On 2003-08-11(Mon) 10:41:39 -0500, w9ya wrote: > Well I switched mirrors and ALL of the programs I was complaining about appear > to have been fixed over the past couple/three days ! > > My hat is off to those who worked so hard on this, am I am glad things are > back on track.
If I have to choose one person for special credit, it would be Per Øvind Karlsen, since he has gone through the pain to fix various packages one by one, which nobody has the patience to do. Abel > Good job and thank you for not only the work but by being attentive to this > ml. > > Best regards; > > Bob Finch > > > > > On Monday 11 August 2003 08:21 am, w9ya wrote: > > Actaully I am rather getting use to the way things are now. It is really > > handy to have over 50 basic packages not upgradable without manual > > intervention. And not being able to fiqure out what is going on because of > > lousy spec files and other such lousy practices by the package maintainers. > > The endless need to get in and dirty and remove packages manually because > > urpmi can't or won't upgrade packages (nor should it under these > > circumstances) is actually becoming a major part of my day. Posting a list > > of such packages to this mailing list (as I and others have done) does not > > seem to help either. > > > > Yes I am whining. But yes the above is also very true. Am I entitled to be > > whining ? Perhaps not. At this point I really don't care. Really. > > > > SIgh > > > > Bob Finch > > > > On Monday 11 August 2003 07:20 am, Guillaume Rousse wrote: > > > Ainsi parlait Abel Cheung : > > > > On 2003-08-11(Mon) 13:17:21 +0200, Guillaume Rousse wrote: > > > > > > Fair enough but this is very dangerous! Think about dropping > > > > > > security patches because they don't apply properly :( > > > > > > > > > > Well, i had no means to know it was a security patch, and i spend too > > > > > much time just clearing the spec to really care. > > > > > > > > Checking patches is a basic responsibility of package maintainers :-( > > > > > > Keeping spec clean to help other people understand it also. > > -- Abel Cheung Linux counter #256983 | http://counter.li.org GPG Key: (0xC67186FF) | http://deaddog.org/gpg.asc Key fingerprint: 671C C7AE EFB5 110C D6D1 41EE 4152 E1F1 C671 86FF
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
