Le vendredi 24 mai 2013 11:43:29 Andrea Scarpino a écrit :
> On Friday 24 May 2013 11:27:16 Thomas Bächler wrote:
> > Networkmanager's OpenVPN plugins connects to OpenVPN servers and
> > receives routes and addresses. It then decides to ignore all routing
> > information the server sent and always
Am 24.05.2013 11:43, schrieb Andrea Scarpino:
> On Friday 24 May 2013 11:27:16 Thomas Bächler wrote:
>> Networkmanager's OpenVPN plugins connects to OpenVPN servers and
>> receives routes and addresses. It then decides to ignore all routing
>> information the server sent and always sets up a defaul
On Friday 24 May 2013 11:27:16 Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Networkmanager's OpenVPN plugins connects to OpenVPN servers and
> receives routes and addresses. It then decides to ignore all routing
> information the server sent and always sets up a default route through
> the VPN. It also takes some arbit
Am 24.05.2013 11:17, schrieb Andrea Scarpino:
> On Friday 24 May 2013 10:37:31 Thomas Bächler wrote:
>> NetworkManager's OpenVPN support is broken by design and has always
>> been. That said, kovpn is broken, too.
>
> Could you argument that? I use a OpenVPN network everyday with no issue.
Networ
On Friday 24 May 2013 10:37:31 Thomas Bächler wrote:
> NetworkManager's OpenVPN support is broken by design and has always
> been. That said, kovpn is broken, too.
Could you argument that? I use a OpenVPN network everyday with no issue.
--
Andrea
Arch Linux Developer
Am 23.05.2013 18:45, schrieb Andrea Scarpino:
> I guess many of them could be already removed, e.g.:
> * kovpn, NetworkManager (both the plasmoid and the applet) support OpenVPN.
NetworkManager's OpenVPN support is broken by design and has always
been. That said, kovpn is broken, too.
signatur
On Thursday 23 May 2013 14:41:05 Allan McRae wrote:
> Do many apps really still depend on qt3? I though even Debian managed
> to go qt3 free in the latest release...
I guess many of them could be already removed, e.g.:
* kovpn, NetworkManager (both the plasmoid and the applet) support OpenVPN.
*
Il 23/05/2013 18:14, Gaetan Bisson ha scritto:
[2013-05-23 17:29:28 +0200] Giovanni Scafora:
Il 23/05/2013 06:32, Tom Gundersen ha scritto:
Why?
For the same reasons written by Eric.
We all can read Eric's emails just fine...
and then?
I know very well that you can all read the Eric's ema
[2013-05-23 17:29:28 +0200] Giovanni Scafora:
> Il 23/05/2013 06:32, Tom Gundersen ha scritto:
> >Why?
>
> For the same reasons written by Eric.
We all can read Eric's emails just fine...
--
Gaetan
Am 22.05.2013 16:20, schrieb Eric Bélanger:
> Beside the fact that they are old, is there any reason to remove them from
> the repo? I maintain these threee packages and they are working well (no
> bug assigned). I don't see why they should be removed especially since
> many apps still depends on
Il 23/05/2013 06:32, Tom Gundersen ha scritto:
Why?
For the same reasons written by Eric.
--
Arch Linux Developer
http://www.archlinux.org
http://www.archlinux.it
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Alexander Rødseth wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> 2013/5/22 Eric Bélanger :
> > Well gtk is a depends for imlib wich is required by fvwm, the WM I use.
>
> fvwm compiles without imlib and thus without gtk1
>
I got an email from a Gentoo dev (Samuli Suominen) :
"imlib1 can work
Hi,
2013/5/22 Eric Bélanger :
> Well gtk is a depends for imlib wich is required by fvwm, the WM I use.
fvwm compiles without imlib and thus without gtk1
(As a former fvwm user, for years, I can recommend pekwm or i3 instead).
+1 for moving old cruft to AUR
--
Sincerely,
Alexander Rødseth
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 23/05/13 00:20, Eric Bélanger wrote:
> > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Jan Alexander Steffens <
> > jan.steff...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Greetings everypony,
> >>
> >> Can we throw out glib 1, gtk 1 and qt3? These are seriously legac
On 23/05/13 00:20, Eric Bélanger wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Jan Alexander Steffens <
> jan.steff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Greetings everypony,
>>
>> Can we throw out glib 1, gtk 1 and qt3? These are seriously legacy
>> libraries.
>>
>> Check "pactree -rs glib" and "pactree -rs qt3"
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 May 2013 10:20:42 Eric Bélanger wrote:
>> Beside the fact that they are old, is there any reason to remove them from
>> the repo? I maintain these threee packages and they are working well (no
>> bug assigned). I don't see
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Giovanni Scafora
wrote:
> Il 21/05/2013 13:12, Jan Alexander Steffens ha scritto:
>
>> Greetings everypony,
>>
>> Can we throw out glib 1, gtk 1 and qt3? These are seriously legacy
>> libraries.
>>
>> Check "pactree -rs glib" and "pactree -rs qt3" for dependent pa
On Wednesday 22 May 2013 10:20:42 Eric Bélanger wrote:
> Beside the fact that they are old, is there any reason to remove them from
> the repo? I maintain these threee packages and they are working well (no
> bug assigned). I don't see why they should be removed especially since
> many apps still
Il 21/05/2013 13:12, Jan Alexander Steffens ha scritto:
Greetings everypony,
Can we throw out glib 1, gtk 1 and qt3? These are seriously legacy libraries.
Check "pactree -rs glib" and "pactree -rs qt3" for dependent packages.
Cheers,
Jan
I give a big -1 to removing glib 1, gtk 1 and qt3 fro
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Jan Alexander Steffens <
jan.steff...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Greetings everypony,
>
> Can we throw out glib 1, gtk 1 and qt3? These are seriously legacy
> libraries.
>
> Check "pactree -rs glib" and "pactree -rs qt3" for dependent packages.
>
> Cheers,
> Jan
>
Well g
Greetings everypony,
Can we throw out glib 1, gtk 1 and qt3? These are seriously legacy libraries.
Check "pactree -rs glib" and "pactree -rs qt3" for dependent packages.
Cheers,
Jan
21 matches
Mail list logo
