Oh, wait... directory index is not off on that directory: http://www.emdebian.org/emdebian/emdebian.planner On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 18:01 -0800, C.J. Adams-Collier wrote: > Could you drop the .planner file there as well? Lots of fun data in the > original that doesn't get exported to html... > > Cheers, > > C.J. > > > On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 11:45 +0000, Neil Williams wrote: > > I'm just a little happy right now - I've just built and uploaded the > > last dependency for GPE in Emdebian. > > > > http://pkg-gpe.alioth.debian.org/status.php > > > > See also: http://www.emdebian.org/emdebian/helpout.php and > > http://www.emdebian.org/emdebian/todo.html after the overnight update. > > > > 1,736 Emdebian packages for ARM (a lot of those are -locale- packages > > and quite a few -dev). I'll be working on langupdate later and trimming > > out the -locale- packages to see if the Emdebian TDeb test > > implementation is workable. > > > > The only GPE app causing any trouble is gpe-filemanager because of a > > dependency on libgnome-vfs-2.0-0 which depends on > > gconf->ldap->libsasl2-2 and libsasl wants to bring in libdb4.4. > > Familiar/OE don't use gconf with ldap so there is a fix needed. So we > > have matchbox, gtk, nearly all GPE currently in Debian and edos-debcheck > > says that all the packages are installable. > > > > I've got some more GPE packages to sort out in Debian too - the current > > ITP's need to be closed and a few more opened and also closed: > > gpe-terminal, gpe-tetris, gpe-calculator, gpe-login and possibly gpe-today. > > > > Question is now - can I get them to actually create a GPE rootfs and run > > ????? > > ;-) > > > > The main point, though, is that there are now sufficient libraries built > > for Emdebian that an Emdebian GUI is certainly possible. > > > > Please test and let me know if any of the changes cause problems with > > the configuration or if any libraries etc. are actually still missing. > > > > Also, any ideas on fixing the remaining blocks in gconf, liborbit2 and > > whether we should build with ldap, let me know. > > > > The packages built very well - no huge delays, no huge surprises or > > problems. Just the usual mix of --cache-file, --disable-foo, adding the > > cross-depends support with $(DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE) etc. and persuading some > > of the larger packages that I really, really, REALLY did NOT want the > > manpages. Quite annoying how persistent some Debian packages are about > > manpages. The only long term solution is for dpkg to drop them from the > > call to dpkg-deb because there are so many ways that manpages can make > > it into the package. > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part