On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 03:26:51AM +0100, Seblu wrote:
> Hello,
>
> ipset4 is "out-of-date", duplicate of ipset and orphan.
>
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34078
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Sébastien Luttringer
> www.seblu.net
I ated it.
Thanks,
dave
Hello,
ipset4 is "out-of-date", duplicate of ipset and orphan.
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34078
Regards,
--
Sébastien Luttringer
www.seblu.net
Ionut wrote:
> On 01/21/2011 09:10 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>> Seblu wrote:
>>> It looks like a trick question!
>>> But if I want to be a good maintainer, I do understand the reasons.
>>>
>>> and **The trust does not exclude the audit.**
>>
>> Excuse me for asking but is there anything prevent
On 01/21/2011 09:10 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Seblu wrote:
It looks like a trick question!
But if I want to be a good maintainer, I do understand the reasons.
and **The trust does not exclude the audit.**
Excuse me for asking but is there anything preventing you from moving
cairo-xcb to c
Seblu wrote:
> It looks like a trick question!
> But if I want to be a good maintainer, I do understand the reasons.
>
> and **The trust does not exclude the audit.**
Excuse me for asking but is there anything preventing you from moving
cairo-xcb to community if you become a TU?
As far as i know i
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> On 01/21/2011 08:04 PM, Seblu wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Ronald van Haren
>> wrote:
>> I see the point.
>> I would contact cairo debian maintainers about that. To have their
>> point of view.
>>
>
> that means that you don't
On 01/21/2011 08:04 PM, Seblu wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Ronald van Haren wrote:
I see the point.
I would contact cairo debian maintainers about that. To have their
point of view.
that means that you don't trust the arch maintainer judgment?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Ronald van Haren wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:41 AM, Seblu wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Ronald van Haren wrote:
> Some pointers
>
> - cairo-xcb is broken and unmaintained by upstream
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/cairo/log/
i see several comm
On 22/01/11 01:57, Xyne wrote:
So if I wrote bindings to libalpm in Haskell (haskell-libalpm) and then created
a package with a binary that used those bindings (foo), then readelf's output
would not indicate libalpm?
Short answer is probably not... especially if you use -Wl,--as-needed.
Loo
On 2011-01-22 01:29 +1000 (03:6)
Allan McRae wrote:
> On 22/01/11 00:43, Xyne wrote:
> > Allan McRae wrote:
> >
> >> I pointed out that hard rules are not good. e.g. coreutils should (and
> >> does) depend on glibc as it is not guaranteed that glibc is installed at
> >> the time when you first i
On 22/01/11 00:43, Xyne wrote:
Allan McRae wrote:
I pointed out that hard rules are not good. e.g. coreutils should (and
does) depend on glibc as it is not guaranteed that glibc is installed at
the time when you first install coreutils (which is likely the initial
install). But there is no
Allan McRae wrote:
> I pointed out that hard rules are not good. e.g. coreutils should (and
> does) depend on glibc as it is not guaranteed that glibc is installed at
> the time when you first install coreutils (which is likely the initial
> install). But there is no point putting glibc in
2011/1/21 Xyne :
> I'm replying because this is tangential... why don't we specify "python3"
> instead of "python" as a dep to make packages future-proof? Even if Python 4
> doesn't come out for a decade or more, it just seems that it would be
> logically
> consistent.
Hi,
this idea came up last
On 21/01/11 22:38, Xyne wrote:
If everyone were to use implicit dependencies then pacman would fail because no
package would specify the required dependency. A rule that would break the
system if it were followed by everyone is a bad rule. Expecting some to follow
it and others not to and just ho
Andrea Scarpino wrote:
> Hi AUR maintainers,
> I did a change in the pyqt package to add Python 3 support to it and to allow
> everyone to install both the Python2 and the Python3 version.
> Every package now need to depends on python2-qt (or python-qt if uses Python
> 3) instead of pyqt.
> The
Cédric Girard wrote:
> It means then that if we have this (dependency are direct dependencies):
> - Package A: depends=(B C)
> - Package B: depends=(C)
>
> C should *not* be removed from the dependency array of A.
I agree with this. A package should list as its dependencies any package on
which
Allan McRae wrote:
> I think we have established the Transitive closure is impractical, so
> lets exclude that.
>
> The "current Arch way" has the advantage of speed in dependency
> resolution if B is installed, but suffers from potential breakage if C
> removes D from its dependency list.
>
Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
>
> > On Thursday 20 January 2011 17:16:41 Peter Lewis wrote:
> > > Congratulations Tom! Welcome aboard the good ship TU!
> > We was waiting Xyne here, anyway your accounts on AUR/BBS/Flyspray are
> > updated
> > sin
18 matches
Mail list logo
