From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 21:17:29 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 03/10] libxmlrpc: new package In-Reply-To: <20120605232646.0367dff5@skate> (Thomas Petazzoni's message of "Tue, 5 Jun 2012 23:26:46 +0200") References: <4FCD4B6D.3080506@mind.be> <20120605232646.0367dff5@skate> Message-ID: <87mwwe5f6u.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: Hi Thomas, Old mail .. Thomas> Hello, Thomas> Le Tue, 05 Jun 2012 01:57:33 +0200, Thomas> Arnout Vandecappelle a ?crit : >> On 06/02/12 18:13, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: >> > +LIBXMLRPC_VERSION = 1.18.05 >> > +LIBXMLRPC_SOURCE = xmlrpc-c-$(LIBXMLRPC_VERSION).tgz >> > +LIBXMLRPC_SITE ="http://xmlrpc-c.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/xmlrpc-c/advanced/?view=tar&pathrev=1716" >> >> It's a bit strange to use a three-year-old unstable version... >> From the website: >> >> Latest Tarballs >> Series Number >> Development unnumbered >> Advanced 1.30.06 >> Stable 1.25.16 >> Super Stable 1.16.41 Thomas> This package comes from a customer project, and the customer had its Thomas> software running with this version, so that's the version I tested. Of Thomas> course, packaging more recent versions would be better, but I thought Thomas> that having the package would be better than nothing. >> A simpler solution would be to just use the svn download method, from >> https://xmlrpc-c.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/xmlrpc-c/stable/ Thomas> Sure, I'll look into that. Any news on this? -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard