On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:56:37 +0100
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 08:16:24PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote:
> > it's usefule when browsing at packages.debian.org too!
> Well hopefully, packages.d.o will be migrated to package tags as well,
> once they are in place.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 08:16:24PM +0100, Gürkan Sengün wrote:
> it's usefule when browsing at packages.debian.org too!
Well hopefully, packages.d.o will be migrated to package tags as well,
once they are in place.
> if we can't have gnustep section i would like the gnome and kde
> sections remov
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 01:53:40 +0100
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 05:56:12PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > > shells 292
> > > news327
> > > embedded383
> > > electronics 515
> > > oldlibs
On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 05:56:12PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > shells 292
> > news327
> > embedded383
> > electronics 515
> > oldlibs 647
> ^^^
> Geez.
[...]
Really, I believe it would serve Debian bet
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 08:57:46AM +0100, G?rkan Seng?n wrote:
>> >> I believe we need a new section called "gnustep", just like we have
>> >> one for gnome and kde.
>> > I think this is a good idea. Would it start by being populated with
>> > anything depending on g
> What do you think about counting wmaker and all its apps also as gnustep
> applications?
They depend on X, which GNUstep applications don't. Personally
I would not put them into the gnustep section, also because
they do not use the GNUstep framework. However they can be recommended
or suggested
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 12:15:00PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> This invalidates my argument, although 47 (or 90 as you estimate)
> packages with 'gnustep' in the description (apt-cache search gnustep|wc
> -l) is still less than 263 (gnome) or 212 (kde) packages, it isn't
> unlike the smal
Gürkan Sengün wrote:
> > On topic: I don't really think a section for this few packages is worth
> > it.
> I think it is worth because
> gnustep *clearly* does not belong in the x11 section.
>
> > Package count (binary, unstable of two days ago, without contrib and
> > non-free) is below, and it s
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 11:54:38AM +0100, G?rkan Seng?n wrote:
> > Package count (binary, unstable of two days ago, without contrib and
> > non-free) is below, and it shows that even the smallest section has nearly
> > 300 packages.
> Nice try butc can you tell me how you got to that numbers, exact
> On topic: I don't really think a section for this few packages is worth
> it.
I think it is worth because
gnustep *clearly* does not belong in the x11 section.
> Package count (binary, unstable of two days ago, without contrib and
> non-free) is below, and it shows that even the smallest section
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 08:57:46AM +0100, G?rkan Seng?n wrote:
> >> I believe we need a new section called "gnustep", just like we have one
> >> for gnome and kde.
> > I think this is a good idea. Would it start by being populated with
> > anything depending on gnustep*, or did I not think that thr
>> I believe we need a new section called "gnustep", just like we have one
>> for gnome and kde.
> I think this is a good idea. Would it start by being populated with
> anything depending on gnustep*, or did I not think that through? What
> packages would that give?
Yep, this would also help me hav
On 2004-03-14 03:34:31 + Gürkan Sengün <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe we need a new section called "gnustep", just
> like we have one for gnome and kde.
I think this is a good idea. Would it start by being populated with anything
depending on gnustep*, or did I not think that through
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 09:11:38 +0100
Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gürkan Sengün wrote:
> > I believe we need a new section called "gnustep", just
> > like we have one for gnome and kde.
>
> Howe many GNUstep packages are there?
if i do, apt-cache search gnustep | wc -l
i get: 61.
gü
Gürkan Sengün wrote:
> I believe we need a new section called "gnustep", just
> like we have one for gnome and kde.
Howe many GNUstep packages are there?
Regards,
Joey
--
Life is too short to run proprietary software. -- Bdale Garbee
15 matches
Mail list logo
