[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. pack needed installed package(s)
2. put it in the urpmi cache (or where ever...)
3. rename it (pretty much like the troels perl script)
4. run rsync
5. do update
For general information, the troels.rsync6.2.pl Mandrake downloader was
recently replaced by a suite of
I got the 3.2 Alpha to work - neat stuff, but not for the faint of
heart. The one thing I miss is the Mandrake specific menus )the
standard KDE menu config is not very intuitive!
I still think we should come up with a way to flag when some major
component in Cooker is broken (whilst under
I'm sure this was meant as sarcasm, but...
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 05:57:29AM +0200, Han Boetes wrote:
Nope, you guys are our test subjects. Our labrats. :)
This is the deal. We make packages and you make decent bugreports or you learn
to live with the fact cooker is broken.
What's the
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 20:57, Han Boetes wrote:
David Kobler wrote:
Can't we just set a simple standard to TEST YOUR PACKAGES before uploading
^^
them. It seems that simple things are constantly ignored by those who
maintain the cooker RPMS. How hard would it be to test your rpms on
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 22:57, Han Boetes wrote:
This is the deal. We make packages and you make decent bugreports or you learn
to live with the fact cooker is broken.
Have you thought even a little bit about how wrong this approach is?
The only way you're going to get _good_ testing is for
On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 15:37, Brad Felmey wrote:
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 22:57, Han Boetes wrote:
This is the deal. We make packages and you make decent bugreports or you learn
to live with the fact cooker is broken.
Have you thought even a little bit about how wrong this approach is?
On Wednesday 22 October 2003 11:44 pm, David Kobler wrote:
Can't we just set a simple standard to TEST YOUR PACKAGES before uploading
them. It seems that simple things are constantly ignored by those who
maintain the cooker RPMS. How hard would it be to test your rpms on a
recently
On Thursday 23 October 2003 03:49 am, Simon Oosthoek wrote:
I'm sure this was meant as sarcasm, but...
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 05:57:29AM +0200, Han Boetes wrote:
Nope, you guys are our test subjects. Our labrats. :)
This is the deal. We make packages and you make decent bugreports or you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Vincent Meyer, MD wrote:
I'd be happy if there were simply a rollback directory on the
mirrors. In
other words when a package is updated, yesterday's version rolls over
to the
rollback directory. Also, the reason I said yesterday's is often
On Thu Oct 23 18:55 +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
I'd be happy if there were simply a rollback directory on the
mirrors. In
other words when a package is updated, yesterday's version rolls over
to the
rollback directory. Also, the reason I said yesterday's is often
there are
2-3 quick
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Levi Ramsey wrote:
On Thu Oct 23 18:55 +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
Excellent idea, Buchan... you are a veritable fountain of such.
Just not enough time to implement them ... at the moment ... ;-)
- --
|--Another happy Mandrake Club
torsdagen den 23 oktober 2003 19.11 skrev Levi Ramsey:
On Thu Oct 23 18:55 +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
I'd be happy if there were simply a rollback directory on the
mirrors. In
other words when a package is updated, yesterday's version rolls over
to the
rollback directory.
SO... has anyone managed to get a working KDE ???
Are we waiting for new KDE or QT rpms?
If not, does anyone have the last working KDE someplace where I can download a
copy?
Thanks,
Vinny.
On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 13:08, Vincent Meyer, MD wrote:
SO... has anyone managed to get a working KDE ???
Are we waiting for new KDE or QT rpms?
If not, does anyone have the last working KDE someplace where I can download a
copy?
Yeah, use the qt that comes with the KDE 3.2 alpha packages.
On Thursday 23 October 2003 03:29 pm, Brad Felmey wrote:
On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 13:08, Vincent Meyer, MD wrote:
SO... has anyone managed to get a working KDE ???
Are we waiting for new KDE or QT rpms?
If not, does anyone have the last working KDE someplace where I can
download a copy?
There is the --repackage rpm option, but despite several reports, I am afraid it is
still broken because the %_repackage_dir macro expands to a non existing
/var/spool/repackage directory.
-o-
kk1
torsdagen den 23 oktober 2003 19.11 skrev Levi Ramsey:
On Thu Oct 23 18:55 +0200, Buchan Milne
On Thursday 23 October 2003 11:10, Quel Qun wrote:
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 20:57, Han Boetes wrote:
David Kobler wrote:
Can't we just set a simple standard to TEST YOUR PACKAGES before
uploading
^^
them. It seems that simple things are constantly ignored by those
who
On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 06:31, Michael Scherer wrote:
On Thursday 23 October 2003 11:10, Quel Qun wrote:
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 20:57, Han Boetes wrote:
David Kobler wrote:
Can't we just set a simple standard to TEST YOUR PACKAGES before
uploading
...
Simple test cases, a minimal
After updating to the latest KDEbase (3.1.3-80) the KDE desktop no
longer works.
After reading the explanation given on this list (it's compiled with a
newer QT version) - I was a bit upset.
I have proposed previously on this list a way to warn Cooker testers
when something is broken (because it
I'm my fustration I've decided to switch to kde3.2 alpha 2 from
http://peoples.mandrakesoft.com/~lmontel/kde-3.2-alpha2/ http://peoples.mandrakesoft.com/%7Elmontel/kde-3.2-alpha2/
I think it at least works a bit, which wouldbe an improvement of it not working at all
Mike
Robert Fox wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Fox wrote:
After updating to the latest KDEbase (3.1.3-80) the KDE desktop no
longer works.
After reading the explanation given on this list (it's compiled with a
newer QT version) - I was a bit upset.
I have proposed previously on this
Le mer 22/10/2003 à 10:23, Michael Lothian a écrit :
I'm my fustration I've decided to switch to kde3.2 alpha 2 from
http://peoples.mandrakesoft.com/~lmontel/kde-3.2-alpha2/
http://peoples.mandrakesoft.com/%7Elmontel/kde-3.2-alpha2/
I think it at least works a bit, which wouldbe an
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 15:18, FACORAT Fabrice wrote:
Le mer 22/10/2003 à 10:23, Michael Lothian a écrit :
I'm my fustration I've decided to switch to kde3.2 alpha 2 from
http://peoples.mandrakesoft.com/~lmontel/kde-3.2-alpha2/
http://peoples.mandrakesoft.com/%7Elmontel/kde-3.2-alpha2/
Le Wednesday 22 October 2003 15:18, FACORAT Fabrice a écrit :
Le mer 22/10/2003 à 10:23, Michael Lothian a écrit :
I'm my fustration I've decided to switch to kde3.2 alpha 2 from
http://peoples.mandrakesoft.com/~lmontel/kde-3.2-alpha2/
Le mer 22/10/2003 à 11:22, Robert Fox a écrit :
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 15:18, FACORAT Fabrice wrote:
Le mer 22/10/2003 à 10:23, Michael Lothian a écrit :
I'm my fustration I've decided to switch to kde3.2 alpha 2 from
http://peoples.mandrakesoft.com/~lmontel/kde-3.2-alpha2/
I'd just like to confirm that this works
I couldn't get 3.2 to work at all :(
Mike
FACORAT Fabrice wrote:
Le mer 22/10/2003 à 11:22, Robert Fox a écrit :
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 15:18, FACORAT Fabrice wrote:
Le mer 22/10/2003 à 10:23, Michael Lothian a écrit :
I'm my fustration
Can't we just set a simple standard to TEST YOUR PACKAGES before uploading
them. It seems that simple things are constantly ignored by those who
maintain the cooker RPMS. How hard would it be to test your rpms on a
recently installed cooker box before uploading them? This would allow
people to
Can't we just set a simple standard to TEST YOUR PACKAGES before uploading
them. It seems that simple things are constantly ignored by those who
maintain the cooker RPMS. How hard would it be to test your rpms on a
recently installed cooker box before uploading them? This would allow
people to
David Kobler wrote:
Can't we just set a simple standard to TEST YOUR PACKAGES before uploading
^^
them. It seems that simple things are constantly ignored by those who
maintain the cooker RPMS. How hard would it be to test your rpms on a
recently installed cooker box before uploading
29 matches
Mail list logo
