On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 04:32 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
Hi,
as you are probably aware, devicekit-power has been deprecated and
replaced by upower.
upower still ships a compat library libdevkit-power-gobjec, which
tracker currently uses, but it's recommended to use the new library
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 04:42 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
Hi,
so, my ~ is around 12Gb of data, ~/.cache/tracker is ~430 Mb, but my
journal files is almost 1Gb!
Why is that file so huge? Can I safely delete it or is there a way to
shrink it?
Have you deleted a lot of resources? A GB is by the
On 13/04/10 22:45, Michael Biebl wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
I noticed with amazement, that tracker-store has a dependency against
libgtk [1], also the dependencies of e.g. libtracker-client-8.0-0 are
not ideal.
No they're not. You're right.
I started working on that a bit, and attached is a serious
On 14/04/10 09:11, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 04:32 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
as you are probably aware, devicekit-power has been deprecated and
replaced by upower.
upower still ships a compat library libdevkit-power-gobjec, which
tracker currently uses, but it's
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:52 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
On 14/04/10 09:11, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 04:32 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
[CUT]
Assuming of course you refer to the patches you posted here just
recently to fix the Makefiles?
If so, then no! Please don't
On 14/04/10 10:13, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
Looks like this was about another patch. A larger one (not just
Makefiles) that was attached to the first E-mail of this thread.
Hmm?
The one attached to the start of this thread is the one being applied -
my question is, does the patch in this
On 14/04/10 09:44, Martyn Russell wrote:
On 13/04/10 22:45, Michael Biebl wrote:
Hi,
[snip]
- Why do we need pango for t-s-t? At least I couldn't see any reference
with grep to it.
- The reference docs for libtracker-common remove HAL_{CFLAGS|LIBS},
surely we need those since we may have
2010/4/14 Martyn Russell mar...@lanedo.com:
On 14/04/10 10:13, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
Looks like this was about another patch. A larger one (not just
Makefiles) that was attached to the first E-mail of this thread.
Hmm?
The one attached to the start of this thread is the one being applied
On 10/04/10 09:04, Ivan Frade wrote:
hi,
Hi,
this is not the first time we hear that request. We have two options
1. add extra properties on nao:Tag
2. make nao.Tag subclass of InformationElement
i think 2. is fine. Any other suggestion? we can change that for the
next week
