You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@subversion.apache.org by "David R. Morrison" <dr...@math.duke.edu> on 2004/02/26 12:40:49 UTC
Re: [Fink-users] Re: ANN: Fink Packages for Subversion 1.0.0 Released
Chris,
Actually, in the 10.2-gcc3.3 tree you shouldn't change the GCC field to 3.1;
in that tree, it is supposed to be 3.3.
So backporting may be quite easy after all.
-- Dave
Christian Schaffner wrote:
> Hi Jack
>
> On 25.02.2004, at 19:23, Jack Repenning wrote:
> > On Feb 23, 2004, at 9:43 AM, Christian Schaffner wrote:
> >> The Fink packages (<http://fink.sf.net>) are now available for the
> >> final
> >> release of Subversion 1.0.0 in the MacOS X 10.3 unstable tree:
> >
> > Is there any plan to build 1.0.0 for 10.2?
>
> It should build almost as it it right now for 10.2 too. The problem is
> that a few of the needed dependencies are not yet ported back to the
> 10.2-gcc3.3 tree. I hope i can do it eventually but haven't got the
> resources at the moment.
>
> > If not, I'll be building my own ... can I contribute to finkization?
>
> Sure. :) You could try move the dependencies to the 10.2-gcc3.3 tree,
> see if they build, and report to the respective package maintainers.
> Ask them if they move their packages. Mostly you just need to change
> the GCC fiels to 3.1 (if the packages have it) and adjust the
> dependecies. Also the package revisions should be lower than in the
> 10.3 tree if the GCC field is available, to allow easy upgrading.
>
> Then you can try to adapt the svn 10.3 package to the 10.2-gcc3.3 tree,
> too.
>
> That would help a lot!
> Thanks, Chris.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [Fink-users] Re: ANN: Fink Packages for Subversion 1.0.0 Released
Posted by Christian Schaffner <ch...@users.sourceforge.net>.
On 26.02.2004, at 13:40, David R. Morrison wrote:
> Actually, in the 10.2-gcc3.3 tree you shouldn't change the GCC field
> to 3.1;
> in that tree, it is supposed to be 3.3.
Ah, yes, sure. What was i thinking... You are right of cause.
> So backporting may be quite easy after all.
Yes. It is just a matter of doing it and tracking all dependencies.
Thanks for correcting me,
Chris.
> Christian Schaffner wrote:
>
>> Hi Jack
>>
>> On 25.02.2004, at 19:23, Jack Repenning wrote:
>>> On Feb 23, 2004, at 9:43 AM, Christian Schaffner wrote:
>>>> The Fink packages (<http://fink.sf.net>) are now available for the
>>>> final
>>>> release of Subversion 1.0.0 in the MacOS X 10.3 unstable tree:
>>>
>>> Is there any plan to build 1.0.0 for 10.2?
>>
>> It should build almost as it it right now for 10.2 too. The problem is
>> that a few of the needed dependencies are not yet ported back to the
>> 10.2-gcc3.3 tree. I hope i can do it eventually but haven't got the
>> resources at the moment.
>>
>>> If not, I'll be building my own ... can I contribute to finkization?
>>
>> Sure. :) You could try move the dependencies to the 10.2-gcc3.3 tree,
>> see if they build, and report to the respective package maintainers.
>> Ask them if they move their packages. Mostly you just need to change
>> the GCC fiels to 3.1 (if the packages have it) and adjust the
>> dependecies. Also the package revisions should be lower than in the
>> 10.3 tree if the GCC field is available, to allow easy upgrading.
>>
>> Then you can try to adapt the svn 10.3 package to the 10.2-gcc3.3
>> tree,
>> too.
>>
>> That would help a lot!
>> Thanks, Chris.
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [Fink-users] Re: ANN: Fink Packages for Subversion 1.0.0 Released
Posted by Christian Schaffner <ch...@users.sourceforge.net>.
On 26.02.2004, at 13:40, David R. Morrison wrote:
> Actually, in the 10.2-gcc3.3 tree you shouldn't change the GCC field
> to 3.1;
> in that tree, it is supposed to be 3.3.
Ah, yes, sure. What was i thinking... You are right of cause.
> So backporting may be quite easy after all.
Yes. It is just a matter of doing it and tracking all dependencies.
Thanks for correcting me,
Chris.
> Christian Schaffner wrote:
>
>> Hi Jack
>>
>> On 25.02.2004, at 19:23, Jack Repenning wrote:
>>> On Feb 23, 2004, at 9:43 AM, Christian Schaffner wrote:
>>>> The Fink packages (<http://fink.sf.net>) are now available for the
>>>> final
>>>> release of Subversion 1.0.0 in the MacOS X 10.3 unstable tree:
>>>
>>> Is there any plan to build 1.0.0 for 10.2?
>>
>> It should build almost as it it right now for 10.2 too. The problem is
>> that a few of the needed dependencies are not yet ported back to the
>> 10.2-gcc3.3 tree. I hope i can do it eventually but haven't got the
>> resources at the moment.
>>
>>> If not, I'll be building my own ... can I contribute to finkization?
>>
>> Sure. :) You could try move the dependencies to the 10.2-gcc3.3 tree,
>> see if they build, and report to the respective package maintainers.
>> Ask them if they move their packages. Mostly you just need to change
>> the GCC fiels to 3.1 (if the packages have it) and adjust the
>> dependecies. Also the package revisions should be lower than in the
>> 10.3 tree if the GCC field is available, to allow easy upgrading.
>>
>> Then you can try to adapt the svn 10.3 package to the 10.2-gcc3.3
>> tree,
>> too.
>>
>> That would help a lot!
>> Thanks, Chris.
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org