On 09/18/2016 10:45 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 10:23:41 -0400, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
On 09/18/2016 01:22 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:14:30 -0400, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
I'm running XFCE desktop btw.
On Arch Linux using Xfce not necessarily explains
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 10:14:35AM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:47:57 -0500
> Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 09:23:01AM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote:
> > > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:11:45 -0500
> > > Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello all:
> > > >
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:47:57 -0500
Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 09:23:01AM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:11:45 -0500
> > Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> >
> > > Hello all:
> > >
> > > TL;DR: One Arch installation will allow redirecting startx's stderr to
>
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 04:29:47PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:24:12 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> >On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:11:45 -0500, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> >>TL;DR: One Arch installation will allow redirecting startx's stderr to
> >>a file, one won't. What is the differe
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 04:24:12PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:11:45 -0500, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> >TL;DR: One Arch installation will allow redirecting startx's stderr to
> >a file, one won't. What is the difference between systems?
>
> Hi,
>
> what actually was too long
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 09:23:01AM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:11:45 -0500
> Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>
> > Hello all:
> >
> > TL;DR: One Arch installation will allow redirecting startx's stderr to
> > a file, one won't. What is the difference between systems?
> >
>
> Is
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 10:23:41 -0400, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
>On 09/18/2016 01:22 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:14:30 -0400, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
>>> I'm running XFCE desktop btw.
>>
>> On Arch Linux using Xfce not necessarily explains what screen lock /
>> screensaver
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:24:12 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:11:45 -0500, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>>TL;DR: One Arch installation will allow redirecting startx's stderr to
>>a file, one won't. What is the difference between systems?
>
>Hi,
>
>what actually was too long to read?
>
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:11:45 -0500, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>TL;DR: One Arch installation will allow redirecting startx's stderr to
>a file, one won't. What is the difference between systems?
Hi,
what actually was too long to read?
Did you for testing purpose install a display manger, e.g. lightd
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:11:45 -0500
Dutch Ingraham wrote:
> Hello all:
>
> TL;DR: One Arch installation will allow redirecting startx's stderr to
> a file, one won't. What is the difference between systems?
>
Is X running as root or as the user (rootless)? This can change based on
configuratio
On 09/18/2016 01:22 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:14:30 -0400, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
I'm running XFCE desktop btw.
On Arch Linux using Xfce not necessarily explains what screen lock /
screensaver you are using.
xflock4/xscreensaver
Hello all:
TL;DR: One Arch installation will allow redirecting startx's stderr to
a file, one won't. What is the difference between systems?
I am having an issue with logging xsession errors. Specifically, if I
create an .xsession-errors file in /home/user, then startx with
< /home/user/.xsessi
On Sunday, 18 September 2016 07:53:56 CEST Doug Newgard wrote:
> This thread is split between arch-general and arch-dev-public
Ohh, my bad. Did not properly read the headers. Thank You.
--
Cheers
Jayesh Badwaik
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 14:50:09 +0200
Jayesh Badwaik wrote:
> On Saturday, 17 September 2016 15:10:48 CEST LoneVVolf wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-09-16 at 21:44 +0200, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
> > > Actually, why don't raise the bar higher? SSE2 has been introduced in
> > > 2001 – that's 15 years
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:14:30 -0400, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
> >I'm running XFCE desktop btw.
>
> On Arch Linux using Xfce not necessarily explains what screen lock /
> screensaver you are using.
>
Personally, I noticed that using xscreensa
On Saturday, 17 September 2016 15:10:48 CEST LoneVVolf wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-09-16 at 21:44 +0200, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
> > Actually, why don't raise the bar higher? SSE2 has been introduced in
> > 2001 – that's 15 years to upgrade one's hardware and given my sad
> > experiences with com
I'm not sure enforcing sse3 or later for AMD64 hardware is the best
course of action.
> egrep "^model name|^flags" /proc/cpuinfo
model name : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov
pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 s
On 18.09.2016 13:14, Chris Stryczynski wrote:
Apologies I sent this through yesterday but without any subject so not
sure if it gets picked up.
I was wondering if there is an API / JSON endpoint for pkgstats?
Saves me having to scrape the page! I'm interested to build a packages
/ aur frontend.
Apologies I sent this through yesterday but without any subject so not
sure if it gets picked up.
I was wondering if there is an API / JSON endpoint for pkgstats?
Saves me having to scrape the page! I'm interested to build a packages /
aur frontend.
It would probably also give more arguments/hardware in need of a
retro-cpu archlinux variant/project which I'd like to see and would
help out with. Which in turn might be a better alternative for my
Geode as well.
Just my 2¢ to this.
cheers!
mar77i
...I'm all for making arch work well for the hardware it runs well on,
and I don't think expecting SSE2 is too bleeding edge wrt hardware
constraints. There are other distros that work well on cpus that
aren't up to par with arch's needs. I started using gentoo on my
pcengines board due to already
21 matches
Mail list logo
