Nautilus 2.5.3

[Joe Marcus Clarke]

On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 14:34, Franz Klammer wrote:
> Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> 
> >On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 08:54, Khairil Yusof wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 03:17 -0600, Jeremy Messenger wrote:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Yeah, I get that too.. Tomorrow, I am planning to clear all of stuff like 
> >>>~/.gnome2, ~/.gconf and etc to see if this issue is still there.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>First thing I tried :)
> >>
> >>Didn't change anything. I couldn't find a bug report in bugzilla,
> >>wondering if this is a FreeBSD issue. I'm submitting one anyways. Bugs
> >>in 2.5 seem minor. 
> >>
> >>Posting this from Evo 1.5 now. Unlike Gnome 2.5.. it really feels like a
> >>development release.  
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >I would advise anyone that's submitting a bug in either GNOME 2.5 or Evo
> >1.5 to make sure all their libraries are in sync first.  That is, make
> >sure each binary only links against one version of a given library. 
> >  
> >
> 
> i'm doing nothing else as be sure that the libraries are in sync since 
> i've installed
> gnome 2.5 - they bring out updates in minutes ;-)
> (the last libbonobo*-update completely shoots my gnome-installation.)
> currently i'm thinking about an automated script that does the job in 
> the background.
> but that's not so easy:
> a portupgrade -rf <port-name> updates every package in +REQUIRED_BY even
> it's not necessary -  is there an easy way to figure out the _exact_ 
> names of the ports
> they _really_ using the given port?

What do you mean?

Joe

> i know that this could be dangerous - but i think not so dangerous as 
> the last
> bonobo-update ;-)
> 
> franz.
> 
> >Also try to include as much console/error output as possible (if it's
> >relevant).  Sometimes, you may have to start bonobo-activation-server,
> >for example, by hand to get all the necessary output.  And, of course,
> >be sure to build all components with "-O -g -pipe" and STRIP= to ensure
> >we get good stack traces.  Also, anytime you can provide a patch, please
> >do so (even if it's a simple header file include patch).  The more
> >patches we can feed back to GNOME, the more seriously they will take
> >us.  Thanks.
> >
> >Joe
> >
> >  
> >
-- 
PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-gnome/attachments/20031210/c75b1ded/attachment.bin