Yes,
I created these packages. I think you do have a very good point about the naming convention. However, I am not sure whether I can just use "mdk" as Mandriva does on the packages, as that could create some confusion about where they came from. As fas as I could find out, Mandriva itself (and people who are in some ways affiliated) use this extension. I am open to suggestions, so if you have a suggestion for a naming extention that is clear and describes where the package is for, please tell me.
I suppose that the static builds could be used in any distro that can handle .rpm files. However Mandriva uses a menu (like Debian's menu), and as far as I know, the static packages don't contain a menu entry that the .hjh packages do have. Also, I did build a x86_64 versoin of inkscape, actually I began with that, as that didn't exist yet, and people were asking for it (especially at Mandriva sites and fora). I don't think that the static build can replace that, can it?
And finally: yes, the rpm's are tested.
bulia byak wrote:
On 8/9/05, Daniel Díaz <mrchapp@...400...> wrote:
Perhaps the packages bear the wrong name. It seems those are for Mandriva something LE.
OK, thanks, I missed that thread, but now that I read it, I don't see the reasons for why we need the RPM. Doesn't the static one work there? If so why? Can we fix it?
And in any case, if these rpms are necessary, PLEASE rename them so it's clear what they're for.
Have anyone tested these RPMs, by the way?