On Sunday, November 17, 2002, at 01:04 PM, Brian Lenihan:
On Saturday, November 16, 2002, at 02:31 AM, Ben Hines wrote:
On Saturday, November 16, 2002, at 01:01 AM, Brian Lenihan wrote:
i efax 0.9a-001114-1 Simple FAX utility
efax is an example of why you should send individual
On Sunday, November 17, 2002, at 03:50 PM, Steven Burr wrote:
On Sunday, November 17, 2002, at 01:04 PM, Brian Lenihan:
On Saturday, November 16, 2002, at 02:31 AM, Ben Hines wrote:
On Saturday, November 16, 2002, at 01:01 AM, Brian Lenihan wrote:
i efax 0.9a-001114-1 Simple FAX
On Friday, November 15, 2002, at 09:49 PM, Ben Hines wrote:
I apologize for the size of this list, but it's much easier for me to
post what I know works than to send 206 messages the maintainers.
i aalib 1.4rc5-2 Ascii art library
i aalib-bin 1.4rc5-2 Ascii art library
i aalib-shlibs
To clarify, i don't think we want everyone sending their lists of
installed apps to the fink lists. We do need people to test basic
functionality, not just compile things. We need to know if it works. We
know everything compiles already. And such mails are not really
appropriate for the lists.
On Saturday, November 16, 2002, at 01:01 AM, Brian Lenihan wrote:
i efax 0.9a-001114-1 Simple FAX utility
efax is an example of why you should send individual messages and not
just blindly send lists of compiled apps. I almost know for certain
that this does not work. Have you actually
On Saturday, November 16, 2002, at 02:31 AM, Ben Hines wrote:
On Saturday, November 16, 2002, at 01:01 AM, Brian Lenihan wrote:
i efax 0.9a-001114-1 Simple FAX utility
efax is an example of why you should send individual messages and not
just blindly send lists of compiled apps. I
If you are using any fink package on 10.2 that is not listed in
stable in FinkCommander or http://fink.sourceforge.net/pdb/index.php
(current-stable), please let the maintainer know. We're not asking for
a full QA report or even testing of every feature, I tried this and it
seems to work fine
On Monday, March 18, 2002, at 01:37 AM, Paul Lieberman wrote:
So what's your definition of
stable as far as Fink is concerned?
Compiles and runs and is generally usable.
-- Finlay
___
Fink-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear Fink user,
we, the Fink team, would like to make a new full Fink release in the
near future. For this, we'd like to move as many package to stable as
possible. But to be able to do so, we need *your* help! Under
http://fink.sourceforge.net/pdb/testing.php, you can find a long list
of
This brings up an interesting point. Many of these programs (not the one you
listed here but the ones on the web site) are only marginally stable on
their native platform (in most cases Linux). So what's your definition of
stable as far as Fink is concerned? Mine would be that the software runs
10 matches
Mail list logo
