Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:39:38 -0500
From:      Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com>
To:        Franz Klammer <klammer@webonaut.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD GNOME Users <gnome@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Nautilus 2.5.3
Message-ID:  <1071085178.769.30.camel@gyros>
In-Reply-To: <3FD77547.8020709@webonaut.com>
References:  <20031210074908.GA96681@wolverine.home.net> <oprzyj3rr68ckrg5@smtp.central.cox.net> <1071064474.19033.6.camel@wolverine.home.net> <1071079364.769.13.camel@gyros>  <3FD77547.8020709@webonaut.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--=-C1iSJ+rTNpVhyYzKSeYV
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 14:34, Franz Klammer wrote:
> Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
>=20
> >On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 08:54, Khairil Yusof wrote:
> > =20
> >
> >>On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 03:17 -0600, Jeremy Messenger wrote:
> >>
> >>   =20
> >>
> >>>Yeah, I get that too.. Tomorrow, I am planning to clear all of stuff l=
ike=20
> >>>~/.gnome2, ~/.gconf and etc to see if this issue is still there.
> >>>     =20
> >>>
> >>First thing I tried :)
> >>
> >>Didn't change anything. I couldn't find a bug report in bugzilla,
> >>wondering if this is a FreeBSD issue. I'm submitting one anyways. Bugs
> >>in 2.5 seem minor.=20
> >>
> >>Posting this from Evo 1.5 now. Unlike Gnome 2.5.. it really feels like =
a
> >>development release. =20
> >>   =20
> >>
> >
> >I would advise anyone that's submitting a bug in either GNOME 2.5 or Evo
> >1.5 to make sure all their libraries are in sync first.  That is, make
> >sure each binary only links against one version of a given library.=20
> > =20
> >
>=20
> i'm doing nothing else as be sure that the libraries are in sync since=20
> i've installed
> gnome 2.5 - they bring out updates in minutes ;-)
> (the last libbonobo*-update completely shoots my gnome-installation.)
> currently i'm thinking about an automated script that does the job in=20
> the background.
> but that's not so easy:
> a portupgrade -rf <port-name> updates every package in +REQUIRED_BY even
> it's not necessary -  is there an easy way to figure out the _exact_=20
> names of the ports
> they _really_ using the given port?

What do you mean?

Joe

> i know that this could be dangerous - but i think not so dangerous as=20
> the last
> bonobo-update ;-)
>=20
> franz.
>=20
> >Also try to include as much console/error output as possible (if it's
> >relevant).  Sometimes, you may have to start bonobo-activation-server,
> >for example, by hand to get all the necessary output.  And, of course,
> >be sure to build all components with "-O -g -pipe" and STRIP=3D to ensur=
e
> >we get good stack traces.  Also, anytime you can provide a patch, please
> >do so (even if it's a simple header file include patch).  The more
> >patches we can feed back to GNOME, the more seriously they will take
> >us.  Thanks.
> >
> >Joe
> >
> > =20
> >
--=20
PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc



--=-C1iSJ+rTNpVhyYzKSeYV
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQA/13Z6b2iPiv4Uz4cRAjwzAJ0SY38CUhPy8w1e9o+gEDICqwV9agCglkV4
msjcEOwSOueog5Tb8ymymLo=
=cur/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-C1iSJ+rTNpVhyYzKSeYV--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1071085178.769.30.camel>