On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 5:10 PM, Martin Langhoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 8:33 PM, Martin Langhoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I meant to say is that all the good things we get from a bespoke
packaging format, we can get from rpm with a few conventions as to the
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Sayamindu Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does that work ?
How do we trust that the setup.py is not malicious? Part of what I am
suggesting when I talk about rpm files that have no %post/%pre etc
(and therefore can be installed with --no-scripts) is that we can
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 9:31 PM, Martin Langhoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Sayamindu Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does that work ?
How do we trust that the setup.py is not malicious? Part of what I am
suggesting when I talk about rpm files that have no
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Alexander Dupuy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
via fink, but it's worth remembering that translation packages are not 'by
definition noarch' - if the packages contain compiled gettext .mo files,
those files may be machine-specific. As noted in
Martin Langhoff wrote:
Using rpm or apt Sugar would getting a bit further away from Windows
(does cygwin carry either?) - a bit less so on OSX (where the fink
toolchain will probably work alright, specially with translation pkgs,
which are by definition noarch).
I don't think that this
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 8:33 PM, Martin Langhoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I meant to say is that all the good things we get from a bespoke
packaging format, we can get from rpm with a few conventions as to the
directories where things land.
A couple of additional notes from a private
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Sayamindu Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have been thinking of having a separate place in the filesystem for
_new_ translations, and using RPM to manage the installation and
upgradation of the new translations.
What is the downside of RPMs? If users edit
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Martin Langhoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Sayamindu Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have been thinking of having a separate place in the filesystem for
_new_ translations, and using RPM to manage the installation and
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 6:49 PM, C. Scott Ananian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fedora does not have a standard solution either, so I'm not sure
where you're going with this. We have to invent something. RPM is
not obviously the right solution.
So Fedora doesn't use rpm files for localization
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:26 PM, Martin Langhoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 6:49 PM, C. Scott Ananian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fedora does not have a standard solution either, so I'm not sure
where you're going with this. We have to invent something. RPM is
not obviously
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 7:34 PM, C. Scott Ananian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please re-read Sayamindu's original message. Thanks.
I don't find anything too special there. Perhaps I wasn't clear earlier.
What I meant to say is that all the good things we get from a bespoke
packaging format, we can
11 matches
Mail list logo
