On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 09:14:31PM -0800, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am that person, and will happily take those packages. I will probably also
> port axkit to another HTTP library at some point.
My fault. I have already looked into them, and made packages. But as I
have
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 09:14:31PM -0800, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am that person, and will happily take those packages. I will probably also
> port axkit to another HTTP library at some point.
My fault. I have already looked into them, and made packages. But as I
have s
On Friday 26 December 2003 08:00 am, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote:
[snip]
> And libhttp-ghttp-perl is used by axkit which is ITA'ed. So maybe the
> person that ITA'ed axkit should also take these two packages.
I am that person, and will happily take those packages. I will probably also
port axkit
On Friday 26 December 2003 08:00 am, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote:
[snip]
> And libhttp-ghttp-perl is used by axkit which is ITA'ed. So maybe the
> person that ITA'ed axkit should also take these two packages.
I am that person, and will happily take those packages. I will probably also
port axkit
GCS ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:00:19AM -0600, Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And libhttp-ghttp-perl is used by axkit which is ITA'ed. So maybe the
> > person
> > that ITA'ed axkit should also take these two packages.
> Haven't seen that. Anywa
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:00:19AM -0600, Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And libhttp-ghttp-perl is used by axkit which is ITA'ed. So maybe the person
> that ITA'ed axkit should also take these two packages.
Haven't seen that. Anyway, I 'made' work on libghttp and
libhttp-ghttp
GCS ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:00:19AM -0600, Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > And libhttp-ghttp-perl is used by axkit which is ITA'ed. So maybe the person
> > that ITA'ed axkit should also take these two packages.
> Haven't seen that. Anyway, I
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:00:19AM -0600, Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> And libhttp-ghttp-perl is used by axkit which is ITA'ed. So maybe the person
> that ITA'ed axkit should also take these two packages.
Haven't seen that. Anyway, I 'made' work on libghttp and
libhttp-ghttp
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:45:09AM +0100, GCS wrote:
> Is it adviceable to take over libghttp? It seems the only one package
> needs it is libhttp-ghttp-perl and also orphaned. IMHO it would be
> better to remove them: gnome-vfs replaces libghttp and perl has other
> bindings to ht
GCS ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:00:19AM -0600, Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And libhttp-ghttp-perl is used by axkit which is ITA'ed. So maybe the
> > person
> > that ITA'ed axkit should also take these two packages.
> Can't be axkit patched t
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:45:09AM +0100, GCS wrote:
> Is it adviceable to take over libghttp? It seems the only one package
> needs it is libhttp-ghttp-perl and also orphaned. IMHO it would be
> better to remove them: gnome-vfs replaces libghttp and perl has other
> bindings to ht
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:00:19AM -0600, Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And libhttp-ghttp-perl is used by axkit which is ITA'ed. So maybe the person
> that ITA'ed axkit should also take these two packages.
Can't be axkit patched to use the newer method - gnome-vfs? As IMO it
Steve Kemp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:45:09AM +0100, GCS wrote:
>
> > Is it adviceable to take over libghttp? It seems the only one package
> > needs it is libhttp-ghttp-perl and also orphaned. IMHO it would be
> > better to remove them: gno
GCS ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:00:19AM -0600, Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > And libhttp-ghttp-perl is used by axkit which is ITA'ed. So maybe the person
> > that ITA'ed axkit should also take these two packages.
> Can't be axkit patched to use
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:00:19AM -0600, Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> And libhttp-ghttp-perl is used by axkit which is ITA'ed. So maybe the person
> that ITA'ed axkit should also take these two packages.
Can't be axkit patched to use the newer method - gnome-vfs? As IMO it
Steve Kemp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:45:09AM +0100, GCS wrote:
>
> > Is it adviceable to take over libghttp? It seems the only one package
> > needs it is libhttp-ghttp-perl and also orphaned. IMHO it would be
> > better to remove them: gno
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:45:09AM +0100, GCS wrote:
> Is it adviceable to take over libghttp? It seems the only one package
> needs it is libhttp-ghttp-perl and also orphaned. IMHO it would be
> better to remove them: gnome-vfs replaces libghttp and perl has other
> bindings t
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 10:45:09AM +0100, GCS wrote:
> Is it adviceable to take over libghttp? It seems the only one package
> needs it is libhttp-ghttp-perl and also orphaned. IMHO it would be
> better to remove them: gnome-vfs replaces libghttp and perl has other
> bindings t
Hi,
Is it adviceable to take over libghttp? It seems the only one package
needs it is libhttp-ghttp-perl and also orphaned. IMHO it would be
better to remove them: gnome-vfs replaces libghttp and perl has other
bindings to http usage.
Cheers,
GCS
Hi,
Is it adviceable to take over libghttp? It seems the only one package
needs it is libhttp-ghttp-perl and also orphaned. IMHO it would be
better to remove them: gnome-vfs replaces libghttp and perl has other
bindings to http usage.
Cheers,
GCS
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
20 matches
Mail list logo
