| 1 |
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:26:19 -0800 |
| 2 |
felix@×××××××.com wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 06:41:22AM +0100, Jes?s Guerrero wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > There's a big chance that you are going to have problems |
| 7 |
> > with amd64 if you use anything below 2.5.16, but, besides that, you |
| 8 |
> > should really be using 2.5.24, which is the most stable version. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > What version of fvwm are you using? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> 2.5.21, the latest ebuild. I know it's behind the fvwm site, but |
| 13 |
> other than install outside of portage, there's not much to do about |
| 14 |
> that. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Well, I made an ebuild for .23 and .24 long ago, though no one seems to care |
| 18 |
about fvwm users for quite a long time :P |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=191638 |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
You can also use the live-ebuild in the devnull overlay (use layman for that). |
| 23 |
Both ebuilds are mine and have been around for a long time. In fvwm, usually, |
| 24 |
the latest version (even cvs) is usually more stable than any previous one. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Fancy stuff is rarely committed, so, almost all commits are bugfixes, |
| 27 |
and that 's why it can only get more and more stable. If you have some problem |
| 28 |
with any of these ebuilds, just ask. Though they have been tested for a long |
| 29 |
time and should work painlessly. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Regards. |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Jesús Guerrero <i92guboj@×××××.es> |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-amd64@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives