Subject: Re: fluxbox irregularities?
To: None <tech-pkg@netbsd.org>
From: Juan RP <jrp@hispabsd.org>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 08/02/2003 23:54:57
--=.?emcAIi.du44Iz
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 21:58:40 +0200
poff <poff@sixbit.org> wrote:

> 
> I did a cvs update, it is using 0.94 (fluxbox -v and the package agree).
> 
> Turns out this is the development version which is why the man pages notes 
> 0.1.15
> 
> Can we get it back to 0.1.14? Or does it not really matter...
> 

Yes, you are right, we have 0.9.4 actually, but this version
is the development version ... the stable branch is 0.1.x.

...

I don't know why we have now the development version ...

Another thing is ... why the BUILD_DEFS on Makefile are called
as FLUKEBOX ? i.e:

FLUKEBOX_USE_XINERAMA?= NO
.if !empty(FLUKEBOX_USE_XINERAMA:M[Yy][Ee][Ss])
CONFIGURE_ARGS+=        --enable-xinerama
.endif

Is there any wrong to use FLUXBOX instead ?

-- 
Juan RP		<jrp@hispabsd.org>
--

--=.?emcAIi.du44Iz
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQE/LDHHmOEpHEa5ttcRAg9DAJ0U+4o95tfIhbFGeEbiuHv25FbgwgCfUJGs
+IIGbip7QPp/q+B7+Sj1pQM=
=tgKK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=.?emcAIi.du44Iz--