On 06/16/2011 04:47 AM, Stuart McGraw wrote:
> Also, why does the source's developer status matter?
> Is there something wrong about the information (which
> I repeat below)? If so, what? I also am interested
> in answers to the questions Ed Greshko asked.
If I correctly read a response by Rah
On 06/16/2011 02:17 AM, Stuart McGraw wrote:
>
> 'bochecha' was not the person who wrote the blog
> response that Ed Greshko quoted, he was the person
> to whom the text was addressed. The quoted response
> was written by Lennart if that changes your assessment
> of its credibility.
It doesn't
On 06/15/2011 03:53 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 06/15/2011 02:34 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> I must admit that I've not spent much time to digest what advantages
>> there are to moving to systemd. However, it does seem to be quite a
>> complex system with, as of yet, ha
2011/6/15 Ed Greshko
> I must admit that I've not spent much time to digest what advantages
> there are to moving to systemd. However, it does seem to be quite a
> complex system with, as of yet, hard to locate documentation. I've also
> not had to debug any start up fa
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 17:04:36 +0800
Ed Greshko wrote:
> I must admit that I've not spent much time to digest what advantages
> there are to moving to systemd. However, it does seem to be quite a
> complex system with, as of yet, hard to locate documentation.
subscribe to the dev.
On 06/15/2011 04:07 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> I saw the words "Developer blog" and made the assumption that it was a
> blog "by and for" developers of systemd.
>
> Do you now understand what I am talking about? And you did notice the
> :-) in my "tripped up" statement, yes? Yet, I'm not sure I am
On 06/15/2011 06:29 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 06/15/2011 03:50 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> On 06/15/2011 05:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>> bochecha is not a systemd developer
>>>
>> Oh, BTW, even though I realized my error I make the error due to
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Systemd#R
On 06/15/2011 03:50 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 06/15/2011 05:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> bochecha is not a systemd developer
>>
> Oh, BTW, even though I realized my error I make the error due to
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Systemd#References
>
> On that page it says
>
> http://0po
On 06/15/2011 03:32 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 06/15/2011 05:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> On 06/15/2011 02:34 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>>> I must admit that I've not spent much time to digest what advantages
>>> there are to moving to systemd. However, it doe
On 06/15/2011 05:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> bochecha is not a systemd developer
>
Oh, BTW, even though I realized my error I make the error due to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Systemd#References
On that page it says
http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/ - Developer blog has lots of
in
On 06/15/2011 05:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 06/15/2011 02:34 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> I must admit that I've not spent much time to digest what advantages
>> there are to moving to systemd. However, it does seem to be quite a
>> complex system with, as of yet, ha
On 06/15/2011 02:34 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> I must admit that I've not spent much time to digest what advantages
> there are to moving to systemd. However, it does seem to be quite a
> complex system with, as of yet, hard to locate documentation. I've also
> not had
On 06/15/2011 02:34 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> I must admit that I've not spent much time to digest what advantages
> there are to moving to systemd. However, it does seem to be quite a
> complex system with, as of yet, hard to locate documentation. I've also
> not had
I must admit that I've not spent much time to digest what advantages
there are to moving to systemd. However, it does seem to be quite a
complex system with, as of yet, hard to locate documentation. I've also
not had to debug any start up failures...but wanted to learn more about
On 05/01/2011 08:21 AM, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I need to use 2 packages:
> f2c and complex
> Unfornutely, they both define their own structure complex which are
> complicting.
> How can I bypass this issue ?
> In fact I need to use both of them !
>
>
Hello,
I need to use 2 packages:
f2c and complex
Unfornutely, they both define their own structure complex which are
complicting.
How can I bypass this issue ?
In fact I need to use both of them !
Thank.
--
---
==
Patrick
16 matches
Mail list logo
