Now that all of KDE has gone, we are left with one issue: kdelibs.
From what I heard kdelibs is LGPL'd and can be distributed freely.
This would mean that someone could reupload it and it will be
accepted into contrib?
Wichert.
--
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Richard Braakman wrote:
darkThat only is a large source of packaging bugs. In fact, the (IMO)
darkmost annoying upgrade problem in hamm was a pathname problem: two
darkpackages had moved to a different directory at the last minute, and
darkthe auto upgrade script hadn't been
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Michael Stone wrote:
mstoneWhat I'm trying to say is why doesn't perl look in /usr/lib/perl5
mstoneanymore? Was this just a gratuitous change, or was there a reason for
mstonebreaking things? I can understand the change if there are modules that
mstonework in 5.004 but not
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Santiago Vila wrote:
2) Are we really going to freeze slink in 7 days?
I dont think we should freeze until we have a broken libc in slink...
--
Madarasz Gergely [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's practically impossible to look at a penguin and
On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Santiago Vila wrote:
2) Are we really going to freeze slink in 7 days?
I dont think we should freeze until we have a broken libc in slink...
^
Hmpf... I meant while :)
--
Madarasz Gergely
John Lapeyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, at least part of their rationale for the new scheme is to
allow multiple versions of perl, a feature that debian is not
interested in.
Threaded perl and non-threaded perl are binary-incompatible at the
extension level, meaning most compiled
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
I suspect that it's in the best interest of the freeze to revert to Perl
5.004. I'm currently uploading the 5.004.04-6 release to master's
Incoming. I'll file a bug on ftp.debian.org that the 5.005 release
should be deleted and the 5.004 release installed.
Darren Stalder wrote:
I suspect that it's in the best interest of the freeze to revert to Perl
Thanks.
5.004. I'm currently uploading the 5.004.04-6 release to master's
Incoming. I'll file a bug on ftp.debian.org that the 5.005 release
should be deleted and the 5.004 release installed.
So, is there any consensus on how to upload source packages for ports?
I have some things like strace that I would like to upload for arm,
but the source is fairly different... Hrmm... pondering.. maybe I can
get around it.. hrmmm
Thanks,
--
David Welton
Gregory S. Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It might not be legal for someone to give him PGP or explain how
crypto works even while he's in the US.
No, the regulations prohibit export. If he's in the US, that's not
export.
As you mention, even if it was a problem, it would be a problem for
the
Rob Browning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that sounds like a better idea if it would work, but just like
the touching idea, you'd have to make sure that all the relevant
programs actually keep the file open, and don't just open it when they
need it.
I think we can safely say that a program
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is from the linux kernel mailing list. I find it pretty completly sums
op my thoughts on all the new constitution and voting and policy voting
stuff that we've been setting up. I haven't been vocal about this, but I
think we've been moving in the wrong
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Emacs should not be part of the 'basics' (I say this as an emacs user).
I think we should have a priority between Standard and Optional,
perhaps named Recommended. These are packages which would be
Standard, but for size. Tex and a lot of X should
On a related note, do we want to continue using names from pixar movies
now that Bruce is gone?
Justin Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i see no reason not to. they are nice names, the only problem is that we
may be running out of good ones (i admit, rc was a stretch)
irony type=mild
Is
Paul Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ever since hamm, expect has been giving me serious trouble. It won't
run cleanly when started from cron. This means that a lot of my
expects scripts are broken. I use expect extensively for system
maintanance and accounting (make sure servers run, upload
Contrib and Non-free packages can't have release critical bugs --
they're not even an official part of debian.
--
Raul
David Engel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Oct 01, 1998 at 12:27:17PM -0700, Alex Romosan wrote:
can somebody who know more about tcl (maybe even the tcl maintainer)
take a look at this? i appreciate any help. thank you.
I (the Tcl maintainer) don't have time to do this right now.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lees [EMAIL PROTECTED]
alpha 2 is released at http://www.lpsg.demon.co.uk/gdselect/
I was trying to compile it, had a little problem with some includes on glib,
which I overcame, but it seg faulted (or something like that, said glib
caught it) in the
I spent some time rewriting the help screens for the rescue disk to
make them more comprehensible and to add information about using the
rescue disk to rescue a system. I put the patch on master
//master.debian.org/~elf/patches/boot-floppies_2.0.11_p1
Comments?
On Thu, Oct 08, 1998 at 08:10:09PM -0700, Alex Romosan wrote:
David Engel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Oct 01, 1998 at 12:27:17PM -0700, Alex Romosan wrote:
can somebody who know more about tcl (maybe even the tcl maintainer)
take a look at this? i appreciate any help. thank you.
Ok, after some thought, and fielding a LOT of perl questions on #debian,
I've come up with a more workable idea which gives us much better
handling for the next time something like this happens..
Rename perl to perl5.005, version 02-2 or such..
Then use the alternatives setup to decide which perl
On Fri, 09 Oct 1998, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Now that all of KDE has gone, we are left with one issue: kdelibs.
From what I heard kdelibs is LGPL'd and can be distributed freely.
This would mean that someone could reupload it and it will be
accepted into contrib?
I think that the packages qt*,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Chris wrote:
Since when did linux get virus's You'd only get them on a really
bad system - which debian is not (or if you did EVERYTHING as root).
On a linux system exporting disk space to Windows machines, it is indeed
practical to have an
On Fri, Oct 02, 1998 at 07:00:31PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
Contrib and Non-free packages can't have release critical bugs --
they're not even an official part of debian.
yeah yeah, the package ain't part of Debian anymore because of a lack of
license and no way to get the author to fix it.
I'd like to announce my intention to package two more python add-on
modules:
Package: python-mxtexttools
Version: 1.0.1-0
Section: interpreters
Priority: optional
Architecture: i386
Depends: libc6, python-base (= 1.5)
Installed-Size: 132
Maintainer: Gregor Hoffleit [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This reminds me of a joke; unfortunately I couldn't track it down
in a quick look on altavista and I haven't any more time to look for it.
In short, a man attends several days of a trade show and each day
tells a security guard that today he will steal
On Thu, Oct 08, 1998 at 11:15:09AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
I was right in that lesstif causes my problems. After reverting to the hamm
version everything is fine again. So there either is a bug in lesstifg or an
incompatibility.
Odd. I've recently been coding a simple Motif program for a
(I've now caught up on debian-devel, barring my 7 articles marked to
return, of which this was one ...)
Guy Maor writes on the 10th of September:
Yes, let's.
I am formally proposing version 0.8 of the constitution as given in
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ian/debian-organisation.html.
Buddha Buck writes (Re: Ratifying the constitution ):
...
That's not what it means. It means that in order for an amendment to
automatically be accepted, you need to convince 6 people, Guy and the
five seconds.
If they don't like it, you can force it to a vote. I think you require
Darren Benham writes (Discussion - Proposed Constitution - voting part 2):
I've found another area that could cause problems in the vote counting area.
I've been running various sceanios and here's what I've found:
In point 5 of A.6. describes the STV method. Basicly, if no one
option has
Martin Schulze writes (Contacting authors):
tonight I was thinking about implementing @authors.debian.org which
would enable a way for us to get in touch with the upstream authors of
some piece of software without the need of looking into the copyright
file or digging in the source if the
Le Thu, Oct 08, 1998 at 08:54:46PM -0400, Michael Alan Dorman écrivait:
Threaded perl and non-threaded perl are binary-incompatible at the
extension level, meaning most compiled extensions must be
distinguishable.
I think you're wrong. perl5.005 and perl5.005-thread are binary-compatible.
But
In light of the perl issues (see my last message) and the message Linus
just sent off to linux-kernel about 2.1.125 and 2.2.0p1 could the freeze
be pushed back a week to see if we should QUICKLY re-target slink
towards 2.2.0?
Thanks.
Zephaniah E, Hull..
pgpL2Z9IpY4sx.pgp
Description: PGP
Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hate replying to myself, but here we go..
kdelibs is LGPL. As someone mentioned it does use some code derived
from gettext (libintl.cpp), which is GPL. However the code was taken
from a version modified for glibc2 where is was redistributed as LGPL.
Then, I'd like to announce my intention to package python-opengl and
pcgi. python-opengl depends on togl, which has not yet been packaged.
Package: python-opengl
Depends: mesag2, togl, python-tk
Description: An Python interface for OpenGL, GLU, GLUT and Togl
PyOpenGL provides bindings
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 06:40:54AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In light of the perl issues (see my last message)
A bug report has been submitted to ftp.debian.org to put the previous
version back, which means the perl issues need not be dealt with in the
current development cycle.
and the
Sorry, maybe I'm deaf or blind or my mail spool went to /dev/null, but I
never saw a concrete date for the freeze in the last months. Can somebody
enlighten me when it will happen ?
Gregor
On Fri, 9 Oct 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In light of the perl issues (see my last message) and the message Linus
just sent off to linux-kernel about 2.1.125 and 2.2.0p1 could the freeze
be pushed back a week to see if we should QUICKLY re-target slink
towards 2.2.0?
I don't think this
Ian Jackson wrote:
Martin Schulze writes (Contacting authors):
tonight I was thinking about implementing @authors.debian.org which
would enable a way for us to get in touch with the upstream authors of
some piece of software without the need of looking into the copyright
file or digging
Hi,
My general rule of thinking about it is:
state is an opion within the program which can be changed and
should be remembered next time.
esp something which reasonably could change every time the program
is used (it is concievable I have a CD today...in a month I am FTP
upgrading)
this
Santiago == Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Santiago There are a lot of packages that would have to be recompiled
Santiago for Linux 2.2. This will take time and a lot of testing.
I can see pcmcia (28-Sep-98 is needed) and netutils (so that IPv6 is
supported), but not a lot of packages.
I'm not aware of any software in slink that must be updated to work with 2.2
properly (with the exception of pcmcia-cs); slink currently runs fine with
2.1.x (which I suspect quite a few developers run).
I do run 2.1.124 on my laptop and am really impressed by this
kernel. It uses less memory
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 01:20:34PM +0200, Samuel Tardieu wrote:
I can see pcmcia (28-Sep-98 is needed) and netutils (so that IPv6 is
supported), but not a lot of packages.
IIRC, libc6 doesn't support IPv6; you need a beta version for that. So this
is only an issue if we intend to release one of
Previously David Welton wrote:
So, is there any consensus on how to upload source packages for ports?
I have some things like strace that I would like to upload for arm,
but the source is fairly different... Hrmm... pondering.. maybe I can
get around it.. hrmmm
I would suggest first mailing
On 9 Oct 1998, Samuel Tardieu wrote:
Santiago There are a lot of packages that would have to be recompiled
Santiago for Linux 2.2. This will take time and a lot of testing.
I can see pcmcia (28-Sep-98 is needed) and netutils (so that IPv6 is
supported), but not a lot of packages.
Well,
On Thu 08 Oct 1998, Edward Betts wrote:
And while we are doing it how about implementing @m86k.porter.debian.org or
@arm.builder.debian.org for the person who has recomplied the package on
different machines (m86k, powerpc, alpha, arm, etc).
Now this _is_ a good idea! I've already asked on
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
The author should get the credit, and more exposition...
Policy says /usr/doc/package/copyruight should say who written the
program. The credit should be already there.
Or are we afraid that they might get bug reports that should go the the
Debian
Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Le Thu, Oct 08, 1998 at 08:54:46PM -0400, Michael Alan Dorman écrivait:
Threaded perl and non-threaded perl are binary-incompatible at the
extension level, meaning most compiled extensions must be
distinguishable.
I think you're wrong. perl5.005
On Fri 09 Oct 1998, J.H.M. Dassen Ray wrote:
and the message Linus just sent off to linux-kernel about 2.1.125 and
2.2.0p1 could the freeze be pushed back a week to see if we should QUICKLY
re-target slink towards 2.2.0?
I'm not aware of any software in slink that must be updated to
I'm not a developer but would like to share my experience with
installing/using Debian and compare it to Windows 95/98. I'm a long
time Unix user (Sun, Apollo, HP), but not administrator, and started
to use/administer a Debian machine a year ago. Since then I
installed/upgraded Debian 2.0 on
Buddha Buck writes (Re: Ratifying the constitution ):
...
...
Out of curiosity, how formal does a proposed amendment have to be. I
mean, will this work for an amendment proposal? (And if so, I'd like
to propose it:
--Amendment Proposal
[replace
Quoting J.H.M. Dassen Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
I'm not aware of any software in slink that must be updated to work with 2.2
properly (with the exception of pcmcia-cs); slink currently runs fine with
2.1.x (which I suspect quite a few developers run).
Things like smbfsx that have 2.0 and 2.1
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 02:07:15PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
On 9 Oct 1998, Samuel Tardieu wrote:
Santiago There are a lot of packages that would have to be recompiled
Santiago for Linux 2.2. This will take time and a lot of testing.
I can see pcmcia (28-Sep-98 is needed) and netutils
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 08:42:57AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
Quoting J.H.M. Dassen Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
I'm not aware of any software in slink that must be updated to work with 2.2
properly (with the exception of pcmcia-cs); slink currently runs fine with
2.1.x (which I suspect quite
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In light of the perl issues (see my last message) and the message Linus
just sent off to linux-kernel about 2.1.125 and 2.2.0p1 could the freeze
be pushed back a week to see if we should QUICKLY re-target slink
towards 2.2.0?
No, this would hold the release for at
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 03:05:17PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In light of the perl issues (see my last message) and the message Linus
just sent off to linux-kernel about 2.1.125 and 2.2.0p1 could the freeze
be pushed back a week to see if we should QUICKLY
Previously [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which is why I asked for another week to see IF we need to re-target,
instead of asking for a re-target now..
Bogus argument. Kernels do not have a set release date, and 2.2 will take
a couple of weeks, esp. since there will probably be a couple of
pre2.2
Previously [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have to do that anyways for 2.0.36..
Only recompile, to work with 2.1 expect to fix a lot of code..
When did we get sound modules? With 2.2.0 we could actually have some!!
shameless plug You did know we have alsa packages, right? And they
even work with
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 04:48:26AM -, Robert Woodcock wrote:
Just out of curiosity would anyone be interested in a mcafee virusscan
installer package in slink contrib? I have everything created, the only
thing I'd have to work on would be upstream upgrades (it currently doesn't
handle this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
In the release naming thread (I don't know whether it died down
already), there was a mention of 3.0 (right after 2.2, for one).
Now... I know `we'[1] don't want to set hard release goals anymore.
And I agree with that.
Someone (can't remember who) a while
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 09:33:49AM -0500, Jeff Noxon wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 04:48:26AM -, Robert Woodcock wrote:
Just out of curiosity would anyone be interested in a mcafee virusscan
installer package in slink contrib? I have everything created, the only
thing I'd have to work
Please check out
http://www.debian.org/~joey/goals/index.html or
http://www.infodrom.north.de/~joey/Linux/Debian/master/goals/index.html
Regards,
Joey
--
No question is too silly to ask, but, of course, some are too silly
to answer. -- Perl book
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 09:33:49AM -0500, Jeff Noxon wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 04:48:26AM -, Robert Woodcock wrote:
Just out of curiosity would anyone be interested in a mcafee virusscan
installer package in slink contrib? I have everything created, the only
thing I'd have to work
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 08:01:05AM -0700, Robert Woodcock wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 09:33:49AM -0500, Jeff Noxon wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 04:48:26AM -, Robert Woodcock wrote:
Just out of curiosity would anyone be interested in a mcafee virusscan
installer package in slink
I suspect that it's in the best interest of the freeze to revert to Perl
Thanks.
5.004. I'm currently uploading the 5.004.04-6 release to master's
Incoming. I'll file a bug on ftp.debian.org that the 5.005 release
should be deleted and the 5.004 release installed.
Maybe that's
I maintain cdparanoia, which has bug #23236 filed against it. This is an
alpha version of the software, and the bug is that a feature isn't yet
implemented. I don't want this to keep this package out of the new
release, as its base functionality works extremely well.
Sorry if I'm missing
Just like debian has an official standard shell - bash, does debian have an
official scripting language ?
If so, is it perl, python, etc ?
The reason I'm asking is largely questions of disk space - ie minimizing the
number of scripting languages installed on a system by writing a package which
On Thu, Oct 08, 1998 at 02:09:48AM -0700, Geoffrey L. Brimhall wrote:
Just like debian has an official standard shell - bash, does debian have an
official scripting language ?
If so, is it perl, python, etc ?
Yes, Bourne Shell :- Bash implements most features of it, afaik.
I really wish
Unless someone else is working on this, I would like to package gqview. It is
a DFSG GTK+ based Image browser that supports thumb nails and image viewing. I
like it. Small and fast -- even on this p75.
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Geoffrey L. Brimhall wrote:
Just like debian has an official standard shell - bash, does debian have an
official scripting language ?
Even if bash is essential, the standard shell is sh, not bash.
[ If you look at our shell scripts, most of them are /bin/sh, not
/bin/bash
On 09-Oct-98 Ian Jackson wrote:
A.6(5)(iii):
This elimination procedure is repeated, moving down ballot papers to
2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. preferences as required, until one option gets
more than half of the `first' preferences.
It seems to me to be clear that the intent is that if a
Just wondering, Dale, but why didn't you announce this to the Debian
lists as well as the c.o.linux.announce?
Ben
--
Brought to you by the letters M and J and the number 10.
XTC versus Adam Ant -- which one will survive? -- They Might Be Giants
Debian GNU/Linux -- where do you want to go
*-Geoffrey L. Brimhall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| Just like debian has an official standard shell - bash, does debian have an
| official scripting language ?
|
| If so, is it perl, python, etc ?
|
| The reason I'm asking is largely questions of disk space - ie minimizing the
| number of scripting
I installed perl 5.005, but I understand that it has been revoked
and all packages in slink shall be built against perl 5.004,
is that so? Now where do I find 004? There's no perl in ftp.debian.org
and ftp.de.debian.org has 005.
thanks
--
Eschew obfuscation(go on; look them both up)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale E. Martin) writes:
I maintain cdparanoia, which has bug #23236 filed against it. This is an
alpha version of the software, and the bug is that a feature isn't yet
implemented.
I don't want this to keep this package out of the new
release, as its base functionality
Greetings! The hp2pbm utility is implicitly called by mgetty-fax's
faxspool when given a HP PCL file. Currently, this results in an
error on Debian. I can't seem to find a license stipulation in the
sources; I'm beginning to think its public domain, and am attempting
to contact the author to
Whenever you start a program running under X11, the windows created
usually have the little 'X' logo in the upper left hand corner. If
you are running RedHat linux however, the upper left hand corner of
the windows contains the RedHat logo (head with a red hat). Why can't
it (under Debian) have
If you don't get the original volunteer, I'll take it over. I like and use
yagirc so I've got a stake in it being kept up-to-date.
On 08-Oct-98 David Welton wrote:
I recall someone wanting to take over yagirc after I offered it up.
Is this person still interested? They ought to upload a new,
[ perl5.005_02's default library is now /usr/lib/perl5/perl5.005,
and might change with 5.006, etc.]
Any idea how to handle this properly ? Maybe we need a sort of perl
policy : package will have to install file under /usr/lib/perl5/debian
which would be a symlink to the current perl version
On Thu, Oct 08, 1998 at 10:53:23PM +0200, Francesco Tapparo wrote:
Slashdot has posted an article about the decision to remove the KDE binaries
right now.
Could someone please post the article or at least the complete URL?
Michael
--
Dr. Michael Meskes | Th.-Heuss-Str. 61, D-41812
On Thu, Oct 08, 1998 at 03:01:58PM -0400, Steve Dunham wrote:
Yup, I just noticed that my package, amaya, no longer works. Layout
problems: the widget holding the page doesn't show up. I think we
might need a newer (or older) version of lesstif in slink.
I absolutely agree. Did anyone
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 01:39:09PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Thu, Oct 08, 1998 at 10:53:23PM +0200, Francesco Tapparo wrote:
Slashdot has posted an article about the decision to remove the KDE binaries
right now.
Could someone please post the article or at least the complete URL?
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.4.0.30
$ dpkg-shlibdeps src/fortify; cat debian/substvars
shlibs:Depends=libc6 (= 2.0.7u)
$ fakeroot dpkg-shlibdeps src/fortify; cat debian/substvars
shlibs:Depends=libc6, libc6 (= 2.0.7u)
^ ^
:-?
Ideas??
PS: libtrick's fakeroot
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Debian Private [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: slashdot
John Lapeyre writes:
Something that came up in the discussion. Does anyone have any idea what
the U.S. legal system (or
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 03:05:17PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
Linux 2.2 is a good candidate for the next unstable to play with.
I believe that it will be fun, but I also forsee that there will
be problems.
I hope our release manager won't jump on that train too quick.
Agreed. There are
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 01:18:46PM +0200, Samuel Tardieu wrote:
I do run 2.1.124 on my laptop and am really impressed by this
kernel. It uses less memory and runs smoother under heavy load than
any kernel I've ever used.
I have to agree. 124 is great on my notebook too. I'm just compiling 125.
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 06:40:54AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In light of the perl issues (see my last message) and the message Linus
just sent off to linux-kernel about 2.1.125 and 2.2.0p1 could the freeze
be pushed back a week to see if we should QUICKLY re-target slink
towards 2.2.0?
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 03:05:17PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
No, this would hold the release for at least two more months.
Joey, that's exaggerated by a lot. But I agree with your reasoning-
. We have several kernel module package that need to be re-packaged.
. We have to rework on the
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 01:02:32PM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
Sorry, maybe I'm deaf or blind or my mail spool went to /dev/null, but I
never saw a concrete date for the freeze in the last months. Can somebody
enlighten me when it will happen ?
I doubt it's your fault. I never saw it
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 01:20:34PM +0200, Samuel Tardieu wrote:
Santiago There are a lot of packages that would have to be recompiled
Santiago for Linux 2.2. This will take time and a lot of testing.
I can see pcmcia (28-Sep-98 is needed) and netutils (so that IPv6 is
supported), but not a
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 01:10:36PM -0400, Shaleh wrote:
Unless someone else is working on this, I would like to package gqview. It is
a DFSG GTK+ based Image browser that supports thumb nails and image viewing.
I
like it. Small and fast -- even on this p75.
Great. Will you get it into
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 11:16:27AM -0700, Kenneth Scharf wrote:
Whenever you start a program running under X11, the windows created
usually have the little 'X' logo in the upper left hand corner. If
you are running RedHat linux however, the upper left hand corner of
the windows contains the
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 11:40:04AM -0700, David Welton wrote:
http://slashdot.org - it's a pretty good source of Linux news. The
comments have degraded though, don't bother with them.. Used to be
people like Alan Cox occasionally posted.. no more (afaik).
Yes, I know that. I was hoping for
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 09:06:30PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 06:40:54AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In light of the perl issues (see my last message) and the message Linus
just sent off to linux-kernel about 2.1.125 and 2.2.0p1 could the freeze
be pushed back
*-Kenneth Scharf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| Whenever you start a program running under X11, the windows created
| usually have the little 'X' logo in the upper left hand corner. If
| you are running RedHat linux however, the upper left hand corner of
| the windows contains the RedHat logo (head with a
*-Darren Benham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| If you don't get the original volunteer, I'll take it over. I like and use
| yagirc so I've got a stake in it being kept up-to-date.
I'm here, working on 0.66 as we speak. This might be a good time to ask
a question. yagirc can now be built with gnome
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 09:14:14PM +0200, Ole J. Tetlie wrote:
*-Darren Benham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| If you don't get the original volunteer, I'll take it over. I like and use
| yagirc so I've got a stake in it being kept up-to-date.
I'm here, working on 0.66 as we speak. This might be a
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 11:16:27AM -0700, Kenneth Scharf wrote:
Whenever you start a program running under X11, the windows created
usually have the little 'X' logo in the upper left hand corner. If
you are running RedHat linux however, the upper left hand corner of
the windows contains the
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 03:09:05PM -0400, Shaya Potter wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Debian Private [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: slashdot
John Lapeyre writes:
Something that came up in the
I'm looking for myself in the bug database and find that I'm not on
the list. I think I had a bug filed against one of my packages, but I
cannot find it, or myself in the database.
Huh?
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
