On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 02:47:12PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
For those playing along at home, I suspect this would look a lot like:
clone XX
severity -1 important
retitle -1 Causes massive failures on package foo
assign -1 bar
Would it be acceptable to add:
forwarded XX
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 10:58:53AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
Otherwise, there is no way to filter out this bug report in BTS
listings.
Not to mention the problem that if -1 is closed, XX needs to be
manually too, but the owner of XX is not informed that -1
has been closed (AFAIK).
--
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 12:41, Julian Gilbey wrote:
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 02:45:09PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
We've often downplayed asking for help in favour of encouraging people
to *offer* to help, but since we're having problems, it's important to
try everything we can to overcome
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 02:45:09PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
We've often downplayed asking for help in favour of encouraging people
to *offer* to help, but since we're having problems, it's important to
try everything we can to overcome them. One of the more effective way
of getting useful
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 06:31:02PM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Peter S Galbraith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
another package's was using convert in the build stage to convert
some images and it was failing. The bug was elevated to
release-critical. I don't think it would be fair to
Hi aj, hi all others,
On 2003-12-01 14:45 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Another possibility is to just drop packages that aren't maintained well
enough. While this is somewhat attractive, it doesn't really serve our
users any better than saying Why don't we just lower our standards?
Basically I
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 03:01:20PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
On 2003-12-01 14:45 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Another possibility is to just drop packages that aren't maintained well
enough. While this is somewhat attractive, it doesn't really serve our
users any better than saying Why don't
Anthony Towns wrote:
* #203339 - freeswan - Rene Mayrhofer
FTBFS, patch in the bug log since July, no further activity
I feel that I need to respond to that, after being mentioned here :)
I fully admit that I have simply overlooked this one, because it is very
easy to fix (and
Nikita V. Youshchenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Can requesting removal from archive be automated, to occur say after 3
weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ or utility in having
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote on debian-devel-announce:
I think the best way is to
file a RFA (which we're redefining as Request For Assistance instead
of just Request For Adoption) report against wnpp
[cut]
Third, personnel
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:38:10AM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote on debian-devel-announce:
I think the best way is to
file a RFA (which we're redefining as Request For Assistance instead
of just
Peter S Galbraith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
another package's was using convert in the build stage to convert
some images and it was failing. The bug was elevated to
release-critical. I don't think it would be fair to remove
imagemagick from the distribution for such a case.
From the other
On Dec 4, 2003, at 10:56, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
But another package's was using convert
in the build stage to convert some images and it was failing. The bug
was elevated to release-critical. I don't think it would be fair to
remove imagemagick from the distribution for such a case.
More
On Dec 4, 2003, at 10:56, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
But another package's was using convert
in the build stage to convert some images and it was failing. The bug
was elevated to release-critical. I don't think it would be fair to
remove imagemagick from the distribution for such a
Frank Lichtenheld [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:38:10AM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote on debian-devel-announce:
I think the best way is to
file a RFA (which we're
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 08:46:19PM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Anyone know the answer to my second question?
: Does the OTA bug get filled against the package you are offering to help
: with, or against wnpp? I presume against the package you are offering
: to help with, but then there's
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 08:46:19PM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Anyone know the answer to my second question?
: Does the OTA bug get filled against the package you are offering to help
: with, or against wnpp? I presume against the package
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 09:33:39AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
aj == Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
aj or overloaded with work, or, for that matter, fixing compromised Debian
aj servers -- do you think it's desirable and possible to:
aj * for confirmed bugs with a
On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 15:45, Anthony Towns wrote:
Having critical, grave or serious bugs open for an extended period is simply
not acceptable.
Nor is it excusable. While it's possible that you mightn't have the skill
required to fix some security bug, or mightn't have the time to respond
to
Anthony Towns wrote:
[...]
Fallback plans are important though, and in this case if we're not able
to get in a position where maintainers are able to keep control of their
RC bug count (which is to say, keep it at zero), we'll have to consider
more drastic measures. An obvious one is to
A levelezm azt hiszi, hogy Zenaan Harkness a kvetkezeket rta:
Can requesting removal from archive be automated, to occur say after 3
weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ or utility in having your
package in the archive. This would give you a
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Hrm.
] $ grep Harkness /var/lib/apt/lists/*_*; echo $?
] 1
Can requesting removal from archive be automated, to occur say after 3
weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
It could, but it shouldn't be -- requests for
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Can requesting removal from archive be automated, to occur say after 3
weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ or utility in having your
package in the archive. This would give
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
Without having evaluated null hypotheses or done exhaustive analyses,
the correlation nevertheless seems fairly convincing. To put it bluntly,
our regular package maintainers are doing such a bad job that without
On 20031201T144509+1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
* #208646 - grep-dctrl - Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
unspecified problems with version in unstable, should take
a couple of days to fix, no activity since September
The unspecified problems are mainly recorded in the other open
On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 18:12, Magosnyi rpd wrote:
A levelezm azt hiszi, hogy Zenaan Harkness a kvetkezeket rta:
Can requesting removal from archive be automated, to occur say after 3
weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ or utility in
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Can requesting removal from archive be automated, to occur say after 3
weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ or utility in having your
package in the archive. This would give
On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 18:09, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
] $ grep Harkness /var/lib/apt/lists/*_*; echo $?
] 1
It's not much (directly) Debian related (yet), but:
I'd be in NM but for the keyservers and NM registration page being down.
On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 18:56, Brian May wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Can requesting removal from archive be automated, to occur say after 3
weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ or utility in
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 10:34:26AM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
That said, it has been too long since I last looked at grep-dctrl. I'll
try to fix that in a couple of days :) I can only say that my
teaching duties have exhausted me during the autumn.
And hey, if you manage to fix it
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 06:56:13PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
A release critical bug in one package could be caused by a non-release
critical bug in another package.
How?
If the bug is caused by a problem in another package then it should be
reassigned (and more importantly fixed). The bug is
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 02:45:09PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Hello world,
Hello aj.
* LSB 1.3 compatibility mostly achieved
(LSB non-compliance issues are now Release Critical; bugs
should be filed and addressed by the LSB team, which hangs
around the
aj == Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
aj or overloaded with work, or, for that matter, fixing compromised Debian
aj servers -- do you think it's desirable and possible to:
aj * for confirmed bugs with a known fix, upload a fixed package
aj within a
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:09:37PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
What happens if say there are simply not enough people interested in
GNOME for example, and the RC counts rise, and rise at an increasing
rate, and we never release again?
That's not a very interesting hypothetical -- there're
Op di 02-12-2003, om 14:46 schreef Mark Howard:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 06:56:13PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
A release critical bug in one package could be caused by a non-release
critical bug in another package.
How?
A program could use some library for most of its core operation, and
fail
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:27:00PM -0500, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
release goal of December 1 didn't inspire any new activity. This gives
the appearance that the ARM port maintainers simply don't care if sarge
gets released at all. This is very discouraging.
If that is what happens, then I
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 01:46:02PM +, Mark Howard wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 06:56:13PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
A release critical bug in one package could be caused by a non-release
critical bug in another package.
How?
If the bug is caused by a problem in another package then it
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 09:33:39AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
[...] It takes me about an
afternoon to do a PAM or OpenAFS release even if I change one line.
OK, for a one line change I can probably get that down to two hours or
so.
It's a lot easier for me if I batch bugs together and if I
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 07:17:57AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 01:46:02PM +, Mark Howard wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 06:56:13PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
A release critical bug in one package could be caused by a non-release
critical bug in another package.
John Goerzen writes:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:27:00PM -0500, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
release goal of December 1 didn't inspire any new activity. This gives
the appearance that the ARM port maintainers simply don't care if sarge
gets released at all. This is very discouraging.
If that is
Hello world,
So as most will have realised, we're not going to be releasing on December
1st. For those who didn't, hopefully you have now.
Before we get into the details of why we haven't made that date, let's do
a quick summary of some of the progress we've made.
* debian-installer
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 12:36:01AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:13:23AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
time). From what Colin
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:13:23AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
time). From what Colin Watson mentioned to me earlier today there are
some other packages
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 07:43:37PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Eventually I found aptitude's Dselect theme, which helped some.
I guess aptitude could be made the recommended default package manager,
but I would hope that:
1. Something more closely approximating the Dselect theme is used
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:13:23AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
time). From what Colin Watson mentioned to me earlier today there are
some other packages
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 02:07:38PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:13:23AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
time). From what Colin
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 06:09:10PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
However, at least lm-sensors and i2c need attention soon.
The i2c bugs are due to some major upstream breakage. I don't see how we're
really going to handle that stuff, the situation is just plain old ugly.
(FWIW I still haven't
Daniel Burrows wrote:
(e) I've heard about a debtags database system that's trying to
find a general solution to the problem of categorizing packages.
I took a look at their library at one point and wasn't able to
figure out how to use it, but if this project is still going
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:59:15PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
(e) I've heard about a debtags database system that's trying to
find a general solution to the problem of categorizing packages.
I took a look at their library at one point and wasn't able to
figure out how to
Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Maybe we should ask the user at first boot if he wishes to use tasksel,
dselect, aptitude or none-of-the-above, instead of going just tasksel
and dselect...
Maybe we should look at a current install of debian before posting to
-devel.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200, Robert Lemmen wrote:
please do! dselect (whil ebeing verty simple and functional) has the
most counter-intuitive user interface i have seen. the day i
discovered aptitude and got rid of dselect meant a big step forward
for my persoanl debian
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 02:07:00PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
The way this garbage collection is implemented is one of the main
dislikes I have about aptitude. Aptitude contains a database with
packages that have been installed through aptitude; as such, it contains
no information on
On 2003-10-03, Daniel Burrows [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see. It's a lot simpler, from the point of view of maintainability,
to have a single user's manual for both offline and online perusal.
One nice way to make this less of an issue would be to rewrite the
documentation in a
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 06:18:58PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
Aptitude is nice power tool for dealing with 6000+ packages (or
whatever it is now)
try twice that:
$ apt-cache search .\* | wc -l
12204
--
gram, who wonders if this could be getting out of hand
signature.asc
Description:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 11:09:29PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:59:58PM -0500, Chris Cheney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:09:16PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney [EMAIL
* Jamin W. Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031002 22:18]:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400, Ervin Hearn III wrote:
Quite seriously, I prefer using dselect... the main complaint I've
heard from new users is being able to search for a specific package
quickly. As soon as I teach them
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:11:52PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400, Ervin Hearn III wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:50:09AM -0700, Chris Jantzen wrote:
Easier for new people to use?!?
/me rolls off chair laughing.
I sincerely hope
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney arranged a set of bits
into the following:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200, Robert Lemmen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Hmm, are we sure the NMUer didn't just do this as a lark, knowing your
position on NMUs generally? ;)
Considering he uploaded like three versions I tend to doubt it.
Certainly, the possibility is there that this particular NMU would not
have
On 02-Oct-03, 21:59 (CDT), Daniel Burrows [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Users Manual starts with a section on the non-interactive interface.
Huh?
I suppose the command-line interface could be documented later, but
it's usually documented earlier. Or are you objecting to the odd phrase
Steve Greenland wrote:
You might consider including a default filter so that the only
candidates for automatic removal begin with 'lib' and don't end with
'-dev'.
This seems rather silly. The whole point of this feature is to
distinguish those packages that you manually requested from those
Op vr 03-10-2003, om 04:59 schreef Daniel Burrows:
Figuring out how to tell aptitude not to automatically delete unused
packages
required reading the User Manual while knowing that this was an issue.
This is on by default, and the information about marking a package
manually selected
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
The way this garbage collection is implemented is one of the main
dislikes I have about aptitude. Aptitude contains a database with
packages that have been installed through aptitude; as such, it contains
no information on packages that were installed through a
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 06:34:29PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
Op vr 03-10-2003, om 04:59 schreef Daniel Burrows:
In most cases, the garbage collection should operate without you
needing to know about it. (the increasing prevalence of meta-packages
is
On 03-Oct-03, 10:49 (CDT), Craig Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Greenland wrote:
You might consider including a default filter so that the only
candidates for automatic removal begin with 'lib' and don't end with
'-dev'.
This seems rather silly. The whole point of this feature
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 09:53:33AM -0500, Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
On 02-Oct-03, 21:59 (CDT), Daniel Burrows [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Users Manual starts with a section on the non-interactive interface.
Huh?
I suppose the command-line interface could
On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 17:20:11 +0200, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 02-Oct-03, 21:59 (CDT), Daniel Burrows [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It will never be off by default while I am a maintainer of the package,
unless someone gets me to change my mind (which I don't think is
likely; I already thought for
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Or, alternatively, this was the only crappy NMU that was noticed while
quite a few others were made against ancient packages with inactive
maintainers who didn't notice or didn't care. I'm not terribly
interested in going through all the NMUs done and
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 10:13:36AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
Or, alternatively, this was the only crappy NMU that was noticed while
quite a few others were made against ancient packages with inactive
maintainers who didn't notice or didn't care. I'm not terribly
interested in going through
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400, Ervin Hearn III wrote:
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
Easier for new people to use?!?
/me rolls off chair laughing.
I sincerely hope the :-P means you
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 11:25:20PM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm also one of dselect haters. I find it difficult to learn in
the way vi is: the keystrokes are so surprising and esoteric that
I'm having hard time even reading the help about those keystrokes.
For me, vi was worth
Ervin Hearn III dijo [Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400]:
And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
well replace dselect as the recommended method.
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
I was interested how we're doing according to AJ's original timetable,
so had a read and see how we're doing given we've just passed the third
date milestone...
This is given without comment, that is I'm not trying to start a
flamewar here.
On Tue, 2003-08-19 at 07:49, Anthony Towns wrote:
* Scott James Remnant [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-10-02 05:57]:
HOWTO use debian-installer to install sarge posted to
-devel-announce (volunteers appreciated)
Ah yes, what a wonderful read that was ... no, wait, this never
happened.
* Debian-Installer HOWTO
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 05:57:58AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
* September 1st
HOWTO use debian-installer to install sarge posted to
-devel-announce (volunteers appreciated)
Ah yes, what a wonderful read that was ... no, wait, this never
happened.
On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 06:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 05:57:58AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
* September 1st
HOWTO use debian-installer to install sarge posted to
-devel-announce (volunteers appreciated)
Ah yes, what a wonderful
Am Do, den 02.10.2003 schrieb Martin Michlmayr um 07:42:
* Debian-Installer HOWTO Sebastian Ley
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/debian-devel-announce-200309/msg7.html
During the last debcamp we took the opportunity to introduce some last
major changes which leaves
I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
time). From what Colin Watson mentioned to me earlier today there are
some other packages that are holding KDE out as well so hopefully they
are resolved by
On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 05:57, Scott James Remnant wrote:
So Where are we now? Having played with d-i some and kept a watchful
eye on the release-critical list, I guess we're currently at the
September 15th dateline which puts us roughly 14 days behind schedule.
And I havent even started work
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
It's been noted several times that the end of the 0-day NMU period was
accompanied by a marked reversal in the RC bug graph. I think it's time
for a group debriefing of this experience. I was pleasantly surprised
to have not heard of a single
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:22:34PM +0100, Rob Bradford wrote:
be fun though. I'm planning to only support upgrades from potato and
woody. So that means i can remove all the cruft about upgrading from
I was under the impression (don't ask me how; perhaps my mind came up with
it on it's own) that
And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
well replace dselect as the recommended method.
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
well replace dselect as the recommended method.
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
Easier for
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
please do! dselect (whil ebeing verty simple and functional) has the
most counter-intuitive user interface
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:50:09AM -0700, Chris Jantzen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
well replace dselect as the recommended method.
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400, Ervin Hearn III wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:50:09AM -0700, Chris Jantzen wrote:
Easier for new people to use?!?
/me rolls off chair laughing.
I sincerely hope the :-P means you are using sarcasm.
Quite seriously, I prefer using
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
well replace dselect as the recommended method.
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
What's wrong
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200, Robert Lemmen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
please do! dselect (whil ebeing verty
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:36:50AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
It's been noted several times that the end of the 0-day NMU period was
accompanied by a marked reversal in the RC bug graph. I think it's time
for a group debriefing of this
Chris Cheney wrote:
From what I have heard about aptitude it has the fun side effect of
removing packages that it thinks you didn't purposely install.
After telling you it will and waiting for you to look over the list of
changes, sure. I have never seen this be a problem. It will also not
On 02-Oct-03, 16:10 (CDT), Chris Cheney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From what I have heard about aptitude it has the fun side effect of
removing packages that it thinks you didn't purposely install.
[and]
Further, if recommends/suggests are on how does a user manage to only
install standard
Well, aptitude is certainly better than it used to be.
At least now it's keystroke-compatible with dselect. I still find it
less useful though. :-P
--
Although aptitude uses only one fewer line of screen space for the
list of packages, somehow it manages to have less information. The
absence
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 05:57:58AM +0100, Scott James Remnant [EMAIL
PROTECTED] was heard to say:
I think it's fair to say that we're not going to reach the following
state within 14 days unless a miracle, or a hell of a lot of work
happens:
I don't know about anyone else, but if we manage
Hi,
aptitude has a lot of problems that I don't have enough time to fix,
but I would appreciate it if people would confine themselves to the
facts when criticizing it.
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:38:18PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:22:34PM +0100, Rob Bradford wrote:
be fun though. I'm planning to only support upgrades from potato and
woody. So that means i can remove all the cruft about upgrading from
I was under the impression
As I indicated in a recent message, I don't currently have time to
get aptitude working the way I'd like. Please consider this a public
call for a codeveloper -- you can interview by submitting working
patches for one of the issues below, particularly the ones I've outlined
a fix for.
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:09:16PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
I also don't think it is a particularly good idea for aptitude to
default to installing suggests since it will likely bloat systems
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:59:58PM -0500, Chris Cheney [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:09:16PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
I also don't think it is a particularly
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 17:12:42 +0200
cobaco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
KDE is not mission critical in the sense that when a user's KDE-instance
crashes the KDE-instances of the other users will continue to run. Just
like when -in that same organization with some thousands of X terminals-
1 X
El 22-ago-2003 a las 10:03:47, Adrian von Bidder escribió:
Content-Description: signed data
On Wednesday 20 August 2003 09:49, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
... what KDE, gcc, X,
gnome versions will be in sarge?
And what about postfix? 2.0 is in unstable quite a while and works ok. I
guess
1 - 100 of 186 matches
Mail list logo
