Hi,
My name is Nicolas Jager, I'm working on the Ring project (https://ring.cx/) at
Savoir Faire Linux.
Ring is a secure and distributed voice, video and chat communication platform
that requires no centralized server and leaves the power of privacy in the
hands of the user.
We want to make
On 16.03.2016 11:52, Martin Koniczek wrote:
> Hello Xenial Team,
>
> recent Areca RAID controllers, e.g. ARC-1882ix-24, still have severe
> issues with the arcmsr driver version v1.30.00.04-20140919 (either
> access to the RAID devices is lost right away, or after hours or days,
> usually
I opted for the locally-built static and patched QT5.
The package builds properly with the PPA backported (to precise) stuff.
I've some doubts about the clean-up step... If somebody can review my
code, it would be nice.
My PPA with dependencies:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 13:42:01 +0100, Colin Law wrote:
>On 31 March 2016 at 12:47, Ralf Mardorf
>wrote:
>> ...
>> Does any of the bloatware desktop environments terminal emulations
>> auto-wrap lines, if you resize the window? In more than ten years
>> that I'm using
On 31 March 2016 at 12:47, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> ...
> Does any of the bloatware desktop environments terminal emulations
> auto-wrap lines, if you resize the window? In more than ten years
> that I'm using Linux, they were unable to support this.
Do you mean in the
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 12:10:08 +0200, Xen wrote:
>Tom H schreef op 31-03-16 10:38:
>> The only way to push for a change is to file an RFE bug with
>> upstream.
>
>Lots of people give up before they even try.
Please provide evidences for this claim. Did you even try?
Assumed you want to know if
Tom H schreef op 31-03-16 10:38:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Xen wrote:
>> Colin Law schreef op 28-03-2016 18:38:
>>> Are these not issues for upstream Nautilus developers to consider
>>> rather than Ubuntu?
>> The point is really that if people "downstream" *care*
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 04:20:15 +0200, Tom H wrote:
>> If you add "nofail" to an fstab entry's options, the generated mount
>> unit "wants" local-fs.target or remote-fs.target and boot won't fail
>> if it fails.
>
>
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Xen wrote:
> Colin Law schreef op 28-03-2016 18:38:
>>
>> Are these not issues for upstream Nautilus developers to consider
>> rather than Ubuntu?
>
> The point is really that if people "downstream" *care* their voice becomes
> stronger