Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 11:07:02 -0800 From: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@freebsd.org> To: Adam Weinberger <adamw@freebsd.org> Cc: Murray Stokely <murray@freebsdmall.com> Subject: Re: fam Message-ID: <1111259222.97034.60.camel@tomcat.kitchenlab.org> In-Reply-To: <423C72BC.6050209@FreeBSD.org> References: <20050319030449.GG4271@freebsdmall.com> <1111210527.41721.40.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <1111215080.97034.9.camel@tomcat.kitchenlab.org> <1111215496.41721.58.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <1111255523.97034.24.camel@tomcat.kitchenlab.org> <423C6A9E.9000702@FreeBSD.org> <1111256759.97034.44.camel@tomcat.kitchenlab.org> <423C72BC.6050209@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-YgVvsdFKWtOSDm0GPF6p Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If memory serves me right, Adam Weinberger wrote: > The upgrade script always updated the non-GNOME out-of-date ports. What=20 > end up happening was that people who had never run 'pkgdb -F' in their=20 > life were winding up with massive inconsistencies in the package=20 > database, and portupgrade would fall over on itself. The upgrade script=20 > now forcibly rebuilds the package database at the beginning. >=20 > A plethora of users were certainly experiencing that problem. But, with=20 > version 2.10-3 of the gnome_upgrade.sh script (the one currently on the=20 > website), that problem is resolved *nod* >=20 > Since that update, actually, bug reports have ceased. Which is neat. OK, I understand now. Thanks a lot for clarifying. BTW, I should mention that when *I* did the upgrade from GNOME 2.8, everything worked pretty well, thanks to everyone's hard work on this. I would have said "worked perfectly", except that my workstation decided that it wanted to panic in the middle of the upgrade. :-p > >>>2. GNOME includes support for the File Alteration Monitor (devel/fam) > >>>by default, in order to improve the GNOME desktop's ability to respond > >>>to files being added, deleted, or modified by other programs. To take > >>>advantage of this functionality, FAM must be enabled in inetd.conf(5). > >>>More information can be found in ports/devel/fam/pkg-message. > >> > >>I have no problem with that message, but it's in no way new news.=20 > >>Nautilus has had fam support since at least 2.0. > >=20 > >=20 > > OK, forget it then. >=20 > Given the message that said that KDE now supports fam as well, maybe an=20 > entry WOULD be a good thing? Something somewhere that says "Hey, GNOME=20 > and KDE users: enable FAM for a gooder desktop experience!" Hmmm...you might have a good point. Not sure what's a good way to word that yet. > I'm not familiar with the security implications of fam (it uses RPC, so=20 > I assume it's got Issues[tm]) [and I think it was wpaul who told me=20 > "GNOME users have a lot more than fam to worry about for security"], but=20 > maybe we should make fam auto-enable itself, and make fam support the=20 > default for the nautilus backend? If it's decided that it should run from inetd, then there's the additional requirement of setting inetd_enable in rc.conf. (e.g. I wasn't running inetd until I needed to enable it for fam.) I'm not sure if there is a precedent for doing that or not. Bruce. --=-YgVvsdFKWtOSDm0GPF6p Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBCPHhW2MoxcVugUsMRAgeaAKD9qxvPoqW+KlYJD0r8TKup3TIFkwCgpybV wUM1uRc2COGH92+Xr8RWojg= =vf/y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-YgVvsdFKWtOSDm0GPF6p--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1111259222.97034.60.camel>