Bonjour,
Après avoir lu ça : http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2009/03/02/
j'ai décidé de sauter le pas et de m'inscrire pour tenter de contribuer au
projet Debian.
Mes compétences :
- développeur de formation et de profession, actuellement spécialisé dans le
développement web (GNU/Linux + Apache + PHP
touco...@free.fr, 2009-03-03 15:14:09 +0100 :
Bonjour,
Après avoir lu ça : http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2009/03/02/ j'ai décidé de
sauter le pas et de m'inscrire pour tenter de contribuer au projet
Debian.
Bienvenue :-)
Mes compétences :
[...]
Mes contributions au logiciel libre :
[...]
To view the message, please use an HTML compatible email viewer!
Bonjour,
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009, touco...@free.fr wrote:
Les tâches qui me semblent accessibles au sein du projet Debian (par ordre
décroissant d'intérêt) :
- traduction des descriptions de paquets en français et en espéranto ;
- traduction de pages web en français et en espéranto ;
- autres
Le mardi 03 mars 2009 à 17:02 +0100, Roland Mas a écrit :
troll type=velu
Je profite sans vergogne que j'ai la parole pour mentionner en
passant
que si tu es développeur web et que tu ne te sens pas de faire des
paquets directement, tu peux aussi être très utile en amont dans les
projets
On Mon, 02 Mar 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 10:02:11PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
winge
Insert the typical winge here about dpkg conffile renaming code
being deployed via cut-n-paste from a wiki page instead of any
of our better technologies, such as a utility, with a
On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Carlo Segre wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Carlo Segre se...@debian.org
* Package name: libxray-absorption-perl
Version : 2.0.1
Upstream Author : Bruce Ravel bra...@bnl.gov
* URL : http://cars9.uchicago.edu/svn/libperlxray
*
On Mon Mar 02 22:36, Bill Unruh wrote:
Are you claiming that he does/did not have the right to release the major
portion of the code under CDDL? (ie those portions that he did release in that
way?) Ie, that he did not have the permission of those other copyright holders
to thus release the
On Mon, 02 Mar 2009, Bill Unruh wrote:
Are you claiming that he does/did not have the right to release the
major portion of the code under CDDL?
He has the ability to release the portions that he has the copyright
to under any license he wishes. He doesn't have the right to put code
that he
after upgrading module-init-tools in unstable just now the boot process shows
a lot of warnings like:
modprobe: WARNING: All config files need .conf: /etc/modprobe.d/aliases, it
will be ignored in a future release.
there is blocks of those lines, one for each file in /modprobe.d,
those blocks
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Matthew Johnson wrote:
On Mon Mar 02 22:36, Bill Unruh wrote:
Are you claiming that he does/did not have the right to release the major
portion of the code under CDDL? (ie those portions that he did release in that
way?) Ie, that he did not have the permission of those
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 05:08:33PM -0800, Bill Unruh wrote:
On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, James Vega wrote:
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 02:41:54PM -0800, Bill Unruh wrote:
Thus, is it correct that the issue centers around mkisofs, a program which
is
under the GPL2 license and is linked with libscg, a
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 06:52:05PM -0800, Bill Unruh wrote:
I do not think we are there yet. The claim is that cdrecord cannot be
distributed as any part of Debian because of legal issues. I am trying to find
out what the issues are, and narrow them down to their essense.
Maybe do so in a
Don Armstrong d...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The OS exception in the GPL just allows you to omit things like
libc from the complete source. The The OS exception in the GPL
does not allow you to treat license compatibility between GPL code
and system
Bill Unruh un...@physics.ubc.ca writes:
OK, good. So if Jorg were to dual license libscg, this would be
sufficient for Debian to believe that they are able to distribute it?
This is far weaker than the demand that all of the software be dual
licensed or GPLed. Whether or not he would be
On Mar 03, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
Is there a chance upstream would accept a patch to implement this as a
blacklist instead of a whitelist?
This is how it used to work (and still does).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 08:12:16AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
If Red Hat wants to pay someone to put up with it, that's their call; it's
a lot easier to be polite in the face of an unending stream of personal
abuse if you're getting a
Bill Unruh un...@physics.ubc.ca wrote:
I believe that you mean the above to apply to mkisofs, not to cdrtools, which
is a bunch of different program. The programs which are purely CDDL I assume
you have no problem with distributing (despite your discomfort with CDDL).
Since it appears that
Joerg Schilling schrieb:
As a hint: the work mkisofs is the plain files that can be found in the
sub-directory mkisofs in the cdrtools source tree. Other sub-directories in
this source tree colletion contain _other_ independent works.
option type=personal
So you like to enhance a program
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
Russell Coker russ...@coker.com.au writes:
If libschilly met the criteria for being a System Library then it
probably have been packaged for use by other programs. If you want to
make a case for including libschilly as a System Library then please
On Tue Mar 03 00:58, Bill Unruh wrote:
I understand this as well. That is a however a different issue than the legal
one. It at least opens the possibility, both for Debian and for the many other
Linux distributions. And relieving the Debian maintainers
from having to try to keep up to date
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) writes:
As said, license compatibility needs to be discussed separately. If you like
to allow to publish binaries from GPLd programs for _any_ OS that does not
come with a GPLd libc, you need to allow (*) to link _any_ GPLd program
On Tue Mar 03 11:07, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The rules of the GPL end at work limit and neither libc nor
libschily or libscg are part of the work mkisofs. For this reason,
there is no problem with the fact that mkisofs links against libschily
and libscg.
The FSF certainly believes (and I
Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de wrote:
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) writes:
As said, license compatibility needs to be discussed separately. If you
like
to allow to publish binaries from GPLd programs for _any_ OS that does not
come with a GPLd libc,
Le mardi 03 mars 2009 à 13:09 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit :
You are uninformed: libc on Linux is under LGPL and the LGPL is as
incompatible
to GPL as the CDDL is incomparible to the GPL.
In what realm?
--
.''`. Debian 5.0 Lenny has been released!
: :' :
`. `' Last night, Darth
Harald Braumann ha...@unheit.net writes:
Agreed. But VCS solution is a 80% success/20% silent
failure. Config::Model is a 80% success/20% abort. The latter should
be easier to deal with for average user.
But you don't need to silently merge (and thus silently fail in some
cases). You can
Matthew Johnson mj...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue Mar 03 11:07, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The rules of the GPL end at work limit and neither libc nor
libschily or libscg are part of the work mkisofs. For this reason,
there is no problem with the fact that mkisofs links against libschily
and
On Tue Mar 03 13:38, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Repeating false claims does not make them correct.
Repeating that correct claims are false does not make them false.
There is enough weight on the side that I have described that I believe
it is in Debian's interest to follow them. After all, if we
Matthew Johnson mj...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue Mar 03 13:38, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Repeating false claims does not make them correct.
Repeating that correct claims are false does not make them false.
There is enough weight on the side that I have described that I believe
it is in
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sebastian Krause sebast...@realpath.org
* Package name: gremind
Version : 0.1.2
Upstream Author : Sergio Perticone gall...@tiscali.it
* URL : http://perticone.homelinux.net/~sergio/c++/gremind/
* License : GPL, LGPL
On Tue Mar 03 14:14, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Attacks from Debian against the cdrtools project caused the license to be
changed. Debian now needs to live with this change.
We do live with this change. We don't have cdrtools in the archive, this
is how we live with such changes.
I've told you
Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org writes:
... now it is only the two of us which needs to stop talking and start
proposing patches as needed :-)
ok. Here's the plan:
- Identify a candidate package to add (as a patch) an upgrade
feature based on Config::Model.
- Then, I'll patch this source
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 12:58:20AM -0800, Bill Unruh wrote:
OK, good. So if Jorg were to dual license libscg, this would be
sufficient for Debian to believe that they are able to distribute it?
This is far weaker than the demand that all of the software be dual
licensed or GPLed. Whether or
Matthew Johnson mj...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue Mar 03 14:14, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Attacks from Debian against the cdrtools project caused the license to be
changed. Debian now needs to live with this change.
We do live with this change. We don't have cdrtools in the archive, this
is
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 09:02:18 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Mon, 02 Mar 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 10:02:11PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
winge
Insert the typical winge here about dpkg conffile renaming code
being deployed via cut-n-paste from a wiki page
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 03:09:52AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Mar 03, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 01:43:53AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
The upstream maintainers decided that in the future the files in
/etc/modprobe.d/ will be processed only if they
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 01:09:29PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
You are uninformed: libc on Linux is under LGPL and the LGPL is as
incompatible to GPL as the CDDL is incomparible to the GPL.
Er?
-
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
Version 3, 29 June 2007
[...]
7. Additional Terms.
Additional
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 02:14:41PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Attacks from Debian against the cdrtools project caused the license to be
changed. Debian now needs to live with this change.
We have. We forked cdrtools, as is perfectly okay with most open source
projects.
--
Lo-lan-do Home
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 02:57:23PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Matthew Johnson mj...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue Mar 03 14:14, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Attacks from Debian against the cdrtools project caused the license to be
changed. Debian now needs to live with this change.
We do
Wouter Verhelst wou...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 01:09:29PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
You are uninformed: libc on Linux is under LGPL and the LGPL is as
incompatible to GPL as the CDDL is incomparible to the GPL.
Er?
Well, it seems that you are uninfored
If you
On 03 Mar 15:41, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Wouter Verhelst wou...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 01:09:29PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
You are uninformed: libc on Linux is under LGPL and the LGPL is as
incompatible to GPL as the CDDL is incomparible to the GPL.
Er?
[M-F-T set. Do *not* Cc to me.]
I demand that Joerg Schilling may or may not have written...
Matthew Johnson mj...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue Mar 03 11:07, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The rules of the GPL end at work limit and neither libc nor libschily
or libscg are part of the work mkisofs. For
I demand that Joerg Schilling may or may not have written...
[snip]
As the FSF is interested to see GPLd programs on OpenSolaris (*), the FSF
did confirm that there is no problem with linking a GPLd program like e.g.
GNU tar with the CDDLd libraries fron OpenSolaris and to publish the
Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote:
In order to create a derived work, you need to add own code of a sufficient
creation level. The simple act of compiling does of course not create a
derived work.
By that argument, it seems to me that if I compile (and link) cdrtools,
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 04:17:00PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
Introducing either a shell library or a non-integrated dpkg-conffile
has a too high cost IMO. It will prompt maintainers to switch to it
(when the annoying part is the initial introduction of the support,
being there already on
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 03:33:57PM +, Darren Salt wrote:
Strange, then, that Eben Moglen's opinion, quoted in this very thread, should
refer explicitly to the C library and otherwise only to *system* libraries.
You're not the first to point this out. It's unclear why you reiterate
this
Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote:
I demand that Joerg Schilling may or may not have written...
[snip]
As the FSF is interested to see GPLd programs on OpenSolaris (*), the FSF
did confirm that there is no problem with linking a GPLd program like e.g.
GNU tar with the
To view the message, please use an HTML compatible email viewer!
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009, Guillem Jover wrote:
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 09:02:18 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
It's already there:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=514316
I would happily include such a file, though it probably needs some thought
on the API before we commit to
At 16:10, someone wrote in another thread:
I believe that you're using circular arguments with no relevance to the
actual case in hand.
At 16:59, Joerg Schilling wrote :
Before you again and again try to present your speudo arguments that go in
circles, carefully read the GPL..
I think
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:31:30 +0100
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote:
Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote:
In order to create a derived work, you need to add own code of a
sufficient
creation level. The simple act of compiling does of course
Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 04:42:19PM +0100, Sylvain Rochet wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 02:02:08AM -0600, William Pitcock wrote:
What does this have over PowerDNS?
Probably nothing, else that I am using it and packaging it for my own
and thought that it would be a
[Mail-Followup-To set again. I note that the last one was ignored...]
I demand that Joerg Schilling may or may not have written...
Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote:
In order to create a derived work, you need to add own code of a
sufficient creation level. The simple act of
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 16:42 +0100, Sylvain Rochet wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 02:02:08AM -0600, William Pitcock wrote:
What does this have over PowerDNS?
Probably nothing, else that I am using it and packaging it for my own
and thought that it would be a good idea to
On Mar 03, Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net wrote:
You could easily adapt these expressions and logic (if needed,
they are very general) for use by modprobe.
I did this in 2004. Upstream was not interested.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
I demand that Michael Banck may or may not have written...
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 03:33:57PM +, Darren Salt wrote:
Strange, then, that Eben Moglen's opinion, quoted in this very thread,
should refer explicitly to the C library and otherwise only to *system*
libraries.
You're not the
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 04:51:26PM +, Darren Salt wrote:
Chances are that I'll not be the last either. I think that he's a lost cause
wrt getting that licensing sorted out, but you know, million-to-one...
million-to-one is the debian-devel S/N ratio you're aiming for?
Michael
--
To
Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote:
[Mail-Followup-To set again. I note that the last one was ignored...]
I demand that Joerg Schilling may or may not have written...
Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote:
In order to create a derived work, you need to add
I demand that Joerg Schilling may or may not have written...
[snip]
I am definitely not writing self contradicting statements, you are.
Keep telling yourself that; I don't think that anybody else believes you.
Your problem seems to be that you repeat untrue claims from other people
block 517957 by 449497
thanks
Hi Daniel!
I cc:ed the d-devel mailing list to get a wider opinion. Please keep at
least the BTS cc:ed.
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:37:33 +0100, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
Firmware is looked for under /usr/share/foo2zjs/firmware, but firmware
is added on and therefore
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Bill Unruh un...@physics.ubc.ca wrote:
I believe that you mean the above to apply to mkisofs, not to cdrtools, which
is a bunch of different program. The programs which are purely CDDL I assume
you have no problem with distributing (despite your
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Joerg Schilling wrote:
...
As a hint: the work mkisofs is the plain files that can be found in the
sub-directory mkisofs in the cdrtools source tree. Other sub-directories in
this source tree colletion contain _other_ independent works.
You have to decide whether the GPL
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Particularly in the case of cdrecord, I don't believe there is enough of
a case that we absolutely must have it that we should take a risk on the
licensing. If, on the other hand, you want your software in Debian, you
need to take into account our
Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote:
End of discussion, as far as I'm concerned. I'm saying no more.
OK, wonderful to see that you no longer write non-fact based claims Once
you are willing to have a fact based discussion I am willing to continue.
For anyone who likes to
Bill Unruh un...@physics.ubc.ca wrote:
There is absolutely no problem with distributing mkisofs binaries that are
linked against CDDLd libs that are a different work.
Well, no, there is a problem. Whether that problem is due to a misreading of
the law, differing laws (Under US, the concept
Hello,
Quite a few packages support only OSS, not ALSA. Nowadays there's quite
little probability that your sound board only has an OSS driver, and so
there is quite little probability that quite a few packages work out the
box.
Of course, there are solutions: fix the apps, load snd_pcm_oss, or
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 03:41:40PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Wouter Verhelst wou...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 01:09:29PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
You are uninformed: libc on Linux is under LGPL and the LGPL is as
incompatible to GPL as the CDDL is incomparible
Samuel Thibault, le Tue 03 Mar 2009 20:27:54 +0100, a écrit :
Quite a few packages support only OSS, not ALSA.
[...]
Are there plans on this issue? Drop packages? Always load snd_pcm_oss?
Put another way: how severe should bugs like
#517853 [G|M| ] [saytime] saytime: depends on the OSS
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 20:27:54 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Are there plans on this issue? Drop packages? Always load snd_pcm_oss?
Make those packages depend on oss-compat?
Cheers,
Julien
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe.
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Bill Unruh un...@physics.ubc.ca wrote:
There is absolutely no problem with distributing mkisofs binaries that are
linked against CDDLd libs that are a different work.
Well, no, there is a problem. Whether that problem is due to a misreading of
the
Severity: wishlist
Package: wnpp
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Hi,
it might be neat to have pywikipediabot in Debian.
Package: pywikipediabot
URL: http://pywikipediabot.sourceforge.net/
see also
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interwiki_bot/Getting_started
Julien Cristau, le Tue 03 Mar 2009 20:36:23 +0100, a écrit :
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 20:27:54 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Are there plans on this issue? Drop packages? Always load snd_pcm_oss?
Make those packages depend on oss-compat?
Ah, didn't know that one. Very few packages depend
Bill Unruh un...@physics.ubc.ca wrote:
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Joerg Schilling wrote:
...
As a hint: the work mkisofs is the plain files that can be found in the
sub-directory mkisofs in the cdrtools source tree. Other sub-directories
in
this source tree colletion contain _other_
Bill Unruh un...@physics.ubc.ca wrote:
Attacks from Debian against the cdrtools project caused the license to be
changed. Debian now needs to live with this change.
Unfortunately it is not Debian who have to live with it, but the users around
the world. Debian is not being particularly
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 08:58:34PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Bill Unruh un...@physics.ubc.ca wrote:
Attacks from Debian against the cdrtools project caused the license to be
changed. Debian now needs to live with this change.
Unfortunately it is not Debian who have to live with
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net
* Package name: booh
Version : 0.9.1
Upstream Author : Guillaume Cottenceau
* URL : http://booh.org/
* License : GPLv2
Programming Lang: Ruby
Description : image classifier
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Antonio Radici anto...@dyne.org
* Package name: libvariable-magic-perl
Version : 0.32
Upstream Author : Vincent Pit p...@profvince.com
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Variable-Magic
* License : GPL-1+ | Artistic
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Antonio Radici anto...@dyne.org
* Package name: cfengine3
Version : 3.0.1b3
Upstream Author : Mark Burgess mark.burg...@iu.hio.no
* URL : http://www.cfengine.org/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description :
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 05:26:11PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
At 16:10, someone wrote in another thread:
I believe that you're using circular arguments with no relevance to the
actual case in hand.
At 16:59, Joerg Schilling wrote :
Before you again and again try to present your
Am 2009-03-02 10:34:38, schrieb Bernd Schubert:
Maybe you should start to test Debian-Testing from time to time and report
bugs if something doesn't work for you? Just complaining *after* a release
isn't really helpful.
How many Enterprises do you know, running testing on there production
Michelle Konzack linux4miche...@tamay-dogan.net writes:
Am 2009-03-02 10:34:38, schrieb Bernd Schubert:
Maybe you should start to test Debian-Testing from time to time and
report bugs if something doesn't work for you? Just complaining *after*
a release isn't really helpful.
How many
Hey folks,
I'm looking at my local mirror (slowly) update at the moment, and I've
got to wondering: are the large -dbg packages actually really useful
to anybody? I can't imagine that more than a handful of users ever
install (to pick an example) the amarok-dbg packages, but we have
multiple
Hello,
(pkg-multimedia-maintainers and pkg-phototools-devel Bcc'ed).
I have several packages (all libraries except one) I can no longer take
proper care of, and I'd appreciate if somebody/group who knows how to
maintain a library would step up and take them.
They come in two groups:
1.
Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com writes:
I'm looking at my local mirror (slowly) update at the moment, and I've
got to wondering: are the large -dbg packages actually really useful to
anybody? I can't imagine that more than a handful of users ever install
(to pick an example) the amarok-dbg
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009, Steve McIntyre wrote:
I've got to wondering: are the large -dbg packages actually really
useful to anybody?
Thoughts?
I think they are useful, but probably not for the vast majority of
users. [I've used them on a few dozen occasions.]
What I really wish for is the
Adeodato Simó d...@net.com.org.es (04/03/2009):
(pkg-multimedia-maintainers and pkg-phototools-devel Bcc'ed).
The latter Cc'd this time.
2. OpenEXR packages
===
* openexr
* ilmbase
These two library packages I RFA'ed quite some time ago (#494877 and
#494878), but
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Don Armstrong d...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009, Steve McIntyre wrote:
I've got to wondering: are the large -dbg packages actually really
useful to anybody?
Thoughts?
See #508585 and http://debug.debian.net/
It will be really nice to have this
Hi,
Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes:
What I really wish for is the ability to have a relatively centralized
location where the symbols from every single package ended up that was
separate from the normal mirrors.
The above, coupled with a coredump submission site which would accept
On 2009-03-03, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
Hey folks,
I'm looking at my local mirror (slowly) update at the moment, and I've
got to wondering: are the large -dbg packages actually really useful
to anybody? I can't imagine that more than a handful of users ever
install (to pick an
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 10:12:22PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
I'm looking at my local mirror (slowly) update at the moment, and I've
got to wondering: are the large -dbg packages actually really useful
to anybody? I can't imagine that more than a handful of users ever
install (to pick
I doubt most users will install them on their own, but I've found
them to be moderately useful in tracking down crashes. It's easier
to convince people to install a -dbg package than to convince them to
recompile the program from source.
Daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 03:11:12PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009, Steve McIntyre wrote:
I've got to wondering: are the large -dbg packages actually really
useful to anybody?
Thoughts?
I think they are useful, but probably not for the vast majority of
users. [I've used
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 04:55:00PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 04:17:00PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
Introducing either a shell library or a non-integrated dpkg-conffile
has a too high cost IMO. It will prompt maintainers to switch to it
(when the annoying part
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 10:12:22PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
I'm looking at my local mirror (slowly) update at the moment, and I've
got to wondering: are the large -dbg packages actually really useful
to anybody? I can't imagine that more than a handful of users ever
install (to pick an
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:27 AM, Samuel Thibault
samuel.thiba...@ens-lyon.org wrote:
Quite a few packages support only OSS, not ALSA. Nowadays there's quite
little probability that your sound board only has an OSS driver, and so
there is quite little probability that quite a few packages work
Paul Wise p...@debian.org (04/03/2009):
Is ALSA supported by kFreeBSD or hurd or other unofficial ports?
Last time I checked, GNU/kFreeBSD provided with OSS, not with ALSA
(which is, as its name suggests, Linux-specific).
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
I've been using Gmail and thought you might like to try it out. Here's
an invitation to create an account.
---
web link has invited you to open a free Gmail account.
To accept this invitation and register for your account,
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 22:59 +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote:
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 09:10:21PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 02:02:08AM -0600, William Pitcock wrote:
What does this have over PowerDNS?
Probably nothing, else that I am using it and packaging it
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 03:45:19 Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
It is a network daemon, so you should also considering security:
different implementations *could* help security,
so redundancy not always is wast of time.
Having different programs to perform a task will decrease the portion of
First, I'm a perl programmer so TMTOWTDI is pretty ingrained into my culture.
I use mydns -- yi.org is based off of it, and I also use it as an easy way
to set up dynamic virtual hosts for automated builds on another project, in
conjunction with libapache2-mod-macro and mod_proxy on the frontend,
1 - 100 of 185 matches
Mail list logo
