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
Received on Fri Feb 27 17:22:56 2004