Previously Martin Schulze wrote:
Section 5.2.2.1 of RFC2046[1] describes Message Fragmentation and
Reassembly. This technique may be used to deliver large files through
the Internet without delivering them in one large mail. For example,
sending a 3MB large picture could be splitted into
Previously Russell Coker wrote:
Wichert, how are plans for getting a public repository for these things going?
It's online now at ftp://ftp.valinux.com/pub/people/wichert/ . It has
all the magic that apt needs to download binary and source packages.
I also split the archive in two sections:
Previously Russell Coker wrote:
Wichert, how are plans for getting a public repository for these things going?
They should appear at ftp://ftp.valinux.com/pub/people/wichert/
somewhere in the next 30 hours.
Please note that I do expect everyone who uses them to subscribe
to the va-debian-users
Previously Russell Coker wrote:
Wichert, how are plans for getting a public repository for these things going?
I pretty much have everything ready to go. There are two bugs I would like
to fix first:
1. update-devfsd in my devfs package isn't executable. I suspect the
debian/rules
script
Previously Russell Coker wrote:
Wichert, how are plans for getting a public repository for these things going?
They should appear at ftp://ftp.valinux.com/pub/people/wichert/
somewhere in the next 30 hours.
Please note that I do expect everyone who uses them to subscribe
to the va-debian-users
Previously Keith G. Murphy wrote:
I must say, my subjective experience has been that rpm's are much faster
to install something. Of course, it's also faster to throw my clothes
on the floor, rather than put them in the hamper...
That is a result of the fact that rpm uses a binary database for
Previously Chip Salzenberg wrote:
Actually, from what I've been told, rpm has at least one serious
technical flaw: The order of execution for pre-install and
post-install scripts is nonsensical for upgrades.
I wouldn't call it nonsensical, but the way dpkg does it is definitely
more robust. I
Previously Chris Wagner wrote:
RPM is a piece of crap compared to dpkg, and now we have apt (advanced
package tool).
Can we please not be so negative about rpm? I'll agree that dpkg is
better (and of course I'm completely not biased here :), but rpm
is not a piece of crap.
Wichert.
--
8 matches
Mail list logo
