> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>>Am Montag, 17. Oktober 2005 01:04 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: >>> >>>>Is it possible to have both version 1 and version 2 co-exist ? >>>> >>>>Very best regards; >>>> >>>>Bob Finch >>>> >>> >>>Hi theoretical it would be possible, but why? >>>OO 2.0 will be developed 1.x not. >>>so please try the OO 2.0 i didn't experienced problems so far, and >>> testing is the right place for enabling the ppl to check if >>> everything will work. OO 2.0 has so many improvements so i think ppl >>> are happy to get the new OO. greetings >>>tpowa >>>-- >>>Tobias Powalowski >>>Archlinux Package Maintainer (tpowa) >>>http://www.archlinux.org >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> Why ? >> >> Because I am a skeptic when it comes to viability of early releases of >> new versions of software compared to later releases of an earlier >> version. (i.e. Some people like me prefer stability from time to time. >> Not all the time mind you, just some of the time.) >> >> And I am seldom surprised by having my skeptic nature voided. >> >> Besides Linux should be able to handle this...!! > > Yeah, Arch does it perfectly - don't install the new one from the repos > and build it yourself and have it install where you want - the ultimate > solution: the power entirely in your hands. But somehow I think that is > one of the benefits that people only find convienet when it suits > them... > > :p
Well I certainly can do that. I was basically asking if the maintainer would like to use some of the fields in *his* PKGBUILD to do this co-resident thing for the community at large AND/OR would two OOs being installed that way cause a problem. I was too terse it seems. Thank you for making me aware I was too terse. Very best regards; Bob Finch > >> >> Thanks ever so much for asking why. It is a good question. >> >> >> Very best regards; >> >> Bob Finch >> >> _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
