Well that is great. On a selfish level, it will make certain things
easier over here! :-)
Dnk
Sent from my iPhone
On 11-Dec-08, at 4:33 PM, Dag Wieers <dag@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2008, dnk wrote:
>
>> On 11-Dec-08, at 2:26 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>>
>>> dnk wrote:
>>>> Well it is not that I expected it to be done. I was just curious as
>>>> in
>>>> my searches I found some for openSuse, etc and "hoped" that maybe
>>>> someone had rolled some.
>>>>
>>>
>>> at one point in the past WinHQ's release process included rpms for
>>> EL4/EL5 - is that no longer the case ? If not, perhaps they could do
>>> with a hand in the release process itself ( which might be a good
>>> way
>>> for you to get involved perhaps ? )
>>>
>>> Would you be able to investigate this a bit further ?
>>
>> They are still making RPM's, it is just that this one is "bleeding"
>> edge, and not considered stable as of yet.
>>
>> It will come down the pipeline at some point.
>
> RPMforge provides stable wine (1.0) packages in the normal
> repositories.
> And we also provide test packages (1.1) from the test repositories.
>
> In this case I only have 1.1.9 releases available from the test
> repository
> because Wine does not announce new unstable releases on freshmeat. So
> there is no practical way to monitor new releases. (We have more
> than 4000
> packages, we cannot monitor individual mailinglists)
>
> (In fact the latest stable release on freshmeat is 1.0, and not
> 1.0.1 :-/)
>
> I am a firm believer to let upstream decide what is stable and is
> unstable because they know much better. I often advice people asking
> me to
> make available an unstable release in RPMforge to discuss with
> upstream to
> see whether they can stabilize their unstable tree.
>
> That said, I am building 1.1.10 packages right now but they will only
> become available on saturday since I will miss the deadline for
> tomorrow.
> Wine packages take a long time to build (often need 2 passes).
>
> --
> -- dag wieers, dag@xxxxxxxxxx, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
> [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
