Re: [gentoo-dev] list masked for removal

2008-01-19 Thread fire-eyes
Stefan Schweizer wrote: # Stefan Schweizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (19 Jan 2008) # Project abandoned. Masked for removal, bug 206105 sys-apps/list Phew I thought this meant the gentoo-dev list was masked for removal -- Hey I just woke up, it's funny!! -- Fieldy -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mai

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: net-im/pidgin protocols

2007-07-20 Thread fire-eyes
Duncan wrote: > joshua jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], > excerpted below, on Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:10:35 -0700: > >> Honestly..this is not something to get picky over jakub. Upstream was >> nice and actually came and politely asked us to change the defaults to >> what most peo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: net-libs/soup

2007-06-04 Thread fire-eyes
Mart Raudsepp wrote: > # Mart Raudsepp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (04 Jun 2007) > # Obsolete Gnome-1.x component, bug 180808 > # Masked for removal in 30 days. > net-libs/soup > > > To avoid any confusions - mail-client/evolution uses net-libs/libsoup > these days, not just soup. I have to say it... N

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Unified nVidia Driver Ebuild ready for testing

2005-12-28 Thread fire-eyes
> I _do_ see the argument that including the extra applications could be > spun off from the main package. I would appreciate nvidia-settings remaining stand alone, due to this as of yet unresolved bug: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114649 -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Unified nVidia Driver Ebuild ready for testing

2005-12-24 Thread fire-eyes
As an end user, I would prefer the ebuilds kept seperately. Also right now, nvidia-settings will not compile for some of us, which would result in a single merge failing: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114649 -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list