On 2011-05-17, at 09:39 , Alexander Hansen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 5/17/11 9:30 AM, Charles Lepple wrote:
>> On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Kevin Horton wrote:
>>> I'm looking for advice on the best way to deal with a change in sylpheed
>>> 3.1.1. Sylp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 5/17/11 9:30 AM, Charles Lepple wrote:
> On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Kevin Horton wrote:
>> I'm looking for advice on the best way to deal with a change in sylpheed
>> 3.1.1. Sylpheed is an X11 mail client.
>>
>> Up to now, user configuratio
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Kevin Horton wrote:
> I'm looking for advice on the best way to deal with a change in sylpheed
> 3.1.1. Sylpheed is an X11 mail client.
>
> Up to now, user configuration data has been stored in ~/.sylpheed-2.0. This
> has been changed to ~/Library/Application S
I'm looking for advice on the best way to deal with a change in sylpheed 3.1.1.
Sylpheed is an X11 mail client.
Up to now, user configuration data has been stored in ~/.sylpheed-2.0. This
has been changed to ~/Library/Application Support/Sylpheed in sylpheed 3.1.1,
but there are no provisions
Dear Fink community,
I compiled a KDE data analysis programme under the 10.4 (gcc-4.0.1)
tree using the same info file I used for 10.4-transitional (gcc-3.3).
It compiled well and starts ok. However, when I try to use it for
real work it crashes with the following log message. Any advice wo
Hi:
I am trying to put together a new version of the fink ccp4 package
(unstable/sci) and am having some problems.
I've written a shell script to install the program, and it works fine.
I then used this as the basis for updating my previous (functioning)
ccp4.info file, and I get a configure e
From Fink's point of view, which is the best advice to give average
fink-users, in order
to "prepare" for a smooth transition to the soon coming installation of
MacOS X 10.3 ?
Thanks and regards,
Pedro
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by
On Sat, 2003-03-01 at 21:08, David R. Morrison wrote:
> We gotta get you on the Fink team, Anthony... you understand the Debian
> tools better than we do!
Thanks ;-)
>
> So how does Debian handle the situation where two different pacakges want
> to provide executables and/or man pages with the s
We gotta get you on the Fink team, Anthony... you understand the Debian
tools better than we do!
So how does Debian handle the situation where two different pacakges want
to provide executables and/or man pages with the same name?
-- Dave
> Noo! That's not what alternatives is for. Its for
On Fri, 2003-02-28 at 07:03, David R. Morrison wrote:
> Fink has borrowed from Debian something called the "alternatives" system.
> If there are two packages which want to install files with the same name,
Noo! That's not what alternatives is for. Its for two packages that
provide the same (or
Fink has borrowed from Debian something called the "alternatives" system.
If there are two packages which want to install files with the same name,
both of them can use the alternatives system, which allows the two files
to coexist on the system and allows the user to select which one of the
files
I'm working on porting xscreensaver. Each saver module is actually a
stand-alone binary and has an associated .1 manpage, but the binaries are
installed in a private area (cf. $FINK/bin). The problem is that (at
least) one module has the same name as another binary already in Fink, and
so there is
12 matches
Mail list logo
