On Wednesday 26 March 2008 01:21:26 Aaron Griffin wrote:
> > gosh, how did you figure? meh. mind adding something actually usefull?
>
> Er? If you took that as bad, it wasn't meant that way. It was an
> internet-ism. "This X is made of win and awesome". It was my informal
> way of saying "I agree
That's my first message to the mailing list, I've just been reading it since
I started using archlinux as my distro in September 2007.
I just want to say that what made me move to arch was The Arch Way. I just
fell in love with it the first time I read it in the wiki. Then came pacman.
It's amazin
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Arvid Ephraim Picciani
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 March 2008 00:37:02 Aaron Griffin wrote:
> > I am a strong believer that this entire paragraph was constructed by
> > typing "win" over and over.
> gosh, how did you figure? meh. mind adding some
On Wednesday 26 March 2008 00:37:02 Aaron Griffin wrote:
> I am a strong believer that this entire paragraph was constructed by
> typing "win" over and over.
gosh, how did you figure? meh. mind adding something actually usefull?
--
best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Arvid Ephraim Picciani
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Arvid Ephraim Picciani
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i believe archlinux is lost and i stopped fighting for it. It's exhausting
> to
> fight against argumentation like "but other distros do the same". those
> people just didnt get the point and should be kicked
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 04:09:35PM -0400, Eric Belanger wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Petar Bogdanovic wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> a gtklp installation should not pull the whole cups package, since its
>> binaries only depend on libcups:
>>
>> $ ldd /usr/bin/gtklp | grep cups
>> libcups
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:32:51PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 03:19:25AM +0700, Emmanuel Benisty wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 03:58:06PM -0400, Eric Belanger wrote:
> > > On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 01:57:
On Tuesday 25 March 2008 20:32:01 Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> Well actually the Arch Way has change a lot recently. Wiki says it was
> done in order to be "more formal and understandable" but i feel quite
> the opposite.
> http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=The_Arch_Way&diff=32398&oldid=323
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 03:19:25AM +0700, Emmanuel Benisty wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 03:58:06PM -0400, Eric Belanger wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 01:57:49AM +0700, Emmanuel Benisty wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 08:39:55PM +
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 03:58:06PM -0400, Eric Belanger wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 01:57:49AM +0700, Emmanuel Benisty wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 08:39:55PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Hi, i have been trying to build firefox
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Petar Bogdanovic wrote:
Hi,
a gtklp installation should not pull the whole cups package, since its
binaries only depend on libcups:
$ ldd /usr/bin/gtklp | grep cups
libcups.so.2 => /usr/lib/libcups.so.2 (0xb79ba000)
$ ldd /usr/bin/gtklpq | g
Hi,
a gtklp installation should not pull the whole cups package, since its
binaries only depend on libcups:
$ ldd /usr/bin/gtklp | grep cups
libcups.so.2 => /usr/lib/libcups.so.2 (0xb79ba000)
$ ldd /usr/bin/gtklpq | grep cups
libcups.so.2 => /usr/li
Grigorios Bouzakis a écrit :
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 01:57:49AM +0700, Emmanuel Benisty wrote:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 08:39:55PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Hi, i have been trying to build firefox3b4 or firefox 2.0.0.12 for the
past day without success. I guess it has something to do with
Am Dienstag 25 März 2008 20:58:40 schrieb Grigorios Bouzakis:
>
> http://rafb.net/p/tNKcg183.html
>
> line 44 seems to be the reason it fails. firefox 2.0.0.12 failed at some
> other point but dont have it handy at the moment
>
> Greg
This:
error: ‘strlen’ was not declared in this scope
is due t
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 01:57:49AM +0700, Emmanuel Benisty wrote:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 08:39:55PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Hi, i have been trying to build firefox3b4 or firefox 2.0.0.12 for the
past day without success. I guess it has s
ONE comment inserted below;
> On Montag, 24. März 2008 22:47 RedShift wrote:
>
> At first see this all only as the opionion of a normal user and i find
> it good that you challenge such things because this is even a good way
> to improve it.
>
> If this discussion is only for devs than please apo
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 01:57:49AM +0700, Emmanuel Benisty wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 08:39:55PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> > Hi, i have been trying to build firefox3b4 or firefox 2.0.0.12 for the
> > past day without success. I guess it has something to do with the latest
> > gcc upg
On Montag, 24. März 2008 22:47 RedShift wrote:
At first see this all only as the opionion of a normal user and i find it good
that you challenge such things because this is even a good way to improve it.
If this discussion is only for devs than please apologize this and copy the
lines below to /d
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 08:07:04PM +0100, Arvid Ephraim Picciani wrote:
> On Monday 24 March 2008 22:47:34 RedShift wrote:
> > I wanted to steer clear of personal attacks but unfortunately, tpowa has
> > been a large contributer to the "lets adapt to the community"-style. I'm
> > sorry to say it, b
On Monday 24 March 2008 22:47:34 RedShift wrote:
> I wanted to steer clear of personal attacks but unfortunately, tpowa has
> been a large contributer to the "lets adapt to the community"-style. I'm
> sorry to say it, but that's how I experience it (because of his work on
> kernel26 and qt) - and i
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 08:39:55PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> Hi, i have been trying to build firefox3b4 or firefox 2.0.0.12 for the
> past day without success. I guess it has something to do with the latest
> gcc upgrade to 4.3.
> Has anyone managed to build it, from AUR or not, within the
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:51:58AM -0700, JaDa wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:39:55 -0700, Grigorios Bouzakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, i have been trying to build firefox3b4 or firefox 2.0.0.12 for the
>> past day without success. I guess it has something to do with the latest
>> gcc
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:39:55 -0700, Grigorios Bouzakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi, i have been trying to build firefox3b4 or firefox 2.0.0.12 for the
past day without success. I guess it has something to do with the latest
gcc upgrade to 4.3.
Has anyone managed to build it, from AUR or not,
Hi, i have been trying to build firefox3b4 or firefox 2.0.0.12 for the
past day without success. I guess it has something to do with the latest
gcc upgrade to 4.3.
Has anyone managed to build it, from AUR or not, within the last couple
of days?
ps. i am using the testing repo
Greg
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 01:09:08PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:16:51AM +0100, Jan de Groot wrote:
> > > -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
> > > Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:arch-general-
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Namens Roman Kyrylych
> > > Verzonden: dinsdag 25 maa
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:16:51AM +0100, Jan de Groot wrote:
> > -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
> > Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:arch-general-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Namens Roman Kyrylych
> > Verzonden: dinsdag 25 maart 2008 9:48
> > Aan: General Discusson about Arch Linux
> > Onderwerp: Re: [a
Great improvements for my athlon xp, lzma is faster than bz2 and with
better compresion ratios. For the end user, uncompressing speed it's
only few seconds greater than gzip but the gzip file is nearly 20 MB
bigger than lzma! I have used the current
openoffice-base-2.4.0-0.4-i686.pkg.tar.gz package
> -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
> Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:arch-general-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Namens Roman Kyrylych
> Verzonden: dinsdag 25 maart 2008 9:48
> Aan: General Discusson about Arch Linux
> Onderwerp: Re: [arch-general] signoff kernel26-2.6.24.3-6
>
>
> > But when you have a ke
2008/3/24, RedShift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[skipped]
> What Arch needs is to have strict guidelines on PKGBUILDs and kick out
> any developers that don't have the same idea. A proposition:
> * Patches are unacceptable unless in the case the software wouldn't work
> *at all* (Hint, qt PKGBUILD)
29 matches
Mail list logo
