Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Roman Gaufman <hackeron@×××××.com>
To: Stefan Schweizer <sschweizer@×××××.com>
Cc: Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@g.o>, gentoo-dev@l.g.o, devil@××××××××××.ua
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] regarding app-rox (attempt n. 2)
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:09:24
Message-Id: 921ad39e041125070924222ffa@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] regarding app-rox (attempt n. 2) by Roman Gaufman
1 Also, anyone noticed that app-gnustep is empty? (except for some empty
2 file .helps_clean_this_dir_on_2.0.50)
3
4 On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:07:42 -0500, Roman Gaufman <hackeron@×××××.com> wrote:
5 > On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:05:22 +0100, Stefan Schweizer
6 >
7 >
8 > <sschweizer@×××××.com> wrote:
9 > > On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:02:54 -0500, Roman Gaufman <hackeron@×××××.com> wrote:
10 > > > I suppose what you want then is rox-base and possibly rox-extra or
11 > > > maybe rox-misc (like kde-misc).
12 > >
13 > > That makes 3 categories for a little bit more than 20 apps.
14 > >
15 > Who said 3? -- I'm just saying take the common naming scheme. 1 will
16 > be enough, another one can be added later.
17 >
18 > gnustep-base # ls | wc -l
19 > 7
20 >
21 > xfce-base # ls | wc -l
22 > 15
23 >
24 > He said around 20 ebuilds so makes perfect sense to have a rox-base
25 >
26
27 --
28 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] regarding app-rox (attempt n. 2) Armando Di Cianno <fafhrd@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] regarding app-rox (attempt n. 2) Armando Di Cianno <fafhrd@g.o>