On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 08:42:39PM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:
Is motor generally useful, or is it just used as an internal component of
mx? (not a good name itself, BTW) If the latter, consider putting motor
into /usr/lib/mx.
It is a generally used pr
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 08:42:39PM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:
> >Is motor generally useful, or is it just used as an internal component of
> >mx? (not a good name itself, BTW) If the latter, consider putting motor
> >into /usr/lib/mx.
>
> It is a generally used program for data acquisition and con
On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Matthew Palmer wrote:
Is motor generally useful, or is it just used as an internal component of
mx? (not a good name itself, BTW) If the latter, consider putting motor
into /usr/lib/mx.
It is a generally used program for data acquisition and control. The name
motor is
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 06:14:39PM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:
> We are working on package of a data acquisition & control system (called
> "mx") which has an executable called "motor" which has a completely
> different function (it is a java editor). This executable conflicts with
> an executabl
On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Adeodato Simó wrote:
procedure is described in the first paragraph of Policy §10.1.
Ah, that's where it was. I was looking for it but not thoroughly enough,
I suppose.
Carlo
--
Carlo U. Segre -- Professor of Physics
Associate Dean for Special Projects, Graduate College
* Carlo Segre [Thu, 08 Jun 2006 18:14:39 -0500]:
> Hello All:
Hey Carlo.
> The only way I can see to handle this is to make our package (called
> mx1.2) conflict with the "motor" package
This is not allowed by policy.
> or just ignore the entire thing and let the last package installed
> with
6 matches
Mail list logo
