Please pay attention to my Mail-Copies-To and X-No-CC headers this time.
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 02:20:54AM -0500, Sam TH wrote:
> Why did you not read the text you just quoted? I've never seen
> AbiWord work over remote X if the fonts weren't installed in *both*
> locations.
Sounds like a bug i
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 03:08:38AM -0700, Seth Arnold wrote:
> * Sam TH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010507 00:11]:
> > I've never seen AbiWord work over remote X if the fonts weren't
> > installed in *both* locations. Thus, AbiWord installs on a machine
> > without the fonts are *not useful* *at all*.
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 03:08:38AM -0700, Seth Arnold wrote:
> However, if the AbiWord developers don't figure they will get around to
> fixing AbiWord any time soon, it sure would be a shame to keep AbiWord
> out of the distribution. Branden, would you have great compunction
> against making your
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 04:47:07PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> (Later being after we work out a satisfactory way of specifying what "must"
> is meant to specify. Julian, I'd really appreciate it if you could propose
> something along those lines. But not in this thread...)
My current order of pr
* Sam TH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010507 00:11]:
> I've never seen AbiWord work over remote X if the fonts weren't
> installed in *both* locations. Thus, AbiWord installs on a machine
> without the fonts are *not useful* *at all*.
Sam, please don't take offense at this: the way I see it, if
cannot
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 10:55:14AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:45:28AM -0500, Sam TH wrote:
> > Why should packages that require a particular font package for
> > operation (and indeed normally require that package to be installed on
> > the local system AND the remo
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 03:08:54AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:45:28AM -0500, Sam TH wrote:
>
> > On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 12:46:04AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >
> > > fonts shipped, such as their license information). If one
> > >
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:45:28AM -0500, Sam TH wrote:
> Why should packages that require a particular font package for
> operation (and indeed normally require that package to be installed on
> the local system AND the remote system) not depend on their font
> packages?
Why did you not read the
* Anthony Towns [010506 00:05]:
> Seconded, with the proviso that I reserve the right to later be
> disagreeable about some of the "musts"...
AJ, I don't think anyone would ever expect you to give up being
disagreeable about "must"s. :) Actually, we might be rather
disappointed or disillusioned.
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:45:28AM -0500, Sam TH wrote:
> On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 12:46:04AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > fonts shipped, such as their license information). If one
> > or more of the fonts so packaged are necessary for proper
> >
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 12:46:04AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I am re-proposing this. The only change is the following two paragraphs:
>
> Fonts of any type supported by the X Window System must be
> be in a separate binary package from any execut
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 12:46:04AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> fonts shipped, such as their license information). If one
> or more of the fonts so packaged are necessary for proper
> operation of the package with which they are associated the
>
close 91257
reopen 91257
thanks
I am re-proposing this. The only change is the following two paragraphs:
Fonts of any type supported by the X Window System must be
be in a separate binary package from any executables,
libraries, or doc
13 matches
Mail list logo
