Re: [arch-general] Make arch-announce read only?

2009-04-02 Thread Allan McRae
pyther wrote: On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 22:23:10 -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote: On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 8:30 PM, pyther wrote: I was wondering if we could make arch-announce a read only list. Sort of like the dev mailing list. Anyone who tries to respond to an announcement could ge

Re: [arch-general] [Fwd: [arch-announce] Dropping i686 support]

2009-04-02 Thread Denis A . Altoé Falqueto
Yeah, you were cought on the right day. You should have seen the brazilian sucker who bought it 2 days earlier! Take the time to read the translation of the brazilian mailing list, in the announcement. LOL!!! On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Andrei Thorp wrote: > Hehe. Don't worry too much, I'm p

Re: [arch-general] [Fwd: [arch-announce] Dropping i686 support]

2009-04-02 Thread Andrei Thorp
Hehe. Don't worry too much, I'm pretty sure people aren't particularly upset. -AT On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 2:03 PM, kludge wrote: > Loui Chang wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 02:35:34PM -0500, kludge wrote: >>> leslie:  fuck you and your macho-nerd, myth-of-progress bullshit. >>> >>> all the res

Re: [arch-general] Make arch-announce read only?

2009-04-02 Thread pyther
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 22:23:10 -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote: > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 8:30 PM, pyther wrote: >> >> I was wondering if we could make arch-announce a read only list. Sort of >> like the dev mailing list. Anyone who tries to respond to an announcement >> could get an email saying somet

Re: [arch-general] [Fwd: [arch-announce] Dropping i686 support]

2009-04-02 Thread kludge
Loui Chang wrote: > On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 02:35:34PM -0500, kludge wrote: >> leslie: fuck you and your macho-nerd, myth-of-progress bullshit. >> >> all the rest: i'm really upset with this decision. the basic >> assumption that anyone who matters is spending money on new hardware is >> fucked-

Re: [arch-general] Fatal Error

2009-04-02 Thread ludovic coues
if coming back to X give a fatal error, there is a problem. try to find a clean way to shut down X, then see if the pipe is still broken. If so, try to comment out the block, then watch what change happen.

Re: [arch-general] [Fwd: [arch-announce] Dropping i686 support]

2009-04-02 Thread Leslie P. Polzer
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 02:35:34PM -0500, kludge wrote: > > >> Yeah, you better do. > >> > >> It's about time the obsolete i686 branch vanished. Everyone who's > >> still wanting it must be a weenie, and there's no place for those > >> in the Arch philosophy -- go try Redhat or something. > >> > >

Re: [arch-general] [Fwd: [arch-announce] Dropping i686 support]

2009-04-02 Thread 李业
Yup, I quite agree with you. I was fooled and even reinstalled x86_64, because I never reminded that I was using a 64bit CPU! I love arch's simplicity as it defines (plus funny as the forum has just shown to me), this is my first fool's day with Arch, but I'm really looking forward to the next! I b

Re: [arch-general] [Fwd: [arch-announce] Dropping i686 support]

2009-04-02 Thread Nebojša Stričević
I just have to add that I definitely decided to stay with Arch exactly one year ago, when I saw that the German thing was a joke! I stoped downloading FreeBSD and my frustration just went away... Those who fools me that big earn my full trust. And I am still here...

Re: [arch-general] Orphan core

2009-04-02 Thread Dieter Plaetinck
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 20:18:33 -0300 Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote: > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 8:14 PM, Aaron Griffin > wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Baho Utot > > wrote: > >> > >> Can someone please orphan core and extra so I can adopt it? > > > > Done > > > > Be fast to readopt them,

Re: [arch-general] [Fwd: [arch-announce] Dropping i686 support]

2009-04-02 Thread Dieter Plaetinck
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 17:55:27 -0300 Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote: > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Johannes Held wrote: > > Denis A. Altoé Falqueto : > >> THAT is exactly the funny part! > > Jap, that's for sure. > > > > But as I mentioned, the line between the funny part and insulting > > is ve