On Wednesday 28 October 2009 02:28:43 James wrote:
PS, if one of you really smart guys figures out mass/parallel
upgrades, then I'd use that, even set up my own server
to keep it efficient. I'm not smart enough (not enough time
at current mental aptitude) to set all of that up, unless
I've edited your message when quoting it in order to meet my agenda.
On 28 Oct 2009, at 00:28, James wrote:
PS, if one of you really smart guys figures out mass/parallel
upgrades, then I'd use that, even set up my own server
to keep it efficient. I'm not smart enough (not enough time
at
Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon at gmail.com writes:
4.3.2 seems to work fine for most folk. These days it's X causing grief, not
KDE...
OK, so I keep the system locked down on X (that it is using) and just
deal with kde4 for now.
Pick the primary workstation and get that one right, either
Frank Steinmetzger Warp_7 at gmx.de writes:
aka how-to-update-many-machines-in-parallel
Another possibility would be to compile on one machine and then distribute
the
binary packages using --buildpkg and --usepkg. That would only work of course
if the hardware is identical and/or
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James wrote:
kde-meta is ideal for me. I thought it was going away?
Since kde(4)-meta is alive and well, that is my preferred
method. I hope when kde-meta goes away (?) there is a migration
plan? When this whole kde4 venture started for me (feb
5 matches
Mail list logo
