I've only been skimming this thread, so I fear this may have been
said. What about:
1) rebrand mozilla-firefox
2) create a permanent "transition package" with the firefox name
that depends on it
3) use alternatives to provide /usr/bin/firefox
The description of the transition package shou
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 10:07:11PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * John Hasler
>
> If you are unsure then you should not use split configuration.
>
> I think the last point sums it up -- use monolithic configuration if
> you don't understand what the question is about.
I've installed exim ma
On Sat, May 17, 2003 at 11:39:00PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2003 13:30:00 -0500, Donald J Bindner
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Maybe I should roll my sleeves up and send them some patches.
>
> apg's upstream is pretty responsive.
I checked out the
On Sun, Apr 13, 2003 at 02:27:10PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Joerg Wendland wrote:
> > When debugging an application of mine using OpenLDAP I found out, that
> > each single ACL makes not queries but return of results significantly
> > slower. Maybe you want to try to tune these..
Well, I didn't expect to inspire such a vibrant thread! A couple
of responses (not in anger, just adding some perspective).
1) free vs. non-free alternatives
I use VMWare 2.0. If you think that bochs and Plex86 aren't
viable alternatives yet, you can imagine the state of the world
(2 years ago
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)
>
> Jeroen Dekke
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:14:17PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> May you should consider VMware's current beta of 3.1?
That might have been an option if my VMWare sessions weren't
"suspended". To upgrade, they first have to be restarted with
version 2.0 and shut down properly. Then they can be u
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:01:00AM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Phillips) writes:
> Petr Vandrovec wrote:
>
> > As SUSv2 mandates that new nice return value is correct,
> > please use [EMAIL PROTECTED] (or @GLIBC_2.2.6 as it is in CVS
> > only) for new nice() interface, so o
8 matches
Mail list logo
