Compose started at Sat Dec 27 05:15:02 UTC 2014
Broken deps for i386
--
[3Depict]
3Depict-0.0.16-3.fc22.i686 requires libmgl.so.7.2.0
[Sprog]
Sprog-0.14-27.fc20.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.0)
[aeskulap]
aes
2014-12-26 23:45 GMT+02:00 Ben Cotton :
> This is a great post and there are a lot of points worthy of
> discussion.
>
And I was certain people would dismiss it saying "someone had too much
eggnog this year"...
> Prior to Fedora 21, I'm not sure we could really claim to have a
> targeted user b
Who else thinks that this part of texlive-base's %preinstall is not really
such a hot idea:
for i in `find /home/*/.texlive* -type d -prune`; do
find $i -name *.fmt -type f | xargs rm -f > /dev/null 2>&1
done
pgppsOwAqwgXZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fe
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 13:03:12 -0500
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Who else thinks that this part of texlive-base's %preinstall is not
> really such a hot idea:
>
> for i in `find /home/*/.texlive* -type d -prune`; do
> find $i -name *.fmt -type f | xargs rm -f > /dev/null 2>&1
> done
I don't think mo
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 13:03:12 -0500, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Who else thinks that this part of texlive-base's %preinstall is not really
> such a hot idea:
>
> for i in `find /home/*/.texlive* -type d -prune`; do
> find $i -name *.fmt -type f | xargs rm -f > /dev/null 2>&1
> done
This is a viol
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 11:59:33 -0700
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I don't think most anyone thinks it's a good idea:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128240
>
> and
>
> https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/451
>
> It seems the texlive maintainer(s) aren't really paying attention.
>
> L
On Sat, 2014-12-27 at 15:57 +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
>
> Actually we do have a VLTS (Very Long Term Support) release, CentOS,
> especially now that they've joined the family, but the connection is
> not immediately apparent.
CentOS is not a release of Fedora. It is a separate distri
On 26 December 2014 at 20:32, Alexander Ploumistos
wrote:
>why not offer packages from every DE and metapackages for other environments?
I don't see how this addresses the multiple "Calculator" application
problem I clearly outlined in my original blog post. Offering choices
and configuration opt
Am 27.12.2014 um 23:26 schrieb Richard Hughes:
On 26 December 2014 at 20:32, Alexander Ploumistos
wrote:
why not offer packages from every DE and metapackages for other environments?
I don't see how this addresses the multiple "Calculator" application
problem I clearly outlined in my origina
2014-12-28 0:26 GMT+02:00 Richard Hughes :
> On 26 December 2014 at 20:32, Alexander Ploumistos
> wrote:
> >why not offer packages from every DE and metapackages for other
> environments?
>
> I don't see how this addresses the multiple "Calculator" application
> problem I clearly outlined in my o
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 6:23 PM, Alexander Ploumistos
wrote:
I don't mind if gnome-software favors GNOME apps, or if Apper does
the same. I have no interest in promoting any DE over another, I am
only partial to echo $SHELL returning bash and while I kept my
distance at the time of the fork, I
On 12/27/2014 01:13 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 11:59:33 -0700
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I don't think most anyone thinks it's a good idea:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128240
and
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/451
It seems the texlive maintainer(s) aren't real
12 matches
Mail list logo
