On Nov 4, 2007 6:35 PM, Oystein Viggen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * ["Nicolas Deschildre"]
>
> > My point was not about the parameter itself. My point was about the
> > ability to edit the kernel parameters while booting.
> > IIRC lilo won't allow you that.
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/ma
> Aaron C. de Bruyn:
> > Upgrading simply because there is a newer version number is the wrong
> > attitude.
>
> It's not that fact that it's a newer version (number): it's that it's a
> final, stable release versus a non-final non-stable release.
And what makes a release stable or non-stable?
Scott (angrykeyboarder) spake thusly:
> Sebastian Heinlein spake thusly:
>> Am Donnerstag, den 08.11.2007, 20:58 -0700 schrieb Scott
>> (angrykeyboarder):
>>> None that would "interest" [some Ubuntu] developers, I suppose
>> You should get used to talk about facts.
>
> As I implied previously
Kai Schroeder spake:
> Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote:
>>> Gutsy shipped with a *non-final* release of The GIMP (2.4 RC3, to be
>>> specific).
>
> Apart from the question whether an update should land in updates or
> backports, I think there definitely is a valid point here: Users have
> been taugh
Scott Kitterman spake thusly:
>
> You provide packages that are newer/not in the official repositories. With
> the exception of packages that are legally questionable for the official
> repositories, why?
Why? Because people want newer packages.
And trying to get them through "official cha
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 19:26 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 16:48:55 -0700 "Scott (angrykeyboarder)"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Gutsy shipped with a *non-final* release of The GIMP (2.4 RC3, to be
> >specific).
> >
> >In situations of this type (my) logic would dictate th
Le jeudi 08 novembre 2007 à 21:22 -0700, Scott (angrykeyboarder) a
écrit :
> Cool. Leave us with a *major* app (ordinarily in the main repository)
> for months without official support. Sounds like a good plan to me.
The package is support as any main package in Ubuntu, your statement is
just no
Aaron C. de Bruyn:
> Upgrading simply because there is a newer version number is the wrong
> attitude.
It's not that fact that it's a newer version (number): it's that it's a
final, stable release versus a non-final non-stable release.
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss
> Wouldn't logic dictate that if their latest release was for bugfixes,
> that they would recommend an update? Or do developers update software
> "just for the heck of it"?
I haven't done an official study or anything, but I'd be willing to bet that a
month after Gutsy is out, about half the pack
Daniel T. Chen ha scritto:
> On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 19:26 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> As a rule, developers aren't terribly impressed by version numbers. What
>> problem are you
>> having that you think this would fix and that is severe enough to warrant a
>> stable release
>> update?
>
>
On Fri, 2007-11-09 at 13:47 +, randall wrote:
> Greg K Nicholson wrote:
> > Kai Schroeder:
> >
> >> Now, every time they start the gimp, a
> >> splash screen appears which says "release candidate"
> >>
> >
> > (Actually, it says “release conadidate”, for me anyway :) )
> >
> >
> >
> at least we
Greg K Nicholson wrote:
> Kai Schroeder:
>
>> Now, every time they start the gimp, a
>> splash screen appears which says "release candidate"
>>
>
> (Actually, it says “release conadidate”, for me anyway :) )
>
>
>
at least we have a bug now!
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-
OK, thanks. Just wondering out loud. :)
--
Greg
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Kai Schroeder:
> Now, every time they start the gimp, a
> splash screen appears which says "release candidate"
(Actually, it says “release conadidate”, for me anyway :) )
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists
On Nov 9, 2007 9:00 PM, Kai Schroeder writes:
> Apart from the question whether an update should land in updates or
> backports, I think there definitely is a valid point here: Users have
> been taught that beta software (or release candidates) should not be
> used on production machines. Now, ever
Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote:
> > Gutsy shipped with a *non-final* release of The GIMP (2.4 RC3, to be
> > specific).
Apart from the question whether an update should land in updates or
backports, I think there definitely is a valid point here: Users have
been taught that beta software (or releas
On Friday 09 November 2007 04:09, Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote:
> Reinhard Tartler spake thusly:
> > "Scott (angrykeyboarder)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> None that would "interest" [some Ubuntu] developers, I suppose
> >>
> >> OK...
> >>
> >> Off to plan B.
> >>
> >> getdeb.net
> >>
> >>
Am 09.11.2007 um 02:28 schrieb Greg K Nicholson:
> Is a compatibility layer (like Wine) to run Mac OS X programs on Linux
> feasible? Does one already exist?
I'm aware of about 5 emulators (PearPC, mac-on-linux, Basilisk,
SheepShaver, qemu) having various extents of Mac OS and Mac OS X
suppo
Am 09.11.2007 um 02:15 schrieb Evan:
> When a binary is [attempted to] run, instead of giving the current
> error, provide a dialogue that notifies the user of the fact that
> it is a Windows program that cannot be run normally under Ubuntu.
While additional funtionality might be desireable,
Very cool...
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/106382
--
Kristian Erik Hermansen
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Reinhard Tartler spake thusly:
> "Scott (angrykeyboarder)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> None that would "interest" [some Ubuntu] developers, I suppose
>>
>> OK...
>>
>> Off to plan B.
>>
>> getdeb.net
>>
>> Oh wait, Ubuntu developers get upset when users go elsewhere for updated
>> versio
Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> My initial thought to the is please, please, no don't do this. I waited a
> couple of hours to reply and I haven't reconsidered.
>
> Once you make desirable Windows software easy to install, you've made all
> Windows software easy to install. It seems the most commo
"Scott (angrykeyboarder)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> None that would "interest" [some Ubuntu] developers, I suppose
>
> OK...
>
> Off to plan B.
>
> getdeb.net
>
> Oh wait, Ubuntu developers get upset when users go elsewhere for updated
> versions of software...
>
> OK..
>
> Off to plan C.
23 matches
Mail list logo
