Michal Kurgan wrote:
Recently new firefox-2.0 was released.
I (and probably many other users) am interested when this new version would
be unmasked and stabilized. If there are any problems, what are they and what
to expect if i would force installation now? Is there any roadmap or timeline
On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 01:01:50 -0600
Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did you try, maybe, looking in bugzilla?
Yes.
--
Michal Kurgan
http://dev.gentoo.org/~moloh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
www.gentoo-sunrise.org seems to be down so I have put qadeps here:
http://dev.gentooexperimental.org/~peper/scripts/
--
Piotr Jaroszyński
Gentoo Developer
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Greetings users and developers.
I would like to remind you that next Saturday, the 4'th, is our monthly
Bugday!
Therefore this is your invitation to show up in #Gentoo-Bugs on
irc.freenode.net to hang out with fellow bug hunters and developers and
help out with making Gentoo an even better
I'm using the -bin version and it seems to be working fine.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sunday 29 October 2006 03:41, Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
- Checks whether runtime deps of installed package are all set. The check
is going LEVEL-deep, where LEVEL is user specified. Uses
checkdeps.rb (great betelgeuse's script) to determine needed rdeps.
qlist ${CPV} | scanelf -L
Yet another last rites. Toxine was added to portage as a CLI frontend for
xine, but it always was below the optimal status for Gentoo. I tried to
contact upstream trying to improve the situation, but they didn't answer me,
and they didn't release anything new since then. For this reason, it
On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 19:54:10 +0200 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Yet another last rites. Toxine was added to portage as a CLI frontend
| for xine, but it always was below the optimal status for Gentoo. I
| tried to contact upstream trying to improve the situation, but they
|
On Sunday 29 October 2006 19:07, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
What specifically is wrong with it? I've been using it because it's the
only non-dep-heavy thing that can play my Carl Orff audio DVD.
Unneeded automagic dependencies, unresponsive upstream, and a few crashes I
was able to reproduce with
On Monday 23 October 2006 00:44, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
I've masked the xmms useflag and the following packages:
xfce-extra/xfce4-xmms
xfce-extra/xfce4-xmms-controller
These two were not depending on xmms but won't build without it, also masked
pending removal.
--
Diego Flameeyes
On 10/28/06, Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I'd go further and question the whole herd concept.
It also gives users the impression that there is an entire team of
people maintaining a package,when in fact it might be just one or two
people.
-Richard
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Michal Kurgan wrote:
Hello!
Recently new firefox-2.0 was released.
I (and probably many other users) am interested when this new version would
be unmasked and stabilized. If there are any problems, what are they and what
to expect if i would force installation now? Is there any roadmap or
The desktop-wm herd is understaffed and has a bunch of dead packages
lying around which no one wants to maintain. I tried to give a valid
alternative for all of the packages I want removed. At first glance, it
seems like all of the following packages also have a dead upstream.
x11-wm/aewm++ --
games-action/phobiaiii, media-libs/allegttf, and games-strategy/magnant
have been masked for removal. Details in package.mask and bugs.
Michael Sterrett
-Mr. Bones.-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=150431
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=136513
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi All,
Apparently its been too long since I've sent one of these out, as people
are starting to slip up and break the tree again.
Please triple check what you want to commit and verify that you don't do
any of the following (which are
On Sun, 2006-10-29 at 19:15 -0800, David Shakaryan wrote:
The desktop-wm herd is understaffed and has a bunch of dead packages
lying around which no one wants to maintain. I tried to give a valid
alternative for all of the packages I want removed. At first glance, it
seems like all of the
Luis Medinas wrote:
Pwm is a different wm than ion but they are both provided on the same
tarball so why remove pwm ? Are you trying to add a USE for ion to
provide pwm ?
Hrm... After a quick glance at the ebuilds and distfiles, it seems like
they aren't using the same tarball. Also, the PWM
On Sun, 2006-10-29 at 19:57 -0800, David Shakaryan wrote:
Luis Medinas wrote:
Pwm is a different wm than ion but they are both provided on the same
tarball so why remove pwm ? Are you trying to add a USE for ion to
provide pwm ?
Hrm... After a quick glance at the ebuilds and distfiles,
On Sun, Oct 29, 2006 at 07:15:01PM -0800, David Shakaryan wrote:
The desktop-wm herd is understaffed and has a bunch of dead packages
lying around which no one wants to maintain. I tried to give a valid
alternative for all of the packages I want removed. At first glance, it
seems like all of
Harald van Dijk wrote:
On Sun, Oct 29, 2006 at 07:15:01PM -0800, David Shakaryan wrote:
The desktop-wm herd is understaffed and has a bunch of dead packages
lying around which no one wants to maintain. I tried to give a valid
alternative for all of the packages I want removed. At first glance,
Jason Wever ha scritto:
Hi All,
Apparently its been too long since I've sent one of these out, as people
are starting to slip up and break the tree again.
Please triple check what you want to commit and verify that you don't do
any of the following (which are punishable by death):
1)
21 matches
Mail list logo
