On 8/5/06, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Making use of unmanaged files I noticed that, in recipes, one has to
specify the unmanaged files in a variable, unmanaged_files, in the recipe
instead of a file, Resources/UnmanagedFiles, in the recipe directory. I
think the latter is more natu
On 8/5/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why do you find it better to review recipes in a tarball?
I've explained why MIME-attached tarballs are frustratingly bad.
How can you read them from your mail client?
I don't :-)
One of RecipeLint's early actions is to unpack the tarball, so it
co
Those of you that follow the recipes list know that there's a possible bug
in InstallPackage, that prevents it from installing aps from recipes if it
doesn't find any package. I think I've found where the error is, but I
haven't the time to do any tests on it atm.
Anyhow, in InstallPackage l
I've found mor bugs in signing, but I can't seem to find a good solution.
To reproduce, try to sign a program that isn't Current and that has files
that differs from Current (the latter shouldn't be that hard) alternative
try to sign a program that isn't symlinked.
As no version is passed to L
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 14:14:58 +0200, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Lucas C. Villa Real" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On 8/1/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sending recipes in a text-like format is good because:
> 1. it's easier for the gurus to read through quickly
> 2. we avoid the 33% base
"Lucas C. Villa Real" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 8/1/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > To fix this, I added to the recipe the patch mailed to gcc's list in
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg01179.html
> >
> > Is it OK to include this in the Gobolinux recipe, please?
>
> By fol
"Lucas C. Villa Real" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 8/1/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sending recipes in a text-like format is good because:
> > 1. it's easier for the gurus to read through quickly
> > 2. we avoid the 33% base64 size penalty, and
> > 3. people can cut-and-paste bits out of t
When the tools are done(?), we might think of planning a real (yeah, I
know, it sounds surreal ;) ) release. For that there's a good thing to
have a defined roadmap. Is there a defined roadmap?
I have two items I want to have in the 013 release.
* Linux-pam as primary authentication
* LVM
--
On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 07:09:38 +0200, Hisham Muhammad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 8/3/06, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 23:22:10 +0200, Hisham Muhammad
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 8/3/06, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
Making use of unmanaged files I noticed that, in recipes, one has to
specify the unmanaged files in a variable, unmanaged_files, in the recipe
instead of a file, Resources/UnmanagedFiles, in the recipe directory. I
think the latter is more natural as it follows the same layout as packages.
10 matches
Mail list logo
