Re: Packaging CX and tlf...
In article <[🔎] 200204211210.20036.pa3aba@debian.org> you wrote:
> Anyone interested in packaging one or both of these software package?
>
> Both CX and tlf are using the curses library, all software is written in C.
> Tlf seems to be the most active. There have been no changes to CX for over a
> year (in fact, it is only available trough CVS). Making RPM's available would
> also be nice, so non-debian users can test these...
Please don't discard CX so quickly. The programmers' aim is to recreate the
latest DOS-version of CT as closely as possible, which has not seen any
changes itself for a long time. In fact, CT does not *need* any further
development, since it it is more or less bugfree and works for 99% of all
contesters' demands.
Seeing that CX has actively been developped by a bunch of Germany's top
contesters, I'd say that CX in the end is more practical than TLF because it
uses CT's keyborad layout and thus makes transistion from DOS to Linux for
any Linux Newbie a lot easier than TLF.
Peter Lemken
DF5JT
Berlin
--
Post quality. Encourage quality. Discourage crap. Be entertaining, be
creative, or shut the fuck up.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hams-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: