Surely, after 014.11 would come 014.100? So it's not limited to three.
Also, isn't it a little odd to mix octal and binary? Maybe
014.1...014.7, 014.10, etc...
Carlo Calica wrote:
On 3/19/08, Lucas C. Villa Real<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Right. I'm ok with 014.1. Or maybe 014.01, then
Just a thought: have you considered using Git for SVN access instead of
SVK? I've used Git with our SVN repos at work for a while now, and I'd
highly recommend it.
Paul
Jonas Karlsson wrote:
> Getting svk to play nicely forced me to revise things with how Perl
> was configured. I was annoyed
Hisham Muhammad wrote:
> According to the zsh manual, /etc/zprofile is for login shells only.
> Not sure if that would be the ideal behavior -- I may be mistaken
> here, but I got used to have variables updated when I open a new
> terminal, rather than having to logout and login again.
>
You
Hello,
I've just discovered that on my system (013), all the default
environment variables are being set from zshrc, which will only be
executed if the shell is interactive. Maybe I'm stupidly missing
something, but shouldn't that be in zprofile, so that they are defined
only for login shells?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is exactly the same as setting up a ChrootCompile environment and
> running a shell inside it instead of Compile.
That's very interesting; I'd like to give that a go. Do you think you
could give an example? I haven't had the opportunity to do much with
ChrootComp
Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> You should check out the ROX desktop environment. It uses the idea of
> AppDirs. And there's a lot of apps out there that can be converted
> easily into appdirs, even though there's also a lot apps that can't
> because they get hardcoded paths in them when compiled..
I
mpb wrote:
> How does Compile not already work for both root and non-root users?
>
It works fine, but it's not completely "safe". One of the problems
Recipes and Packages face is the dependency list. ChrootCompile is
designed to use an isolated environment so that we can be sure that the
rec
mpb wrote:
> The "chroot" system call fails when run as non-root.
>
> However, you could make an suid wrapper just for ChrootCompile. You
> would need root access to set the wrapper up, be thereafter non-root
> users could run ChrootCompile.
>
Yes, that sounds good. Would there be problems i
Hisham Muhammad wrote:
> Yes, that's the plan. It's a unionfs-style solution, but not using
> unionfs directly because it doesn't scale too well for hundreds of
> layers (it's just not what it was designed for) and we have some other
> stuff in mind related to versioning beyond just merging layers.
MLA-Gobo wrote:
> On Friday 27 July 2007 13:44, Paul Dann wrote:
>
>> My thoughts
>> particularly lie with programs being re-locatable (ie not necessarily in
>> the /Programs dir).
>>
> Out of curiosity, what do you see as the advantage for this?
>
Hi guys,
Sorry to gatecrash the dev list here. I'm hoping to start really
getting my teeth into the problem of Linux usability, which is the
number one issue that has kept me from switching completely to Linux as
a desktop system for years. I'm biting the bullet now, however, and
ready to get
11 matches
Mail list logo
