On 2014-01-11 23:10, Robert Millan wrote:
On 11/01/2014 21:32, Niels Thykier wrote:
As for #712848, the latest comment sent by Petr suggested that the test
might be
incorrect when applied to kqueue.
I guess you are referring to comment #25 here? Quote:
[...]
Seems like no one picked
On 12/01/2014 09:24, Niels Thykier wrote:
It was filed as serious and then downgraded by Julien on July 9th.
Indeed, buildd.d.o lists no build problems at all. So at first glance I
would expect the tests to have been disabled/ignored. Assuming this is
no a simple error-hiding tactics, then
Hi,
Robert Millan wrote (12 Jan 2014 12:35:56 GMT) :
For example, I've been trying to assess the state of GNOME in
general by trying to find bugs myself. I will report my findings
soon, however this is clearly not optimal. My quick kick the tires
testing is much less reliable than day-to-day
On 12/01/2014 13:52, intrigeri wrote:
Hi,
Robert Millan wrote (12 Jan 2014 12:35:56 GMT) :
For example, I've been trying to assess the state of GNOME in
general by trying to find bugs myself. I will report my findings
soon, however this is clearly not optimal. My quick kick the tires
On 2014-01-05 12:22, Robert Millan wrote:
On 05/01/2014 10:30, Niels Thykier wrote:
On 2013-12-16 23:32, Robert Millan wrote:
On 15/12/2013 13:34, Niels Thykier wrote:
It would probably be good if you (i.e. the BSD porters) could start a
dialogue with the GNOME maintainers and figure out
On 11/01/2014 21:32, Niels Thykier wrote:
So far #733122. Barring that, the GNOME desktop seems to work fine (including
empathy, nautilus, etc). Once the patch in #733122 is applied, it will be
easier
to gather reports from day-to-day users and provide a more complete
assessment.
Thanks
On 11/01/2014 21:32, Niels Thykier wrote:
As for #712848, the latest comment sent by Petr suggested that the test
might be
incorrect when applied to kqueue.
I guess you are referring to comment #25 here? Quote:
This test is guarded by:
[...]
The kqueue support might have
On 11/01/2014 22:54, Robert Millan wrote:
Do you have an idea of the consequences of making it linux-only? If it
is just using (e.g.) xdm instead of and kFreeBSD losing a couple of
packages, it will probably not be much of an issue. But then, I assume
that GNOME and GDM are not tightly
Wiadomość napisana przez Robert Millan w dniu 5 sty 2014, o godz. 19:09:
On 05/01/2014 18:47, Edward Tomasz Napierała wrote:
We can help as porters but we can't maintain abandoned codepaths on our
own. I
think GDM upstream doesn't want to deal with this problem, so perhaps it is
better
if
On 05/01/2014 10:30, Niels Thykier wrote:
On 2013-12-16 23:32, Robert Millan wrote:
On 15/12/2013 13:34, Niels Thykier wrote:
It would probably be good if you (i.e. the BSD porters) could start a
dialogue with the GNOME maintainers and figure out exactly where GNOME
is on kFreeBSD (vs. where
Wiadomość napisana przez Robert Millan w dniu 5 sty 2014, o godz. 12:22:
On 05/01/2014 10:30, Niels Thykier wrote:
On 2013-12-16 23:32, Robert Millan wrote:
On 15/12/2013 13:34, Niels Thykier wrote:
It would probably be good if you (i.e. the BSD porters) could start a
dialogue with the GNOME
On 05/01/2014 18:47, Edward Tomasz Napierała wrote:
We can help as porters but we can't maintain abandoned codepaths on our own.
I
think GDM upstream doesn't want to deal with this problem, so perhaps it is
better
if we accept that GDM is not a portable program anymore, and make it
brunomaxi...@openmailbox.org brunomaxi...@openmailbox.org (2014-01-05):
So, gnome-shell is working for you?
Can you please stop breaking threads? That's very annoying.
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
So, gnome-shell is working for you?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/3d26b6360471ca9a1164153b95fe5...@openmailbox.org
On 05/01/2014 23:05, brunomaxi...@openmailbox.org wrote:
So, gnome-shell is working for you?
Yes. It just needs a patch from the bug I mentioned.
Or you can edit config.js by hand and comment out the bluetooth /
network-manager
bits.
--
Robert Millan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Em 2014-01-05 20:34, Robert Millan escreveu:
On 05/01/2014 23:05, brunomaxi...@openmailbox.org wrote:
So, gnome-shell is working for you?
Yes. It just needs a patch from the bug I mentioned.
Or you can edit config.js by hand and comment out the bluetooth /
network-manager
bits.
I think the
On 05/01/2014 23:47, brunomaxi...@openmailbox.org wrote:
Em 2014-01-05 20:34, Robert Millan escreveu:
On 05/01/2014 23:05, brunomaxi...@openmailbox.org wrote:
So, gnome-shell is working for you?
Yes. It just needs a patch from the bug I mentioned.
Or you can edit config.js by hand and
On 15/12/2013 13:34, Niels Thykier wrote:
It would probably be good if you (i.e. the BSD porters) could start a
dialogue with the GNOME maintainers and figure out exactly where GNOME
is on kFreeBSD (vs. where it is supposed to be). Once that is sorted
out, please send the release team a
On 2013-11-30 11:46, Robert Millan wrote:
On 28/11/2013 21:49, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
On 28/11/13 20:04, Niels Thykier wrote:
kFreeBSD was a technology preview, and has not generated enough
user interest to bring in sufficient install base to continue
in this state.
We will review this
Gnome guys is not interested in help kFreeBSD because now Gnome is
Linux-only.
FreeBSD guys is porting Gnome 3.6 yet and Debian has 3.10 incoming.
I think is more feasible to bet on a Gnome-derivative DE like MATE
and/or Cinnamon because they are portable and they are interested in
being
On 15/12/13 12:34, Niels Thykier wrote:
Uhm I think we both may have misunderstood. Perhaps 'this state'
just means 'as technology preview'. I.e. normal QA requirements are
no longer waived because of preview status.
This is exactly what we meant; we intend to not do technology previews
for
On 28/11/2013 21:49, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
On 28/11/13 20:04, Niels Thykier wrote:
kFreeBSD was a technology preview, and has not generated enough user
interest to bring in sufficient install base to continue in this
state.
We will review this situation after 28th January 2014.
On 28/11/2013 21:49, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
On 28/11/13 20:04, Niels Thykier wrote:
kFreeBSD was a technology preview, and has not generated enough user
interest to bring in sufficient install base to continue in this
state.
We will review this situation after 28th January 2014.
On 28/11/13 20:04, Niels Thykier wrote:
kFreeBSD was a technology preview, and has not generated enough user
interest to bring in sufficient install base to continue in this
state.
We will review this situation after 28th January 2014.
Architectures still causing us concern at that point
24 matches
Mail list logo
