Re: please review baler and eor
Thomas Klausner <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.pkgsrc.wip.review |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 05:34:38PM +0200, Jan Šmydke wrote: > Thank you for your comments - all fixed. I hope the DESTDIR support > in eor now works as you expected. I had to add INSTALLATION_DIRS= bin because otherwise the bin directory wasn't created. Now it works. > par2 is very good, yet too sophisticated and seemed not to be > maintained more(?). EOR, by contrast, brings simplicity so that even if > EOR is no longer mantained, a user does not have to worry about his > data, because anyone can write EOR easily again :-) > > Similar idea brought Baler (vs too sophisticated dar & comp ...) I've fixed baler as well, for the /usr/bin/env issue (in pkgsrc we want the interpreters hardcoded to the one used as dependency, not run through the environment looking for perhaps another one). I think the packages are finished, but I'll leave it to someone else to import them to pkgsrc since I think better tools exist there already -- I hope that doesn't offend you :) Thomas ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability What every C/C++ and Fortran developer should know. Learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools to help boost performance applications - inlcuding clusters. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay _______________________________________________ pkgsrc-wip-review mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pkgsrc-wip-review