Re: [Gnu-arch-users] The future of GNU Arch users

[Toby White]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:


> Anyway, does anyone have interest in maintaining tla?  A pre-1.4 release
> was announced in February but 1.4 never went out; additionally, 1.3.3 is
> broken on some architectures (at least SPARC and PPC).

One of the things I really liked about tla was the very small list
of dependencies. I have tla compiled up on a wide range of new &
old Unices. Not always easily, but the problems were isolated to
getting tla itself compiled correctly; Gnu patch, diff, tar, & make 
are about the most portable programs I've found.

But this means I can't upgrade to baz - I've no intention of trying to 
get all of expat, libgpgme (>=1.0) and libgpg-error compiled everywhere;
it was difficult enough trying on Mac OS X Tiger (which I still can't
get to work, and that ought to be one of the better supported targets)
What hope have I of getting it all compiled on anything more esoteric?

And bzr is not an option - I don't mind it being written in Python; I
can usually find a version of Python on most hosts, but its requiring 
minimum 2.4 makes it useless to me.

So if there is any interest in continuation of tla, or reducing the
dependencies of baz (I'd be reasonably happy without signed archives
most of the time) then there's at least one potential user here.

Otherwise I'll stick with old tla versions for the moment, and
start thinking about migrating elsewhere - does anyone have any
recommendations for modern VC systems with very small dependency
lists?

-- 
Dr. Toby White 
Dept. of Earth Sciences, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EQ. UK
Email: <address@hidden>