[Fwd: Bug#207475: libtool: wrongly hides important compiler output]

2003-09-30 Thread Scott James Remnant
Forwarded for discussion purposes ... I can see Sam's point, but I can also see the reason for suppressing one of two near-identical compilations. Scott -Forwarded Message- From: Sam Hocevar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Bug#207475: libto

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 17:58, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > After the next cron web update, please read: > > http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/contribute.html > > and give me your feedback... > Makes sense to me, seems to cover everything well enough to avoid any confusion about what kind of re

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Dalibor Topic wrote: Scott James Remnant wrote: On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 09:31, Bernd Jendrissek wrote: On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 09:33:29AM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: etc. Keeping odd version for development ensure people cannot mis-sort versions with letters with others. It could also give

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Earnie Boyd
Scott James Remnant wrote: Not sure whether it's a concern, but generally most packaging systems (RPM springs to mind) do not allow a '-' in the package's upstream version. It's only a concern to the RPM users and maintainers. If it's a CVS snapshot for the next version increment just timestamp th

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: "Daniel" == Daniel Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Daniel> Several GNU projects (including GCC) do leave off .0's Daniel> for anything past the minor number, so it seems ls -v Daniel> can't be the final authority :/ Sorry I meant to compare only the version

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Dalibor Topic
Scott James Remnant wrote: On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 09:31, Bernd Jendrissek wrote: On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 09:33:29AM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: etc. Keeping odd version for development ensure people cannot mis-sort versions with letters with others. It could also gives some feeling of sen

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 10:15, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: > > I didn't understand your proposal, but I hope you are not > > planning to make 2.2 < 2.3a < 2.3. That would be counter > > intuitive. IMHO any numbering scheme ought to work with `ls -v'. > > Actually, that is

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 09:31, Bernd Jendrissek wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 09:33:29AM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: > > etc. Keeping odd version for development ensure people cannot > > mis-sort versions with letters with others. It could also gives > > some feeling of sense to accustome

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Gary V. Vaughan wrote: Your point about `ls -v' is a good one though. I'll put an extra `-' before the letter: ] touch libtool-1.5.tar.gz libtool-1.6a.tar.gz libtool-1.6.tar.gz ] \ls -1 -v libtool-1.5.tar.gz libtool-1.6.tar.gz libtool-1.6a.tar.gz ] mv libtool-1.6a.tar.gz

Re: libtool pre-1.5b tests fail on 9 debian arches

2003-09-30 Thread Dalibor Topic
Robert Millan wrote: On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 02:36:13AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: Getting these patches accepted upstream is tricky though, I've sent some bug fixes through. A few days ago I decided to have a go getting some of the portability patches (some of which are large) accepted, I

Jurisprudência e Legislação

2003-09-30 Thread Pesquise
MENSAGEM DESTINADA EXCLUSIVAMENTE PARA ADVOGADOS, ESTUDANTES DO DIREITO, BIBLIOTECAS JURÍDICAS, PROCURADORIAS, JUÍZES, PROMOTORES E DEFENSORES PÚBLICOS.CASO NÃO O QUEIRA RECEBER NOVAMENTE,

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: "Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Gary> And that's why people find our version scheme confusing. I'm not sure Gary> how we ended up working in this way, I think we copied it from Gary> Automake? Tsk tsk tsk. Libtool used that scheme fi

RE: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Howard Chu
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bernd Jendrissek > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 09:33:29AM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: > > Obviously, as long as characters are reserved for beta relea

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Bernd Jendrissek
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 09:33:29AM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: > Obviously, as long as characters are reserved for beta releases, ^ > we may not care about such installation tools.

Re: only static libraries created

2003-09-30 Thread Bernhard . Rumpler
On 26.09.2003 02:44:28 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Bob Friesenhahn wrote: >> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003, Bernhard Rumpler wrote: >>>When I try to link static libraries, then a warning "Linking the shared >>>library libgtkhtml-2.la against a loadable module - libhtmllayouthtml.a is >>>not portable!" is disp

Re: Version numbering

2003-09-30 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Daniel> Several GNU projects (including GCC) do leave off .0's Daniel> for anything past the minor number, so it seems ls -v Daniel> can't be the final authority :/ Sorry I meant to compare only the version numbers not the full fil