[clc-devel] missing packages.
-- missing packages shared-mime-info from gnome-mime-data netpbm from xscreensaver j2re from firefox-java-plugin gtk2 from gqview gal from gtkhtml xfree86 from mod_php_complete freetype2 from mod_php_complete shared-mime-info from rox xfree86 from tightvnc xfree86 from xemacs shared-mime-info and netpbm built fine for me. The rest were just simple changes, so I went on and made them. I don't mean to step on anyone's toes, I'm just trying to save everybody some time. Anyway, I haven't done anything with j2re, because I don't know anything about that. And gal, well, I have an update for that one... $ cvs tag -c -F CONTRIB-2_0 shared-mime-info netpbm $ sed -i 's/xfree86/x11/' ... $ sed -i 's/gtk2/gtk/' ... $ sed -i 's/freetype2/freetype/' ... $ cvs commit -m "fix depends" ... etc.
Hey Robert, On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 22:27:31 -0400, Robert McMeekin wrote:
-- missing packages shared-mime-info from gnome-mime-data netpbm from xscreensaver j2re from firefox-java-plugin gtk2 from gqview gal from gtkhtml xfree86 from mod_php_complete freetype2 from mod_php_complete shared-mime-info from rox xfree86 from tightvnc xfree86 from xemacs
shared-mime-info and netpbm built fine for me. The rest were just simple changes, so I went on and made them. I don't mean to step on anyone's toes, I'm just trying to save everybody some time. Great, thanks a lot.
The release of CRUX 2.0 also means that we should create a cvs branch for 1.3 (see [1]); I can do it this evening or tomorrow (moving offices at work today, so I won't have internet access). If someone else can do it earlier, that's even better :-) Kind regards, Johannes 1 http://rfhs8012.fh-regensburg.de/~opel/crux/clc/ -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
Hey, On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 07:21:24 +0200, Johannes Winkelmann wrote: [...]
The release of CRUX 2.0 also means that we should create a cvs branch for 1.3 (see [1]); I can do it this evening or tomorrow (moving offices at work today, so I won't have internet access). If someone else can do it earlier, that's even better :-) Okay, the branch CRUX-1_3 is created from the ports currently tagged CONTRIB-1_3.
Work on ports for CRUX 1.3 should be done in this branch; do get it, execute the following command: cvs -d$USER@crux.fh-regensburg.de:/home/crux/cvs \ checkout -r CRUX-1_3 clc change $USER if needed :-) Besides this, everyone is kindly asked to move to 2.0 and test and tag all his working ports with the 'CONTRIB-1_3' tag. Feel free to ask if anything is not clear (CVS tagging and branching never will be ;-)) Best regards, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 10:14, Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Besides this, everyone is kindly asked to move to 2.0 and test and tag all his working ports with the 'CONTRIB-1_3' tag.
I think you mean 'CONTRIB-2_0', no? But that brings up an interesting point. This is a huge upgrade, and there are likely those who don't want to use the new 2.6 kernel for a bit longer, until it gets a bit more mature. I won't be using 1.3 anymore though, so I won't be able to test my ports there. Would it be worthwhile to send a mail to crux@ asking for people to test newer ports and if they work, let us know so we can tag them CONTRIB-1_3? Maybe we should just leave it like what normally happens, but this is the biggest release I've seen since I started using CRUX at 0.9.4. // Rob
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 10:25:19 -0400, Robert McMeekin wrote:
On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 10:14, Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Besides this, everyone is kindly asked to move to 2.0 and test and tag all his working ports with the 'CONTRIB-1_3' tag.
I think you mean 'CONTRIB-2_0', no? Yeah, sure :-)
Would it be worthwhile to send a mail to crux@ asking for people to test newer ports and if they work, let us know so we can tag them CONTRIB-1_3? Not sure about this one "contrib" means "maintained" after all, and I don't like the idea of tagging ports in contrib of 1.3 without being able to test them. On the other hand, the idea is reasonable after all. What do the other think?
Regards, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
Robert McMeekin <rrm3@rrm3.org> [2004-05-21 19:00]:
On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 10:14, Johannes Winkelmann wrote: I think you mean 'CONTRIB-2_0', no? But that brings up an interesting point. This is a huge upgrade, and there are likely those who don't want to use the new 2.6 kernel for a bit longer, until it gets a bit more mature. I won't be using 1.3 anymore though, so I won't be able to test my ports there.
Same here :\
Would it be worthwhile to send a mail to crux@ asking for people to test newer ports and if they work, let us know so we can tag them CONTRIB-1_3? Maybe we should just leave it like what normally happens, but this is the biggest release I've seen since I started using CRUX at 0.9.4.
I don't like the idea of tagging ports without having verified that the changes are actually okay. After all, this is contrib/, which usually means that only tested ports go in etc... -- Regards, Tilman
participants (3)
-
Johannes Winkelmann -
Robert McMeekin -
Tilman Sauerbeck