Re: Quality of Helixcode's Debian Packages (was: Re: spidermonkey.helixcode.com down?)
On Wed, 06 Dec 2000 06:08:54 Ethan Benson wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 09:17:30PM -0200, Rogerio Brito wrote:
> > On Dec 04 2000, Willy Lee wrote:
> > > Anyone else seeing this?
> >
> > Well, I don't have any problems connecting to spidermonkey,
> > but I'd like to bring up a new point: is there anybody else
> > besides me that is a bit annoyed with the fact that many of
> > Helixcode's packages are not well polished?
> >
> > The problem that I'm referring to is that a lot of packages
> > seem to have duplicate files, that is, there are some packages
> > that try to overwrite other package's files.
> >
> > I just tried installing Helixcode's Gnome on a brand new
> > potato installation and I've received loads and loads of
> > warnings from apt/dpkg about this problem. Unfortunately, the
> > only packages that I can remember having this problem are
> > libgnomeprint* (and, more precisely, the i18n files).
> >
> > Are there other people seeing this problem or is it a problem
> > with me? (Of course, if it is indeed a problem with HC's
> > packages, then the solution would be to split the packages to
> > avoid them doing wrong things).
>
> yes i installed helix on one debian potato box. the helix packages
> are very very poorly made, i am NOT going to install helix packages
> ever again, instead i think upgrading to woody would be a better
> choice. when you upgrade to woody you get current gnome packages
> which negates the need for helix.
Strange, I haven't had any of these probs on my potato. OTOH, I had
never installed /any/ potato gnome packages, only Helix. Maybe that's
got something to do with it? I'm very satisfied with the quality oh
Helix's debs
I did not vote for the Austrian government
Linux: The choice of a GNU generation. Visit http://www.gnu.org/
Reply to: