On Fri, 4 May 2001, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > Well, we'll see what
> > happens. Maybe I'll get used to it. It's major "sell point", apt, isn't
> > much use for me since I live behind a 28.8 modem and can't download
> > updates just because I want it. Unless they are small...
>
> Apt is not limi
> Nope, I don't think packaging is "important" it's just
> covenient(sp?). What I *do* think is really, really important is
> documentation. Almost every Free Software project is lacking in that
> area. If I can help with it, I will.
WOW Someone who thinks documentation is important. Are you
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 02:07:45PM +0200, Andreas L. Gustafsson wrote:
> But I think your asessment is correct. It takes quite awhile for me to get
> my grips about the Hurd, and dpkg isn't helping.
Well, although there are certain issues with using dpkg, you don't need
to work on them to do usefu
On Wed, 2 May 2001, David Coquil wrote:
> I think you have a point with your popularity argument. The Hurd would
> clearly benefit from having more users. But OTOH, there is quite a lot of
> learning involved before you can contribute anything even vaguely useful to
> the Hurd ; I still haven't fo
First post!
[snap]
> Well, I had only been using RPM-based Linux distibutions before I tried
out
> the Hurd, so I can understand how dpkg can seem confusing to you at first.
> OTOH, if you keep on learning how to use it, I think you will find that
> there isn't anything that makes rpm better than p
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:29:59AM +0200, Andreas L. Gustafsson wrote:
>
> OK, I have often read that getting Hurd to run on top of many different
> microkernels is one main goal. I guess it is still focused on mach
> then? Probably a good at idea at this time.
>
There is (was?) an effort to get
6 matches
Mail list logo
