On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 21:20:49 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>2. Synaptic not really is an apt-get front-end, e.g. packages hold by
>Synaptic aren't hold for apt-get and packages hold by apt-get aren't
>hold by Synaptic.
On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 14:02:43 -0400, lukefro...@hushmail.com wrote:
>In my work which includes manual updates and excluding packages with
>problem newer versions Synaptic in mandatory. Anytime I install
>Ubuntu, Mint, or Debian anywhere it's something I always install if
>not already present.
It's
Go ahead and add the packages but thoroughly check for incompatibility
issues between versions and/or other various bugs inside releases of the
application(s).
Currently I see no problems that may emerge in the near or distant future,
Audacious should be fine but keep a close eye on Shotwell and
On 2016-04-02 19:18, Len Ovens wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Apr 2016, Len Ovens wrote:
>
>> Hmm, commit 1445 comment "Removed Shotwell." I didn't do a very good
>> job. :P
>
> Further looking finds:
> https://lists.launchpad.net/ubuntustudio-dev/msg00586.html
> Which gives the reason why it was removed.
>
On 2016-04-03 13:24, Jimmy Sjölund wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 18:57, Len Ovens <'l...@ovenwerks.net'> wrote:
>> On Sat, 2 Apr 2016, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
>>
>> > I think all DEs have a media player that comes with the DE. So, I don't
>> > see why audacious absolutely needs to be included.
>>
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 18:57, Len Ovens <'l...@ovenwerks.net'> wrote:
On Sat, 2 Apr 2016, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
> I think all DEs have a media player that comes with the DE. So, I don't
> see why audacious absolutely needs to be included.
> Is Shotwell intresting for graphics?
I think we removed
Thanks guys,
On 04/02/2016 07:18 PM, Len Ovens wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Apr 2016, Len Ovens wrote:
>
>> Hmm, commit 1445 comment "Removed Shotwell." I didn't do a very good
>> job. :P
>
> Further looking finds:
> https://lists.launchpad.net/ubuntustudio-dev/msg00586.html
> Which gives the reason why
On Sat, 2 Apr 2016, Len Ovens wrote:
Hmm, commit 1445 comment "Removed Shotwell." I didn't do a very good job. :P
Further looking finds:
https://lists.launchpad.net/ubuntustudio-dev/msg00586.html
Which gives the reason why it was removed.
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
--
On Sat, 2 Apr 2016, Len Ovens wrote:
On Sat, 2 Apr 2016, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
I think all DEs have a media player that comes with the DE. So, I don't
see why audacious absolutely needs to be included.
Is Shotwell intresting for graphics?
I think we removed shotwell on purpose a cycle or two
On Sat, 2 Apr 2016, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
I think all DEs have a media player that comes with the DE. So, I don't
see why audacious absolutely needs to be included.
Is Shotwell intresting for graphics?
I think we removed shotwell on purpose a cycle or two ago. It may have
been a (temporary) bug
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016, at 05:46 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Prompted by a comment by Len on IRC (about Audacious), I did a quick
> check for obvious packages that might have dropped of our DVD without a
> conscious action.
>
> When producing the Package QA Tracker, I prioritised the Test
On Sat, 2 Apr 2016, Ross Gammon wrote:
Prompted by a comment by Len on IRC (about Audacious), I did a quick
check for obvious packages that might have dropped of our DVD without a
conscious action.
When producing the Package QA Tracker, I prioritised the Test Cases
based on what was in our
12 matches
Mail list logo
