the only ones to suffer from this wait, it
seems like a good tradeoff. If we require a separate package for each
compiler, I imagine many library packagers would opt for just packaging
their library for ghc, which would be a shame as far as portability goes.
--
David Roundy
http://www.abridgegame.org
On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 09:46:47PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 17:06:14 -0400, David Roundy
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > probably wouldn't hid mp3blaster. Maybe novices should only be
> > shown gui programs after all. They probably don&#
On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 03:35:17PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On an unrelated tangent, let me say: darcs is cool :)
Thanks! :)
> On Mon, 2003-04-28 at 13:51, David Roundy wrote:
> > I would hope that rather than such generic terms, one could specify
> >
possible, leaving more subtle distinctions as derived
tags wherever possible. The tags that are applied directly should be as
obvious as possible, so that when reading the tag description anyone
familiar with a given package will always give the same answer. Of course,
this is the job of the tag task force, so maybe I should leave it up to
them...
--
David Roundy
http://civet.berkeley.edu/droundy/
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 10:45:29PM +0200, Otto Wyss wrote:
> Since I hated to start dselect again and again just to read a package
> description I wrote a script "dsc2man" which creates appropriate man
> pages for each package.
Wouldn't it be easier to just use apt-cache
5 matches
Mail list logo
