Hi Hamilton
On 28.09.2006, at 11:36, Hamilton Link wrote:
> I just had a thought, so here's two questions for fink/svn people...
I am the package maintainer of the fink svn packages.
> If I'm trying to install binaries of svn and apache2, which are
> supposedly linked against stuff related to the binary fink 0.8.1,
> but have updated fink from cvs, is it possible that therein lies a
> problem? Or should that not matter.
That should not matter, but of cause it could.
> Should I be building the unstable svn 1.4 stuff? Is that better
> than the current stable svn 1.2 builds in any important ways?
In that case they definitely are. I haven't updated the svn packages
in a while before svn 1.4 came out. The new 1.4 packages seem to work
very well. So I suggest that you update to those packages.
A couple of notes:
1)
"unstable" in Fink terms often means actually more stable, since the
packages are newer. Your mileage may vary...
But please: Give me some feedback on how the new packages work, so I
can move them to the stable tree soon.
2)
To enable packages in the unstable tree please read:
http://www.finkproject.org/faq/usage-fink.php#unstable
and
http://www.finkproject.org/faq/usage-fink.php#bindist
3)
The new svn packages are now using the OS supplied openssl libraries.
So you no longer need (nor should) install the -ssl package variants.
Just use 'fink install svn-client', 'fink install svn', or 'fink
install libapache2-mod-svn'
(You might need to first remove any svn-ssl packages before
installing the new packages)
4)
There is an inofficial binary distribution for the unstable tree: Add
"deb http://fink.sodan.ecc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/apt/10.4 unstable main
crypto" to /sw/etc/apt/sources.list . Remember it's not officially
supported, don't expect us to fix breakage!
Hope that helps!
Chris
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 28 19:12:26 2006