search for: tarballs

...h NVPTX. However, PTX subdirectory > > > still sit in lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do you think update the > > > release tarball is a good idea? Also could you remove it from > > > the trunk? > > > > Please do not, under no circumstances, change the 3.2 release tarballs at this point. They are mirrored around the world now with cryptographic hashes and signatures. Changing them will break things for many people, especially for an extremely minor thing like an empty directory. > > > > I'm not sure if Pawel's tarball change should be reverted no...

This is not specifically a CentOS question, but I am creating RPMS for CentOS 6 from some CRAN tarballs. I run R2spec -s tarball to create a spec file, and most of the time it works ok, but sometimes (RPostgresSQL, Rcpp for example) the package has test or example programs that start with #!/usr/bin/r with lower case r, and the resulting package then winds up with a dependency on /usr/bin/r, whi...

...irectory >>>> still sit in lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do you think update >>>> the release tarball is a good idea? Also could you remove it >>>> from the trunk? >>> >>> Please do not, under no circumstances, change the 3.2 release >>> tarballs at this point. They are mirrored around the world now >>> with cryptographic hashes and signatures. Changing them will >>> break things for many people, especially for an extremely >>> minor thing like an empty directory. >>> >>> I'm not sure if P...

Hi, Where''s the master repository for downloading open source Xen source tarballs? In the past, I''ve always just gone to the xensource web page, clicked on download, and then followed the "Open Source Xen" link. However, this link seems to no longer be there. I found a Univ of Cambridge download page ( http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/xen/downloa...

On 26 June 2016 at 13:31, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > What you're probably missing is that 3.8.1 is made in release_38 > branch. So, everything is there and already mirrored. > > Source tarballs will be available upon the release. Which are just coming, now that final has been tested successfully. :) They'll be announced in the list and available here: http://llvm.org/releases/download.html#3.8.1 cheers, --renato

...t linaro.org> wrote: > On 26 June 2016 at 13:31, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> What you're probably missing is that 3.8.1 is made in release_38 >> branch. So, everything is there and already mirrored. >> >> Source tarballs will be available upon the release. > > Which are just coming, now that final has been tested successfully. :) > > They'll be announced in the list and available here: > > http://llvm.org/releases/download.html#3.8.1 > Thanks you both for your answers. Can you or Tom (as...

...still sit in lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do you think update > >>>> the release tarball is a good idea? Also could you remove it > >>>> from the trunk? > >>> > >>> Please do not, under no circumstances, change the 3.2 release > >>> tarballs at this point. They are mirrored around the world now > >>> with cryptographic hashes and signatures. Changing them will > >>> break things for many people, especially for an extremely > >>> minor thing like an empty directory. > >>> > >>&...

...s Hahnfeld <hahnjo at hahnjo.de> wrote: > On 2018-08-27 09:44, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> Yeah, I see. >> You have an unusual development process seen from my POV. > > > GNOME does the same, to pick one example: > https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointTwentynine > Tarballs are due on Monday, official release and announcement are on > Wednesday. > >> IMHO you can provide the tarballs before the "binaries" are uploaded >> which means "prebuilt binaries". >> That could increase the quality of developing when different arch/os...

Due to a packaging error, the tarball released on Friday night did not have a version number embedded in it, which results in various strange build errors and other odd behavior. The tarball on the FTP servers has been updated to correct this situation. Sorry for the inconvenience :-)

...elease. Do you think update >>>>>>> the release tarball is a good idea? Also could you remove it >>>>>>> from the trunk? >>>>>> >>>>>> Please do not, under no circumstances, change the 3.2 release >>>>>> tarballs at this point. They are mirrored around the world now >>>>>> with cryptographic hashes and signatures. Changing them will >>>>>> break things for many people, especially for an extremely >>>>>> minor thing like an empty directory. >>>&g...

...t; still sit in lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do you think update > >>>> the release tarball is a good idea? Also could you remove it > >>>> from the trunk? > >>> > >>> Please do not, under no circumstances, change the 3.2 release > >>> tarballs at this point. They are mirrored around the world now > >>> with cryptographic hashes and signatures. Changing them will > >>> break things for many people, especially for an extremely > >>> minor thing like an empty directory. > >>> > >>>...

...l ... >> >> Is this intended? Any clarification would be appreciated. > > Probably not (it is on Martin Maechler's turf, though). These things are run by cron jobs, and sometimes they get stalled. It is also possible that a change to the build tools on that machine caused the tarballs to fail their builds (the way things work, you need to build R before you can build the tarball.) Yes, I am aware of the build process before the tarball. The mail should only take some attention on it ;) Since end of August, there had been a change of the location, where devel and patched source...

Is there any reason that the R-devel tarball at [1] stucks on r69202? It seems, that newer R-devel versions are now published on /pub/misc/cran/src/base-prerelease, for example at http://ftp5.gwdg.de/pub/misc/cran/, but without an R-devel.tar.gz tarball ... Is this intended? Any clarification would be appreciated. Thanks and greetings, Rainer Hurling [1]

Greetings, During the past week, there have been some requests for nightly tarballs to help making testing new Asterisk code easier. There was some debate as to whether they would be useful. The reason that they may not be useful is because you can get equivalent access to new code just by accessing the subversion repository directly. However, for one reason or another, some pe...

.... >> >> So far I have solved it by editing all the files and replacing with >> /usr/bin/R, recreating the tarball and going through the process again, but >> I have to believe there is an easier way. > Kind of. This is an obvious error in the packaged scripts in the > tarballs. I generally don't recommend modifying the original tarball as > I like it to be a true representation of the tarball source that you get > from upstream. What I do instead is patch it in the spec file. > > In this case it would probably be easier to do one line of perl or awk &gt...

...cise his FLOSS >> rights has to use git or nodejs or for php composer or whatever just to >> get what use to be available with no more complexity than choosing >> tar.gz or tar.bz2 or .zip if the dev was Windows. >> >> Whatever happened to KISS and why can't source tarballs be distributed >> as source tarballs? >> >> Back when I was a Fedora packager - the packaging guidelines would >> reject a package of the Source tarball wasn't a URL and if the timestamp >> on the tarball in the src.rpm didn't match upstream even if the checksu...

Hi,all: I've couple of large tarballs such as www.tar and images.tar. Is it possible to extract a single file or a list of files from a large tarball such as images.tar instead of extracting the entire tarball? How do I extract specific files under Linux / UNIX operating systems? Thanks in advance ~~ -------------- next part ------...

...lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do >>>>>> you think update the release tarball is a good idea? Also >>>>>> could you remove it from the trunk? >>>>> >>>>> Please do not, under no circumstances, change the 3.2 >>>>> release tarballs at this point. They are mirrored around >>>>> the world now with cryptographic hashes and signatures. >>>>> Changing them will break things for many people, especially >>>>> for an extremely minor thing like an empty directory. >>>>> >...

Hi Tom, [1] does not list any 3.9.1rc2 pre-release tarballs, can you please upload? Thanks in advance. Regards, - Sedat - [1] http://www.llvm.org/pre-releases/

Yeah, I see. You have an unusual development process seen from my POV. IMHO you can provide the tarballs before the "binaries" are uploaded which means "prebuilt binaries". That could increase the quality of developing when different arch/os maintainers give their OK. But for 7.0.0rc1 I see only prebuilt binaries for... * macOS * FreeBSD10 AMD64 * Windows (32-bit) * Windows (64-bi...