On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 01:22:52PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:39:50AM -0700, Warren Young wrote: >>On 8/9/2013 11:17, Steven Penny wrote: >>> Because of this dependency line >>> >>> man >>> groff >>> perl >> >>The groff package includes several helper programs written in Perl: >>afmtodit, groffer, and grog. >> >>Red Hat and Mandriva split these utilities out into a separate >>package[*] but that would be something you'd have to prevail on cgf to >>change. > >Actually, I didn't upload the 64-bit groff. This is one of the reasons >why I had reservations about people other than the package maintainers >uploading packages. The end result is that I'm forced to deal with >someone else's decision. This has been the case for a few of my >packages, uploaded during the 64-bit transition. If I had created the >package I might have paused at the perl dependency since clearly groff >is part of base. > >In retrospect, it would have potentially made sense to use the same >versions and packaging for the 64-bit as for the 32-bit. That might >have minimized this type of problem.
I forgot to add: Thanks for clarifying (reiterating?) that this is my problem to solve. I'll try to roll out a new version of groff in the next few days and use the packaging that Warren kindly pointed to. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
