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 at wieers.com, 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: signature.asc 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-0005.sig>