On 2008-07-10, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 01:11:54PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
wrote:
> > On 2008-07-09, Chris Waters wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:05:11AM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
> >
> > wrote:
> > > >
On 2008-07-10, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 09:40:53AM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
wrote:
> > > There's also the ?package field (pretty basic, doesn't always match
> > > the enclosing package)
> >
> > TryExec in .desktop, though
On 2008-07-09, Chris Waters wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 01:11:54PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
wrote:
> > Anybody know of any other concrete worries?
>
> There's also the ?package field (pretty basic, doesn't always match
> the enclosing package)
TryE
On 2008-07-09, Chris Waters wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:05:11AM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
wrote:
> > -> AFAIK there's no fundamental reason why Debian couldn't switch
> > from menu to .desktop to specify the desktop entries (aside from the
> >
menu file
that can't be specified in a .desktop file (though I haven't sat
[1] http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/desktop-entry-
spec-1.0.html
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On 2008-06-09, Russ Allbery wrote:
> "cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On 2008-06-06, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> This proposal asks for an /etc/profile.d, the contents of which would
> >> be sourced by every shell and which coul
east 2 years or so, though granted that they're
all less commonly used shells)
Could it be abused, contrary to section 9.9? Yes, but:
- then it would be an RC-bug
- it's unlikely (given that this exact mechanism has not caused problems
when provided elsewhere)
--
Cheer
On Wednesday 03 May 2006 22:56, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 12:53:01PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
wrote:
> > On Sunday 23 April 2006 20:26, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > Jari Aalto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > What we need and wh
of the devcamp meeting
[2] for the same reason that desktop-profiles needs it, not unlogical as the
latter is a generalization of the approach used by debian-edu-config to
customize the KDE-configuration, plans are to migrate debian-edu-config
to desktop-profiles for the etch version of debian-edu.
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis):
pgpXYXiEz12R4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Monday 30 January 2006 13:17, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> > On Sunday 29 January 2006 02:36, Santiago Vila wrote:
> I object to b) being in policy. The file /etc/profile is not a file
> which two or more packages need to be
configuration file) for random use by any package, especially use cases
that are explicitly forbidden by policy, it merely opens it up for
configuration packages as used by CDD's.
[1] desktop-profiles, user-de, user-es, user-euro-es, and sysprofile are
the ones I know of
--
Cheers, co
desktop-profiles package
provides a way for controlling that stacking)
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB)
2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double
format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam)
--- deb
On Monday 05 September 2005 17:04, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 04:28:03PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
> > (actually the distinction between 'multi-user without network' and
> > 'multi-user with network' is more interesting to me: b
tinction between 'multi-user without network' and
'multi-user with network' is more interesting to me: booting a laptop
without netwerk easily saves whatever the netwerktimeout is on bootup when
your somewhere without working network, which by default is a minute I
think)
On Friday 02 September 2005 14:58, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 11:45:47AM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
wrote:
> > On Thursday 01 September 2005 18:26, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 02:03:27PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Corneli
#x27;s what needs for conversion to the LSB-default to
happen, I really don't think that's gonna be a problem
(the companies involved in the DCC have mentioned LSB-compliance as an
explicit goal and should be willing to do part of it, and i've seen several
posts wanting it on devel)
On Thursday 01 September 2005 18:26, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 02:03:27PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
wrote:
> > but is there really any good reason to have the default run-level
> > states differ from the LSB defined init-level states [1]?
>
&
els.html
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB)
2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double
format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam)
pgpX0Te7F3Fav.pgp
Description: PGP signature
18 matches
Mail list logo
