On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 14:06 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, William L. Maltby wrote:
>
> > Dag in the thread about kvirc, I had pointed to dries repo, based on a
> > list of repos I use *now*, <snip>
> > Should I be including *both* rpmforge and dag?
>
> No, if you install rpmforge-release you will be using:
>
> 'dag' on EL2, RH7, RH9, EL3, FC1, FC2, FC3 and EL4
> 'dries' on FC4 and FC5
>
> I'd like to leave the other FC? release and possible RH9 to dries (or
> someone else if Dries has no resources to do it) but as long as there is
> no alternative, I'm doing those as the authoritative builder.
>
> Even though a big part of the packages are being packaged by Dries.
>
> Packaging and building are different things in the RPMforge context. It's
> not because you package something, you're also building it for all the
> different distributions/architectures.
>
> Kind regards,
> -- dag wieers, dag@xxxxxxxxxx, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
> [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
<snip sig, leaving the part I really love, above>
Thanks. That clears it up for me. I hate when I give only a partial
answer without realizing and telling.
Bill
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060403/0c56abca/attachment.bin
