Everything is up and running folks! Thanks devnet for pointing me to
the right path. :)
--
Og B. Maciel
omac...@foresightlinux.org
ogmac...@gnome.org
ogmac...@ubuntu.com
GPG Keys: D5CFC202
http://www.ogmaciel.com (en_US)
http://blog.ogmaciel.com (pt_BR)
_
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Og Maciel wrote:
> Could this be related to the way I configured apache? Below is my
> /etc/httpd/conf.d/foresightlinux.conf file:
>
>
> ServerAdmin omac...@foresightlinux.org
> DocumentRoot /srv/www/foresight-website
> ServerName www.foresight
Could this be related to the way I configured apache? Below is my
/etc/httpd/conf.d/foresightlinux.conf file:
ServerAdmin omac...@foresightlinux.org
DocumentRoot /srv/www/foresight-website
ServerName www.foresightlinux.org
ServerAlias www.foresightlinux.org
--
O
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Og Maciel wrote:
> The new web site running atop Word Press is finally published and can
> be accessed at www.foresightlinux.org. Not all pages are populated and
> the content will need to be massaged. I am counting on everyone to
> step up and either file an issu
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Andres Vargas wrote:
> github account ?
https://github.com/omaciel/Foresight-Website/tree
--
Og B. Maciel
omac...@foresightlinux.org
ogmac...@gnome.org
ogmac...@ubuntu.com
GPG Keys: D5CFC202
http://www.ogmaciel.com (en_US)
http://blog.ogmaciel.com (pt_BR)
_
github account ?
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Og Maciel wrote:
> The new web site running atop Word Press is finally published and can
> be accessed at www.foresightlinux.org. Not all pages are populated and
> the content will need to be massaged. I am counting on everyone to
> step up and eit
The new web site running atop Word Press is finally published and can
be accessed at www.foresightlinux.org. Not all pages are populated and
the content will need to be massaged. I am counting on everyone to
step up and either file an issue for wonky pages, or better yet, lend
me a hand doing this
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:22:40PM -0500, Andres Vargas wrote:
> Ubuntu left deb ? i dont think so All employee are deb experts.
just because they are experts at one thing doesn't mean they are unable
to recognize something better. on the contrary, they more expert they
are the easier they will re
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Stephanie
Watson wrote:
> I have waited to give my thoughts on this because I wanted to carefully word
> my response to be as useful as possible.
>
> LAYER 1 of 2... the non-technical end-user, and the easy out-of-box
> experience:
>
> One of the original goals of
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 11:00:35PM +0800, Zhang Sen wrote:
> > on a different label in the same repository (say, on
> > @fl:2-automake17).
> > It should be obvious how to deal with the first case in a
> > buildRequires;
> > for the later case you can depend on automake:runtime=:2-automake17 --
> >
I have waited to give my thoughts on this because I wanted to carefully word
my response to be as useful as possible.
LAYER 1 of 2... the non-technical end-user, and the easy out-of-box
experience:
One of the original goals of Foresight was to ensure a clean and simple
desktop with the latest ver
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 10:37 -0400, Michael K. Johnson wrote:
>
> The idea is that a different version that is still a maintained part
> of the platform (not some old piece of cruft from an old version) has
> to be maintained either with a different name (say, "automake17")
This looks to be the r
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 08:45 -0500, Andres Vargas wrote:
> what im do, im hack the makefile.am for fix it from 1.7 to 1.0 ..
No it won't work with 1.10, or else why would they ask for a particular
(old!) version? :)
___
Foresight-devel mailing list
Fores
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 10:37:12AM +0800, Zhang Sen wrote:
> I think it's not so rare that a package requires a particular version of
> it's dependency, instead of the newest version. For example, gtk
> requires automake1.7 and 1.10 won't work. (i know, i already brought
> this up for several times
what im do, im hack the makefile.am for fix it from 1.7 to 1.0 ..
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:37 PM, Zhang Sen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think it's not so rare that a package requires a particular version of
> it's dependency, instead of the newest version. For example, gtk
> requires automake1.7 and 1.10
15 matches
Mail list logo
