On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 03:04:57PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
Why do you think that discussing problems with packages constitutes
whining? Are the developers now supposed to get feedback from the user
community by divination?
please go read your original post.
is that useful feedback or
Marc Espie [Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:30:28PM +0200] wrote:
It's because of gitk which is a repository browser (or so
http://git.or.cz/course/svn.html tells me). Annoying that there's no
git-no_x11 but them's the breaks.
Makes no sense. It's clearly a multi-package situation, not flavor.
MY APOLOGIES --- getting cross-eyed in my old age.
On 7/16/08, Tony Abernethy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted Unangst wrote:
anip
If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
I most certainly did not write
Ted Unangst wrote:
anip
If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
The parallel argument is that if any GUI tool has a command line
helper function, then that package is broken.
(Microsoft Windows still has a
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Tony Abernethy wrote:
Ted Unangst wrote:
On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on
X that should
**NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if
you're saying I
should be
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Ted Unangst wrote:
On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on X that should
**NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if you're saying I
should be installing X on a production server. NOT.
On 7/16/08, Tony Abernethy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted Unangst wrote:
anip
If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
I most certainly did not write that.
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Marco Peereboom wrote:
You could also use a less retarded source control system.
Not my choice, unfortunately, .. almost all of the Rails projects use GIT.
Lee
==
Leland V. Lammert[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chief
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Tony Abernethy wrote (to tedu@):
Out of curiosity, what happens when you install X but
answer no to the question about intending to RUN X?
... It would install all the C crap and not put startx
in rc, in
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Ted Unangst wrote:
On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on X that should
**NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if you're saying I
should be installing X on a production server. NOT.
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Tony Abernethy wrote:
Ted Unangst wrote:
anip
If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
The parallel argument is that if any GUI tool has a command line
helper function, then that
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 02:08:51PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Ted Unangst wrote:
On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on X that should
**NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if
On 7/16/08, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It was mentioned earlier that there is a non-X version in ports - why
don't the maintainers FIX the problem and make that the package instead of
all this bitching about why people compain about broken packages?
The problem was fixed months
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:08 PM, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That doesn't fix the main problem, however, .. a version control package
should NOT be in packages as an X flavor.
It was mentioned earlier that there is a non-X version in ports - why
don't the maintainers FIX the
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of L. V. Lammert
It was mentioned earlier that there is a non-X version in ports - why
don't the maintainers FIX the problem and make that the package
instead
of
all this bitching about why people compain about broken packages?
At 09:54 PM 7/16/2008 +0200, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:08 PM, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That doesn't fix the main problem, however, .. a version control package
should NOT be in packages as an X flavor.
It was mentioned earlier that there is a non-X version
At 09:54 PM 7/16/2008 +0200, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:08 PM, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That doesn't fix the main problem, however, .. a version control package
should NOT be in packages as an X flavor.
It was mentioned earlier that there is a non-X version
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 03:42:15PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
I always do my homework,
Is the following mindless word-drool about 'put startx into rc'
an example of how you do your homework?
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Tony Abernethy
At 05:23 PM 7/16/2008 -0400, William Boshuck wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 03:42:15PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
I always do my homework,
Is the following mindless word-drool about 'put startx into rc'
an example of how you do your homework?
Yep, .. though I relied on another post instead
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
You don't get it, so I'll explain it.
There are a lot of packages in OpenBSD. We can spend time
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Marc Espie wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
You don't get it, so I'll explain it.
Yes, I DO get it,
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Marc Espie wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
You
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 8:41 PM, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Marc Espie wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package
is
broken (which, I believe, is the case
At 10:52 AM 7/17/2008 +1000, Damien Miller wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, L. V. Lammert wrote:
You know, if you spent 1/10th of the effort that you have wasted ranting
on learning the ports system then you could have modified the port to
place the X11-requiring bits in a subpackage already. It
At 09:03 PM 7/16/2008 -0400, bofh wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 8:41 PM, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Flavors is what enables the no_x11 option. What do you not understand about
packages? If CVS requires X, then it requires X. You need to understand
OpenBSD's philosophy. Why are
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 04:54:34PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
At 05:23 PM 7/16/2008 -0400, William Boshuck wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 03:42:15PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
I always do my homework,
Is the following mindless word-drool about 'put startx into rc'
an example of how you
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:18 PM, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for making my point! There's no good reason why git should require
X, so the package version should not.
Now I understand why there's so many issues in the world. Love you way you
deliberately misinterpret my
Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do with git??
Can't install tk-8.4.7p1: lib not found X11.11.1
Is this a broken dependency or . . . ? Seems like git installed cleanly on 4.2.
Lee
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
with git??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tk_%28framework%29
Can't install tk-8.4.7p1: lib not found X11.11.1
Is this a broken dependency
No.
or . . . ?
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Will Maier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
with git??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tk_%28framework%29
Can't install tk-8.4.7p1: lib
On 2008-07-15, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do with git??
ports@, dammit.
Can't install tk-8.4.7p1: lib not found X11.11.1
Is this a broken dependency or . . . ? Seems like git installed cleanly on
4.2.
And check
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:52:16PM -0400, Nick Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Will Maier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
with git??
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Will Maier wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
with git??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tk_%28framework%29
Can't install tk-8.4.7p1: lib not found X11.11.1
Is
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 05:51:04PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Will Maier wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
with git??
On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on X that should
**NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if you're saying I
should be installing X on a production server. NOT.
tar zxf X
pkg_add crap
rm -r /usr/X11R6
Ted Unangst wrote:
On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on
X that should
**NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if
you're saying I
should be installing X on a production server. NOT.
tar zxf X
On 7/15/08, Tony Abernethy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted Unangst wrote:
tar zxf X
pkg_add crap
rm -r /usr/X11R6
Lovely.
Out of curiosity, what happens when you install X but answer
no to the question about intending to RUN X?
exactly the same thing that happens when you answer
You could also use a less retarded source control system.
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 05:51:04PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Will Maier wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
No, I want it *MY* way, all the time! Oh, wait, I'm not talking about
a burger or my own distro, am I?
On 7/15/08, Marco Peereboom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You could also use a less retarded source control system.
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 05:51:04PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Tue, 15
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 08:11:37PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
On 7/15/08, Tony Abernethy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted Unangst wrote:
tar zxf X
pkg_add crap
rm -r /usr/X11R6
Lovely.
Out of curiosity, what happens when you install X but answer
no to the question about
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Ted Unangst wrote:
try it. install x, then resist the urge to type startx. can you do
it? can you ignore the siren song, or do your fingers fly forth of
their own volition?
I have it on good authority that plugging one's ears with wax helps.
-d
On 7/15/08, Darrin Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Out of curiosity, what happens when you install X but answer
no to the question about intending to RUN X?
exactly the same thing that happens when you answer yes.
Doesn't that question effect the machdep.allowaperature sysctl?
42 matches
Mail list logo
