Hi Sam,
On 12/2/19 6:12 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> "Thomas" == Thomas Goirand writes:
>
> Thomas> Sam,
>
> Thomas> Is this a real life case (if so, please name the
> Thomas> package...), or just a pure fictional one, just because you
> Thomas> love debating?
>
> Thomas>
* Neil McGovern:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 05:18:35PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 11/29/19 11:32 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> > Imagine that we have a program that has compile time support for systemd
>> > and for other mechanisms. It provides enhanced functionality when built
>> > against
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 11/29/19 11:32 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> Ian, I find that I'm not able to answer Simon's question with regard to
>> Proposal D.
>>
>> Imagine that we have a program that has compile time support for systemd
>> and for other mechanisms. It provides enhanced
> "Thomas" == Thomas Goirand writes:
Thomas> Sam,
Thomas> Is this a real life case (if so, please name the
Thomas> package...), or just a pure fictional one, just because you
Thomas> love debating?
Thomas> Cheers,
So, first of all, note that this question has already
On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 05:18:35PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 11/29/19 11:32 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > Imagine that we have a program that has compile time support for systemd
> > and for other mechanisms. It provides enhanced functionality when built
> > against systemd, but when so
On 11/29/19 11:32 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> Ian, I find that I'm not able to answer Simon's question with regard to
> Proposal D.
>
> Imagine that we have a program that has compile time support for systemd
> and for other mechanisms. It provides enhanced functionality when built
> against
Thibaut Paumard writes ("Re: Question Under Proposal D: Compile Time Option"):
> I think the right fix would be to compile the package twice as "foo"
> (for the systemd version) and "foo-non-systemd".
>
> Another option would be to ship both versions in p
Bernd Zeimetz writes:
> On 11/30/19 8:58 AM, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
>> I think the right fix would be to compile the package twice as "foo"
>> (for the systemd version) and "foo-non-systemd".
>> Another option would be to ship both versions in package "foo" and
>> decide at runtime which one to
On 11/30/19 8:58 AM, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> I think the right fix would be to compile the package twice as "foo"
> (for the systemd version) and "foo-non-systemd".
>
> Another option would be to ship both versions in package "foo" and
> decide at runtime which one to run, if technically
Le 29/11/2019 à 23:32, Sam Hartman a écrit :
>
> Ian, I find that I'm not able to answer Simon's question with regard to
> Proposal D.
>
> Imagine that we have a program that has compile time support for systemd
> and for other mechanisms. It provides enhanced functionality when built
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
