Max Bowsher writes:
> In this way, there will be some visible indication in setup.exe that
> progress is occurring.
I see what you mean, but that's quite a hack. What about having setup
display some progress indication based on the amount of console output
that is printed?
Jan.
--
Jan Nieuwen
I believe I have now got the MD5 checking to behave in a sensible way.
I'm inclined to make a release branch, to start the process of getting the
nicer dialogs and proxy port fix into a release. Then, Brian can start using
trunk to develop the new dependency logic.
Any thoughts on anything addit
In order to give the user a little progress feedback, I suggest that
post-texmf.sh be split into post-texmf-stage1.sh, -stage2.sh, etc.
In this way, there will be some visible indication in setup.exe that
progress is occurring.
Max.
Max Bowsher wrote:
> > You're right, it's not really Redhat's copyright. I changed it to say
> > "Copyright 2001-2005 Redhat" because the previous value "Copyright
> > 2000,2001" seemed a bit out of date. What about, "Copyright 2000-2005
> > Redhat and various contributors"?
>
> Yes, I think th
Brian Dessent wrote:
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Would it be possible to hide the ZZZRemovedPackages category when in
Category view, without changing the dependency logic regarding this
category?
Yes, in fact I've been meaning to bring this up. In terms of the end
user, there should be no reason at al
Brian Dessent wrote:
Okay, how about this scenario:
Remove the checkbox; add a button that says "Select these now
(Recommended)". When you press it the packages are selected and the
contents of the text box are replaced with the status of those changes
(e.g. "selecting foomatic-1.2.3-1..." but the
Brian Dessent wrote:
Reini Urban wrote:
Brian Dessent schrieb:
Again, I'm looking for any kind of feedback about these new features:
works/doesn't work, bad wording, UI comments, etc.
Are you really sure that Redhat has the copyright from 2002-2005 also?
I remember only for the beginning, but from
Reini Urban wrote:
> Brian Dessent schrieb:
> > Again, I'm looking for any kind of feedback about these new features:
> > works/doesn't work, bad wording, UI comments, etc.
>
> Are you really sure that Redhat has the copyright from 2002-2005 also?
> I remember only for the beginning, but from the
Brian Dessent schrieb:
Again, I'm looking for any kind of feedback about these new features:
works/doesn't work, bad wording, UI comments, etc.
Are you really sure that Redhat has the copyright from 2002-2005 also?
I remember only for the beginning, but from then on it belongs to the
authors:
Re
