]] Eugene Gorodinsky
| I also think some abstraction from the actual filesystem is a good
| idea. For example currently the only way to install a lib in a
| directory other than the one it was intended for is by using a hack
| that would look at the directory of a file and move it somewhere. It
2009/8/1 Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no:
]] Eugene Gorodinsky
| I also think some abstraction from the actual filesystem is a good
| idea. For example currently the only way to install a lib in a
| directory other than the one it was intended for is by using a hack
| that would look at the
Hi all
I've read the debian news announcement today
(http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090730). What got me very
interested was the part about a new package format (in my oppinion
this area can be vastly improved, and I'm interested in contributing).
Searching the list archives I was unable
Eugene Gorodinsky e.gorodin...@gmail.com wrote:
I've read the debian news announcement today
(http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090730). What got me very
interested was the part about a new package format (in my oppinion
this area can be vastly improved, and I'm interested in contributing
Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
Hi all
I've read the debian news announcement today
(http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090730). What got me very
interested was the part about a new package format
There are two changes: one about the source package format
(a true format change) and about binary
2009/7/31 Giacomo A. Catenazzi c...@debian.org:
Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
Hi all
I've read the debian news announcement today
(http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090730). What got me very
interested was the part about a new package format
There are two changes: one about the source package
Eugene Gorodinsky e.gorodin...@gmail.com wrote:
On windows a program may contain some optional components, which you
can choose at install time. This approach (I mean having some main
package and some required and some optional subpackages inside it) is
quite user-friendly. Neither dpkg nor
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 03:32:43PM +0300, Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
On windows a program may contain some optional components, which you
can choose at install time. This approach (I mean having some main
package and some required and some optional subpackages inside it) is
quite user-friendly.
Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
2009/7/31 Giacomo A. Catenazzi c...@debian.org:
Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
(in my oppinion
this area can be vastly improved, and I'm interested in contributing).
What are the problems of actual format?
For one the dependencies are specified as actual packages, rather
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi,
Am Fr den 31. Jul 2009 um 13:32 schrieb Eugene Gorodinsky:
Since programs usually store their settings in the user's home
directory, that aren't deleted when the program is uninstalled the
user's home directory becomes a mess. I'm not sure
Hello.
This may not be relevant in here, but I felt the need to ask.
There's any plan of supporting another format - without breaking
compatibility, I mean supporting - besides the RFC one?
I think YAML would be a good one.
IMHO there is stuff that could be somehow automated, then reviewed, but
2009/7/31 Giacomo A. Catenazzi c...@debian.org:
Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
2009/7/31 Giacomo A. Catenazzi c...@debian.org:
Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
(in my oppinion
this area can be vastly improved, and I'm interested in contributing).
What are the problems of actual format?
For one the
Klaus Ethgen kl...@ethgen.de writes:
Hi,
Am Fr den 31. Jul 2009 um 13:32 schrieb Eugene Gorodinsky:
Since programs usually store their settings in the user's home
directory, that aren't deleted when the program is uninstalled the
user's home directory becomes a mess. I'm not sure if it's
Adrian Perez adrianperez@gmail.com writes:
This may not be relevant in here, but I felt the need to ask.
There's any plan of supporting another format - without breaking
compatibility, I mean supporting - besides the RFC one?
There isn't any plan that I'm aware of.
I think YAML would be
Le Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 03:32:43PM +0300, Eugene Gorodinsky a écrit :
Currently debian policy is to have a .desktop file for each GUI
program. What would be better, IMHO, is having some sort of
abstraction, so that the package manager itself would create a
.desktop file entry, given an icon
After getting pgp up and running, I only had to try dpkg-buildpackage
about 4 times before I got it right. (That's actually very easy) At each
step of the way the errors were informative enough to get me down the
road.
I got several errors about the failure of getpwd to return a path.
Diff -u
From: Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I got several errors about the failure of getpwd to return a path.
One of the directories above the current directory is not readable?
Bruce
On Wed, 4 Sep 1996, Bruce Perens wrote:
From: Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I got several errors about the failure of getpwd to return a path.
One of the directories above the current directory is not readable?
By root? Pwd works ok. I'll keep an eye out. Next time I see these errors,
18 matches
Mail list logo
