On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, Dr. Volker Zell wrote:
> I propose that documentation in general should go to /usr/share/doc/$PACKAGE
> even for X11 packages and the main man page directory should be dictated
> by the generic X11 tree, which is right now /usr/X11R6/man/manX (X=1,)
>
> Any comments ?
Why
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian Ford wrote:
> Why do you propose keeping a distinct X11R6 tree yet puting documentation
> outside it. I would prefer these to be consistent.
FWIW, Debian and Gentoo both do as proposed.
> IIRC, Harold had decided to eliminate the X11R6 subtree
Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
What does "Cygwin native" mean? If Cygwin is meant to be a POSIX
environment, then X11 should be the standard for GUI apps.
Not gonna happen: it has been stated before on this list that 'insight'
*must* run without X -- which means that tk will remain Win32GUI.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Charles Wilson wrote:
> Not gonna happen: it has been stated before on this list that 'insight'
> *must* run without X -- which means that tk will remain Win32GUI.
Tk must remain Win32GUI, or *a* Win32GUI Tk must remain, for the sake of
insight?
> It
Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
Others have mentioned building *NIX tcl/tk on Cygwin, and I wouldn't
call building gtk2 daunting;
Daunting to build it in such a way that (a) the win32 version doesn't
interfere with the X version, (b) vice versa, and (c) you're SURE that
nothing win32-runtime
Charles Wilson wrote:
Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
[...]
What's stopping us from moving the Win32 tcltk in /opt/win32, and making
new *NIX tcl and tk packages in /usr? Then all that's necessary for
insight is to add /opt/win32 to PATH (either through a script,
profile.d, or manually). Simil
On Oct 10 21:59, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> Charles Wilson wrote:
> >Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
> [...]
> >>What's stopping us from moving the Win32 tcltk in /opt/win32, and making
> >>new *NIX tcl and tk packages in /usr? Then all that's necessary for
> >>insight is to add /opt/win32 to PATH (
Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Charles Wilson wrote:
Not gonna happen: it has been stated before on this list that 'insight'
*must* run without X -- which means that tk will remain Win32GUI.
Tk must remain Win32GUI, or *a* Win32GUI Tk must remai
[snip]
> > 1) How many of our BDs actually work for Red Hat anymore?
>
> 1 (one)
>
Harold also stated:
"Look, it has been made quite clear to us on several occasions that Red Hat
doesn't pay for anyone in their company to do development on Cygwin[...]"
Is this correct?
--
Gary R. Van Sickle
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Charles Wilson wrote:
All of this mucking about with tk and insight requires the concurrence
of -- and oodles of extra work by -- the tk maintainer and the insight
maintainer. Plus, given the centrality of the
debugger to the GNUPro product, this sort of change might
Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
[snip]
1) How many of our BDs actually work for Red Hat anymore?
1 (one)
Harold also stated:
"Look, it has been made quite clear to us on several occasions that Red Hat
doesn't pay for anyone in their company to do development on Cygwin[...]"
Is this correct?
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 03:08:50PM -0400, Larry Hall (Cygwin X) wrote:
>Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
>>[snip]
1) How many of our BDs actually work for Red Hat anymore?
>>>
>>>1 (one)
>>
>>Harold also stated:
>>"Look, it has been made quite clear to us on several occasions that Red Hat
>>doesn't pa
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 03:08:50PM -0400, Larry Hall (Cygwin X) wrote:
Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
[snip]
1) How many of our BDs actually work for Red Hat anymore?
1 (one)
Harold also stated:
"Look, it has been made quite clear to us on several occasions that Red
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 05:40:33PM -0400, Larry Hall (Cygwin X) wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 03:08:50PM -0400, Larry Hall (Cygwin X) wrote:
>>
>>>Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
>>>
[snip]
>>1) How many of our BDs actually work for Red Hat anymore?
>
>1
14 matches
Mail list logo
