Excerpts from Mantas Mikulėnas's message of 2011-11-22 00:50:25 +0100:
On 2011-11-21 23:36, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
So how is this stuff controlled these days? Those funky desktop files?
gconf? dconf? Something else entirely?
The default programs are kept in
Forwarding this to arch-general to get some developers' attention on
this (I failed at entering the mail address the first time).
- Forwarded message from Lukas Fleischer archli...@cryptocrack.de -
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 10:17:47 +0100
From: Lukas Fleischer archli...@cryptocrack.de
To:
On 11/22/2011 11:23 AM, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
Forwarding this to arch-general to get some developers' attention on
this (I failed at entering the mail address the first time).
- Forwarded message from Lukas Fleischer archli...@cryptocrack.de -
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 10:17:47 +0100
The 21/11/11, Thorsten Töpper wrote:
Seriously, it's probably meant like this but your mail reads like a
Hey why don't you learn $INSERT_LANG_HERE and rewrite your whole
system.
I've not participated in pacman development myself so I guess I should
stfu myself, but for me this proposal
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr wrote:
The 21/11/11, Thorsten Töpper wrote:
Seriously, it's probably meant like this but your mail reads like a
Hey why don't you learn $INSERT_LANG_HERE and rewrite your whole
system.
I've not participated in pacman
One can use defaults.list file in /usr/share/applications to associate.
But it is one hell of a job. Especially when C header is different from c
source.
The problem is mainly that for the application to overwrite 100s of file
association wrongly take no time. For me to restore them back is a
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:43:17AM +0200, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 11/22/2011 11:23 AM, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
Forwarding this to arch-general to get some developers' attention on
this (I failed at entering the mail address the first time).
- Forwarded message from Lukas Fleischer
The 22/11/11, Karol Blazewicz wrote:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr wrote:
OP raised one or two benefits of Haskell over shell scripting. He is
right even if it's somewhat partial: many of high-level languages have
very good advantages over shell
On 22/11/11 12:02, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
The 22/11/11, Karol Blazewicz wrote:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Nicolas Sebrechtnsebre...@piing.fr wrote:
OP raised one or two benefits of Haskell over shell scripting. He is
right even if it's somewhat partial: many of high-level languages
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl wrote:
On 22/11/11 12:02, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
The 22/11/11, Karol Blazewicz wrote:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Nicolas Sebrechtnsebre...@piing.fr
wrote:
OP raised one or two benefits of Haskell over shell
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:02, Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr wrote:
The 22/11/11, Karol Blazewicz wrote:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr
wrote:
OP raised one or two benefits of Haskell over shell scripting. He is
right even if it's somewhat
On Tuesday 22 Nov 2011 12:20:25 Magnus Therning wrote:
- Many of these languages improve the ability to reason about the
behaviour of the program. This _can_ improve quality. HOWEVER, pacman
doesn't strike as a tool that suffers from bad quality, there seems to
be a development team that
On 22 November 2011 11:20, Magnus Therning mag...@therning.org wrote:
So my conclusion is that when you say I do think pacman could much
better if rewritten in one of these languages, then I say that you
most likely are completely wrong. The more likely effect of rewriting
pacman in one of
The 22/11/11, Magnus Therning wrote:
I am somewhat allergic to the kind of statements you make.
Don't be. We are only _discussing_ the advantages/disadvantages of the
current language, aren't we?
Please, don't be allergic from talking.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 13:02, Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr wrote:
The 22/11/11, Magnus Therning wrote:
I am somewhat allergic to the kind of statements you make.
Don't be. We are only _discussing_ the advantages/disadvantages of the
current language, aren't we?
Please, don't be
Hi Arch community,
Arch Linux (archboot creation tool) 2011.11-1, 2k11-R7 has been released.
To avoid confusion, this is not an official arch linux iso release!
Homepage and for more information on archboot:
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Archboot
Forum:
The 22/11/11, Magnus Therning wrote:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 13:02, Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr wrote:
But it's missing advanced features.
OP raised rollbacks, I'd rather talk about simultaneous/concurrency
pacman calls and mutli-threading to handle packages installation where
Nicolas Sebrecht, Tue 2011-11-22 @ 16:24:02+0100:
I don't think, so. IMHO, the pool of contributors is bigger with a
high-level language than for C, simply because the learning curve of a
good high-level language is much shorter.
You can't seriously be suggesting that switching to Haskell
On 11/22/2011 13:36, Taylor Hedberg wrote:
Nicolas Sebrecht, Tue 2011-11-22 @ 16:24:02+0100:
I don't think, so. IMHO, the pool of contributors is bigger with a
high-level language than for C, simply because the learning curve of a
good high-level language is much shorter.
You can't seriously
Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense, Tue 2011-11-22 @ 13:43:58-0200:
Code language should not be chosen based on popularity. C is used in
most unix-like software because of its quality and not as a
consequence of the available developer pool for it.
Maybe not, but the person I was replying to was making
The 22/11/11, Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense wrote:
On 11/22/2011 13:36, Taylor Hedberg wrote:
You can't seriously be suggesting that switching to Haskell would
increase the size of the pacman developer pool.
Notice I didn't support Haskell. I'm talking about high-level languages
in general. Not all
The 22/11/11, Taylor Hedberg wrote:
Maybe not, but the person I was replying to was making the specific
argument that higher-level languages like Haskell would be more suitable
for a tool like pacman because a larger number of people would be able
to contribute. I was simply pointing out the
The 22/11/11, Piyush P Kurur wrote:
Many here will agree to almost all the points that you raised about
Haskell. However the way the you introdued might have irked some.
I'm sorry about that. Poor circumstances might give this wrong
impression.
Here is how one would go about suggesting such
Taylor Hedberg [2011.11.22 1036 -0500]:
Nicolas Sebrecht, Tue 2011-11-22 @ 16:24:02+0100:
I don't think, so. IMHO, the pool of contributors is bigger with a
high-level language than for C, simply because the learning curve of a
good high-level language is much shorter.
You can't
Hi,
I've looked around for the last couple of weeks for a package providing
uname26 [1]. However I couldn't find such and in the mean time compiled
it for myself.
I've also searched for the appearance of uname26 in the forums and the
mailing lists and couldn't find that much about it.
So I'm
Am 22.11.2011 19:12, schrieb Karol Babioch:
Hi,
I've looked around for the last couple of weeks for a package providing
uname26 [1]. However I couldn't find such and in the mean time compiled
it for myself.
$ setarch $(arch) --uname-2.6 uname -a
Linux evey 2.6.41-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Fri
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Karol Babioch ka...@babioch.de wrote:
Hi,
I've looked around for the last couple of weeks for a package providing
uname26 [1]. However I couldn't find such and in the mean time compiled
it for myself.
I've also searched for the appearance of uname26 in the
Hi,
Am 22.11.2011 19:24, schrieb Thomas Bächler:
$ setarch $(arch) --uname-2.6 uname -a
Linux evey 2.6.41-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Fri Nov 11 22:28:29 CET 2011
x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M 520 @ 2.40GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
So this seems to mean that setarch makes uname26 quite useless. I
If I still may:
roll-back and reproducible configuration was already proposed in the past?
The idea raised by Nix devs was the a purely functional approach was a
way to implement it. Of course people can have similar ideas with
other techniques.
If it a very practical question because I'm sure
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Bernardo Barros
bernardobarr...@gmail.com wrote:
If I still may:
roll-back and reproducible configuration was already proposed in the past?
The idea raised by Nix devs was the a purely functional approach was a
way to implement it. Of course people can have
On Nov 22, 2011 1:30 PM, Bernardo Barros bernardobarr...@gmail.com
wrote:
If I still may:
roll-back and reproducible configuration was already proposed in the past?
The idea raised by Nix devs was the a purely functional approach was a
way to implement it. Of course people can have similar
Am 22.11.2011 20:17, schrieb Karol Babioch:
Hi,
Am 22.11.2011 19:24, schrieb Thomas Bächler:
$ setarch $(arch) --uname-2.6 uname -a
Linux evey 2.6.41-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Fri Nov 11 22:28:29 CET 2011
x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M 520 @ 2.40GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
So this seems to
On 22 November 2011 14:42, C Anthony Risinger anth...@xtfx.me wrote:
On Nov 22, 2011 1:30 PM, Bernardo Barros bernardobarr...@gmail.com
wrote:
If I still may:
roll-back and reproducible configuration was already proposed in the
past?
The idea raised by Nix devs was the a purely
A layer above pacman taking advantage of ARM?
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:01 PM, Bernardo Barros
bernardobarr...@gmail.com wrote:
A layer above pacman taking advantage of ARM?
ARM is limited to official repos, but you don't need another layer,
just use http://arm.konnichi.com/2011/11/21/ as your server and run
'pacman -Suu' to downgrade.
On 11/22/2011 02:41 PM, Karol Blazewicz wrote:
I using testing / staging repos does this already: you try out
[testing], if it doesn't work, you disable it and run 'pacman -Suu'.
Would using different sync dbs and a separate cache turned into a
local repo make it easy enough to be practical?
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Isaac Dupree
m...@isaac.cedarswampstudios.org wrote:
On 11/22/2011 02:41 PM, Karol Blazewicz wrote:
I using testing / staging repos does this already: you try out
[testing], if it doesn't work, you disable it and run 'pacman -Suu'.
Would using different sync
On (11/22/11 11:30), Bernardo Barros wrote:
-~ If I still may:
-~
-~ roll-back and reproducible configuration was already proposed in the past?
-~
-~ The idea raised by Nix devs was the a purely functional approach was a
-~ way to implement it. Of course people can have similar ideas with
-~
I am trying to access a camera using the gphoto2 frontend to x86_64 libgphoto2
2.4.10.1-2, which installs a udev rules file to
/lib/udev/rules.d/40-gphoto.rules.
40-gphoto.rules (abridged):
# udev rules file for libgphoto2 devices (for udev 136 version)
# Created from this library:
#
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Jayesh Badwaik
jayesh.badwai...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
I am thinking of writing a small program to do so. I'll let you know
how I am progressing. Right
now I only have a design in my mind and I have some exams coming up in
three-four days.
So after I am done
ohk... I will see that...
i was thinking something very simple
I was thinking more along the lines of a utility to create a mimeinfo.list
from a description file. (XML or something like that)
That description file can be provided by the package and then whenever
it gets updated. There are certain
41 matches
Mail list logo
