Proposal has been seconded by Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Edward> A bad idea.
I thought so too.
Edward> If they are both part of the same source package, just make it
Edward> multi-binary. If a2ps depends on ogonkify, make it depend on
Edward> ogonkify.
Upstream doesn't think splitting is such good idea.
Edward> If the two can not be spl
On Sat, 15 May, 1999, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> Soemone recenly announced an ITP ogonkify. Yes, this already exists, but is
> part of a2ps. Both the upstream authors of a2ps and of ogonkify are happy
> with that situation and don't feel strongly in favour of a distinct ogonkify
> package.
>
> So
Soemone recenly announced an ITP ogonkify. Yes, this already exists, but is
part of a2ps. Both the upstream authors of a2ps and of ogonkify are happy
with that situation and don't feel strongly in favour of a distinct ogonkify
package.
So it was suggest to create an empty ogonkify package (which
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Bug:
> > Title: utmp group proposal
> > Posted: 09 May 99
> > Proposer: Wichert Akkerman
> > Seconders: Branden Robinson, Joel Klecker, Ossama Othman, Raphael Hertzog,
> >Marco d'Itri, Joseph Carter
> > Status: discussion
> > Description:
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, May 14, 1999 at 05:11:25PM -0700, Chris Waters wrote:
> > I'm working on a proposal to handle this in a similar fashion to the
> > virtual package list, i.e. as a separate list we can change when
> > sufficient need is found. I've been slacking
Chris Waters wrote:
> > >Technical - technical stuff
>
> > Sorry, what goes in technical? most of Debian is quite technical.
>
> The heirarchy I copied verbatim from Joeyh's previous proposal, with
> the two minor modifications I mentioned. So, Joeyh is the one to
> ask. I hadn't notice
On Sat, 15 May, 1999, Chris Waters wrote:
> I've thought about that one myself, and I do like the idea, but there
> may be issues -- I'm not quite sure why some window managers have a
> separate section for things like exit and restart while others don't,
> and there may be reasons, so I'd like to
Chris Waters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here is the authoritative list of Debian's menu structure.
Note to self -- detabify list next time, so it doesn't look so funky
when quoted. :-)
Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I know you this is exactly the opposite of what you want, but there
> was another on of the suggestions that I think is quite important,
> and others would agree. The restart Window Manager option is
> currently the name of the current Window Manager in t
On Sat, 15 May, 1999, Chris Waters wrote:
> TWO: Create the menu_policy.txt file, using the text below. Note that
> the heirarchy is the one proposed by Joey Hess, with my suggestion of
> "Help", which he seconded, and someone else's suggestion of
> "Apps/Databases", which received a few seconds.
Package: debian-policy
Version: 2.5.1.0
Severity: wishlist
Ok, so maybe we need to make some changes to the menu heirarchy. But
that's not important now. Anyone who was holding his breath, waiting
for me to release a great restructuring of the menu heirarchy can just
stop. I'm not only NOT goin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Miquel van Smoorenburg) wrote:
>Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Joel Klecker wrote:
>>>The main problem is that 2.0 kernels do not support sigaltstack(),
>>>this causes such things as m4 to fail when run on a Linux 2.0 system
>>>if it was compiled on a glibc 2.1 s
On Fri, May 14, 1999 at 05:11:25PM -0700, Chris Waters wrote:
> > Has someone written the proposed changes to the menu hierarchy as cited
> > in the objection to this made by Wichert and others (incl. myself)?
>
> There are approximately a THOUSAND proposed changes, many of them
> contradictory, t
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Bug:
> > Title: moving the menu hierarchy into debian policy
> > Posted: 01 May 1999
> > Proposer: Chris Waters
> > Seconders: Joey Hess, Karl M. Hegbloom
> > Status: stalled
> > Description:
> > Identical to proposal #36051, with addition of top-leve
15 matches
Mail list logo
