On Sunday 30 July 2006 19:57, Peter TB Brett wrote:
If only all libraries came with their manuals in info format, my
software development tasks would be so much easier. I browse info
pages in Konqueror using the info:/ protocol, and it's just like
web pages except for the much, much better
On Sunday 30 July 2006 09:21, Arnim Littek wrote:
On Sunday 30 July 2006 19:57, Peter TB Brett wrote:
If only all libraries came with their manuals in info format, my
software development tasks would be so much easier. I browse info
pages in Konqueror using the info:/ protocol, and it's
Hello gEDA-dev,
I have been using your work for a while and am presently trying to
find my way around the source. While I do like your work I feel that
if the documentation can be in 100k and not 1M it should be. I don't
care for Adobe Acrobat. It runs ok on my Athlon but one my older PII
laptop
Generalizing, the problem is *dependencies*. For end users, one of
gEDA's bigger problems is the number of dependences. Distros are all
over the map in terms of what is bundled, what is not, what is
installed by default and what is not. Many of the complaints we hear
from clueless newbies have
On Sunday 30 July 2006 14:54, Stuart Brorson wrote:
As for the person who made the point that the problem was an autoconf
issue: If you would care to actually do some work and send a patch to
fix the configure.ac file instead of proferring cheap advice, then I'd
stand up and take notice.
Alas, another top post! Sorry!
What you say is fine. I have heard from many people over the last two
years that the install CD is brain-dead, wrong-headed, and/or just
plain stupid. Fair enough. But apparently enough people have used it
to install gEDA and become productive that it has
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Peter TB Brett wrote:
On Sunday 30 July 2006 14:54, Stuart Brorson wrote:
As for the person who made the point that the problem was an autoconf
issue: If you would care to actually do some work and send a patch to
fix the configure.ac file instead of proferring cheap
I also apologize in advance for pouring cold water on your project. I
took a look at the screenshots and the Cairo stuff does look slightly
whizzier than the GTK stuff. I also hate to discourage a developer
who just took on a project and did it. That's the spirit we like
around here!
First
Stuart Brorson wrote:
Generalizing, the problem is *dependencies*. For end users, one of
gEDA's bigger problems is the number of dependences. Distros are all
over the map in terms of what is bundled, what is not, what is
installed by default and what is not. Many of the complaints we hear
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Stuart Brorson wrote:
Alas, another top post! Sorry!
What you say is fine. I have heard from many people over the last two
years that the install CD is brain-dead, wrong-headed, and/or just
plain stupid. Fair enough. But apparently enough people have used it
to install
Russell Shaw wrote:
Stuart Brorson wrote:
I'll try to refine my point this way: For Al's Gnucap manual the build
chain in question is this:
Latex - dvi - pdf
Many users don't have Latex installed. In certain situations, this
causes Gnucap's configure to die, and you can't build Gnucap
Peter TB Brett wrote:
On Sunday 30 July 2006 14:54, Stuart Brorson wrote:
As for the person who made the point that the problem was an autoconf
issue: If you would care to actually do some work and send a patch to
fix the configure.ac file instead of proferring cheap advice, then I'd
stand
Russell Shaw wrote:
Stuart Brorson wrote:
If you fill the package with PDFs, it'll get rejected or repackaged
by any decent Debian maintainer to have a separate documentation package.
With the current build problems, it's lucky to be accepted into any
distribution at all.
As for the
I still maintain that if someone can work out how to use a graphical
package manager to install regular software, it's not overly
optimistic to assume that the can use the same graphical package
manager to install the relevant -devel, -dev or [whatever else they
happen to be called]
this patch isn't adding any new dependencies (only adding a requirement
for Gtk = 2.6).
Crap, I'd have to upgrade my main development machine to a new version
of Fedora to get that.
If you compile an unpatched version of Gschem on a recent system,
you will see that it already gets linked
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Russell Shaw wrote:
If you fill the package with PDFs, it'll get rejected or repackaged
by any decent Debian maintainer to have a separate documentation package.
With the current build problems, it's lucky to be accepted into any
distribution at all.
This is an interesting
16 matches
Mail list logo
