Dnia 16-05-2007, śro o godzinie 08:45 +0200, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz
napisał(a):
>
> DON'T use ,,th is development'' as excuse for such things please.
>
Yea, maybe You're right. Nevertheless I couldn't have tested it in the
first place, that's why I've asked the RFC.
http://svn.pld-linux.org/cgi
On Wednesday 16 of May 2007, Cezary Krzyzanowski wrote:
> > - geninitrd generates initromfs images by default (why isbeyond my
> > imagination, I can only think about bootsplash bling bling here)
>
> As it supposed to do in TH
That's true. Someone has to test new things.
> (the development versi
Dnia 15-05-2007, wto o godzinie 22:33 +0200, Patryk Zawadzki napisał(a):
> Please stop changing geninitrd to your liking without performing
> sanity checks FIRST.
>
A the initramfs was my idea in the first place I feel responsible to
respond. I'm sorry for You screwed up evening. Nevertheless ther
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 11:13:19PM +0200, Jakub Bogusz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +-MYSQLLIBS=`$d/mysql_config --libs`
> > > > ++MYSQLLIBS=`$d/mysql_config --libs | sed 's/-Wl,--as-needed
> > > > //'`
>
> Not here. These -Wl,* or -s must disappear from --libs output.
I thought so, bu
On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 08:37:11PM +0100, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
>
> A bit of blurring is good. Antialiased fonts are more blurred than
> non-antialiased.
Please read:
http://www.nabble.com/New-FreeType-proofing-tool:-ftdiff-p9754631.html
--
Tom Pala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> htt
On Tue, 15 May 2007, Aredridel wrote:
>
> > have 'packages/%{name}' containt (a) the spec file, (b) a 'files' subdir,
> > that
> > contains the traditional 'SOURCES' content and (c) any other files
> > containing
> > metadata. Off the top of my head -- the 'tag->revision' file we've
> > disc
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 10:46:51PM +0200, Tomasz Wittner wrote:
> On Tue 15. of May 2007, 18:08, Jakub Bogusz wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:30:20PM +0200, gotar wrote:
> > > Author: gotarDate: Tue May 15 13:30:17 2007 GMT
> > > Module: SOURCES T
Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
> - geninitrd generates initromfs images by default (why isbeyond my
> imagination, I can only think about bootsplash bling bling here)
Why should it not?
--
regards,
Jakub Piotr Cłapa
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@l
On Tuesday 15 of May 2007, Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
> Dear PLD devs,
>
> Please stop changing geninitrd to your liking without performing
> sanity checks FIRST.
>
> To your notice:
>
> - geninitrd generates initromfs images by default (why isbeyond my
> imagination, I can only think about bootsplash
> - /dev/vgsys/* does not seem to match any of these clever rules, but
> lo and behold as we have an alternative way..
For the record, I got bit by this too. Root on LVM got toasted, hard.
Still not working on one machine, just haven't had time to fix it yet.
Aria
On 5/15/07, Patryk Zawadzki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
Too little coffe, too much stress, s/initromfs/initramfs/ - romfs works fine.
--
Patryk Zawadzki
Generated Content
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.
Dear PLD devs,
Please stop changing geninitrd to your liking without performing
sanity checks FIRST.
To your notice:
- geninitrd generates initromfs images by default (why isbeyond my
imagination, I can only think about bootsplash bling bling here)
- initromfs uses the following magic to determ
Jakub Bogusz wrote:
> One more thing: non-specs and template specs need to be moved to some
> other place (scripts/ and templates/ dirs? mirrors and
> additional-md5sums are used by scripts, so they can be together with
> scripts).
>
>
Call it bin/ and templates/? It's a good change.
Aria
> have 'packages/%{name}' containt (a) the spec file, (b) a 'files' subdir,
> that
> contains the traditional 'SOURCES' content and (c) any other files containing
> metadata. Off the top of my head -- the 'tag->revision' file we've discussed
> wrt to svn migration. And in the future -- any oth
On Tuesday 15 of May 2007 12:51:48 Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
> On 5/15/07, Mariusz Mazur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ok, after some talks on irc, this is how (the first version of) this
> > solution is going to look like:
> >
> > 'packages' module in our current CVS repo with a flat structure
> > u
On 5/15/07, Jakub Bogusz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One more disadvantage: more work when adding new package (1 or 3 mkdirs
> + cvs adds depending on layout - is it going to be
> package/{package.spec,package*.patch} or
> package/{SPECS/package.spec,SOURCES/package*.patch} ?
SOURCES shoud stay,
On 5/15/07, Mariusz Mazur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, after some talks on irc, this is how (the first version of) this solution
> is going to look like:
>
> 'packages' module in our current CVS repo with a flat structure underneath
> consisting of package '%{name}'s. Like this: 'packages/glibc
17 matches
Mail list logo
