Robert G. Werner wrote:
Just could you include a note in the README or somewhere detailing
what we need to download and how to install it.
Yes, I guess there should be a few lines.
/Kim
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorial
Ben Rockwood wrote:
Sounds great Kim. I haven't check, have the Makefiles been updated
to make dist without all the cruft?
I think auto* and RPM specs are updated and working in the e16/e as well
as in the new edox-data and theme directories.
And are you planning a pre- release of 16.7 or just goi
Kim Woelders wrote:
Kim Woelders wrote:
Hi,
I have made a test with splitting up the E16 distribution.
I rearranged the directories:
The WM, dox, eesh, and epp, mostly in the usual places
e16/e
e16/e/config (was e16/e/src/themes/config)
e16/e/dox
e16/e/eesh
...
e16/e/src
Moved the dox data, i.
Kim Woelders wrote:
[snip]
No objections.
Just could you include a note in the README or somewhere detailing
what we need to download and how to install it.
Must say, I've enjoyed your efforts to keep e16 up to date. Not only
are bugs getting fixed but I've appreciated your ready willingness
Kim Woelders wrote:
Hi,
I have made a test with splitting up the E16 distribution.
I rearranged the directories:
The WM, dox, eesh, and epp, mostly in the usual places
e16/e
e16/e/config (was e16/e/src/themes/config)
e16/e/dox
e16/e/eesh
...
e16/e/src
Moved the dox data, i.e. the documentation p
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:47:41 +0100 Kim Woelders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled:
> Hi,
>
> I have made a test with splitting up the E16 distribution.
>
> I rearranged the directories:
>
> The WM, dox, eesh, and epp, mostly in the usual places
> e16/e
> e16/e/config (wa
On Saturday, 06 March 2004, at 08:48:28 (+0100),
Kim Woelders wrote:
> I think we could be a bit pragmatic about the name of a program that
> is probably never ever called explicitly.
Hrmph. You're no fun. :-P
> Actually, I think it should be moved to $EROOT/bin/ (e.g.
> /usr/share/enlightenmen
On Saturday 06 March 2004 02:48 am, Kim Woelders wrote:
> Actually, I think it should be moved to $EROOT/bin/ (e.g.
> /usr/share/enlightenment/bin/) together with epp. Then it wouldn't have
> to be renamed.
generally putting arch-specific binary data in /usr/share is frowned upon ...
moving it to
Michael Jennings wrote:
On Friday, 05 March 2004, at 19:59:23 (-0500),
Mike Frysinger wrote:
i dont know how other people feel but there any chance we could change 'dox'
to 'edox' ?
i had to do so in Gentoo due to the fact it was clobbering the dox package,
http://dox.berlios.de/ ...
E had "do
On Thursday 04 March 2004 06:47 pm, Kim Woelders wrote:
> Is there any reason not to go ahead and do this?
> Is there a better way (names, directory layout, ...)?
> Comments?
i dont know how other people feel but there any chance we could change 'dox'
to 'edox' ?
i had to do so in Gentoo due to t
On Friday, 05 March 2004, at 19:59:23 (-0500),
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i dont know how other people feel but there any chance we could change 'dox'
> to 'edox' ?
> i had to do so in Gentoo due to the fact it was clobbering the dox package,
> http://dox.berlios.de/ ...
E had "dox" long before th
On Thursday 04 March 2004 06:47 pm, Kim Woelders wrote:
> Is there any reason not to go ahead and do this?
> Is there a better way (names, directory layout, ...)?
> Comments?
i dont know how other people feel but there any chance we could change 'dox'
to 'edox' ?
i had to do so in Gentoo due to t
KW> We had
KW> 11.9 Mbyte enlightenment-0.16.7.tar.gz
KW>
KW> The new packages are
KW> 1.6 Mbyte enlightenment-0.16.7.tar.gz (binaries are < 1 Mbyte)
Maybe this can be called enlightenment-base, as it does not include
docs etc.
KW> 2.1 Mbyte edox-docs-0.16.7.tar.gz
KW>
KW> 0.7 Mbyte e
13 matches
Mail list logo
