On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 08:55:10AM -0700, Evan Martin wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 09:44:42AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > The source of the bug was without a doubt, X, not totem. Recent XF4.3
> > > packages include a patch to rectify this bug - which, with a little help,
> > > was found and
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 09:44:42AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > The source of the bug was without a doubt, X, not totem. Recent XF4.3
> > packages include a patch to rectify this bug - which, with a little help,
> > was found and fixed by Bastien, author of totem. Both totem and XF4.3 (when
> > cr
On 22 Aug 2003 09:01:35 -0400,
James Strandboge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 05:25, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > On 21 Aug 2003 09:07:39 -0400,
> > James Strandboge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > >
> > >
On 21 Aug 2003 09:07:39 -0400,
James Strandboge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> The main way I advertised the backport was through this list and
> debianplanet.org. Both of those have these instructions.
..urls? (I'm new on this list.)
--
..med vennlig hils
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 05:34:55PM +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
>
> > Totem has never worked as far as i can remember, but xine works fine.
> > But then, buggy applications are no reason for saying X 4.3 is no good.
>
> The source of the bug was without a doubt, X, not totem. Recent XF4.3
> packag
> Totem has never worked as far as i can remember, but xine works fine.
> But then, buggy applications are no reason for saying X 4.3 is no good.
The source of the bug was without a doubt, X, not totem. Recent XF4.3
packages include a patch to rectify this bug - which, with a little help,
was fo
On 21 Aug 2003 15:51:54 -0400
James Strandboge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> When that was posted on debianplanet, xfree86 was not part of of my
> backport. After it was, I let people know via the list. I am not sure
> what you are trying to accomplish here, but I have submitted another
> arti
On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 06:58:40PM -0700, Evan Martin wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-08-19 at 23:48, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Would it not be better to rebuild the gnome 2.2 backport together with a
> > backport of branden's unofficial 4.3 packages ? I seriously doubt that
> > it is wise to continue to stay w
On 21 Aug 2003 09:07:39 -0400
James Strandboge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> The main way I advertised the backport was through this list and
> debianplanet.org. Both of those have these instructions. As for
> others, I would like them to have proper instructions, but there isn't
> much I ca
With more help from friends at #debian, I actually managed to get rid of the offending
XFree86 files. I then finished the backport install according to James' instructions.
In general, it seems to be working. But I have a few concerns:
1) I think that James and whoever is promoting his backpor
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 01:44:51AM -0700, Michael Bennett Cohn wrote:
> James,
>
> Please explain the relationship between what you're saying here, and the info
> appearing at http://www.linuxcompatible.org/print20707.html, which was apparently
> posted quite recently, and which suggests differe
>
> What is the output of each of these commands?
>
> dpkg -l|grep freetype
> dpkg -l|grep fontconfig
> dpkg -l|grep xlibs
> dpkg -l|grep libxft2
> dkpg -l|grep xserver
>
> Jamie Strandboge
Since our last exchange, I have had some help from a friend on #debian in removing the
incorrect xfree86
James,
Please explain the relationship between what you're saying here, and the info
appearing at http://www.linuxcompatible.org/print20707.html, which was apparently
posted quite recently, and which suggests different changes to sources.list, and gives
different instructions.
mbc
On 19 Aug
13 matches
Mail list logo
