Moins,
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 00:08 -0400, Mathias Gug wrote:
Hi Loïc,
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 09:43:19PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008, Mathias Gug wrote:
This was indeed suggested at the very beginning of the bug thread [1] by
using /etc/profile.d/. However it was
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hey David,
great you're getting involved with the MOTU team!
David Dodd schrieb:
My name is David and I am abit confused as to where I should actually
begin. I do not have any programming experience , but I do have a will
to learn new things.
When trying out the xmonad window manager, I had some problems which
went away when I installed libghc6-xmonad-dev and a bunch of dependent
packages. This package is not a dependency of xmonad. Perhaps it
should be, or some files should be moved from that package to the
xmonad package.
The whole
Helge Stenström wrote:
Is this the right place for a bug report on the xmonad package? This
is the maintainer mail address according to Synaptic.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xmonad would be the right place.
Cheers,
Emilio
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008, Mathias Gug wrote:
* it's not against policy to setup a system to try to expand its PATH
to use additional data, as long as using the default PATH wouldn't
break the system and its packages
What do you mean by as long as using the default PATH wouldn't break
In the hopes that some of you are python developers, and may know
how to parse iCal feeds, ubottu needs your help to properly schedule
#ubuntu-meeting. Specifically, although the data on recurring
meetings is available, ubottu isn't quite able to keep track of the
fact that they recur, and so
Hi Loïc,
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 04:04:57PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
Do you mean that only the gem system should be setup to use gem
installed binaries ?
No, I mean that it's not a policy violation to try to add the gem
binary path to PATH on a best effort basis because packages will
On Thursday 04 September 2008 21:13, Dustin Kirkland wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Mathias Gug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 04:04:57PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
No, I mean that it's not a policy violation to try to add the gem
binary path to PATH on a best
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Mathias Gug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 04:04:57PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
No, I mean that it's not a policy violation to try to add the gem
binary path to PATH on a best effort basis because packages will
continue to work whether PATH
Is there any plans or work in progress to package django 1.0 in Ubuntu ?
The current ubuntu package for django is at version 0.96-1, which is
itself relatively outdated, security fixes have been introduced in 0.96-3
best regards
--
Maxime Haineault | Centdessin Design
Chargé de projet |
Why version 2.2? Version 2.6.1 is available for Hardy:
http://stella.sourceforge.net/
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
11 matches
Mail list logo