Thanks Brent
I now have in
http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/research/poplog/debian/
these files
-rw-r--r-- 1 7551 Apr 23 08:08 poplog_15.53e-1.diff.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 346 Apr 23 08:08 poplog_15.53e-1.dsc
-rw-r--r-- 1 499 Apr 23 08:08 poplog_15.53e-1_i386.changes
-rw-r--r-- 1 24957594 Apr 23 08:39 poplog_15.53e-1_i386.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 2313 Apr 23 17:53 AREADME
The last contains your message posted to pop-forum. If you would
rather have the email address mangled please say so: I assumed
not since postings are archived all over the world, e.g.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&group=comp.lang.pop
Alternatively if you wish to have something more specific for
Debian users who don't know poplog I'll be happy to
replace the README file.
Later I'll update
http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/research/poplog/freepoplog.html
> The main thing I dislike about the current package is
> that it is not generated from source files, but is
> rather just a repackaging of Aaron's tarball. This
> leads to two problems:
> .....
OK. This is what I have been waiting for!
Now that I have to work compatibly with someone else producing
complete poplog packages from the same sources, I'll change my
way of working instead of doing it in a way that is simplest for
me to fit in in the odd few minutes I have from time to time. I
have been waiting for the motivation to change!
I guess this means clearly separating the stuff that is linux
specific (eg installation scripts) from the stuff that is not,
merging the bham stuff (including emacs directory) with the
'main' poplog tree, getting rid of dependency on $poplocalbin,
etc.
I am going to a conference on Monday and will not be able
to do anything till some time after I return on Thursday
29th.
Thanks for your efforts.
Cheers.
Aaron
|