| 1 |
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 12:50:57 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > I've also been hit by the first, as I think I mentioned. As for the |
| 4 |
> > other two, re-emerging a binary package won't help at all, because |
| 5 |
> > it's a binary package, so you unpack it rather than rebuild it. |
| 6 |
> > That's more a problem with using binary packages on a source distro |
| 7 |
> > than a fault of python-updater itself. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Understood and agreed. For OO I couldn't quite get up the interest to |
| 10 |
> start building from scratch though. Something like 450MB of things to |
| 11 |
> download and then what, do it again in a week or two? Not worth it for |
| 12 |
> my needs. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
That shouldn't be a problem with the release frequency of OOo, with LO |
| 15 |
that's more of a problem. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
At least with OOo/LO you get a better program for the effort of |
| 18 |
compiling, the open source version of VirtualBox is crippled :( |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature. |
Archives