Yep that works. Thanks. I had confused that with -j which stores the files with
no path information. I’ll update the wiki.
— DM
> On Aug 17, 2015, at 7:39 PM, Kahunapule Michael Johnson
> wrote:
>
> How about the more simple and cross-platform
>
> zip -r -D $ZIPDIR/xyzABC.zip mods.d/xyzABC
On 08/17/2015 01:53 PM, Karl Kleinpaste
wrote:
On 08/17/2015 07:49 PM, Kahunapule
Michael Johnson wrote:
in
the interest of brevity, I'll take them out
If you change module names entirely, you
will need to add "Obsol
On 08/17/2015 07:49 PM, Kahunapule Michael Johnson wrote:
> in the interest of brevity, I'll take them out
If you change module names entirely, you will need to add "Obsoletes:
oldNameHere" to each affected .conf. Otherwise those of us who have
been testing your repo will have our module populatio
See responses/questions interspersed,
below:
On 08/17/2015 10:30 AM, Martin Denham wrote:
1. Some of the language prefixes seem non-standard.
I have not seen modules with an underscore in them before
e.g. eng_web2015. We don
How about the more simple and
cross-platform
zip -r -D $ZIPDIR/xyzABC.zip mods.d/xyzABC.conf modules/texts/ztext/xyzABC
where "-D" means "don't create entries for directories"?
On 08/17/2015 07:25 AM, DM Smith wrote:
CrossWire's “g
On 08/17/2015 04:44 PM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> I still don’t know what's the advantage of lying about the API version.
I suppose it's a small example of a much larger problem. If GTK3 is
updated from 3.14.15 to 3.14.16, we shouldn't induce a rebuild of all
GTK3 applications. Current /usr/lib64/libgt
The point is that, if we build against 1.1.2 (the way we used to build
against 1.7.1 of SWORD, etc) then we are forced to execute a rebuild
of the Xiphos and all other downstream packages just because the
filename changes to 1.1.3 later on. Even though 1.1.2 and 1.1.3 are
API/ABI compatible. By exp
On 2015-08-17, 19:10 GMT, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> I pulled down the official (i.e. Greg's) BibleSync packages from Fedora
> repos to look inside them. His packages contain .so.1.1, not
> .so.1.1.2. Perhaps Greg did the soversion thing? But in the name of
> consistency, then, a Xiphos built agai
On 2015-08-17, 18:18 GMT, Greg Hellings wrote:
> Are you certain that you're calling up the xiphos that came from my
> packages? My biblesync build script never generates a
> biblesync.so.1.1.2 at all, so there should be no way for the Xiphos
> package to be created while referencing it. If the bib
Apologies for taking a long time to look at the new eBible repo. Here are
a couple of comments/questions.
Firstly I have tried adding the new eBible repo to And Bible and downloaded
a few modules without any problems but there were a few things I noticed
while testing.
1. Some of the language pr
I pulled down the official (i.e. Greg's) BibleSync packages from Fedora
repos to look inside them. His packages contain .so.1.1, not
.so.1.1.2. Perhaps Greg did the soversion thing? But in the name of
consistency, then, a Xiphos built against that BibleSync package should
link fine using just .s
Matej,
Are you certain that you're calling up the xiphos that came from my
packages? My biblesync build script never generates a
biblesync.so.1.1.2 at all, so there should be no way for the Xiphos
package to be created while referencing it. If the biblesync spec file
was generating a library file
On 2015-08-17, 13:00 GMT, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> I can't offer any guess, being not involved in Redhat repo management.
> My builds use a spec that started as mostly Greg's. Your version lacks
> Greg's -fPIC additions from several months ago (F22 got uptight about
> security in some new, weird s
CrossWire's “gold” standard is the servlet that packages zip files for
download. I verified that it only puts files into the zips.
I’ve updated the wiki page.
For simple modules, having no subdirectories, such as images, it was lacking /*
on the end and included -r.
zip $ZIPDIR/XYZ.zip mods.d/
On 08/17/2015 11:55 AM, Konstantin Maslyuk wrote:
> Are sub folders permitted at all?
Subfolders are common in modules having image content, such as maps or
like OpenHymnal in which sheet music is in image files. A subdirectory
named "images" is routinely used, in which all *.{gif,jpg,png} are
pla
At moment there is no way to display overall installation progress for a module
in Sword. Our StatusReporter works in per directory manner, so if in module
there is a sub folder, it will report downloading status for it with in parent
folder report.
Is there some thing I have to know before mak
I would prefer that someone fixes it who knows exactly what should be written
there.
Peter
> Gesendet: Montag, 17. August 2015 um 16:41 Uhr
> Von: "David Haslam"
> An: sword-devel@crosswire.org
> Betreff: Re: [sword-devel] eBible.org repository refresh done
>
> Please edit the wiki page if it
You are right on all counts.
Peter
> Gesendet: Montag, 17. August 2015 um 16:44 Uhr
> Von: "David Haslam"
> An: sword-devel@crosswire.org
> Betreff: Re: [sword-devel] Github Move of Module-tools git repository and
> related stuff
>
> When the dust is settled, we ought to add links to the GitHub
When the dust is settled, we ought to add links to the GitHub repo in one or
more of our wiki pages.
It's essential to keep the developers' wiki up to date, it being one of the
most useful sources of information regarding all things done at CrossWire.
David
--
View this message in context:
ht
Please edit the wiki page if it needs correcting, Peter.
David
--
View this message in context:
http://sword-dev.350566.n4.nabble.com/eBible-org-repository-refresh-complete-tp4654913p4655002.html
Sent from the SWORD Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_
Remeber that we have Crosswire's github organization living at
https://github.com/crosswire :)
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> For the last few months John Austin, some friends of his, myself and
> others have worked on getting our usfm - to - osis proc
Dear all,
For the last few months John Austin, some friends of his, myself and
others have worked on getting our usfm - to - osis process onto a safer
and more solid footing.
There remains still a lot of work.
This is where we are right now:
We ran a small git repository which contains a set
I reviewed the history, it was my flawed understanding which is recorded there.
Sorry for this.
Peter
Sent from my phone. Apologies for brevity and typos.On 17 Aug 2015 5:49 am,
Kahunapule Michael Johnson wrote:
>
> On 08/16/2015 06:48 AM, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
>
> On 08/16/2015 03:18 AM, Kah
On 08/17/2015 12:42 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> I didn’t build it, it was downloaded from the official EPEL repo.
Sorry, my mistake, I thought you were experimenting with the build
process for it as well.
> Why in the world, we define that __soversion macro? I have never
> in my life with SPEC files (
Added a link in
http://www.crosswire.org/wiki/DevTools:Modules#Related_Pages
David
--
View this message in context:
http://sword-dev.350566.n4.nabble.com/eBible-org-repository-refresh-complete-tp4654913p4654997.html
Sent from the SWORD Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
I might then have created my recent zips the wrong way too... Need to check.
Peter
Sent from my phone. Apologies for brevity and typos.On 16 Aug 2015 9:31 pm, DM
Smith wrote:
>
>
>> On Aug 16, 2015, at 12:48 PM, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
>>
> On 08/16/2015 03:18 AM, Kahunapule Michael Johnson wro
26 matches
Mail list logo
