What with a change of circumstances and lack of time recently I don't honestly
think I'm doing a good enough job on the LVM packages, so I'm offering them up
for adoption to anyone who thinks they can do a better job.
The packages are:
lvm2- in active development, upstream helpful but
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 03:46:18PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
>
> On 17 Jan 2005, at 5:42 pm, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:28:56AM +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> >>lvm2- in active development, upstream helpful but often
>
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 01:11:09PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
>
> My recommendation would be an LVM alioth project, w/ a svn or arch
> (preferred) repository. I've kept track of lvm2 stuff in arch for a
> number of years, it has worked well.
>
> Patrick, it might even be worth all 4 of us main
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 06:05:44PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 08:47:29PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>
> | Now, what's finally got to me one too many times:
> | * I run firebird then can't run mozilla.
> | * I run mozilla then can't run firebird.
>
> I've also notic
LVM1 includes kernel headers in its build - yeah, I know, but it does interface
(rather too) tightly into the kernel.
The problem now is that the linux-kernel-headers package has Linux 2.6 files in
it rather than 2.4 and LVM(1) is not supported in 2.6. so it doesn't build.
This isn't a new probl
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 03:33:53PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 02:18:34PM +0000, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> > The only solution I can think of is for the lvm10 package to build-depend on
> > (eg) kernel-source-2.4.19, then in the build script u
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: multipath-tools
Version : 0.3.3
Upstream Author : christophe varoqui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://christophe.varoqui.free.fr/
* License : LGPL, GPL
Description : Command-line utilities for administerin
On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 04:40:43AM -0400, Simon Law wrote:
>
> I grant you that, this piece of software is a young 'un;
> although I'm surprised that this didn't come up any sooner. (Lucky us.)
>
> I don't think either library has more than one piece of software
> that currently requ
On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 08:06:54AM -0400, Simon Law wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 10:11:33AM +0100, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 04:40:43AM -0400, Simon Law wrote:
> > As the man page at http://libdnet.sourceforge.net/dnet.3.txt refers to the
> > li
9 matches
Mail list logo
