy/guide line for this? if I would like to
> package
Hi Eduard
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 01:07:44PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Viral wrote on Tue Aug 21, 2001 um 02:29:25PM:
>
> > I need to build an i386 version of a package, and also an i686 optimised
> > version for the same package. Is it possible to build both packages from
> > one source, ins
#include
Viral wrote on Tue Aug 21, 2001 um 02:29:25PM:
> I need to build an i386 version of a package, and also an i686 optimised
> version for the same package. Is it possible to build both packages from
> one source, instead of doing it twice in two different directories ?
Please don't do th
On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 10:28:11AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> well, good hint!
> (inverting the test obviously or I remove all 'good' files ...)
Oops. Sorry!
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to brin
Hi,
After trying to get some dv software running, I have noticed that a few
packages have mmx code in it, e.g. quicktime4linux, libdv, libjpeg-mmx.
I wonder if there is any policy/guide line for this? if I would like to
package mmx optimized binary.
i386/i486 wouldn't run these codes unless peopl
#include
Philipp Frauenfelder wrote on Tue Aug 21, 2001 um 01:38:35PM:
> I guess he wants to build a
> foo
> package and a
> foo-i686
> package as it was done with libc6 some time ago.
I guess too, but the foo-i686 would cause Grave-Bugs soon. But there is
another issue: I considered to create
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 08:12:28PM +1000, Chanop Silpa-Anan wrote:
> After trying to get some dv software running, I have noticed that a few
> packages have mmx code in it, e.g. quicktime4linux, libdv, libjpeg-mmx.
> I wonder if there is any policy/guide line for this? if I would like to
> package
Hi Eduard
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 01:07:44PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Viral wrote on Tue Aug 21, 2001 um 02:29:25PM:
>
> > I need to build an i386 version of a package, and also an i686 optimised
> > version for the same package. Is it possible to build both packages from
> > one source, in
#include
Viral wrote on Tue Aug 21, 2001 um 02:29:25PM:
> I need to build an i386 version of a package, and also an i686 optimised
> version for the same package. Is it possible to build both packages from
> one source, instead of doing it twice in two different directories ?
Please don't do t
Hi,
I need to build an i386 version of a package, and also an i686 optimised
version for the same package. Is it possible to build both packages from
one source, instead of doing it twice in two different directories ?
viral
--
http://www.infofin.com/~gandalf
"Live for today, gone tomorrow, t
On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 10:28:11AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> well, good hint!
> (inverting the test obviously or I remove all 'good' files ...)
Oops. Sorry!
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bri
On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 09:43:16PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Martin Sj|gren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Some time ago, I filed an ITA on the gap package and started working on a
> > new package, updating gap to version 4, since the old one was hideously
> > out of date. It turns out
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 10:07:13AM +0530, Viral wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have to move my packages gutenbook and gutenbrowser to non-US because of
> a dependency on unzip. I'd slipped up on that, and got a bug report to do
> so.
what about miniunzip from zlib-bin? is not enough for you?
--
Christian S
Hi,
I need to build an i386 version of a package, and also an i686 optimised
version for the same package. Is it possible to build both packages from
one source, instead of doing it twice in two different directories ?
viral
--
http://www.infofin.com/~gandalf
"Live for today, gone tomorrow,
On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 09:43:16PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Martin Sj|gren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Some time ago, I filed an ITA on the gap package and started working on a
> > new package, updating gap to version 4, since the old one was hideously
> > out of date. It turns out
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 10:07:13AM +0530, Viral wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have to move my packages gutenbook and gutenbrowser to non-US because of
> a dependency on unzip. I'd slipped up on that, and got a bug report to do
> so.
what about miniunzip from zlib-bin? is not enough for you?
--
Christian
27 matches
Mail list logo
