This Time Self-Hosted
dark mode light mode Search

Happened while testing…

Seems strange, but while I’m on AMD64 team, I don’t really mark many things.. I used to have a stable chroot to mark stable things, but I haven’t updated it in eons and then I just trashed it.
I sometimes marked things ~amd64 if they were missing, but it’s rare.. well if everything goes like I think, in the next days I’m going to mark a couple of packages 😛

The first is app-mobilephone/moto4lin, that builds and runs fine on AMD64… I have to see if it works with my new phone, tho (the Motorola V180 I talked about)… to do that I have to buy the USB cable, luckily it seems to be a standard USB mini-A connection.

Then, I was looking for a SIP client for KDE/QT, as kphone does not seem to work with the VoIP provider I just registered with… Twinkle seems to be what I was looking for, but it requires to be patched for AMD64 compliancy, and also its dependency net-libs/ccrtp needs to. Unfortunately to submit the patch to ccrtp I had to registered with Savannah.. and yet another registration, sob.

Talking about the VoIP provider I registered with… well it does seem to provide a decent service, so I can’t blame them about that, but in the “Who we are” page, they really seems to be lamers:

“When the project shaped, a storm rose above the Eutelia’s premises and the thunderbolts struck the iron tower that dominate them; from here the Skypho name as short for Sky Phone.”

a part the “poetry” of all the story, that I don’t trust neither with a nail of my fingers, for a project born in 2005, with “skypho” as name, the only reason for the naming is the similarity with the way more known Skype service.

Geeeee, why they need to be so lame while faking the reasons of their name? Better avoiding telling that, than having this lame impressions to people who know other services (because I’m sure many Italian users that does not know Skype will fall for such a beautiful story..).

Oh well… and for the KDE category I added to this post, Halcy0n confirmed that an ICE I was getting building 2.6.14 kernel with GCC 4.0.2-r1 is due to the famous visibility patch backported from Fedora. Now remember me, why we are still fighting with that? Because KDE upstream still thinks that there’s no point in disabling visibility, also if 90% of KDE becomes unstable after that? Because Dirk is still convinced that changing the default visibility, possibly breaking KDE in subtle way is good?

Sob, I just hope that people don’t start blaming “KDE is unstable” just because of that visibility stuff that does not and won’t ever work.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.