From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3035 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2009 22:56:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 3025 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jan 2009 22:56:58 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-gx0-f11.google.com (HELO mail-gx0-f11.google.com) (209.85.217.11) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:56:53 +0000 Received: by gxk4 with SMTP id 4so171040gxk.2 for ; Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:56:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.10.2 with SMTP id 2mr17268770qbj.76.1231369010535; Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:56:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.0.101? (S0106001346f94b85.wp.shawcable.net [24.76.249.6]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p31sm45852339qbp.18.2009.01.07.14.56.49 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:56:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <49653331.1090905@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:56:00 -0000 From: "Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [ITP] Macaulay2 1.1 References: <200901071904.n07J4dE1015497@u123.math.uiuc.edu> In-Reply-To: <200901071904.n07J4dE1015497@u123.math.uiuc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Sender: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2009-01/txt/msg00028.txt.bz2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Daniel R. Grayson wrote: > I submitted an ITP for Macaulay 2 on Nov 11 and there have been no positive > votes since then. I would have thought that by now, if there were any interest > in having it in cygwin, there would have been a positive vote. I understand > that 5 are required. On 14 November, Corinna explained[1] that you (or someone else) will need to ITP the yet-unpackaged dependencies as well before this can be seriously considered. AFAICS that hasn't happened yet, so I think the question of interest is still moot. [1] http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2008-11/msg00100.html Yaakov -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEAREIAAYFAkllMzEACgkQpiWmPGlmQSMHjQCeO7PiT+hAq+tyrpbklIzvd1Pw 4CgAnjO+lio1ZvoUytywwap+liRydHhc =oKLX -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----