On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:18:29AM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> I just noticed foobillard 2.4 has been released, so I will update my
> packages sometime today.
They are up to date now:
deb http://www.xs4all.be/~gevaerts/debian/bin/i386 ./
deb http://www.xs4all.be/~gevaerts/debian/bin/powerpc ./
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:18:29AM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> I just noticed foobillard 2.4 has been released, so I will update my
> packages sometime today.
They are up to date now:
deb http://www.xs4all.be/~gevaerts/debian/bin/i386 ./
deb http://www.xs4all.be/~gevaerts/debian/bin/powerpc ./
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 02:31:54AM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote:
>
> Hi Frank,
>
>
> it's great that you're packaging foobillard. What kind of powerpc box do
> you have? In case it's one with a Radeon chip with an R100 core and a
> TCL unit, and you're using my dri-trunk packages,
I have an iboo
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 02:31:54AM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote:
>
> Hi Frank,
>
>
> it's great that you're packaging foobillard. What kind of powerpc box do
> you have? In case it's one with a Radeon chip with an R100 core and a
> TCL unit, and you're using my dri-trunk packages,
I have an iboo
Hi Frank,
it's great that you're packaging foobillard. What kind of powerpc box do
you have? In case it's one with a Radeon chip with an R100 core and a
TCL unit, and you're using my dri-trunk packages, you've probably
noticed the flickering artifacts with spheremap reflections. I wrote to
the u
Hi Frank,
it's great that you're packaging foobillard. What kind of powerpc box do
you have? In case it's one with a Radeon chip with an R100 core and a
TCL unit, and you're using my dri-trunk packages, you've probably
noticed the flickering artifacts with spheremap reflections. I wrote to
the u
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 08:12:20PM +0100, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Frank Gevaerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for
> > debian.
>
> Looks nice.
>
> > a foobillard goes to non-free, which would be a pity.
>
> And people who
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 08:12:20PM +0100, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Frank Gevaerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for
> > debian.
>
> Looks nice.
>
> > a foobillard goes to non-free, which would be a pity.
>
> And people who
Frank Gevaerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for
> debian.
Looks nice.
> a foobillard goes to non-free, which would be a pity.
And people who have ttf-larabie-* installed will have some fonts
double, which is also bad.
> b Th
Frank Gevaerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for
> debian.
Looks nice.
> a foobillard goes to non-free, which would be a pity.
And people who have ttf-larabie-* installed will have some fonts
double, which is also bad.
> b Th
On Thursday 09 January 2003 8:35 pm, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> Well, since the fonts are already packaged in non-free (ttf-larabie-*), I
> assumed this judgement to be valid.
Absolutely.. and this phrase confirms it.
> > 2. DESCRIPTION OF OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS.
> >
> > a) Do not alt
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 12:07:51PM -0800, Sam Powers wrote:
> It seems to me that the fonts included with foobilliard aren't _exactly_
> non-free, but perhaps debian-legal should look over the license to make a
> final decision on the DFSG-ness of the fonts; I might be wrong, but a
> cursory glance
It seems to me that the fonts included with foobilliard aren't _exactly_
non-free, but perhaps debian-legal should look over the license to make a
final decision on the DFSG-ness of the fonts; I might be wrong, but a
cursory glance over the README.FONTS file in foobilliard gives me the
feeling that
On Thursday 09 January 2003 8:35 pm, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> Well, since the fonts are already packaged in non-free (ttf-larabie-*), I
> assumed this judgement to be valid.
Absolutely.. and this phrase confirms it.
> > 2. DESCRIPTION OF OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS.
> >
> > a) Do not alt
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 12:07:51PM -0800, Sam Powers wrote:
> It seems to me that the fonts included with foobilliard aren't _exactly_
> non-free, but perhaps debian-legal should look over the license to make a
> final decision on the DFSG-ness of the fonts; I might be wrong, but a
> cursory glance
It seems to me that the fonts included with foobilliard aren't _exactly_
non-free, but perhaps debian-legal should look over the license to make a
final decision on the DFSG-ness of the fonts; I might be wrong, but a
cursory glance over the README.FONTS file in foobilliard gives me the
feeling that
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 08:38:09PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 09:25:50PM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> > This means that either :
> > a foobillard goes to non-free, which would be a pity.
> > b The fonts are removed from the package, which gets foobillard to
> >
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 08:38:09PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 09:25:50PM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> > This means that either :
> > a foobillard goes to non-free, which would be a pity.
> > b The fonts are removed from the package, which gets foobillard to
> >
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 09:25:50PM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> This means that either :
> a foobillard goes to non-free, which would be a pity.
> b The fonts are removed from the package, which gets foobillard to
> contrib, but with dependencies on ttf-larabie-straight and
> ttf-la
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 09:25:50PM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> This means that either :
> a foobillard goes to non-free, which would be a pity.
> b The fonts are removed from the package, which gets foobillard to
> contrib, but with dependencies on ttf-larabie-straight and
> ttf-la
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 08 Jan 2003 20:25, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for
> debian. I have the following problems :
[snip]
> Should I file an ITP bug?
Yes.
Paul Cupis
- --
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 08 Jan 2003 20:25, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for
> debian. I have the following problems :
[snip]
> Should I file an ITP bug?
Yes.
Paul Cupis
- --
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for
debian. I have the following problems :
- I am not a DD, so I will need a sponsor (or the package will have to
remain unofficial)
- foobillard is GPL, but is distributed with 3 non-free fonts (larabie).
This means that e
Hi,
I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for
debian. I have the following problems :
- I am not a DD, so I will need a sponsor (or the package will have to
remain unofficial)
- foobillard is GPL, but is distributed with 3 non-free fonts (larabie).
This means that e
24 matches
Mail list logo
