Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] mdkkdm-9.1-1mdk
On Monday 03 of February 2003 12:55, Buchan Milne wrote: Does this mean we get normal kdm back? If so, thanks! Buchan I sure hope so. Thanks from me too. But I think that with some enhancements this MDK KDM could become usefull. -- Live long and prosper!
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] mdkkdm-9.1-1mdk
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 03 February 2003 06:55 am, Buchan Milne wrote: Laurent MONTEL wrote: --=-=-= Name: mdkkdm Relocations: (not relocateable) Version : 9.1 Vendor: MandrakeSoft Release : 1mdk Build Date: Mon Feb 3 11:53:49 2003 Install date: (not installed) Build Host: ke.mandrakesoft.com Group : System/Configuration/Other Source RPM: (none) Size: 545101 License: GPL Packager: Montel Laurent [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL : http://www.mandrakelinux.com/ Summary : Mdk kdm. Description : Mdk kdm. --=-=-= * Mon Feb 03 2003 Laurent MONTEL [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9.1-1mdk - initial package Does this mean we get normal kdm back? If so, thanks! Buchan Yes it does! and Laurent - THANK YOU! - -- Jason Straight [EMAIL PROTECTED] icq: 1796276 pgp: http://www.JeetKuneDoMaster.net/~jason/pubkey.asc -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iQCVAwUBPj5n1RFHZPcobeHxAQLQZwP+MsC8J1rPDxCMTBcFM+h5xlR8S2n1HFlC GWTIGEnOIDdrHcOt9u3QUOH3qm6uhp+fPgbLbRWwPMCA3sADZsvF6TDMnP61nIpY 8gH3yj5oNPrSBdH9uKJkUl8CwmAoG8UZCQWT1K0vGd0X1cIHl1lkuMRqk2n9M5QV o7v16uOIk1Q= =gLnz -END PGP SIGNATURE-
why mdk should be renamed mandrake-kdm (was Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM]mdkkdm-9.1-1mdk)
Buchan Milne wrote: Laurent MONTEL wrote: --=-=-= Name: mdkkdm Relocations: (not relocateable) Version : 9.1 Vendor: MandrakeSoft Release : 1mdk Build Date: Mon Feb 3 11:53:49 200 Does this mean we get normal kdm back? If so, thanks! Buchan why have this been renamed as mdkkdm ?? Once upon a time, people tried to make mandrake specific RPMs more coherent, either by the name or by the numbering scheme... For the moment, we have drakfoo (or foodrake sometimes) for drakxtools-like tools mandrake-foo for others such as mime, desktop, menu and so and so on. thus why changing this defacto policy ? i suggest to rename it mandrake-kdm.
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] mdkkdm-9.1-1mdk
En réponse à Jason Straight [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 03 February 2003 06:55 am, Buchan Milne wrote: Laurent MONTEL wrote: --=-=-= Name: mdkkdm Relocations: (not relocateable) Version : 9.1 Vendor: MandrakeSoft Release : 1mdk Build Date: Mon Feb 3 11:53:49 2003 Install date: (not installed) Build Host: ke.mandrakesoft.com Group : System/Configuration/Other Source RPM: (none) Size: 545101 License: GPL Packager: Montel Laurent [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL : http://www.mandrakelinux.com/ Summary : Mdk kdm. Description : Mdk kdm. --=-=-= * Mon Feb 03 2003 Laurent MONTEL [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9.1-1mdk - initial package Does this mean we get normal kdm back? If so, thanks! Buchan Yes it does! and Laurent - THANK YOU! \o/ Yes !!! Thank you all of you. Thank you Mandrake Team for taking care of what users say. I love you :) So now I can upgrade my MandrakeClub Level and help MandrakeSoft to survive and I invite all of you to make the same. Mandrake just proove us that users are more important than other considerations. Thanks a lot !!! Shift PS : Sorry, sorry, sorry for my f*cking e-mail :)
Re: why mdk should be renamed mandrake-kdm (was Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] mdkkdm-9.1-1mdk)
I agree *aol'er* ;p to Han - Original Message - From: Yves Duret [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 4:06 PM Subject: why mdk should be renamed mandrake-kdm (was Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] mdkkdm-9.1-1mdk) Buchan Milne wrote: Laurent MONTEL wrote: --=-=-= Name: mdkkdm Relocations: (not relocateable) Version : 9.1 Vendor: MandrakeSoft Release : 1mdk Build Date: Mon Feb 3 11:53:49 200 Does this mean we get normal kdm back? If so, thanks! Buchan why have this been renamed as mdkkdm ?? Once upon a time, people tried to make mandrake specific RPMs more coherent, either by the name or by the numbering scheme... For the moment, we have drakfoo (or foodrake sometimes) for drakxtools-like tools mandrake-foo for others such as mime, desktop, menu and so and so on. thus why changing this defacto policy ? i suggest to rename it mandrake-kdm.
Re: why mdk should be renamed mandrake-kdm (was Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] mdkkdm-9.1-1mdk)
Le Lundi 3 Février 2003 16:31, Per Øyvind Karlsen a écrit : I agree *aol'er* ;p to Han - Original Message - From: Yves Duret [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 4:06 PM Subject: why mdk should be renamed mandrake-kdm (was Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] mdkkdm-9.1-1mdk) Buchan Milne wrote: Laurent MONTEL wrote: --=-=-= Name: mdkkdm Relocations: (not relocateable) Version : 9.1 Vendor: MandrakeSoft Release : 1mdk Build Date: Mon Feb 3 11:53:49 200 Does this mean we get normal kdm back? If so, thanks! Buchan why have this been renamed as mdkkdm ?? Once upon a time, people tried to make mandrake specific RPMs more coherent, either by the name or by the numbering scheme... For the moment, we have drakfoo (or foodrake sometimes) for drakxtools-like tools mandrake-foo for others such as mime, desktop, menu and so and so on. thus why changing this defacto policy ? i suggest to rename it mandrake-kdm. I agree too. I remember a long thread about cleaning up the name standard for next release :) drak_xx or x_drak ? -- Pascal Cavy - VMF __ Running 3 days, 22:42, 5 users, load average: 0.41, 0.43, 0.54 (gcc version 3.2.1 (Mandrake Linux 9.1 3.2.1-4mdk)) Kernel Linux version 2.4.21pre4-1mdkenterprise
Re: why mdk should be renamed mandrake-kdm (was Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] mdkkdm-9.1-1mdk)
drak_xx or x_drak ? drakdm then Gregory K. Meyer ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
