-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Check out Linphone. Works well to Mac OS X and Microsoft Windows in my
experience. The interface is not great, but several non-technical
users have been able to use it to talk to me, so it can't be that bad
while we're waiting for Tox to mature.
Usi
Patrick Lauer:
>
That means either say "you cannot expect anything, because there might
or might not be metadata" or say "you can expect metadata for any
provided/installed package" in which case package.provided feature has
to be removed from portage.
>>>
>>> "Provided" means
> >> That means either say "you cannot expect anything, because there might
> >> or might not be metadata" or say "you can expect metadata for any
> >> provided/installed package" in which case package.provided feature has
> >> to be removed from portage.
> >
> > "Provided" means "not managed by
Anthony G. Basile:
> On 09/07/14 22:36, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> On Saturday 06 September 2014 16:22:46 hasufell wrote:
>>> Anthony G. Basile:
On 09/06/14 12:12, hasufell wrote:
> Anthony G. Basile:
>>> And when you do ask, is a package that's "provided" installed,
>>> and if
>>
Patrick Lauer:
> On Saturday 06 September 2014 16:22:46 hasufell wrote:
>> Anthony G. Basile:
>>> On 09/06/14 12:12, hasufell wrote:
Anthony G. Basile:
>> And when you do ask, is a package that's "provided" installed, and if
>> so, what's its metadata?
>
> When the package is i
On 09/07/14 22:36, Patrick Lauer wrote:
On Saturday 06 September 2014 16:22:46 hasufell wrote:
Anthony G. Basile:
On 09/06/14 12:12, hasufell wrote:
Anthony G. Basile:
And when you do ask, is a package that's "provided" installed, and if
so, what's its metadata?
When the package is installed
This discussion has now become rather OT and does not belong
to this list. Anyway, since there appear to be some misunderstandings
concerning my previous remarks, I contribute one more post.
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> > > > Please don't. Not all communication partners are linux users
> On Sun, 7 Sep 2014, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Right now the general policy is that we don't allow unmasked (hard or
> via keywords) ebuilds in the tree if they use an scm to fetch their
> sources. There are a bunch of reasons for this, and for the most part
> they make sense.
> I was wondering
