We got some old school install done in a server around town, the libgpm was
located in /usr/lib while /usr was only mounted later. This is a bug... Nothing
should have a soft link to /usr/* from /bin or /lib*. Anyway it was an easy fix.
Could people around check, and if they find anything dist
foser wrote:
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 17:56 +0300, Philippe Trottier wrote:
If no one has an objection, I'll pick up that package, I think it is fun, never
tought I'd use it, but I have so much code written I'd like how much I have
really done.
If there is no objection I
foser wrote:
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:22 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
either you have a policy of cutting unmaintained packages or you dont ... you
cant have some vague middle ground
Hide behind policy if you can't do it with common sense. The policy is
to add valid metadata.xml data to pack
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kalin KOZHUHAROV wrote:
> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 19:53 +0900, Kalin KOZHUHAROV wrote:
>>
Make this distributed tool for tar zip bzip2 and gzip and I'm in, I
don't think it would be useful with anything else than Gigabit
the point is, it would be usefully to separate the
load distribution on the local machine and cluster nodes.
Philippe Trottier
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ervin Nemeth wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
>>On Thursday 22 September 2005 05:23 am, Ervin Németh wrote:
>>
>>>For automake packages it is as simple as giving a --disable-static to
>>>configure.
>>
>>
>>you can put 'EXTRA_ECONF=--disable-static' in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 18:54 +0100, José Carlos Cruz Costa wrote:
>
>>Hi everybody,
>>
>>If it's commercial, the company in question should (and must) allow an
>>ebuild for is product, like what happens with rpms and other packag
Richard Fish wrote:
I.o.w. is it still necessary to have RC_DEVICE_TARBALL="yes" as a
default or can we move to a pure udev system and change the default to
"no".
>>>I've been running my boxes successfully with "no" since the option
>>>showed up just fine :)
>>
>>I think people i
