Thomas Goirand wrote:
> I'm wondering, and you still didn't reply my question: what is the use
> of "st" in suckless-tools? Is it a binary called by the user, or barely
> just launched by a script?
Sorry, I missed your question. "st" is a program that people launch,
like xterm (in fact, it is an
On 07/04/2011 01:57 AM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 01:19 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 07/04/2011 12:15 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>> Or at least to add the Conflicts
>>> to swift to prevent immediate breakage?
>>
>> Yes, and this should be also put into suckless-tools unt
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> What other fix do you propose? I don't want to rename "st" if upstream
> calls it this way in swift upstream, and have a delta between Debian and
> Ubuntu. Are you proposing to rename "st" in suckless-tools? What would
> be the impact?
I was suggesting:
1) as a short-ter
On 07/04/2011 01:22 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 07/04/2011 12:15 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
>>> Would it not be possible to patch swift to rename the binary or put it
>>> somewhere outside of $PATH locally?
>>
>> Not until it also happens upstream. I'd rather maintai
On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 01:19 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 07/04/2011 12:15 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > Or at least to add the Conflicts
> > to swift to prevent immediate breakage?
>
> Yes, and this should be also put into suckless-tools until this is solved.
No, it shouldn't. Adding the C
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 07/04/2011 12:15 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Would it not be possible to patch swift to rename the binary or put it
>> somewhere outside of $PATH locally?
>
> Not until it also happens upstream. I'd rather maintain a Conflicts:
> flag rather than doing double work when
On 07/04/2011 12:15 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Would it not be possible to patch swift to rename the binary or put it
> somewhere outside of $PATH locally?
Not until it also happens upstream. I'd rather maintain a Conflicts:
flag rather than doing double work when upstream is already aware of th
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> This is a longterm project, so IMHO, you shouldn't have reassigned this
> issue. I see no way that I can solve it right now, so if the maintainers
> of suckless-tools could add a "Conflicts:" for the moment, that would be
> a good idea.
Such a Conflicts would violate Debia
On 07/03/2011 12:41 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> reassign 629998 swift 1.3.0-1
> tags 629998 + upstream
> retitle 629998 swift: error when installing with suckless-tools (st binary
> conflicts with "simple terminal")
> quit
>
> Hi Ralf,
>
> Ralf Treinen wrote:
>
>> dpkg: error processing /var/c
reassign 629998 swift 1.3.0-1
tags 629998 + upstream
retitle 629998 swift: error when installing with suckless-tools (st binary
conflicts with "simple terminal")
quit
Hi Ralf,
Ralf Treinen wrote:
> dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/swift_1.3.0-1_all.deb
> (--unpack):
> trying to
Package: swift,suckless-tools
Version: swift/1.3.0-1
Version: suckless-tools/38-1
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
Date: 2011-06-10
Architecture: amd64
Distribution: sid
Hi,
automatic installation tests of packages that share a file and at the
same time do
11 matches
Mail list logo
