On 5/4/06, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/3/06, Rohan Dhruva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > dont compare with any distro, it just gives some people
> > here a reason to bash ubuntu and canonical, and not talk
> > about the point itself.
>
> It's rather obvious you're referring to m
On Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2006 23:25 Aaron Griffin wrote:
> For one, Ubuntu is backed by Canonical. People get paid. I don't. I
> still have to work 9 to 5 like any other stiff, and have other
> commitments. I know for a fact 90% of the current developers are the
> same way. There's not enough time
On 5/3/06, Rohan Dhruva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dont compare with any distro, it just gives some people
> here a reason to bash ubuntu and canonical, and not talk
> about the point itself.
It's rather obvious you're referring to me. Can you please point out
where I "bashed" Ubuntu and Canoni
Well, guys, imo, the only mistake that Hussam made is comparing to
ubuntu -- because he is right, python was out of date from a month.
Hussam, next time just say they are out of date, dont compare with any
distro, it just gives some people here a reason to bash ubuntu and
canonical, and not talk ab
On 5/4/06, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wow, this thread has gone on for a really long time.
>
> TomK has the proper approach here. I get that some packages are out
> of date. Big deal, it happens alot. I haven't updated quodlibet in
> about 3 days. Oh noes! Wut will we doo!
>
> T
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aaron Griffin wrote:
> Wow, this thread has gone on for a really long time.
>
> TomK has the proper approach here. I get that some packages are out
> of date. Big deal, it happens alot. I haven't updated quodlibet in
> about 3 days. Oh noes! Wut w
Wow, this thread has gone on for a really long time.
TomK has the proper approach here. I get that some packages are out
of date. Big deal, it happens alot. I haven't updated quodlibet in
about 3 days. Oh noes! Wut will we doo!
The fact of the matter is that this thread was started because of
On Montag, 1. Mai 2006 22:54 Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> No just the .desktop files. kde associates media files by default to noatun,
> kaboodle and juk all of which I don't use since I prefer
> kaffeine/amarok/xmms
I have spoken from doing this with the not working apps from kdeadmin.
> A better s
Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> No just the .desktop files. kde associates media files by default to noatun,
> kaboodle and juk all of which I don't use since I prefer kaffeine/amarok/xmms
>
> A better solution would be to split kdemultimedia into two packages.
> 1. kdemultimedia ( containing vanilla kd
On Monday 01 May 2006 11:25 am, Attila wrote:
> On Sonntag, 30. April 2006 21:14 Damir Perisa wrote:
> > maybe we can disable them then? wish in bugs.archlinux.org?
>
> I'm not an expert in this case but perhaps for a short solution it will be
> enough to delete the certain *.desktop files to elima
On Sonntag, 30. April 2006 21:14 Damir Perisa wrote:
> maybe we can disable them then? wish in bugs.archlinux.org?
I'm not an expert in this case but perhaps for a short solution it will be
enough to delete the certain *.desktop files to elimate the presentation of
this non necessary programs in
On Sunday 30 April 2006 10:14 pm, Damir Perisa wrote:
> Sunday 30 April 2006 20:35, Attila wrote:
> | > The reason I'm asking as some part of kdeadmin ( kpackage ,
> | > knerworkconf and ksysv ) are useless in archlinux.
> |
> | Yes, in arch you don't need them and i never start them.-)
>
> may
Sunday 30 April 2006 20:35, Attila wrote:
| > The reason I'm asking as some part of kdeadmin ( kpackage ,
| > knerworkconf and ksysv ) are useless in archlinux.
|
| Yes, in arch you don't need them and i never start them.-)
maybe we can disable them then? wish in bugs.archlinux.org?
- D
--
On Samstag, 29. April 2006 21:22 Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> The reason I'm asking as some part of kdeadmin ( kpackage , knerworkconf and
> ksysv ) are useless in archlinux.
Yes, in arch you don't need them and i never start them.-)
> Also, in kdemultimedia ( naotun , kmid and kaboodle ) can be dis
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 20:51:37 +0300
Hussam Al-Tayeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 8:22 pm, Jason Chu wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 19:44:44 +0100
> >
> > Tom K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> > > > On Saturday 29 April 2006 7:43 pm, Tom K wrote:
> >
On Sunday 30 April 2006 8:22 pm, Jason Chu wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 19:44:44 +0100
>
> Tom K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> > > On Saturday 29 April 2006 7:43 pm, Tom K wrote:
> > >> Rohan Dhruva wrote:
> > >>> On 4/29/06, Damir Perisa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>>
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 19:44:44 +0100
Tom K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> > On Saturday 29 April 2006 7:43 pm, Tom K wrote:
> >
> >> Rohan Dhruva wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 4/29/06, Damir Perisa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> to most non-upgraded pkgs, there
On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 13:58 +0530, Vinay S Shastry wrote:
> Oi!
> kdeadmin's kpackage etc _are_ being used by ppl like me..
> there are some packages that are easy to install from rpm.. say
> staroffice -
> the installer _needs_ rpm installed.. and having a frontend like
> kpackage
> makes it ve
Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> Last question.
> How do I modify the PKGBUILD so that it will patch using the
> file 'patch-v1.diff' after it uncompresses the source tarball?
> Do I just add that under build()
> patch -p0 < /path/to/patch-v1.diff
> ?
>
>
Yes, add the patch command to the build(). Yo
On Sunday 30 April 2006 02:03, Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> On Saturday 29 April 2006 10:48 pm, Jan de Groot wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 22:22 +0300, Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> > > The reason I'm asking as some part of kdeadmin ( kpackage ,
> > > knerworkconf and
> > > ksysv ) are useless in archlin
On 29/04/06, Hussam Al-Tayeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Saturday 29 April 2006 10:48 pm, Jan de Groot wrote:> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 22:22 +0300, Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:> > The reason I'm asking as some part of kdeadmin ( kpackage ,> > knerworkconf and
> > ksysv ) are useless in archlinux.> > Also
On Saturday 29 April 2006 10:48 pm, Jan de Groot wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 22:22 +0300, Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> > The reason I'm asking as some part of kdeadmin ( kpackage ,
> > knerworkconf and
> > ksysv ) are useless in archlinux.
> > Also, in kdemultimedia ( naotun , kmid and kaboodle ) ca
Last question.
How do I modify the PKGBUILD so that it will patch using the
file 'patch-v1.diff' after it uncompresses the source tarball?
Do I just add that under build()
patch -p0 < /path/to/patch-v1.diff
?
Also, how would I share my PKGBUILD for python 2.4.3 and tk/tcl 8.4.13 ?
pgpF23sHPEbF
On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 22:22 +0300, Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> The reason I'm asking as some part of kdeadmin ( kpackage ,
> knerworkconf and
> ksysv ) are useless in archlinux.
> Also, in kdemultimedia ( naotun , kmid and kaboodle ) can be
> disregarded if
> kdemultimedia is split up because most o
On Saturday 29 April 2006 9:44 pm, Tom K wrote:
> Yep, more than one package out of a tarball is possible.
>
> There's been discussion previously on splitting up KDE - do a search
> here and on the forum for relevant threads.
>
> ___
> arch mailing list
>
Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> On Saturday 29 April 2006 7:43 pm, Tom K wrote:
>
>> Rohan Dhruva wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/29/06, Damir Perisa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
to most non-upgraded pkgs, there is a reason, why they are not updated
yet!
>>> And the reason for
Saturday 29 April 2006 19:04, Rohan Dhruva wrote:
| On 4/29/06, Damir Perisa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > Saturday 29 April 2006 18:32, Rohan Dhruva wrote:
| > | [...] Because no app would break, like in case of openssl.
| >
| > have you tried it?
|
| Yes. Just need to change the pkgver,
On Saturday 29 April 2006 7:43 pm, Tom K wrote:
> Rohan Dhruva wrote:
> > On 4/29/06, Damir Perisa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> to most non-upgraded pkgs, there is a reason, why they are not updated
> >> yet!
> >
> > And the reason for not upgrading python since a month is ? Lazy devs ?
> > Beca
On 4/29/06, Damir Perisa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Saturday 29 April 2006 18:32, Rohan Dhruva wrote:
> | [...] Because no app would break, like in case of openssl.
>
> have you tried it?
Yes. Just need to change the pkgver, nothing else. It works perfect.
Or atleast perfect for me, since I don
Saturday 29 April 2006 18:32, Rohan Dhruva wrote:
| [...] Because no app would break, like in case of openssl.
have you tried it?
- D
--
We are MicroSoft. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
(Attributed to B.G., Gill Bates)
pgprYBay0m5n8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__
Rohan Dhruva wrote:
> On 4/29/06, Damir Perisa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> to most non-upgraded pkgs, there is a reason, why they are not updated
>> yet!
>>
>
> And the reason for not upgrading python since a month is ? Lazy devs ?
> Because no app would break, like in case of openssl.
On 4/29/06, Anders Bergh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/29/06, Rohan Dhruva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, packages in arch are upgraded only by the dev team.
>
> So you're saying if I wrote a PKGBUILD for let's say Lua 5.1, and the
> Lua package in Arch is at 5.0 I can't submit it to the ma
On 4/29/06, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's not, look in testing.
> http://archlinux.org/packages.php?id=10859
> lua 5.1
Oooh, I didn't know, thanks! I thought I already was using testing, oh well.
--
Anders
___
arch mailing list
arch@archlinux.o
Saturday 29 April 2006 17:05, Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
| Ok thanks, I'll make packages for tcl, tk and python. After that,
| where do I submit them + the respective PKGBUILDs for review?
you can just tell everybody on the ML that they are ok in the new
version and do not break anything.
the main
On Saturday 29 April 2006 4:22 pm, Rohan Dhruva wrote:
> On 4/29/06, Johannes Held <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> > would it be possible for me to package those programs and submit for
> > review?
>
> No, packages in arch are upgraded only by the dev team.
>
> >[snip]
> > S
Saturday 29 April 2006 15:12, Johannes Held wrote:
| Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
| > would it be possible for me to package those programs and submit
| > for review? If yes, how?
| > I haven't yet tried building archlinux packages yet as I have
| > only been using arch for a month now. Before that,
On 4/30/06, Anders Bergh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/29/06, Rohan Dhruva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, packages in arch are upgraded only by the dev team.
>
> So you're saying if I wrote a PKGBUILD for let's say Lua 5.1, and the
> Lua package in Arch is at 5.0 I can't submit it to the ma
On 4/29/06, Rohan Dhruva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, packages in arch are upgraded only by the dev team.
So you're saying if I wrote a PKGBUILD for let's say Lua 5.1, and the
Lua package in Arch is at 5.0 I can't submit it to the maintainers?
Why not?
I'm just wondering because to me it seem
On 4/29/06, Johannes Held <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> would it be possible for me to package those programs and submit for review?
No, packages in arch are upgraded only by the dev team.
>[snip]
> Simply use ABS.
> do "abs"
> then copy the whole direcory from /var/abs/..
Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> would it be possible for me to package those programs and submit for review?
> If yes, how?
> I haven't yet tried building archlinux packages yet as I have only been using
> arch for a month now. Before that, I used to make a lot of rpm and deb
> packages.
Simply use AB
would it be possible for me to package those programs and submit for review?
If yes, how?
I haven't yet tried building archlinux packages yet as I have only been using
arch for a month now. Before that, I used to make a lot of rpm and deb
packages.
pgp8tm6Nvf4zV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Rohan Dhruva wrote:
> On 4/29/06, Tom K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> This comes up every now and then, and the answer is, as always, that the
>> packages should be flagged out of date (python and openssl already are),
>> and the devs will get to them when they get to them. If you're in a
>> h
On 4/29/06, Rohan Dhruva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Isnt it arch's motto to stay bleeding edge up to date ?
>
That would really depend on how u take the statement "We try to stay
fairly bleeding edge, ..." - http://www.archlinux.org/about.php
-jf
_
On 4/29/06, Tom K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This comes up every now and then, and the answer is, as always, that the
> packages should be flagged out of date (python and openssl already are),
> and the devs will get to them when they get to them. If you're in a
> hurry, get the PKGBUILDs and any
Saturday 29 April 2006 13:23, Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
| Well, I don't want to create rivalry between distributions as
| that's not really the spirit behind linux but I think we are
| behind ubuntu in a couple of packages:
| Both
| Python 2.4.2 ( ubuntu has 2.4.3
| http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubu
On 4/29/06, Tom K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This comes up every now and then, and the answer is, as always, that the
> packages should be flagged out of date (python and openssl already are),
> and the devs will get to them when they get to them. If you're in a
> hurry, get the PKGBUILDs and a
Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote:
> Well, I don't want to create rivalry between distributions as that's not
> really the spirit behind linux but I think we are behind ubuntu in a couple
> of packages:
> Both
> Python 2.4.2 ( ubuntu has 2.4.3
> http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/p/python2.4/python
i think if the packages are not too complicated, we could update the
given PKGBUILDS to the latest version, and then pass them on to the
maintainer to verify. That should help ease the workload on these guys
a bit.
-jf
___
arch mailing list
arch@archlin
On 4/29/06, Hussam Al-Tayeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I don't want to create rivalry between distributions as that's not
> really the spirit behind linux but I think we are behind ubuntu in a couple
> of packages:
> Both
> Python 2.4.2 ( ubuntu has 2.4.3
I requested for python to be updat
Well, I don't want to create rivalry between distributions as that's not
really the spirit behind linux but I think we are behind ubuntu in a couple
of packages:
Both
Python 2.4.2 ( ubuntu has 2.4.3
http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/p/python2.4/python2.4_2.4.3-0ubuntu4_i386.deb
)
and
50 matches
Mail list logo
