On 2021-07-21 12:05, Reco wrote:
As always, any attempt on improving Debian is welcome, regardless of
the
outcome. It's not like Debian needs an improvement IMO, but
nevertheless.
Personally I liked it when it was files and documentation.
The internet distribution of things is obviously
On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 07:36:09AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
The goalposts were moved in the text that was omitted up there. "Such a
role" refers to the hypothetical generic use of gnome-www-browser to
act as a virtual package (replacing x-www-browser) in all contexts,
not just the dependency
Hi.
On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 07:36:09AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 02:05:10PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 11:45:07AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 01:34:50PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > > > One would think that
On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 02:05:10PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 11:45:07AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 01:34:50PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > > One would think that gnome-www-browser virtual package would fit such
> > > role perfectly. I mean, if GNOME DE
On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 11:45:07AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 01:34:50PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > One would think that gnome-www-browser virtual package would fit such
> > role perfectly. I mean, if GNOME DE has some special requirement for a
> > browser, and Debian
5 matches
Mail list logo
