Go Linux wrote:
> I once investigated helping a friend use some open source software on her
> Mac. A program that was free (gratis) in the Linux community was available in
> the Apple app store for $30! That really pissed me off and soured me even
> more on Apple than before (if that was poss
On Sat, 8/15/15, Simon Hobson wrote:
Subject: Re: [DNG] Devuan and upstream
To: "dng@lists.dyne.org"
Date: Saturday, August 15, 2015, 3:53 PM
Hendrik Boom wrote:
>> THe way I heard the story, in the ncient days when Apple was
The lack of the last two: multiple versions and shell scripts are why
Debian derivatives cannot share packages, even though they use
identical base code.
Correction:
The lack of multiple versions and packahe shell scripts are why
Debian derivatives cannot share packages, even though they use
ide
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 20:19:03 +
Stephanie Daugherty wrote:
Hi, Stephanie! =)
> They did, but out of all this design by committee, hidden between all
> the political bullshit and bikeshedding, they also created the most
> brilliant, most comprehensive set of standards for quality control,
> pa
Stephanie Daugherty wrote:
> They did, but out of all this design by committee, hidden between all the
> political bullshit and bikeshedding, they also created the most brilliant,
> most comprehensive set of standards for quality control, package uniformity,
> license auditing, and of course.
On 15/08/2015 22:19, Stephanie Daugherty wrote:
They did, but out of all this design by committee, hidden between all
the political bullshit and bikeshedding, they also created the most
brilliant, most comprehensive set of standards for quality control,
package uniformity, license auditing, and o
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 02:20:44PM -0500, T.J. Duchene wrote:
>
> Having a specifically defined base makes it easier for third parties to
> ensure that software is going to work without a hitch. It's much more
> attractive from a testing standpoint than the usual Linux hodge-podge. I
> think it i
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:20 PM James Powell wrote:
> Slackware is maintained by 3 core people with extra help as needed. The
> rest of the packages are pushed by the community at large contributing.
> Devuan doesn't have to maintain every package possible. That's ludicrous to
> think so.
>
> Deb
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:02:12 +
Roger Leigh wrote:
> That's a considerable achievement--how many other projects have been
> able to achieve an equivalent scale?
Not very many and I agree with you, it is very impressive, even if
Debian makes internal bickering look commonplace. I'd say it is
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:13:56 +
Roger Leigh wrote:
er revision for 2017, and I think they are nuts.
>
> I don't. I write C++ code for my day job, and I'd have to say that
> these revisions make C++ better than ever to write. It's cleaner,
> simpler, and more maintainable. Just last week
On 15/08/2015 05:57, T.J. Duchene wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 22:38:35 -0700
Isaac Dunham wrote:
To elaborate on this, GCC 5.1 (I think) has changed the ABI for C++11
support.
Packages using C++11 need to be rebuilt with the new library;
libreoffice has already been rebuilt, but not KDE.
Th
On 15/08/2015 05:38, Isaac Dunham wrote:
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 02:42:14PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 02:02:22PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
Seems to me there's something weird, both, in libreoffice depending on
just one single version of libstdc++, and in libklabxm
On 15/08/2015 00:19, James Powell wrote:
Slackware is maintained by 3 core people with extra help as needed. The
rest of the packages are pushed by the community at large contributing.
Devuan doesn't have to maintain every package possible. That's ludicrous
to think so.
Debian got in over its he
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 22:38:35 -0700
Isaac Dunham wrote:
>
> To elaborate on this, GCC 5.1 (I think) has changed the ABI for C++11
> support.
> Packages using C++11 need to be rebuilt with the new library;
> libreoffice has already been rebuilt, but not KDE.
That's a very good point, Isaac. C++
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 02:42:14PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 02:02:22PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
> > Seems to me there's something weird, both, in libreoffice depending on
> > just one single version of libstdc++, and in libklabxml being broken by this
> > version o
PM
To: dng@lists.dyne.org<mailto:dng@lists.dyne.org>
Subject: Re: [DNG] Devuan and upstream
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 05:19:25PM -0700, James Powell wrote:
> Slackware is maintained by 3 core people with extra help as needed. The rest
> of the packages are pushed by the community at lar
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 05:19:25PM -0700, James Powell wrote:
> Slackware is maintained by 3 core people with extra help as needed. The rest
> of the packages are pushed by the community at large contributing. Devuan
> doesn't have to maintain every package possible. That's ludicrous to think so.
of the maintainer that much?
-Jim
From: Stephanie Daugherty<mailto:sdaughe...@gmail.com>
Sent: 8/14/2015 6:21 AM
To: T.J. Duchene<mailto:t.j.duch...@gmail.com>;
dng@lists.dyne.org<mailto:dng@lists.dyne.org>
Subject: Re: [DNG] Devuan and upstream
On Thu
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 4:06 PM T.J. Duchene wrote:
>
> 1. You can't mark a package as "Do not install." APT simply does not give
> you the option.
>
> Heaven knows, there are a lot of people who dislike things like network-
> manager, and do not them to install for any reason.
>
> Someone migh
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 02:02:22PM +0200, Didier Kryn wrote:
> Seems to me there's something weird, both, in libreoffice depending on
> just one single version of libstdc++, and in libklabxml being broken by this
> version of libstdc++, be it the fault of kde or libstdc++ developpers.
That's t
Le 14/08/2015 10:16, Noel Torres a écrit :
Everyone that has anytime been trapped in the Dependency Hell knows
about the complicated chains of dependencies in Debian. As a simple
example, today it is impossible to install LibreOffice 5 and KDE
together, since libreoffice 1:5.0.1~rc1-2 ends de
James Powell escribió:
[...]
Devuan should follow the Debian methodology, but equally it should
forge it's own path away from Debian. It doesn't need to draw from
any other distribution like Funtoo, CRUX, Slackware, or anything
other distributions, other than seeing what people are using a
but what
users need will matter most of all.
Devuan should be Devuan.
That's all I can say on that for now.
-Jim
From: T.J. Duchene<mailto:t.j.duch...@gmail.com>
Sent: 8/13/2015 1:06 PM
To: dng@lists.dyne.org<mailto:dng@lists.dyne.org>
Subje
Everyone of course is welcome to comment but the question is really for the
Devuan team.Is the general plan is just to copy Debian, or are there plans
to make more changes than just systemd?
Debian APT is an example. It's a good manager, but it falls short in some key
areas that are not un
24 matches
Mail list logo
