On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 02:18, Allan McRaeal...@archlinux.org wrote:
Dan McGee wrote:
1. Making something impossible is never good (this is mostly the
unforeseen difficulties excuse)
2. probably leaves a lot of wiggle room
3. If your name is Allan McRae (or anyone else) and you run an x86_64
Just checking the sanity of an idea here:
What do you all think of supporting wildcards for version comparisons?
I was thinking fnmatch could almost be dropped in directly to
alpm_pkg_vercmp in place of the initial strcmp.
Use case:
readline version 6.0.003
bash depends readline=6.0.*
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 6:22 AM, Allan McRaeal...@archlinux.org wrote:
Roman Kyrylych wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 02:18, Allan McRaeal...@archlinux.org wrote:
Dan McGee wrote:
1. Making something impossible is never good (this is mostly the
unforeseen difficulties excuse)
2. probably
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 15:19, Dan McGeedpmc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 6:22 AM, Allan McRaeal...@archlinux.org wrote:
Roman Kyrylych wrote:
Well, I've managed to install i686 pacman-git (replacing old pacman)
on my x86_64 system by making a mistake in repo name. :-P
So,
From 5979ea01d2f4217c1b199c675a7a3d4c728da9fa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nagy Gabor ng...@bibl.u-szeged.hu
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 15:50:08 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Fix a minor memleak
Signed-off-by: Nagy Gabor ng...@bibl.u-szeged.hu
---
lib/libalpm/remove.c |1 +
1 files changed, 1
does this look ok?
needroot.diff
Description: Binary data
___
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
I hope its good now :P
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Xaviershinin...@gmail.com wrote:
does this look ok?
0001-Add-new-print-operation-for-all-operations.patch
Description: Binary data
___
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Xaviershinin...@gmail.com wrote:
I hope its good now :P
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Xaviershinin...@gmail.com wrote:
does this look ok?
lol...
I intended to send these two last mails to Nagy, not to the ML.
Anyway, the last patch should be almost ok
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Giovanni Scaforagiova...@archlinux.org wrote:
2009/7/20, Giovanni Scafora giova...@archlinux.org:
Hi guys,
here's an update Italian translation for pacman and libalpm.
Thanks.
Hi Dan,
please, do not forget for pushing my update Italian translation.
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Xavier Chantryshinin...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Charly COSTE chang...@laposte.net
A new option -Qk which checks if all packages files are really on the
system (i.e. not accidentally deleted).
This implements FS#13877
Signed-off-by: Charly COSTE
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was
generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing
the project The official pacman repository.
The branch, master has been updated
via cf669eda9c6b8e0b1d38bcf32fa08c0637a9e030 (commit)
via
On Wednesday 22 July 2009 04:38:23 Allan McRae wrote:
@Pierre: Was the a reason to put pkgbase above pkgname in the .PKGINFO
and repo db files? It is secondary information so I have moved it to be
included after.
No, there was no reason for a specific order.
--
Pierre Schmitz,
Pierre Schmitz wrote:
On Wednesday 22 July 2009 04:38:23 Allan McRae wrote:
@Pierre: Was the a reason to put pkgbase above pkgname in the .PKGINFO
and repo db files? It is secondary information so I have moved it to be
included after.
No, there was no reason for a specific order.
13 matches
Mail list logo
