On 6/13/07, Johan Grahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 22:43 +0100, Andrew Fyfe wrote:
> > Are there any plans (if so when) to switch the official repositories
> > over to the new package naming format?
> >
> > Current/Old: name-ver-rel.pkg.tar.gz
> > New: name-ver-rel-arch.pkg.
Johan Grahn wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 22:43 +0100, Andrew Fyfe wrote:
>> Are there any plans (if so when) to switch the official repositories
>> over to the new package naming format?
>>
>> Current/Old: name-ver-rel.pkg.tar.gz
>> New: name-ver-rel-arch.pkg.tar.gz
>
> Why do you wanna do this
On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 22:43 +0100, Andrew Fyfe wrote:
> Are there any plans (if so when) to switch the official repositories
> over to the new package naming format?
>
> Current/Old: name-ver-rel.pkg.tar.gz
> New: name-ver-rel-arch.pkg.tar.gz
Why do you wanna do this? I'm just curios...
Is it
I don't have any information about this, but i could think of this just
within a new ISO release. Also, there probably are people around who are
still running pacman2, what would cause troubles.
Yours,
Georg
On 6/13/07, Andrew Fyfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are there any plans (if so when) to
Are there any plans (if so when) to switch the official repositories
over to the new package naming format?
Current/Old: name-ver-rel.pkg.tar.gz
New: name-ver-rel-arch.pkg.tar.gz
Andrew
___
arch mailing list
arch@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mai
On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 17:00 +0300, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> hi there. i wanted to ask if theres any thoughts including the bash and
> zsh completion packages into the default installation of the above
> metioned shells.
I don't think so because base has alot of packages allready and
completion
hi there. i wanted to ask if theres any thoughts including the bash and
zsh completion packages into the default installation of the above
metioned shells.
also there an unsolved afaik issue with zsh-pacman
(currently in aur). has any progress been made in adding it to pacman?
phrakture had said s
