On Sat, 24 May 2003 09:51, Alan Shutko wrote:
The citizens of the US have a little more power than the rest of the
world, in that you have a *vote* as to who gets to fuck the rest of the
world.
Well, didn't work that way last time...
They got their second choice.
--
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: debdivert
* URL : http://www.some.org/
License : GPL
Description : Debian packaging aid to create patch packages
This package aims to create packages which replace files
On Sat, 24 May 2003, Masato Taruishi wrote:
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: debdivert
* URL : http://www.some.org/
License : GPL
Description : Debian packaging aid to create patch packages
[snip]
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 05:25:29PM -0400, Joe Drew wrote:
Do we need some method of deciding what constitutes 'the' Debconf?
No, as everyone knows that the only true Debconf are the ones in
Australia, with LCA.
;-).
--
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 03:14:48PM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
My only objection to a conference in the US is the weather is miserable.
I want to go somewhere warm!
Debian MiniConf @ Linux.conf.au, January 2004.
http://conf.linux.org.au/. Speakers lined up for the main conference
(which
Hello!
Does this mean that the, IMHO brain-dead, 24-color limit has
been droped?
From menu's changelog:
* No more require icons to use the colors from cmap.xpm.
Closes:#193231, #175430, #192218, #97080
* No more install cmap.xpm. Closes:#172092
[]s!
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Gustavo
On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 06:15:48PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
Hi Greg,
Now that you've got this release out, have you given any thought to the
message I sent earlier about merging gdb server versions?
Kindly get this on-topic shit out of this off-topic thread. ;-)
--
G. Branden Robinson
2003$BG/(B05$B7n(B24$BF|(B(?)$B$N(B14$B;~(B32$BJ,$K(B Adam Heath
$B[)$/(B:
(B
(B Package: wnpp
(B Version: unavailable; reported 2003-05-24
(B Severity: wishlist
(B
(B * Package name: debdivert
(BLicense : GPL
(BDescription : Debian packaging aid
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 10:02:42PM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
The problem is that people who can get expenses reimbursed need to have
a focus. Sponsors need to have a focus. There needs to be a major
conference for these kinds of things; in other words, it has to be
billed as something more
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: pyblosxom
Version : 0.7beta1-1
Upstream Author : Wari Wahab [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://roughingit.subtlehints.net/pyblosxom/
* License : Python
Description :
[James Troup]
Tor Slettnes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I forwarded this email to his other address, which I came across in a
mail from a common friend of our.
On 24 May 2003 15:40:08 +0900
Masato Taruishi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, the main point of this package is to create a local ad-hoc package
which can coexist with its official package. Escpecially, I can manage
my temporary on-going improvement to some debian package as a debian
package. I
Le Fri, May 23, 2003 at 02:22:08PM -0300, Gustavo Franco écrivait:
You didn't understand my affirmation.Debian Desktop is on www.debian.org
and many others aren't there, for example: Mono for Debian and ipv6.
What are the rules to be there? AFAIK, there are no documented rules.
The rules are
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 09:55:33PM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
http://www.debian.org/devel/, Projects section:
* Debian Web Pages
[...]
* Alioth: Debian GForge
Certainly seems that they're listed.
The Debian Usability Research seems to be missing:
Masato Taruishi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, the main point of this package is to create a local ad-hoc package
which can coexist with its official package. Escpecially, I can manage
my temporary on-going improvement to some debian package as a debian
package. I didn't think to waste
David B Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24 May 2003 15:40:08 +0900
Masato Taruishi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, the main point of this package is to create a local ad-hoc package
which can coexist with its official package. Escpecially, I can manage
my temporary on-going improvement to
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 08:44:48AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
Guido Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This only works if we have a _clean_ kernel-source-2.X.Y package. One of
the reasons why maintaining kernel-patch-2.X.Y-arch packages is such a
pain is the asymmetry between i386 and other
* Joe Drew ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030524 01:11]:
It's not entirely clear to me what makes Debconf into 'the' Debian
conference. For example, if this conference in the US ends up
happening, what's to say it isn't Debconf 3? The defining
characteristics, so far as I can define them, are that it
On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 08:55:31PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
This doesn't mean that we should not have a
Debian conference in North America. I'm sure there are many North
American DDs who'd like to meet more DDs in person. Having a
conference in the US or Canada is not an endorsement of US
On Sat, 24 May 2003 10:19:38 +0200
Enrico Zini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.debian.org/devel/, Projects section:
* Debian Web Pages
[...]
* Alioth: Debian GForge
Certainly seems that they're listed.
The Debian Usability Research seems to be missing:
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 10:28:19AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
The rules are quite simple: is there someone willing to write those
pages ? I have this very same problem for DebianEdu, if I want a page on
www.debian.org I have to prepare it but I have no time for that. I also
don't have any
On Wed, 21 May 2003 21:40:04 +1000, Craig small [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The flow reports come out in text and
show flow summaries (such as top n ASes, protocols, etc per m minutes).
NetFlow is a packet protocol that is used by routers such as Cisco and
Juniper.
Is there any tool that enables a
* Petter Reinholdtsen
| [James Troup]
| Tor Slettnes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| I forwarded this email to his other address, which I came across in a
| mail from a common friend of our.
I've recently mailed with him, and for the time being, he is out of
time for doing Debian work.
--
Tollef Fog
Guido Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's very hard to get these bug fixes anyway since when I do a
_complete_ diff between kernel-source-2.X.Y in the archive and the
kernel source for architecture foo I'll _always_ (accidentally)
pull out all the bug fixes you made. Only diffing specific
[Tollef Fog Heen]
So, why do you think having a more even distribution is a good
thing?
Because in Debian there is a few people with high load in debian,
and many with less load. People with high load are more likely to
burn out and disappear. It is thus better to have more people with
less
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 09:48:02PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
On Sat, 24 May 2003, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
The script can't even get everything a Debian Developer does for Debian.
While most, if not all, active Debian Developers do packaging work,
there's other stuff to be done -- such as
On Sat, 24 May 2003 22:15, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Because in Debian there is a few people with high load in debian,
and many with less load. People with high load are more likely to
burn out and disappear. It is thus better to have more people with
less load.
Of course, the packages
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 11:25:03PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
On Sat, 24 May 2003 22:15, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Because in Debian there is a few people with high load in debian,
and many with less load. People with high load are more likely to
burn out and disappear. It is thus
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Because in Debian there is a few people with high load in debian,
and many with less load. People with high load are more likely to
burn out and disappear.
Do you have statistics to support that statement?
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing
Please take all of these political screeds off -devel!!
Regards.
Bob
--
_
|_) _ |_Robert D. Hilliard[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|_) (_) |_) 1294 S.W. Seagull Way [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Palm City, FL 34990 USA GPG Key ID: 390D6559
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 09:24:16PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
OK, barring any major objections, that's how it will be for 2.4.21.
I will make kernel-source-2.4.21 be identical to the upstream tar ball
except for the non-free bits. A kernel-patch-i386 package will be
introduced.
You won't here
On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 11:47:52PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 12:31:14PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
* New Upstream Version (closes: #176227, #188308, #90276)
Changelog abuse. This is only a valid entry if all 3 of these bugs were
requests for a new
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 01:58:31PM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
Why Debian Desktop subproject is on official website
and many others[1] aren't?
You're on crack. http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-desktop/
It's hard to discern useful information when you start out by showing you
Hi,
Jesus Climent wrote:
On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 11:47:52PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 12:31:14PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
* New Upstream Version (closes: #176227, #188308, #90276)
Changelog abuse. This is only a valid entry if all 3 of these bugs
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libemail-simple-perl
Version : 1.4
Upstream Author : Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/R/RC/RCLAMP/Email-Simple-1.4.tar.gz
* License
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libemail-filter-perl
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/S/SI/SIMON/Email-Filter-1.0.tar.gz
* License : Same as
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libemail-localdelivery-perl
Version : 0.04
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/S/SI/SIMON/Email-LocalDelivery-0.04.tar.gz
* License
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libemail-mime-encodings-perl
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/S/SI/SIMON/Email-MIME-Encodings-1.0.tar.gz
* License
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Petter Reinholdtsen) writes:
[Tollef Fog Heen]
So, why do you think having a more even distribution is a good
thing?
Because in Debian there is a few people with high load in debian,
and many with less load.
I think this is the wrong way to see it. Since work for
Andreas Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I still don't get why you wouldn't simply generate a modified version
and install it _instead_ of the original package, unless foo also
include a switch-debdivert-foo package that enables to choose to
switch to officila package faster than 'dpkg -i
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 04:06:30PM +0200, Guido Guenther wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 09:24:16PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
OK, barring any major objections, that's how it will be for 2.4.21.
I will make kernel-source-2.4.21 be identical to the upstream tar ball
except for the non-free
On Saturday, May 24, 2003, at 03:28 AM, Colin Walters wrote:
Pyblosxom is so-named because it was inspired by the blosxom package.
Does pyblosxom offer any features which blosxom proper doesn't?
Quoting Laurent Bonnaud [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Either upgrade to Roxen 2.1
OK. I upgraded to the latest roxen2 package in sid. Now I have another
question: would it be possible to update roxen to depend on pike7.4
instead of pike7 ?
Same answer. Roxen 2.1 won't work with pike 7.4... I'm
Russell Coker wrote:
On Sat, 24 May 2003 09:51, Alan Shutko wrote:
The citizens of the US have a little more power than the rest of the
world, in that you have a *vote* as to who gets to fuck the rest of the
world.
Well, didn't work that way last time...
They got their second choice.
I never
Hello,
from time to time, especially while upgrading a lot of packages I notice
debconfig questions for packages I do not know. This is of course quite
likely given the size of debian archive and the fact, that task packages
introduce a lot of packages one has not selected explecitely.
Some of
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 11:37:09AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Guido, you're not going about it the right way. It's a three-way
merge. You take a kernel.org tree, diff it against the architecture
tree that you're interested in, and then wiggle it into applying to the
kernel source
On Sat, 24 May 2003, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 09:48:02PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
On Sat, 24 May 2003, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
The script can't even get everything a Debian Developer does for Debian.
While most, if not all, active Debian Developers do packaging
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 09:24:16PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
Guido Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's very hard to get these bug fixes anyway since when I do a
_complete_ diff between kernel-source-2.X.Y in the archive and the
kernel source for architecture foo I'll _always_
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 07:03:22PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 11:37:09AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Guido, you're not going about it the right way. It's a three-way
merge. You take a kernel.org tree, diff it against the architecture
tree that you're
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 11:37:09AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Guido, you're not going about it the right way. It's a three-way merge.
You take a kernel.org tree, diff it against the architecture tree that
you're interested in, and then wiggle it into applying to the kernel
source
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 05:37:31PM +0900, Masato Taruishi wrote:
Masato Taruishi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, the main point of this package is to create a local ad-hoc package
which can coexist with its official package. Escpecially, I can manage
my temporary on-going improvement to
On Sun, 25 May 2003 02:24, Ed Cogburn wrote:
Well, didn't work that way last time...
They got their second choice.
I never chose Little Napolean and he wasn't on my alternate list either.
Something between 49% and 50% of US voters wanted the Shrub as president.
Please stop assuming
Em Sat, 24 May 2003 06:11:18 -0400, David B Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu:
On Sat, 24 May 2003 10:19:38 +0200
Enrico Zini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.debian.org/devel/, Projects section:
* Debian Web Pages
[...]
* Alioth: Debian GForge
Certainly seems that
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 01:25:38PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Sure, it's more work but I think it's worth it.
Because no one's done it?
Hey, if that was an argument. The question is whether people want it..
We can't count on it because the architecture ports become available at
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 07:55:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Some m68k architectures might be a hard, I agree. But having a package
that works on as many machines as possible would be very cool.
well, I there is a shared debian-kernel cvs then all architecture
maintainers can commit,
On Sat, 2003-05-24 at 11:52, Joe Drew wrote:
On Saturday, May 24, 2003, at 03:28 AM, Colin Walters wrote:
Pyblosxom is so-named because it was inspired by the blosxom package.
Does pyblosxom offer any features which blosxom proper doesn't?
Plugins, sane code, xmlrpc support, different
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 07:51:17PM +0200, Karsten Merker wrote:
Because it simply did not work out - not all architectures are in sync with
Linus' tree
Oh, I know that well enough.
and if I understood our port maintainer correctly, there are
some architecture-specific things Linus does not
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 09:20:28PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
So unless someone can come up with a solution to this problem,
we will have to live with multiple Debian source packages for now.
This does make security fixes more difficult than it would be otherwise,
however, I do not think it
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 11:37:09AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Guido, you're not going about it the right way. It's a three-way
merge. You take a kernel.org tree, diff it against the architecture
tree that you're interested in, and then wiggle it into applying to the
kernel source
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 08:18:40PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 07:55:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Some m68k architectures might be a hard, I agree. But having a package
that works on as many machines as possible would be very cool.
well, I there is a
On Sun, 25 May 2003 04:18, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 07:55:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Some m68k architectures might be a hard, I agree. But having a package
that works on as many machines as possible would be very cool.
well, I there is a shared debian-kernel
Russell Coker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't assume that everyone agrees, just the 49.X% that voted for him.
This figure is not as meaningful as it might seem; we still use a
non-preferential voting system, in which votes for non-mainstream
candidates are effectively wasted. :-/
The most
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 02:34:17PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
What benefit is there in not announcing these problems? Security through
obscurity? How can we inform our users of their exposure when we are not
informed ourselves about security problems?
Noise. You can's accnounce every
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 01:42:22PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
So this means that maintainers of the architecture patches must be sure to
merge in these fixes, otherwise they may inherit security vulnerabilities
(for example)? How can we track when this has happened when there are so
many
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 11:37:09AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Guido, you're not going about it the right way. It's a three-way
merge. You take a kernel.org tree, diff it against the architecture
tree that you're interested in, and then wiggle it into applying to the
kernel source
On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 04:29:13AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
On Sun, 25 May 2003 04:18, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 07:55:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Some m68k architectures might be a hard, I agree. But having a package
that works on as many machines as
Manoj said:
Oh, as a sponsor of the GR, I suppose I should clarify that I
am not going to accept this amendment; I consider it a bad one. This
makes our vote method fail the monoticity criteria
(http://www.electionmethods.org/evaluation.htm). See Scenario 2 below.
I'll
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given an explicit kernel-patch-debian, containing architecture-agnostic
differences between kernel.org source and Debian's kernel source,
arch-specific merges could be mostly automated, and security fixes could be
made in one place.
How does this
Hello,
I created a new package for stunnel 4, it is available at :
http://people.debian.org/~speedblue/stunnel/
I will wait a little before take over the package.
Best Regards.
--
Julien LEMOINE / SpeedBlue
pgpNIXSuf9fJZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that we can live with multiple source packages given a little bit of
infrastructure which more closely follows the way that kernel development
happens. We need to be able to introduce specific patches to all of our
kernels while minimizing the
Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why can't Debian have just one tree for multiple architectures like
SuSE and RedHat (sometimes) do. Okay suse supports 'only' i386,
x86_64,ppc,ppc64,s390,s390x,ia64 but their kernel also has patches
for sparc,sparc64,mips and m68k although I can't
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 08:42:39PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 02:34:17PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
What benefit is there in not announcing these problems? Security
through obscurity? How can we inform our users of their exposure when
we are not informed
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 08:44:26PM +0200, Guido Guenther wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 01:42:22PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
So this means that maintainers of the architecture patches must be sure
to merge in these fixes, otherwise they may inherit security
vulnerabilities (for
On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 07:37:10AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given an explicit kernel-patch-debian, containing architecture-agnostic
differences between kernel.org source and Debian's kernel source,
arch-specific merges could be mostly automated,
* Aaron M. Ucko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030519 04:26]:
What are other developers' feelings on the matter these days?
I would rather not come.
On Sun, May 25, 2003, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
What are other developers' feelings on the matter these days?
I would rather not come.
Neither would I. Given what happened to Sklyarov, I don't fancy going
to the USA at all. And like many others, I won't object, I merely won't
attend.
Sam.
On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 03:32:57AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
For avoiding entering the US there are better reasons such as the following:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1689.htm
May 20, 2003. French reporters covering Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3)
arrested, forcibly
On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 07:58:09AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By 'independent packages', do you mean that we should have separate
kernel-source source packages for each architecture? This would seem to
be a step backward.
No, they are independent
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why can't Debian have just one tree for multiple architectures like
SuSE and RedHat (sometimes) do. Okay suse supports 'only' i386,
x86_64,ppc,ppc64,s390,s390x,ia64 but their kernel also has patches
Florian Thiel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-01-13
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: firehol
There was no further activity on this ITP.
I've packaged FireHOL myself, found a sponsor and mailed Florian 3 weeks
ago [1]. If there is no answer in a
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 07:37:10AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
How does this automate the arch-specific merges where conflicts arise?
1. unpack pristine kernel source
2. apply Debian patch
3. dry-run arch-specific patch
4. if no conflicts, test and
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In general, this is not a problem. The exception is coordinated disclosure,
where it is important that fixes be available for all architectures in order
to minimize exposure. In those cases, it would be helpful to coordinate
with all of the kernel
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 05:37:31PM +0900, Masato Taruishi wrote:
Masato Taruishi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, the main point of this package is to create a local ad-hoc package
which can coexist with its official package. Escpecially, I can manage
my temporary on-going
On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 07:46:53PM -0400, Geordie Birch wrote:
On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 03:32:57AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
For avoiding entering the US there are better reasons such as the following:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1689.htm
May 20, 2003. French
Eu tambem estou em SP - Capital e gostaria de ir ... mas por enquanto
estou sozinho
Infelizmente peguei o thread pela metade, entao nao tenho nenhum
email/endereco de alguem que esteja organizando um onibus p/ la.
[]'s
On Fri, 2003-05-23 at 17:15, Gustavo Polillo wrote:
Ola lista,
85 matches
Mail list logo
