Scripsit Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the long run, the user-friendly solution is probably to offer (via
a debconf question that defaults to 'yes') to automatically rewrite
the conffile to take the change into account.
That can only be done if
Hi HTere~!
I am in Dhaka for a week, and have organised a key signing party with
the local Bangladesh Linux Users Group (BDLUG) Hopefully we will end up
with 1 or 2 maintainers from there!
Regards,
Matthew Grant
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 15:14 -0500, Alejandro Bonilla wrote:
Someone sent an email I dunno if here or in evolution-hackers ML but I also
lost All my contacts after upgrading yesterday in Sid! ;0(
Close Evolution and killall evolution-data-server-1.4, then restart
Evolution. That *should* work.
* Alex Ross:
2) 2,300 Debian packages available for immediate usage.
How do you solve the problem that you cannot legally distribute
software which is licensed under the GNU General Public License and is
linked against a libc which is covered by the CDDL? Have you ported
GNU libc?
3)
Hello!
I posted to debian-devel because I think it's a general question and I
cannot figure out the answer with the manuals. Sorry if I was wrong.
I'm in the process of debianize some CL software [1] and I've the same
problem as bug #328423: some extra features of the package needs other
* Luca Capello:
I'm in the process of debianize some CL software [1] and I've the same
problem as bug #328423: some extra features of the package needs other
packages to be installed, so I don't know if the package should use
Suggests or Recommends.
Use Recommends: if the functionality added
Il giorno mer, 02/11/2005 alle 09.15 +, Ross Burton ha scritto:
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 15:14 -0500, Alejandro Bonilla wrote:
Someone sent an email I dunno if here or in evolution-hackers ML but I also
lost All my contacts after upgrading yesterday in Sid! ;0(
Close Evolution and
Hello,
Mea culpa. I did a stupid thing with sbcl: in version 1:0.9.6.0-1 I used the
following construction:
Package: sbcl
Depends: sbcl-common (= ${Source-Version}), ${shlibs:Depends}
...
Package: sbcl-common
Now it turns out that the buildd network cannot build new packages[1]:
|The
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Krzysztof Krzyzaniak (eloy) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: libdbix-class-loader-perl
Version : 0.01
Upstream Author : Sebastian Riedel, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-module/DBIx/
* License :
* Florian Weimer [Wed, 02 Nov 2005 11:26:30 +0100]:
* Luca Capello:
I'm in the process of debianize some CL software [1] and I've the same
problem as bug #328423: some extra features of the package needs other
packages to be installed, so I don't know if the package should use
Suggests
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Andrew Lau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: denyhosts
Version : 1.1.2
Upstream Author : Phil Schwartz
phil_schwartz at users.sourceforge.net
* URL : http://denyhosts.sourceforge.net/
*
* Peter Van Eynde:
So is there anything else I can do?
Bootstrap with one of the other supported Lisp implementations?
MLton recently solved a similarly problem by manually building the
supported architectures outside the buildd network.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 01:17:53PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Florian Weimer [Wed, 02 Nov 2005 11:26:30 +0100]:
* Luca Capello:
I'm in the process of debianize some CL software [1] and I've the same
problem as bug #328423: some extra features of the package needs other
packages to
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 11:59:22PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
Another obvious benefit is that OpenSolaris licensed under open sourced
license which allowes to HW vendors to write their own drivers for all
that variety of existing specific hardware and yet not to open their IP.
Why would this
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 07:21:48PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I have been in a discussion with a fellow developer about the exact
meaning of the 0-day NMU policy that is currently in effect.
For the record: there currently is not a 0-day NMU policy in effect. There
was a 0-day NMU
Hamish:
I read all of your points as criticisms of Linux. That is disappointing.
I read most of his points as being factual, some of which might be
comparisons to and constructive criticisms of Linux. Not disappointing
at all.
I don't think anyone could argue that Linux's interfaces
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Scripsit Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the long run, the user-friendly solution is probably to offer (via
a debconf question that defaults to 'yes') to automatically rewrite
the conffile to take the change
Hi,
Well, this build takes a long time (at least 45 minutes from start to
failure). I'm getting tired of trying over and over again; it took me
about four hours of compiling to prove certainly that Blars suggestion
wouldn't work.
Can you give me a hook script that will give an
Am 2005-10-26 14:51:00, schrieb Humberto Massa:
It seems that you still did not get my point.
My point is, in a SoHo workstation, this is exactly the most common
scenario nowadays (example: hmm. let me try this new dvd-player... I
open synaptic, install it, ... nah, it does not work as I
Am 2005-10-26 14:51:00, schrieb Humberto Massa:
It seems that you still did not get my point.
My point is, in a SoHo workstation, this is exactly the most common
scenario nowadays (example: hmm. let me try this new dvd-player... I
open synaptic, install it, ... nah, it does not work as I
Hello Humberto,
Am 2005-10-26 14:30:32, schrieb Humberto Massa:
Problem being, if daemons don't remove their (supposedly exclusive-use)
accounts, you can end in two years with 100 unnecessary accounts in a
workstation.
Realy interesting...
I have counted the System-Users on my 146
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Paul Wise [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: as2api
Version : 0.3
Upstream Author : David Holroyd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.badgers-in-foil.co.uk/projects/as2api/
* License : GPL
Description : API
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 05:12:18AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 07:21:48PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I have been in a discussion with a fellow developer about the exact
meaning of the 0-day NMU policy that is currently in effect.
For the record: there
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005, Steve Langasek wrote:
For the record: there currently is not a 0-day NMU policy in effect. There
was a 0-day NMU policy through the sarge release, and there are 0-day NMU
policies during BSPs, but the default NMU policy has reverted to that in the
developer's reference
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sam Hocevar (Debian packages) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: bse-alsa
Version : 0.6.6
Upstream Author : Tim Janik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://beast.gtk.org/beast-ftp/v0.6/
* License : LGPL
Description :
Marc Haber:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 07:00:37PM +0200, Per Olofsson wrote:
retitle 319583 ITP: pcmciautils -- PCMCIA userspace utilities (Linux
2.6.13+)
thanks
I'm the maintainer of pcmcia-cs so I'm intending to package
pcmciautils.
May I ask for the status of this ITP?
I haven't
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 10:41 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Alex Ross:
2) 2,300 Debian packages available for immediate usage.
How do you solve the problem that you cannot legally distribute
software which is licensed under the GNU General Public License and is
linked against a libc which
Scripsit Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you mean that every package that offers to edit conffiles based on
debconf questions is policy-buggy?
Of course, see 10.7.3:
| These two styles of configuration file handling must not be mixed, for
| that
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 09:54:30AM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 10:41 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Alex Ross:
2) 2,300 Debian packages available for immediate usage.
How do you solve the problem that you cannot legally distribute
software which is licensed
Quoting Matthew Grant ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Hi HTere~!
I am in Dhaka for a week, and have organised a key signing party with
the local Bangladesh Linux Users Group (BDLUG) Hopefully we will end up
with 1 or 2 maintainers from there!
Don't hesitate pointing them at the current efforts in
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 12:11:32AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
I read all of your points as criticisms of Linux. That is disappointing.
Why is criticism disappointing? The goals of Linux and the Linux
development model do not fit everybody's needs. Having an alternative
that takes a different
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 12:13 -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 09:54:30AM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 10:41 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Alex Ross:
2) 2,300 Debian packages available for immediate usage.
How do you solve the problem that
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:41:10AM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 12:13 -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
People have to ask for an account to find out how you're not violating
the license on their code?
We wanted to get as much feedbacks about the layout,
contents, usability
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 14:36 -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:41:10AM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 12:13 -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
People have to ask for an account to find out how you're not violating
the license on their code?
We wanted to
Erast Benson wrote:
in short, the answer on your legality question is in GPL itself. Look
for executable runtime explanations. This is the reason for Cygwin,
www.blastwave.org and others to exists.
Or rather, in cases where code is linked with glibc, the LGPL. See a
work that uses the
Anyone knows what package brings the todos command?
I had this error in a debian-cd try:
tools/add-bin-doc: line 42: todos: command not found
Thanks-- Cumprimentos,João Carlos Galaio da Silva
On Wednesday 02 November 2005 22:20, João Silva wrote:
Anyone knows what package brings the todos command?
I had this error in a debian-cd try:
tools/add-bin-doc: line 42: todos: command not found
Try http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages#search_contents
Christoph
--
|\ _,,,---,,_
Le 02.11.2005 22:20:15, João Silva a écrit :
Anyone knows what package brings the todos command?
I had this error in a debian-cd try:
tools/add-bin-doc: line 42: todos: command not found
sysutils
try something like 'apt-file search todo | grep bin'
Thanks
Jean-Luc
pgpkND6vrqfTX.pgp
João Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anyone knows what package brings the todos command?
$ apt-file search bin/todos
sysutils: usr/bin/todos
--
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NOT a valid e-mail address) for more info.
--
To
On Wed, 02 Nov 2005, Andrew Lau wrote:
DenyHosts is a python program that automatically blocks ssh attacks
by adding entries to /etc/hosts.deny. DenyHosts will also inform
Linux administrators about offending hosts, attacked users and
suspicious logins.
Some discussion/comparison as to how
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 09:24:16PM +, Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh) wrote:
Anyone knows what package brings the todos command?
I had this error in a debian-cd try:
tools/add-bin-doc: line 42: todos: command not found
sysutils
try something like 'apt-file search todo | grep bin'
Dead grep.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Margarita Manterola [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: linsmith
Version : 0.9.1
Upstream Author : John Coppens
* URL : http://jcoppens.com/soft/linsmith/index.en.php
* License : GPL
Description : a Smith charting
Scripsit Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) [051101 17:23]:
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 12:41:09PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
So, would anybody object if I set up a cronjob that emails the PTS
whenever a (source) package propagates to, or is removed
Hello,
Some time ago I searched for a tool to convert my already downloaded and
mounted stable Debian CDs into a mirror structure. However I failed (the
ways was able to find didn't seem feasible or couldn't find the actual
way, please tell me if something along the same lines exists).
Thus I put
Michael Banck wrote:
Do you plan to use debian-installer for installation?
Yes.
Do you plan to submit your port as an official port to Debian once it
stabilizes?
Yes.
If so, do you plan to use Debian's mailing lists and bug
tracking system for development?
No. We have ours: svn,
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 06:21:45PM -0800, Alex Ross wrote:
Nexenta OS: Debian based GNU/Solaris
==
This is to announce Nexenta: the first-ever distribution that combines
GNU and OpenSolaris. As you might know, Sun Microsystems just opened
Solaris kernel under CDDL
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, João Silva wrote:
Anyone knows what package brings the todos command?
I had this error in a debian-cd try:
tools/add-bin-doc: line 42: todos: command not found
File a bug on that package for not using a depends.
Also, this is a -user question, not a -devel question.
Alex Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Banck wrote:
If so, do you plan to use Debian's mailing lists and bug
tracking system for development?
No. We have ours: svn, Trac, and mailing lists.
It's unlikely that you'll be accepted as an official Debian port unless
you're willing to use the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 12:41:09PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 14:36 -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:41:10AM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 12:13 -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 17:18 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 12:41:09PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 14:36 -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:41:10AM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:21:12PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source
code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
associated interface
On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 01:14 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Alex Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Banck wrote:
If so, do you plan to use Debian's mailing lists and bug
tracking system for development?
No. We have ours: svn, Trac, and mailing lists.
It's unlikely that you'll be
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 17:37 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:21:12PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source
code means all the source code
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't want to debate on legality of GPL vs. CDDL. But if you in doubt,
you could try to ask Sun lawers on why exactly this is possible:
http://www.sun.com/gnome as well as other LGPG and GPL software which is
shipped with Solaris distribution.
How
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:21:12PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
read some more GPL vs. CDDL legality stuff on our web site at
http://www.gnusolaris.org/gswiki/GNU/Solaris_Resources
Authorization Required
This server could not verify that you are authorized to access the document
requested.
Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:21:12PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
read some more GPL vs. CDDL legality stuff on our web site at
http://www.gnusolaris.org/gswiki/GNU/Solaris_Resources
Authorization Required
This server could not verify that you are authorized to
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 17:48 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't want to debate on legality of GPL vs. CDDL. But if you in doubt,
you could try to ask Sun lawers on why exactly this is possible:
http://www.sun.com/gnome as well as other LGPG and
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
CDDL is a good open source license and blessed by R.S.
That does not make it compatible with the GPL. You cannot combine
code from two licenses unless the licenses are compatible, and the
CDDL is not compatible with the GPL.
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:31:00PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 01:14 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
It's unlikely that you'll be accepted as an official Debian port unless
you're willing to use the Debian bug tracking system. It's not
reasonable to expect Debian
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 18:05 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
CDDL is a good open source license and blessed by R.S.
That does not make it compatible with the GPL. You cannot combine
code from two licenses unless the licenses are compatible, and the
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If development is carried out within the Debian project then yes, it's
likely that the Debian community would work on GNU/Solaris. See the
kFreeBSD and hurd ports, for instance.
But only with the licensing question sorted out first.
--
To
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We *do not* mix GPL-based and CDDL-based projects within Nexenta OS.
You don't link CDDL libraries into GPL'd programs? At all? I
disbelieve.
Please read some more details on license which allows closed binary
re-distribution at
Erast Benson quotes from the GPL:
However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not
include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
operating system on which the executable runs,
The words executable runtime are not present in the text of the GPL. What
the GPL *does* say is that kernels are only exempted from being considered
part of the GPL definition of source code for a work *if* the GPLed work is
not distributed together with the kernel.
I think you're
But yes, GPL is more restrictive than CDDL.
More accurately, the GPL preserves more end user rights than CDDL.
That's hardly restrictive--- especially if you're an end user.
b.g.
--
Bill Gatliff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Bill Gatliff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If application A is deployed as a standalone application built using the
major components of the target operating system, a'la a Debian package,
I don't have to provide source code for anything other than the
application itself.
Wrong.
Thomas:
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Bill Gatliff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If application A is deployed as a standalone application built using the
major components of the target operating system, a'la a Debian package,
I don't have to provide source code for anything other than the
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source
code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
associated interface definition files, plus the
Bill Gatliff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bill Gatliff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If application A is deployed as a standalone application built
using the major components of the target operating system, a'la a
Debian package, I don't have to provide source code for anything
other than the
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source
code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
associated interface
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
on another hand, Ubuntu has its own tracking system, so GNU/Solaris is
not the first one. Even though Ubuntu is GNU/Linux system...
Ubuntu is not an official Debian Port.
on another hand, GNU/Solaris uses different kernel and libc, which
brings many
Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ubuntu is not an official Debian Port.
on another hand, GNU/Solaris uses different kernel and libc, which
brings many non-Debian-related issues into play.
There is also hurd or freebsd kernel ports for debian, so those projects are
similiar.
With
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Some time ago I searched for a tool to convert my already downloaded and
mounted stable Debian CDs into a mirror structure. However I failed (the
ways was able to find didn't seem feasible or couldn't find the actual
way, please tell me if
Thomas:
Alright then, enlighten me.
Let us suppose that you have a GPLd application foo which links
against libbar.
You can only distribute the binaries for foo under section 3 of the
GPL, which requires you to provide the complete source for libbar, and
you must do so providing all the
On 11/3/05, Blars Blarson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I submitted a patch to apt-move to do this to the Debian BTS.
Does it also provide the symbolic links only functionality the
parent poster mentioned?
--
Andrew Saunders
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 18:20 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
If you want to be part of Debian, one of the requirements is that you
help convince us when there is doubt that there isn't a licensing
problem. Repeated assertion does not convince us. Pointing at
websites that require
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Let me re-phrase your question. What Debian Community wants from Nexenta
OS? Do they care to support GNU/Solaris as another *real* system in
their list besides GNU/Linux?
I have no problem with it, provided it fits the legal requirements.
It seems to
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 18:54 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ubuntu is not an official Debian Port.
on another hand, GNU/Solaris uses different kernel and libc, which
brings many non-Debian-related issues into play.
There is also hurd or
On Wed, 02 Nov 2005, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Well, I'd expect meta packages to have nothing on them
Why? Was there any other definition than the link I posted that leads to
this assumption?
The link you posted has never bothered me
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't want to debate on legality of GPL vs. CDDL. But if you in doubt,
you could try to ask Sun lawers on why exactly this is possible:
http://www.sun.com/gnome as well as other LGPG and GPL software which is
shipped with
Alex Ross wrote:
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't want to debate on legality of GPL vs. CDDL. But if you in doubt,
you could try to ask Sun lawers on why exactly this is possible:
http://www.sun.com/gnome as well as other LGPG and GPL software which is
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 21:04 -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 18:54 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ubuntu is not an official Debian Port.
on another hand, GNU/Solaris uses different kernel and libc, which
brings many
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 19:34 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Let me re-phrase your question. What Debian Community wants from Nexenta
OS? Do they care to support GNU/Solaris as another *real* system in
their list besides GNU/Linux?
I have no
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
On 11/3/05, Blars Blarson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I submitted a patch to apt-move to do this to the Debian BTS.
Does it also provide the symbolic links only functionality the
parent poster mentioned?
No.
--
Blars Blarson [EMAIL
Alex Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The issue... what issue? The http://www.sun.com/gnome issue? The
numerous-our-examples issue?
Of course, that's an issue.
Sun does not have the right to ship Gnome with Solaris. But I'm not
sure they do so.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
FreeBSD kernel under BSD license and not GPL-compatible.
You are incorrect. The BSG license most certainly is GPL-compatible.
Native GNU libc do not make any difference since it is a part of system
runtime which includes: kernel, libc, compiler, etc
[Henning Makholm]
Do you mean that every package that offers to edit conffiles based on
debconf questions is policy-buggy?
'conffile' is dpkg jargon that has a specific meaning: configuration
files that dpkg handles specially w/r/t upgrades and removals. Editing
a conffile at install time
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 21:25 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Alex Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The issue... what issue? The http://www.sun.com/gnome issue? The
numerous-our-examples issue?
Of course, that's an issue.
Sun does not have the right to ship Gnome with Solaris. But I'm
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
but their loyers obviosly reads GPL differently. since they do ship
GNOME as their primary JDS desktops, among others GNU GPL software, gcc,
tar, sed, awk etc... btw, Solaris 10 is absolutely free available for
download, so, one could try to install and
* Bill Gatliff:
From this:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html
Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL)
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/licensing/cddllicense.txt
This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; it
has some complex restrictions
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:31:00PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 01:14 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Alex Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Banck wrote:
If so, do you plan to use Debian's mailing lists and bug
tracking system for development?
No. We have
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 22:01 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
but their loyers obviosly reads GPL differently. since they do ship
GNOME as their primary JDS desktops, among others GNU GPL software, gcc,
tar, sed, awk etc... btw, Solaris 10 is
On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 15:50 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:31:00PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 01:14 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Alex Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Banck wrote:
If so, do you plan to use Debian's mailing lists
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But are you seriosly saying that SUN violates GPL?
I don't know. I've asked the FSF. It depends on the details of
exactly what they are doing.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:52:07PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 21:25 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Alex Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The issue... what issue? The http://www.sun.com/gnome issue? The
numerous-our-examples issue?
Of course, that's an
* Erast Benson:
Are you seriously saying that whatever Sun does must be ok, so we can
do the same?
i'm not claiming anything.
But are you seriosly saying that SUN violates GPL?
In the past, Sun shipped the GNU components on separate media. (I
don't know if you had to order them
On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 17:47 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:52:07PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 21:25 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Alex Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The issue... what issue? The http://www.sun.com/gnome issue? The
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 09:27:04PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Erast Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Native GNU libc do not make any difference since it is a part of
system runtime which includes: kernel, libc, compiler, etc (as
per GPL).
You use these quotation marks in the most
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 09:07:12 +0100
Source: vpnc
Binary: vpnc
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.3.3+SVN20051028-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Eduard Bloch [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 09:31:08 +0100
Source: twpsk
Binary: psk31lx twpsk
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.1+2.2beta1-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Joop Stakenborg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Joop Stakenborg
1 - 100 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
