On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 03:04:57PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> Why do you think that discussing problems with packages constitutes
> whining? Are the developers now supposed to get feedback from the user
> community by divination?
please go read your original post.
is that useful feedback
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:18 PM, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for making my point! There's no good reason why git should require
> X, so the package version should not.
Now I understand why there's so many issues in the world. Love you way you
deliberately misinterpret my w
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 04:54:34PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> At 05:23 PM 7/16/2008 -0400, William Boshuck wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 03:42:15PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
>> >
>> > I always do my homework,
>>
>> Is the following mindless word-drool about 'put startx into rc'
>> an examp
At 09:03 PM 7/16/2008 -0400, bofh wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 8:41 PM, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Flavors is what enables the no_x11 option. What do you not understand about
packages? If CVS requires X, then it requires X. You need to understand
OpenBSD's philosophy. Why are
At 10:52 AM 7/17/2008 +1000, Damien Miller wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, L. V. Lammert wrote:
You know, if you spent 1/10th of the effort that you have wasted ranting
on learning the ports system then you could have modified the port to
place the X11-requiring bits in a subpackage already. It isn'
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 8:41 PM, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Marc Espie wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> > > If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package
> is
> > > broken (which, I believe, i
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Marc Espie wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> > > If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
> > > broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
>
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Marc Espie wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> > If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
> > broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
>
> You don't get it, so I'll explain it.
>
Yes, I DO g
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
> broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
You don't get it, so I'll explain it.
There are a lot of packages in OpenBSD. We can spend time pro
At 05:23 PM 7/16/2008 -0400, William Boshuck wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 03:42:15PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
>
> I always do my homework,
Is the following mindless word-drool about 'put startx into rc'
an example of how you do your homework?
Yep, .. though I relied on another post instea
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 03:42:15PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
>
> I always do my homework,
Is the following mindless word-drool about 'put startx into rc'
an example of how you do your homework?
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Tony Abernethy
At 09:54 PM 7/16/2008 +0200, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:08 PM, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That doesn't fix the main problem, however, .. a version control package
> should NOT be in packages as an X flavor.
>
> It was mentioned earlier that there is a non-X ver
At 09:54 PM 7/16/2008 +0200, Landry Breuil wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:08 PM, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That doesn't fix the main problem, however, .. a version control package
> should NOT be in packages as an X flavor.
>
> It was mentioned earlier that there is a non-X ver
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of L. V. Lammert
> It was mentioned earlier that there is a non-X version in ports - why
> don't the maintainers FIX the problem and make that the package
instead
> of
> all this bitching about why people compain about broken packages?
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:08 PM, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That doesn't fix the main problem, however, .. a version control package
> should NOT be in packages as an X flavor.
>
> It was mentioned earlier that there is a non-X version in ports - why
> don't the maintainers FIX the
On 7/16/08, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It was mentioned earlier that there is a non-X version in ports - why
> don't the maintainers FIX the problem and make that the package instead of
> all this bitching about why people compain about broken packages?
The problem was fixed mon
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 02:08:51PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Ted Unangst wrote:
>
> > On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on X that should
> > > **NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obvio
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Tony Abernethy wrote:
> Ted Unangst wrote:
>
> >If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
> >broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
>
> The parallel argument is that if any GUI tool has a command line
> helper function, then t
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on X that should
> > **NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if you're saying I
> > should be installing X on a production serv
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Tony Abernethy wrote (to tedu@):
>
> > Out of curiosity, what happens when you install X but
> > answer "no" to the question about intending to RUN X?
> >
> ... It would install all the C crap and not put startx
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> You could also use a less retarded source control system.
>
Not my choice, unfortunately, .. almost all of the Rails projects use GIT.
Lee
==
Leland V. Lammert[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chief
On 7/16/08, Tony Abernethy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ted Unangst wrote:
>
>
> >If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
> >broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
I most certainly did not write that.
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on X that should
> > **NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if you're saying I
> > should be installing X on a production serv
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Tony Abernethy wrote:
> Ted Unangst wrote:
> >
> > On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on
> > X that should
> > > **NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if
> > you're saying I
> > >
Ted Unangst wrote:
>If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
>broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
The parallel argument is that if any GUI tool has a command line
helper function, then that package is broken.
(Microsoft Windows still has a co
MY APOLOGIES --- getting cross-eyed in my old age.
>On 7/16/08, Tony Abernethy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ted Unangst wrote:
>>
>>
>> >If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is
>> >broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation).
>
>I most certainly di
Marc Espie [Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:30:28PM +0200] wrote:
>> It's because of gitk which is a repository browser (or so
>> http://git.or.cz/course/svn.html tells me). Annoying that there's no
>> git-no_x11 but them's the breaks.
>
>Makes no sense. It's clearly a multi-package situation, not flavor.
On 7/15/08, Darrin Chandler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Out of curiosity, what happens when you install X but answer
> > > "no" to the question about intending to RUN X?
> >
> > exactly the same thing that happens when you answer "yes".
>
>
> Doesn't that question effect the machdep.allo
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Ted Unangst wrote:
> try it. install x, then resist the urge to type "startx". can you do
> it? can you ignore the siren song, or do your fingers fly forth of
> their own volition?
I have it on good authority that plugging one's ears with wax helps.
-d
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 08:11:37PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On 7/15/08, Tony Abernethy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ted Unangst wrote:
> > > tar zxf X
> > > pkg_add crap
> > > rm -r /usr/X11R6
> > >
> >
> > Lovely.
> >
> > Out of curiosity, what happens when you install X but answer
> >
No, I want it *MY* way, all the time! Oh, wait, I'm not talking about
a burger or my own distro, am I?
On 7/15/08, Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You could also use a less retarded source control system.
>
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 05:51:04PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
>> On Tue,
You could also use a less retarded source control system.
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 05:51:04PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Will Maier wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> > > Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to
On 7/15/08, Tony Abernethy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ted Unangst wrote:
> > tar zxf X
> > pkg_add crap
> > rm -r /usr/X11R6
> >
>
> Lovely.
>
> Out of curiosity, what happens when you install X but answer
> "no" to the question about intending to RUN X?
exactly the same thing that happens
Ted Unangst wrote:
>
> On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on
> X that should
> > **NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if
> you're saying I
> > should be installing X on a production server. NOT.
>
>
On 7/15/08, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, I'm sending an email to misc when a package depends on X that should
> **NOT** depend on X. That's what's broken, obviously, if you're saying I
> should be installing X on a production server. NOT.
tar zxf X
pkg_add crap
rm -r /usr/X11R6
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 05:51:04PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Will Maier wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> > > Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
> > > with git??
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Will Maier wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> > Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
> > with git??
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tk_%28framework%29
>
> > Can't install tk-8.4.7p1: lib not found X11.11.1
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:52:16PM -0400, Nick Guenther wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Will Maier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> >> Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
> >> with git??
> >
> > htt
On 2008-07-15, L. V. Lammert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do with git??
ports@, dammit.
> Can't install tk-8.4.7p1: lib not found X11.11.1
>
> Is this a broken dependency or . . . ? Seems like git installed cleanly on
> 4.2.
And
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Will Maier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
>> Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
>> with git??
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tk_%28framework%29
>
>> Can't install tk-8.
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 02:30:36PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do
> with git??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tk_%28framework%29
> Can't install tk-8.4.7p1: lib not found X11.11.1
>
> Is this a broken dependency
No.
> or . . .
Depends on tcl-8.4.7p6, .. maybe, .. but what does X have to do with git??
Can't install tk-8.4.7p1: lib not found X11.11.1
Is this a broken dependency or . . . ? Seems like git installed cleanly on 4.2.
Lee
42 matches
Mail list logo
