On Wed, 17 May 2006 13:54:21 +0200, Tom K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> On Tue, 16 May 2006 23:57:14 +0200, Thomas Bächler >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: >>> >>>> buuut, i just changed the pkgver and removed the md5sums from the >>>> pkgbuild >>>> in abs and built from that one, so my wine 0.9.13 which has the force >>>> flag >>>> sat to 'y' still shouldn't be "upgraded" by an older release, should >>>> it? >>>> Because that would be a bug wouldn't it? >>>> >>> The force-flag doesn't affect the package, it only affects the repo you >>> put the package in. So you >>> will still be forced to 0.9.11 (which was originally done because >>> 0.9.12 >>> was only trouble). >>> >>> >> >> hmm, you know what would be cool? To be able to somehow inform users >> about >> why given >> package isn't updated yet, because I just assumed it was due to lazyness >> or something. >> >> new mailing-list? "package-problems" or something? >> >> Subject: Wine on hold >> >> Reason: Ie doesn't work anymore, + X other reasons (where you would fill >> in X) >> >> What do you think? Asking too much? Just get used to it? >> >> > > The reason is given in CVS: "forced downgrade, due to many issues with > 0.9.12" > Ok. CVS fills that gap. No problems then. Only a obscurity one, but thats ok. There is no explanation for 0.9.13 though, but I assume it's the same issue "reason".
so that's ok. > Personally, I don't see the need to a new ML. > > Lazyness or something? That's the second time I've seen someone say > something like that about the dev team. FFS ....... > FFS what? "......." never was a sufficient explanation. no hard feelings. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
