rcc wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:30:17 +
HA Quoc-Viet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sorry for this.
the wine-mdkconf is still in the SRPMS
I haven't really busted anything have I ? :o)
don't know, I rarely install the cooker wine. It's just that Danny and I
made some changes to the default
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:30:17 +
HA Quoc-Viet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sorry for this.
> the wine-mdkconf is still in the SRPMS
> I haven't really busted anything have I ? :o)
don't know, I rarely install the cooker wine. It's just that Danny and I
made some changes to the default config li
On Monday 20 January 2003 19:30, you wrote:
> sorry for this.
> the wine-mdkconf is still in the SRPMS
> I haven't really busted anything have I ? :o)
course not:)
I will try to integrate the few small changes Mark and I made with this
version and send it to you tomorrow.
Actually it might be ve
sorry for this.
the wine-mdkconf is still in the SRPMS
I haven't really busted anything have I ? :o)
Viet
On Monday 20 January 2003 4:19 pm, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Need sleep and there's a new wine package in
> > > cooker which brutally dumped our thoroughly
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Need sleep and there's a new wine package in
> > cooker which brutally dumped our thoroughly crafted mdkconf.
> >
> aha.Didn't see that yet. My cooker install is hopelessly behind. Want to
> do a fresh install anyway but lack the time.
>
> Thierry: any reasons fo
rcc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I guess I don't get the logic behind mdk policy. Split libs from
> actual programs and then but progs in lib packages because they
> happen to be devel tools. Ah, it dawns on me, Thierry would probably
> suggest splitting out the stuff into yet another package.
e
On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:21:52 +0100 (CET)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > no, it's more of a frontend than a configuration program. Let it
> > have its own menu entry and when the user starts it and then a
> > winexe through it, wine-config will run. Ah, I see, the user might
> > be tempted to confi
> no, it's more of a frontend than a configuration program. Let it have
> its own menu entry and when the user starts it and then a winexe through
> it, wine-config will run. Ah, I see, the user might be tempted to
> configure wine before running an exe. Hmm, have to think about this.
ok, but using
On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:00:06 +0100 (CET)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, rcc wrote:
> > > > I like Xwine
> >
> > this looks so much nicer
> Well than, I can try packaging it. But should wine depend on it and
> run it automatically on first start (after the wine-config.pl)?
no,
On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, rcc wrote:
> > > I like Xwine
>
> this looks so much nicer
Well than, I can try packaging it. But should wine depend on it and run it
automatically on first start (after the wine-config.pl)?
> I guess I don't get the logic behind mdk policy. Split libs from actual
> programs
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:03:13 +0100
Danny Tholen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 16 January 2003 00:46, rcc wrote:
> > never seen it. Is it that tcl/tk thingy I never got to run?
> yes, it didn't run?
not for me, but I didn't try very hard
because
> > I like Xwine
this looks so much n
On Thursday 16 January 2003 00:46, rcc wrote:
> so you can actually do work at work? :)=)
actually, it was a collegues machine.
>
> never seen it. Is it that tcl/tk thingy I never got to run?
yes, it didn't run?
>
> I like Xwine, though last time I checked the config editor was not
> implemented y
>
> How do you *tell* that you've corrupted Windows? =)
Umm.. it doesn't crash correctly? :oP
On Thu, 2003-01-16 at 13:46, Wim Horst wrote:
> Good idea. Its very easy, with current default install, to corrupt your
> existing windows when playing around with wine.
How do you *tell* that you've corrupted Windows? =)
--
adamw
Op woensdag 15 januari 2003 20:16, schreef Danny Tholen:
> On Wednesday 15 January 2003 19:41, rcc wrote:
> > anyway, wine should pick up an existing win as long as it is in fstab.
> > The dummy win is always there in /var/lib/wine. Changing from one to the
> > other means changing one line in your
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:16:36 +0100
Danny Tholen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > anyway, wine should pick up an existing win as long as it is in
> > fstab. The dummy win is always there in /var/lib/wine. Changing from
> > one to the other means changing one line in your .wine/config
> actually this
On Wednesday 15 January 2003 19:41, rcc wrote:
>
> anyway, wine should pick up an existing win as long as it is in fstab.
> The dummy win is always there in /var/lib/wine. Changing from one to the
> other means changing one line in your .wine/config
actually this failed on NT/2k/XP machines (I made
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 19:15:25 +0100
Wim Horst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it possible to give it a first time wizard asking to use existing
> windows or creating a new windows directory structure.
sure, if you provide the code ;)
anyway, wine should pick up an existing win as long as it is in
Op dinsdag 14 januari 2003 09:37, schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Is it possible to give it a first time wizard asking to use existing windows
or creating a new windows directory structure.
> I will soon send an updated version to Thierry.
>
> d.
>
> On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Vincent Meyer, MD wrote:
> >
On Tuesday 14 January 2003 09:37, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I will soon send an updated version to Thierry.
>
> d.
>
> On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Vincent Meyer, MD wrote:
> > Is an update of wine planned for 9.1?
> >
> > V.
This is good news!
Please make sure that it is compiled with CUPS support, and
I will soon send an updated version to Thierry.
d.
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Vincent Meyer, MD wrote:
> Is an update of wine planned for 9.1?
>
> V.
>
21 matches
Mail list logo
