Though I am not sure I am going to have any success with this, every
thing that I attempt and know to try fails.
On 06/04/2010 03:46 AM, Ike Devolder wrote:
I understand your reason for doing it
and maybe be are some massochists as Philipp says because we're building on
a gcc *.0
but thats the fun of arch ofcourse
2010/6/4 Nathan O.<[email protected]>
I understand, and I am not trying to attack either, just wanted to clarify
why I am trying the deb file to attempt to get it to work. See kamix was the
previous version, kalsamix is the updated name version, so I am trying to
get it to work in case something may depend on it or somebody wants it.
On 06/04/2010 03:37 AM, Ike Devolder wrote:
i'm sorry if this is somekind of attack on your effort to keep this
packages
up to date
it was just your message about kalsamix that triggered my concern about
deb
packages since i saw more of this.
2010/6/4 Nathan O.<[email protected]>
First I just wanted to clear this, I would normally build from source,
but
if it doesn't work I will attempt at a deb package, but even that doesn't
work
On 06/04/2010 03:28 AM, Ike Devolder wrote:
in some recent updates of some packages you see more and more deb's or
rpms
or whatever being extracted and repacked for arch
is there some aur guideline about this, i really don't like this
development
because why not take advantage of our bleeding edge gcc power
if the source is there, why not build from it?
in cases like opera it is understandable because it is not open source,
but
in some other cases like kalsamix i find it very disturbing
maybe some other comments about this ?
