Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
Didn't post the ports earlier (before this backend backport),
since it was kinda useless to run with the "dummy" backend. :-)
No problem. I did notice some nits in the plist of packagekit. You
should not include blank lines (even to logically segment
sections). If
On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 18:22 +0200, Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
>
> >> Hopefully this will go into PackageKit 0.4.10, for use
> >> while waiting for required PolicyKit/DeviceKit support.
> >>
> >> Besides some (unused) differences in API, the backend is
> >> identical to th
Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
Hopefully this will go into PackageKit 0.4.10, for use
while waiting for required PolicyKit/DeviceKit support.
Besides some (unused) differences in API, the backend is
identical to the one in the latest PackageKit (0.5.2).
Feedback appreciated, maintainer didn't respon
On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 09:06 +0200, Anders F Björklund wrote:
> I've backported the PackageKit 0.5.x backend to 0.4.x,
> and made some ports for it and the GNOME/KDE frontends.
>
> As described earlier, it uses portupgrade and portaudit
> and compiles binary packages from source ports if needed.
>
I've backported the PackageKit 0.5.x backend to 0.4.x,
and made some ports for it and the GNOME/KDE frontends.
As described earlier, it uses portupgrade and portaudit
and compiles binary packages from source ports if needed.
http://afb.users.sourceforge.net/packagekit/
Hopefully this will go i
