gdm 2.4 log files (was Re: GDM 2.4 in sid)
Thanks again for your unofficial packages - using them with no problems.
BTW, why your gdm packages keep log files in /var/lib/gdm instead of
/var/log/gdm? Is this hard to change? The old gdm package in unstable
puts the log files in the correct location. You might want to take a
look at it to see how it does it.
Sean Harshbarger <email@example.com> writes:
> Until the "true" maintainer decides on his plan of action on gdm we are
> stuck with the third party packages like mine. I have been activly
> keeping it up to date for the past few months. Now it is already preped
> for mainstream release as long as I have the go ahead to do it. If
> anything bugs are fixed in my version and will help the "real" release
> be good. I would recommend that we just use mine in the
> meantime...report problems to me, and ill fix them and release the
> unoffical versions. If the package is to be orphaned then I elect that I
> should adopt it since I have the experience and system already in place.
> Am Don, 2003-02-06 um 18.04 schrieb Christian Marillat:
> > Ryan Murray <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 11:09:48PM +0100, Christian Marillat wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Actively ? The last upload has been done the 4 Apr 2002. The BTS page
> > > for gdm contains :
> > >
> > > 6 important bugs
> > > 31 normal bugs
> > > 2 minor bugs
> > > 17 whishlist bugs
> > > None of which are RC. None of which give you a reason to hijack the package.
> > GNOME 2 has been release 6 months ago, an we are still waiting for a new
> > gdm package.
> > > The last change in the BTS has been done the 6 Apr 2002 for bug #141184
> > > abd I don't see any reply to a bug since this date.
> > > Maybe you use a different BTS than I do, but I see activity from at
> > > least October 2002, and January 2003.
> > I've never received any reply to my bug #147637 filed 8 months ago...
> > > Then, tell me how you call that ?
> > > Why don't we stop worrying about what to call things (which benefits
> > > no one), and worry about RC FTBFS packages in the gnome2 dep chain.
> > I'm not concerned by that. All my packages are clean and if a receive a
> > FTBFS bug I upload a new package within 2 days.
> > > That benefits everyone. I've had some of those bugs (which are of RC
> > > severity) ignored for 3 months, with uploads of "new upstream
> > > release" happening in the meantime.
> > I still don't see any good reason with the latest gdm isn't uploaded.
> > Christian
> Sean Harshbarger
> http://harshy.homelinux.org - Personal Website
> http://coaster.sourceforge.net - Coaster - The Gnome CD Burner