On 2012-05-02, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I'm also not seeing GNOME applications as file type handlers in
> Akregator (KDE application). So I'm not sure this is even 'just' a
> problem for text-mode applications.
I just tried to install 'gedit' to test it, and I can nicely now set
gedit as a handler
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 15:30 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just would like to warm up this thread a bit because I wonder if a
> solution would be found in time for Wheezy release. It seems nobody
> really seems to care about those suggested scripts and we are breaking a
> certain amount
Hi,
I just would like to warm up this thread a bit because I wonder if a
solution would be found in time for Wheezy release. It seems nobody
really seems to care about those suggested scripts and we are breaking a
certain amount of programs if mailcap entries are dropped without any
replacement.
Dear Raphael,
thank you for your update on the status of this issue
> On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Giovanni Biscuolo wrote:
[...]
> Please see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=497779
OK thanks a lot for the link, now I understand very well what is
happening :-)
this bug is definetly l
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 05:44:57PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 29 février 2012 à 17:24 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> > I'd consider the "chance to write something which might probably work in
> > most cases" as a weak excuse to drop a solution that worked for years
> > and
Le mercredi 29 février 2012 à 17:24 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> I'd consider the "chance to write something which might probably work in
> most cases" as a weak excuse to drop a solution that worked for years
> and would continue working quite reasonable. I agree that duplication
> of code/d
On 2012-02-29, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 04:59:32PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> Russ Alberry gave some tentative spec for such a tool:
>> http://lists.debian.org/87k446oqzh@windlord.stanford.edu
> Quoting this mail:
>
>I think one has to make the
>assumption t
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 04:59:32PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Russ Alberry gave some tentative spec for such a tool:
> http://lists.debian.org/87k446oqzh@windlord.stanford.edu
Quoting this mail:
I think one has to make the
assumption that one can add %s after Exec in order to load
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Giovanni Biscuolo wrote:
> so the proposed solution is that *users* will maintain mime-support
> database by hand?
No.
> the idea not to maintain 2 files containing the same information is
> interesting and should be done with proper tools on maintainers side,
> not on users
hi all,
i'm having the same problem described on 31 Jan 2012 by Andreas Tille:
see, mutt and all other programs depending on mailcap are not able to
open PDF files with **evince**
please see Debian policy 9.7 about multimedia handlers:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s-mim
> And since, after seven months, nothing happened, it means no one is
> interested enough,
The conclusion seems rather hasty to me. I'm not able to write that script
but would gladly open pdf files from mutt.
As Adreas Tille, I would like to voice my astonishment by this decision to
intentionaly
Hello,
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 31 janvier 2012 à 21:51 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> > I agree that an automatic solution would be prefered. However, as long
> > as such someone does not stand up and write such a program removing
> > existing solutions is .
>
Josselin Mouette writes ("Re: Breaking programs because a not yet implemented
solution exists in theory (Was: Bug#658139: evince: missing mime entry)"):
> This is a blatant lack of knowledge of the current state of the
> distribution.
I'm afraid you are demonstrating you
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 12:27:40AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 19:11 +, brian m. carlson a écrit :
> > The mime-support solution is part of Policy. It is a perfectly working,
> > fully-implemented solution.
>
> This is a blatant lack of knowledge of the curr
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 19:11 +, brian m. carlson a écrit :
> The mime-support solution is part of Policy. It is a perfectly working,
> fully-implemented solution.
This is a blatant lack of knowledge of the current state of the
distribution.
> If you feel that it is obsolescent or
> ob
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 18:59 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 04:52:22PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > However, to prove your point you need to mention counter examples which
> > > are actually failing to use mime-support or are actually broken because
> > > of u
On 02.02.2012 20:11, brian m. carlson wrote:
> The mime-support solution is part of Policy. It is a perfectly working,
...
> As a package maintainer, you're going to have to support some things you
> don't like. If you hate natural alignment and think sparc is awful, you
Show us where mime-su
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 06:08:33PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 16:12 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > The correct approach it is not to unilaterally decide to do switch to
> > some other half-implemented system, remove support for the previously
> > working machiner
On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:08:33 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 16:12 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > The correct approach it is not to unilaterally decide to do switch to
> > some other half-implemented system, remove support for the previously
> > working machinery, an
Josselin Mouette writes ("Re: Breaking programs because a not yet implemented
solution exists in theory (Was: Bug#658139: evince: missing mime entry)"):
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 16:12 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > The correct approach it is not to unilaterally dec
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 04:52:22PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > However, to prove your point you need to mention counter examples which
> > are actually failing to use mime-support or are actually broken because
> > of using mime-support.
>
> Are you trying to troll, or do you actually not k
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 16:12 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> The correct approach it is not to unilaterally decide to do switch to
> some other half-implemented system, remove support for the previously
> working machinery, and demand that bug submitters write the
> compatibility code.
The cor
Josselin Mouette writes ("Re: Breaking programs because a not yet implemented
solution exists in theory (Was: Bug#658139: evince: missing mime entry)"):
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 15:51 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
> > The "issue" here (or at least at the dawn
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 16:43 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> > The policy
> > might claim it is the recommended way, but only a handful of programs,
> > such as mutt and lynx, actually make use of this information.
>
> Any reason you are leaving out those two programs (see, mc) which were
>
* Josselin Mouette [120202 16:23]:
> [the usual insults removed] The policy
> might claim it is the recommended way, but only a handful of programs,
> such as mutt and lynx, actually make use of this information.
Or programs like "see" or everything using it that wants to savely run
a program for
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 04:23:01PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>
> Claiming that the mime-support system actually works is stretching
> reality as much as a bone who just met Chuck Norris’ fist.
I fail to see a reason to fall back to polemics.
> The policy
> might claim it is the recommended
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 15:51 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
> The "issue" here (or at least at the dawn of this thread) is that some
> package maintainers have chosen to break something that used to work.
Claiming that the mime-support system actually works is stretching
reality as much a
On 12-02-02 at 03:32pm, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 02:14 +, Wookey a écrit :
> > It wasn't at all obvious that the actual reason was a conspiracy to
> > remove mime file support from evince. Now that I know about it, I'm
> > not very impressed. Andreas has already e
Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 02:14 +, Wookey a écrit :
> It wasn't at all obvious that the actual reason was a conspiracy to
> remove mime file support from evince. Now that I know about it, I'm
> not very impressed. Andreas has already expressed this annoyance so I
> won't say it again.
Being
+++ Andreas Tille [2012-02-01 09:56 +0100]:
> Hi Josselin,
>
> > To break such a chicken/egg circle, we
> > needed either to write the program ourselves, or to simply drop support
> > for the obsolete mime system.
>
> Somehow I missed an announcement that mime is obsolete and not supported
> in D
Hi Josselin,
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 09:29:46AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 31 janvier 2012 à 21:51 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> > I agree that an automatic solution would be prefered. However, as long
> > as such someone does not stand up and write such a program removing
> >
Le mardi 31 janvier 2012 à 21:51 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> I agree that an automatic solution would be prefered. However, as long
> as such someone does not stand up and write such a program removing
> existing solutions is .
The point is, no one will write such a program until we remove
Andreas Tille (31/01/2012):
> This is definitely not "wishlist" - but I do not like to play
> severity-changing pingpong.
Please avoid “To: debian-devel@” when you disagree with maintainers on
individual bugs; thanks already.
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
this problem concerns missing *.mime file which breaks other programs
like for instance see
$ see test.pdf
Error: no "view" mailcap rules found for type "application/pdf"
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 07:57:39PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> severity 658139 wishlist
> tags 658139 + wontfix
:-(
34 matches
Mail list logo
