debconf template translations from ddtp
Hello We've started the translation of debconf templates some weeks ago. See http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/gnuplot/ddts-stat.png The debconf template translation is still in a beta stage and only few translators from 2-3 language teams are making translations every now and then. But now the first translated debconf templates from the ddtp is downloadable from the ddtp web site. At http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/maintainer/new.all.txt you'll get a list of all packages including new translated debconf templates. (File http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/maintainer/new.all.sort.txt is sorted by number of new translated templates) If you are a package maintainer, you can obtain a package-related file from http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/maintainer/$PACKAGE with more information. http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/maintainer/base-config as example: |../maintainer/new.all.txt: 84 base-config |../maintainer/new.cs.txt:- 26 7 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.da.txt:- 29 7 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.de.txt:- 29 12 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.es.txt:- 25 6 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.fr.txt:- 25 6 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.hu.txt:- 19 6 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.it.txt:- 20 6 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.ja.txt:- 21 7 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.nl.txt:- 20 6 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.pl.txt:- 27 6 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.pt_BR.txt:- 30 9 33 base-config |../maintainer/new.ru.txt:- 22 6 33 base-config The ddtp server has 84 new translated templates for the base-config package (first line). The package uses 33 templates of which: - 29 are translated into German, and - 12 are in ddtp's db only (not in the unstable base-config package) You can download translated template files from http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/template_unstable/$PACKAGE (like http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/template_unstable/base-config/templates-de for German) Comments? Gruss Grisu -- Michael Bramer - a Debian Linux Developer http://www.debsupport.de PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Linux Sysadmin -- Use Debian Linux Zwei Dinge sind unendlich, das Universum und die menschliche Dummheit, aber bei dem Universum bin ich mir noch nicht ganz sicher. -- A. Einstein pgpStFK7rXjFs.pgp Description: PGP signature
Uploaded blackbook 3-4 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 13:36:24 +0100 Source: blackbook Binary: blackbook Architecture: m68k Version: 3-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Rafal Zawadzki [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: blackbook - GTK+ Address Book Applet Closes: 168324 Changes: blackbook (3-4) unstable; urgency=low . * Fix arch to all. Closes: #168324 Files: 57a4d75cc569d0d0374f3c1165216e59 77372 utils optional blackbook_3-4_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94xs2WgZ1HEtaPf0RAr09AJ9BwZp/VPWjstESxkxYx8iQAq7NhgCePWbq PWEKVl2y+kAhjz9wbu9lGew= =EG1o -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded pdb2dhl 1.0.0-3 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 05:51:34 -0800 Source: pdb2dhl Binary: pdb2dhl Architecture: m68k Version: 1.0.0-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: pdb2dhl- Convert PDB files to dihedral angle/ECEPPAK input file format Changes: pdb2dhl (1.0.0-3) unstable; urgency=low . * Changed priority from optional to extra * Updated maintainer's email address (old one to expire) * Null-terminate all string copies * Added lots of error checking throughout the code (every new should have a corresponding assert). * New feature allowing input files of any size, rather than only 700 lines as previous, without crashing the program. * README.Debian added. Files: d3368f170c3e9f39dfc21e540af35cea 72622 science extra pdb2dhl_1.0.0-3_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94xtIWgZ1HEtaPf0RAvY9AKCH4R+CJfvPq2jBeQviNdm5PjlHRgCfWe7F xOZEfopJrwDhTV/Xso7sS24= =lJ7j -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded smssend 3.1-1 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 00:49:21 +0100 Source: smssend Binary: smssend Architecture: m68k Version: 3.1-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Lenart Janos [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: smssend- Utility to send SMS messages to GSM mobile phones Closes: 89774 97385 135500 141493 141776 158315 Changes: smssend (3.1-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream release. (closes: Bug#89774, Bug#97385, Bug#141776) * Some obsolate scripts deleted or renewed. (closes: Bug#135500) * Option -update now works. (closes: Bug#141493) * Scripts added locally: tmobile_cz, etsity. (closes: Bug#158315) * Added Build-Depends on skyutils because of the new construct. * Added regexp support, and so appending libpcre to the Build-Depends. Files: 6e22945be2296e20072c5480d1c039ef 66520 comm optional smssend_3.1-1_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94xtdWgZ1HEtaPf0RAliaAJ9cK//iWGVGQzkTLo+OlPEh4aVrtACbBHVR ivOSVAyucjQ11BNH1AYcpGs= =0Kmp -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded zebra 0.93b-1.1 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 19:14:51 -0800 Source: zebra Binary: zebra-doc zebra Architecture: m68k Version: 0.93b-1.1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: David Kimdon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: zebra - A GPL'd, BGP/OSPF/RIP capable routing daemon Closes: 168642 Changes: zebra (0.93b-1.1) unstable; urgency=low . * Non Maintainer Upload * Update config.guess and config.sub (closes: #168642) Files: c40976d5dc71176e3de26205a55bc4e5 747794 net extra zebra_0.93b-1.1_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94xsfWgZ1HEtaPf0RAkFZAJ0WGoI3T1qpuYNYyDVP9mFFN3w+IgCfbhDF ILMliokHDRg8bZZN8G7EpkI= =SGD1 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded autotrace 0.29-1.3 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 21:33:43 +0100 Source: autotrace Binary: autotrace Architecture: m68k Version: 0.29-1.3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Fedrowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: autotrace - Bitmap to vector graphics converter Closes: 169626 Changes: autotrace (0.29-1.3) unstable; urgency=low . * NMU * Rebuild against latest libs (again). (Closes: #169626) Files: 97163ed048442ba416f238674c1579a4 70188 graphics optional autotrace_0.29-1.3_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94xsvWgZ1HEtaPf0RAinzAKCXNH0BvBQ76yiO28EqtsitDHS1tACgi/V+ lx+drBd97n7oSI1gAOaritI= =GGWU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded pycurl 7.10.2-1 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 15:41:40 +0100 Source: pycurl Binary: python2.2-pycurl Architecture: m68k Version: 7.10.2-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Domenico Andreoli [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: python2.2-pycurl - Python interface module to libcurl Changes: pycurl (7.10.2-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream version. Files: 787732022b9b63b7a925f92d4a226a05 39880 interpreters extra python2.2-pycurl_7.10.2-1_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94xtOWgZ1HEtaPf0RAo3mAJ9p2ScGNQWYv62trYevKoTjQ+9e4ACgmq0u CzdQOLXSE5v1tw40hZGvuXs= =u4r1 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded xmms-status-plugin 0.9-2 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 20:37:30 + Source: xmms-status-plugin Binary: xmms-status-plugin Architecture: m68k Version: 0.9-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: xmms-status-plugin - Status panel applet for XMMS Closes: 170178 Changes: xmms-status-plugin (0.9-2) unstable; urgency=low . * Build depend on xlibs-dev (closes: #170178). Files: ce3adb605efd5c1b9e46896218185f94 42832 sound extra xmms-status-plugin_0.9-2_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94xtiWgZ1HEtaPf0RAnuRAJ9f9vBD9Be1R1aN4GvVeQ7xjGNK2QCfU6wL MTPBYlWQKbY6f/5EaqoOuQs= =kZaN -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded gputils 0.10.6-1 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 23:41:53 +0100 Source: gputils Binary: gputils Architecture: m68k Version: 0.10.6-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gputils- GNU PIC utilities Changes: gputils (0.10.6-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream version: - Added new directives: banksel and pagesel - Changed gpasm default hex file format to inhx32. - Added support for sx, 17xx, and 18xx devices in gpdasm. Files: 9c3d50baab3875632d819a9ada0bcb16 342832 electronics extra gputils_0.10.6-1_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94xtDWgZ1HEtaPf0RAr2rAJ0fDPslqhJkmAXDDpV/l55aQkuNSACfRR9o CUYknH1PYmKmmD8JWNcnibk= =L9rT -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded evolver 2.14-5 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 11:38:11 -0500 Source: evolver Binary: evolver-doc evolver Architecture: m68k Version: 2.14-5 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Adam C. Powell, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: evolver- Surface Evolver Closes: 170172 Changes: evolver (2.14-5) unstable; urgency=low . * Changed Build-Depends from xlib6g-dev to xlibs-dev (closes: #170172). * Updated Standards-Version to 3.5.8. Files: 7cb65d9de1b4ee9de787264d209864ea 518416 math extra evolver_2.14-5_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94xs8WgZ1HEtaPf0RAusbAJ9zA7Vo1PKF3aupsGEw2b4Ur6nTNACdELUG hG+wFQ7FemSxjQaH/uyod6Y= =Lm0C -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded exult 1.00-2 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 23:22:34 +0100 Source: exult Binary: exult exult-studio Architecture: m68k Version: 1.00-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Robert Bihlmeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: exult - Play Ultima VII on a decent OS exult-studio - Create or modify a role playing game like Ultima VII Changes: exult (1.00-2) unstable; urgency=low . * The fixdaemon release. * g++ 3.2 apparently broken on sparc, go back to the default compiler ... * Update config.sub for s390 et al. Files: ea2eb3289a3189ad07cdeaea3cae2279 1025672 contrib/games extra exult_1.00-2_m68k.deb 9cfe59550f89a18a0177a76963c27b5b 621634 contrib/games extra exult-studio_1.00-2_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94zkYWgZ1HEtaPf0RAvBsAJ9Cs54RWTil124P0t9h4Ib+jpye3ACggqT4 9gv/wsP4IXzjTx0iiwxqGMw= =X9ed -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded gnuchess 5.04-4 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 20:58:56 -0500 Source: gnuchess Binary: gnuchess Architecture: m68k Version: 5.04-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Lukas Geyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gnuchess - Plays a game of chess, either against the user or against itself. Closes: 170652 Changes: gnuchess (5.04-4) unstable; urgency=low . * src/book.c: fixed segfault when using gnuchess without book in xboard or eboard. (closes: #170652) Files: 1a5585cd5d175e88a535074bc84de99d 73124 games optional gnuchess_5.04-4_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94zk2WgZ1HEtaPf0RArF5AJ47gIQvqtZmn0Xbw5+WW/NkjeODOwCcC4XR 3Xk6m92AsCi2k5tQHixPsCg= =I1xB -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded gretl 1.0-3 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:38:43 -0600 Source: gretl Binary: libgretl1-dev libgretl1 gretl Architecture: m68k Version: 1.0-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Dirk Eddelbuettel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gretl - The GNU Regression, Econometric Time-Series Library libgretl1 - The GNU Regression, Econometric Time-Series Library -- library libgretl1-dev - The GNU Regression, Econometric Time-Series Library -- developm Closes: 170124 170576 Changes: gretl (1.0-3) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control: Build-Depends s/xlib6g-dev/xlibs-dev/ (Closes: #170124) * debian/libgretl1.shlibs: Corrected soname-version (Closes: #170576) Files: 4a6be9f60458300e2ca0d28e1e22fda9 2394512 math optional gretl_1.0-3_m68k.deb 7611f75e282d55daef19e83ebe4e3c94 168612 libs optional libgretl1_1.0-3_m68k.deb 5556a5232a3b69f5395d2099d24cb35e 195480 devel optional libgretl1-dev_1.0-3_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9479ZWgZ1HEtaPf0RAhi6AJ9kDPvtaCCjWJTHa91aZDDqL+IuGgCfYKDM 4mhKqBjnnE2JDsYSy1Lci0g= =hh2M -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded libvorbis-perl 0.04-2 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 20:00:23 -0800 Source: libvorbis-perl Binary: libvorbis-perl Architecture: m68k Version: 0.04-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: tony mancill [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: libvorbis-perl - Perl extension for Ogg Vorbis streams Closes: 169704 Changes: libvorbis-perl (0.04-2) unstable; urgency=low . * corrected missing build-depends entry (closes: #169704) Files: 7303533efa73e6eaa6a93176abc57b8a 33920 interpreters optional libvorbis-perl_0.04-2_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9479sWgZ1HEtaPf0RAizVAJ443tMJU9pp920jzDkUMJvCtNVmXQCfd/op XLwIxz01HtDL9hVMokR5VqE= =TzE8 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded semidef-oct 2.2-7 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:35:03 -0600 Source: semidef-oct Binary: octave-sp Architecture: m68k Version: 1:2.2-7 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Dirk Eddelbuettel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: octave-sp - Semidefinite Programming functions for GNU Octave Closes: 170519 Changes: semidef-oct (1:2.2-7) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control: Softer Depends on octave2.1 (= 2.1.40) (Closes: #170519) Files: 1343f2ba77bf9fbbd112b3267a720047 323724 math optional octave-sp_2.2-7_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94790WgZ1HEtaPf0RAiwTAJ9yZPsDIrTa+j0yLxZK9AweYOJ8tQCePP5u L5YAGXUL1W7Dz0ilfrHqpDs= =yl21 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded lftp 2.6.2-2 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 13:36:00 +0100 Source: lftp Binary: lftp Architecture: m68k Version: 2.6.2-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Noel Koethe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: lftp - Sophisticated command-line FTP/HTTP client programs Closes: 170584 Changes: lftp (2.6.2-2) unstable; urgency=low . * added netbase dependency (closes: Bug#170584) Files: 2b2443ce3769ca6d13d5770dbc0c44c3 419330 net optional lftp_2.6.2-2_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9479lWgZ1HEtaPf0RAjO+AJ9vQoc85GVdBpOapmDUv66kvPJ63QCePUG9 bMxZE+KCbx5TLxA07RoKcUU= =F8Ku -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded verilog 0.6+20021117-1 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 08:33:47 +1100 Source: verilog Binary: verilog Architecture: m68k Version: 0.6+20021117-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: verilog- Icarus verilog compiler Closes: 167057 167614 Changes: verilog (0.6+20021117-1) unstable; urgency=low . * Pre-release of 0.7 * Upstream: works with latest bison (closes: #167057) * Upstream: fixed insecure handling of temporary files (closes: #167614) Files: 4f1370af4e83f8226c432e2f8e56c8db 682878 electronics optional verilog_0.6+20021117-1_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE947+AWgZ1HEtaPf0RAg7GAJ95RsIwpVvvKSwKYT+UpumTXGtnTgCgh7uk p9uGMGnYchxSdXTbIbs7cRA= =Qp3P -END PGP SIGNATURE-
imlib1 / imlib2 : compilation de paquet
Salut, je suis devant un paquet qui se compile apparemment bien avec le contexte suivant : dpkg -l | grep imlib ii gdk-imlib-dev 1.9.14-11 ii gdk-imlib2 1.9.14-11 ii imlib-base 1.9.14-11 néanmoins, quand je veux l'installer (en repassant par une source apt locale), sur la même machine, j'obtiens : Depends: gdk-imlib1-dev (= 1.9.14-8) Bon, si je comprends bien le debian/control d'origine, cette dépendance est cablée dedans ..., gdk-imlib1-dev (= 1.9.14-8), Pourtant j'ai l'impression en naviguant dans la doc du mainteneur que l'on pourrait sortir cette dépendance et la faire calculer par les dh_* (shlibs). En effet, un grep dans les *.substvars (issus de la recompilation) ne me donne que du imlib2 (et pas imlib1) Comment je m'y prends pour intégrer ça (les dépendances calculées à la volée) proprement dans le control (à la place de la dépendance cablée) ? Est-ce la bonne méthode ? Merci -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: (33) 03 20 43 84 06 INRETS, 20 rue Élisée Reclus fax: (33) 03 20 43 83 59 BP 317 -- 59666 Villeneuve d'Ascq http://www3.inrets.fr/estas/mariano
Re: Echec mode digest (Etait: Re: Unidentified subject!)
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 12:54:31AM +0100, Pierre Machard wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 12:47:12AM +0100, Pierre Machard wrote:
LIST-DAEMON COMMAND {{ DIGEST MODE FLAG TRUE TOGGLE }} STOP END
Bof, le test n'est pas très concluant;-(
Je viens d'avoir confirmation qu'il n'y avait pas de listes digest. :-(
a+
--
Pierre Machard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] TuxFamily.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] techmag.info
+33(0)668 178 365http://migus.tuxfamily.org/gpg.txt
GPG: 1024D/23706F87 : B906 A53F 84E0 49B6 6CF7 82C2 B3A0 2D66 2370 6F87
Bug#170760: ITP: zope-localizer -- helps build multilingual web sites and multilingual Zope products
Package: wnpp Version: N/A; reported 2002-11-26 Severity: wishlist * Package name: zope-localizer Version : 0.9.2 Upstream Author : Juan David Ibanez Palomar [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://telia.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/lleu/Localizer-0.9.2.tgz * License : GPL-2 Description : helps build multilingual web sites and multilingual Zope products
Bug#170761: ITP: zope-translationservice -- A location-aware translation service for Zope
Package: wnpp Version: N/A; reported 2002-11-26 Severity: wishlist * Package name: zope-translationservice Version : 0.2 Upstream Author : Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://www.zope.org/Members/efge/TranslationService/TranslationService-0.2.tgz * License : GPL-2 Description : A location-aware translation service for Zope
Re: new build system
On 25 Nov 2002, Colin Walters wrote: I attempted to take some of these ideas, and adapt them to the Debian build system; in particular, debian/rules. The result is currently called Colin's Build System, but don't let the name give you the Oh, I like it. I haven't used it yet, but the idea is very nice, for GNU autoconf-ruled packages. I'll have more comments when I've stretched it's legs a little, but for now, I'd encourage all DD's (and other people who package) to have a look at it and give it a go. Hopefully at least a few people will take heed and make their packages build a little nicer. -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org
Re: Why do system users have shells?
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 22:34, H. S. Teoh wrote: Possibly because otherwise, you cannot run any shell scripts as that user. (This may also apply to more than shell scripts, but I'm not sure about that.) sudo, start-stop-daemon, su -s Why can't people read man pages before replying? [snip] But there are programs that don't use su -s. E.g., custom logins (non-anonymous) from wu-ftpd will fail if the login shell is set to /bin/false. This, of course, is probably a bug, but I suspect a lot of things will break if (some) system users have no shell. Try it out. You'll find that very little breaks, and most of that can be fixed by a few one-line changes to scripts. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: Why do system users have shells?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 25 November 2002 9:34 pm, H. S. Teoh wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 09:53:22PM +0100, Russell Coker wrote: On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 20:39, H. S. Teoh wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 12:10:44PM -0700, James Hamilton wrote: I'm curious why system users such as bin, sys, and nobody have /bin/sh as a shell instead of a noshell program or /bin/false. [snip] Possibly because otherwise, you cannot run any shell scripts as that user. (This may also apply to more than shell scripts, but I'm not sure about that.) sudo, start-stop-daemon, su -s Why can't people read man pages before replying? [snip] But there are programs that don't use su -s. E.g., custom logins (non-anonymous) from wu-ftpd will fail if the login shell is set to /bin/false. This, of course, is probably a bug, but I suspect a lot of things will break if (some) system users have no shell. I remember trying to set all(most/some) system accounts to /bin/false and the only thing I noticed breaking was fetchmail. Of course there may have been others, but fetchmail persuaded me to revert to /bin/sh. Would it be worth filing a bug about this? - -- David Pashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94z2YYsCKa6wDNXYRAgesAJ4wSUV6Nc6SESWZC1ObDRvK27i18wCfXlAz llLPDoAOcFxhhLA/4GI0f0k= =bNH+ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
Right I'm more awake now, its was late a night went I sent my last mail. A special thanks to Matt for his reply ;-) Right lets make this clear, I'm not here to push Gentoo, I was originally responding to the original question, is Debian losing users to Gentoo? Rather than bother arguing the point again, heres an interesting link: http://www.distrowatch.com/stats.php?1#04 The shows that the top 4 Distributions are: 1) Mandrake 2) Red Hat 3) Gentoo 4) Debian Whats really interesting in this list in that a source based distribution can make it into the top 5, the others are nowhere near. Anyway 'nuff said really on that point I think. I know its not exactly solid figures, but interesting nevertheless. Whilst its fine to say we don't care about this, and I tend to agree on that point, if Debian slips more this tends to mean less users. Less users means less testing, which means either a longer, God forbid, period between stable releases, or a less stable stable release due to lack of testing. It could also more less developers coming into the fold, which in turn affects releases and packages that can be offered. Now that we have X 4.2.1 in testing, maybe its a good time to do a point release? Get stable up to date, as testing is fairly up to date and seems stable at least on my boxes (x86). Radical thinking I know ;-) Whats really important here is not Gentoo and how its doing today, but Debian and how its starting to be perceived as outdated and outmoded and not the techie's choice anymore. This seems to be forgotten, but is more important than anything else. You may not care about people's perception, but that was due, partically, to UNIX's down fall when MS turning up with Windows. Everyone perceived UNIX to be complex and where quite happy to dump it in favour of NT. Perception, unfortunately, counts for a lot, technical excellance gets forgotten. Its crap I know, but that the way of the world. Jon __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Bug#170774: ITP: cl-pg -- Common Lisp library that provides a socket level postgresql interface.
Package: wnpp Version: N/A; reported 2002-11-08 Severity: wishlist * Package name: cl-pg Version : 0.14 Upstream Author : Eric Marsden [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://www.chez.com/emarsden/downloads/ * License : LGPL Description : Common Lisp library that provides a socket level postgresql interface. Pg is a socket-level interface to the PostgreSQL object-relational Database. The Library implements the client part of the frontend/backend protocol, so does not require interfacing with the libpq library. SQL types are converted to the equivalent Common Lisp types where possible. Supports large objects (BLOBs). Groetjes, Peter -- It's logic Jim, but not as we know it. | [EMAIL PROTECTED] God, root, what is difference? - Pitr| http://people.debian.org/~pvaneynd/ God is more forgiving. - Dave Aronson| http://users.belgacom.net/pvaneynd/ pgpU3JPyrfiYF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Discussion - non-free software removal
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 05:27:22PM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:20:39PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: That's a recursive definition. The way things are now is our current social contract, so you are saying The way things are now is consistent with the way things are now. I suppose that could be taken as an axiom, but I don't see any useful benefit to it :-) I'm aware that the definition is somewhat tautological. But my opinion remains that our users are currently better served by the status quo than what you are proposing. Ahh but John is not working in the interests of our users but rather a higher body known as the Free Software Community. It is not known whether any actual Debian user is a member of that group at this time (the answer to THAT question when asked was just as obtuse). Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:48:15AM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote: But I have performed many debian installs with the boot floppy setup, and I found that it still suffers from problems. One problem faced by all dists is that of teaching people about partitioning and backing up. At least the installer says don't do this unless you're backed up. debian-installer might solve that problem by offering to make all the partitioning decisions. I don't see how automated partitioning avoids the need for a backup. Things can still go wrong. The power could go down at the wrong time and take the partition table with it. The software could be buggy in some circumstances, or the kernel is, or something. You certainly shouldn't assume that nobody wants to partition their disk manually, either. dselect, for all its use once a person gets used to it, is not suitable for a new person. Its interface is hostile in friendly clothes as well You are not forced to use dselect during the boot-floppies installation process. By comparison, boot-floppies looks like kludges atop and beneath other kludges, and I get the impression this is not easy to change without affecting other aspects of the installer. I think that unless boot- That may be a correct impression from the code, but it isn't my experience as a user of the process. I find it quite smooth; predictable, certainly. Easy once you've done a few. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: two 'news' aliases
also sprach Stephen Gran [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.11.25.2236 +0100]: I'm not that familiar with postfix myself, but it looks like the postinst calls newaliases and does some other work with /etc/aliases - that's probably the source of it. none of my postinst files on this system installed a news user. -- .''`. martin f. krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' :proud Debian developer, admin, and user `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system pgpPujNiX0Eod.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why do system users have shells?
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, David Pashley wrote: I remember trying to set all(most/some) system accounts to /bin/false and the only thing I noticed breaking was fetchmail. Of course there may have been others, but fetchmail persuaded me to revert to /bin/sh. Would it be worth filing a bug about this? Sure. It is very simple to fix... I am not the fetchmail maintainer anymore, but I would not have minded such a bug, and would have fixed the issue. I think the new maintainer will do the same. -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
* Jon Kent | Now that we have X 4.2.1 in testing, maybe its a good | time to do a point release? Get stable up to date, as | testing is fairly up to date and seems stable at least | on my boxes (x86). Radical thinking I know ;-) we. don't. have. a. working. installer. for. sarge. how hard is that to comprehend? -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `-
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
--- Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: we. don't. have. a. working. installer. for. sarge. how hard is that to comprehend? Thanks for the witty reply but thats why I suggested a _point_ release, OK, its not the same as a major release, comprehend!!! A point release is. not. sarge. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
* Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-11-26 11:59]: | Now that we have X 4.2.1 in testing, maybe its a good | time to do a point release? Get stable up to date, as we. don't. have. a. working. installer. for. sarge. * Jon Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-11-26 03:20]: Thanks for the witty reply but thats why I suggested a _point_ release, OK, its not the same as a major release, comprehend!!! A point release is. not. sarge. But. testing. is. sarge. -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:08:54AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: Rather than bother arguing the point again, heres an interesting link: http://www.distrowatch.com/stats.php?1#04 The shows that the top 4 Distributions are: 1) Mandrake 2) Red Hat 3) Gentoo 4) Debian Well, here's another link: http://www.linux-magazin.de/Artikel/ausgabe/2002/12/award/award.html 1. Debian 2. Knoppix 3. SuSE So what? (oh, and Gentoo was in the list, too[1]. They are even the best newcomer) Now that we have X 4.2.1 in testing, maybe its a good time to do a point release? Get stable up to date, as testing is fairly up to date and seems stable at least on my boxes (x86). Radical thinking I know ;-) You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. There's no problem in other distributions to step up, compile KDE3 with whatever compiler, optimize for i686, use PGI, include X4.2.1 and call it 'Desktop Debian' or whatever. Hell, you could perhaps make a lot of money that way. *We* will release when we are ready[tm]. Whats really important here is not Gentoo and how its doing today, but Debian and how its starting to be perceived as outdated and outmoded and not the techie's choice anymore. And that's news exacttly since when? 1999? Michael -- [1] http://www.linux-magazin.de/Artikel/ausgabe/2002/12/award/nominees.html
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:20:38AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: Thanks for the witty reply but thats why I suggested a _point_ release, OK, its not the same as a major release, comprehend!!! A point release is. not. sarge. A point release is on the way, check the facts dude.[1] Michael -- [1] Of course, it won't include X4.2
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
OK I have enough of this for the moment, do what you feel is right but I'm not convinced that some of the directions things are going are for the benefit of Debian, the blinkers seem to well and truely attached to some people. To the people here who at least replied in a polite manner, thanks, and for those that see some of my points, maybe you have more time than me to follow them up. Looks like an uphill battle mind. I want Debian to be a key player, not an underdog or also ran, which some of you seem to be quite happy with. This annoys the hell out of me, Debian was once looked up to, now its the one with apt. Anyway enough Jon __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
* Jon Kent | --- Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | | we. don't. have. a. working. installer. for. sarge. | | how hard is that to comprehend? | | Thanks for the witty reply but thats why I suggested a | _point_ release, OK, its not the same as a major | release, comprehend!!! 'Multiple exclamation marks,' he went on, shaking his head, 'are a sure sign of a diseased mind.' (Terry Pratchett, Eric) | A point release is. not. sarge. stable does not gain new versions. (with a few exceptions, such as where backporting security fixes is ~impossible.) -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `-
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
--- Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'Multiple exclamation marks,' he went on, shaking his head, 'are a sure sign of a diseased mind.' (Terry Pratchett, Eric) Indeed, or someone who trying to convey that they are annoyed. | A point release is. not. sarge. stable does not gain new versions. (with a few exceptions, such as where backporting security fixes is ~impossible.) Are you sure? I seem to remember 2.2 getting a few releases, called them point or called them R# it means the same thing. Were this security only releases? (I'm can't remember) Jon __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:03:27AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: I want Debian to be a key player, not an underdog or also ran, which some of you seem to be quite happy with. This annoys the hell out of me, Debian was once looked up to, now its the one with apt. What does that mean, anyway? Does it mean that apt is a disadvantage? Or that apt is our only advantage? Or what? I reckon breadth of software and quality of the overall system are the advantages personally, as well as the free software emphasis. We have thousands of open source programs properly integrated into our system, something I don't believe any of the others have. rpmfind.net doesn't even score a mention. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: setuid/setgid binaries contained in the Debian repository.
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:39:04PM +, Steve Kemp wrote: I was wondering if there was a definitive list of all the setuid/setgid binaries which may be installed from the Debian archives. (Such a list would be very useful in prioritizing any examination of source code). I've partially worked my way through the list of packages which are mentioned via the lintian warnings for 'setuid-binary' and 'setgid-binary' which I found at: http://lintian.debian.org/reports/Tsetuid-binary.html and http://lintian.debian.org/reports/Tsetgid-binary.html After that is there any location I could look at Simply use the raw output of lintian, which includes the overridden tags. http://lintian.debian.org/lintian.log Then egrep 'set(g|u)id' lintian.log it, and you'll see the offset from the web pages in O: lines. -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:43:03PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: Certainly it will have a hard time working on any of the BSDs anytime soon, if it relies on devfs more than trivially; they have no concept of it, nor are they really likely to anytime soon. Use of /proc should also, prefferably, be limited to traditional /proc items and not the Linux view of using it as a sysctl area (though there is Another option is for the bsd port to write their own installer module. If something is radically easier to do using devfs or proc I don't think it's reasonable to forbid it because of a hypothetical bsd port. Mike Stone
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 05:20:56PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:48:10PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: Time, I'm afraid, is something I lack. Don't get me wrong the work Branden has done is great, what I'm trying to point out is that 4.2 is not in stable and, currently, will no tbe in stable for a year or more. Thats not good. I think 2.2 is still the default kernel in 3.0 (I could be wrong) and so on. 3.0 also included a 2.4 kernel as an option. Why the conservative default should be cited as a sign that Debian is behind the times, I cannot fathom. Such conservativism has served business users VERY well. This is a very good point. I just installed debian on one of our servers, but cannot for the life of me get 2.4 kernels to run. 2.2 kernels run like a dream though, and the installation went beautifully. What I would like to see is a 2.2 kernel with smp support. Getting this server working got pushed back as a priority, so I haven't built my own yet. Anyway, Gentoo has a much different niche than Debian, so I don't understand why people are arguing about changing Debian because of it. If Gentoo serves their needs better, good. Perhaps Debian can then focus less on those people and more on others? Why duplicate work, right? (BTW, sorry for the anecdote, I know how much they're hated here. ;-) Sean Proctor
Re: Processed: no longer using osk@hem.passagen.se
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 07:00:00AM +0100, Oskar Liljeblad wrote: On Tuesday, November 12, 2002 at 16:06, Branden Robinson wrote: Congratulations, you now own all bugs that were ever merged with one you filed, and the original submitters will now be cut off from the BTS. :) This is most unfortunate. I was told from informed sources that close+reopen was the commands to run to have replies on *my* bugs sent to a different email address. (The reason I did this is because all mail sent to the old email address [EMAIL PROTECTED] is lost because of an free email ISP not keeping its promises...) Is there a command I can run to add the email addresses of the submitters of the merged bugs? I'll go through the bugs to figure out the submitters if necessary. There's now a 'submitter' command, so you can do something like: submitter 34363 Oskar Liljeblad [EMAIL PROTECTED] It notifies the original submitter, and doesn't affect merged bugs in the way close/reopen does. Unless you have specialized requirements and know what you're doing, it's probably now best to use submitter wherever you'd previously have used close/reopen. Thanks to Matt Kraai for prompting this with a patch. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:24:14AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: | A point release is. not. sarge. stable does not gain new versions. (with a few exceptions, such as where backporting security fixes is ~impossible.) Are you sure? I seem to remember 2.2 getting a few releases, 2.2r1 included a new mozilla, because I was feeling adventurous, because it didn't have any impact on other package, and for a couple of other reasons I can't recall now. It also included a broken libc6 for sparc, and r2 was released a week or two later. 2.2r3 and onwards were managed by Joey (Martin Schulze, as flamed on slashdot!), and only include security updates. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/ I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.'' pgp8mC03rdz28.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#170798: ITP: cwwm -- a minimalist window manager for X11
Package: wnpp Version: N/A; reported 2002-11-26 Severity: wishlist * Package name: cwwm Version : 1.2.0 Upstream Author : ChezWam [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://cwwm.chezwam.org * License : GPL Description : a minimalist window manager for X11 cwwm is based on evilwm by Ciaran Anscomb. It further maximises screen real-estate and provides full multihead support, a good set of keyboard controls and mouse resizing. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux shiva 2.4.18 #1 Mon Jul 22 10:53:53 CEST 2002 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C -- no debconf information
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:07:47PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:46:20PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote: Debian's support for so many arches slows down development in other areas as well. For example, getting gcc-3.2 working on all arches has [...] the key issue. We have one outstanding issue with gcc-3.2 at the moment, which is that cmath on sparc doesn't work. Something is seriously wrong, if a single bug that affects a single arch can stop everyone else from forward. We need a way to get packages that are broken on some platform into the distrubution while the developers of the arch sort out the problem. Not the way it is happening currently, that everyone has to wait the platform to fix itself before updated packages get into distribution. Maybe we should start the gcc-3.2 migration now, and just not autocompile c++ apps on sparc until gcc is fixed? -- Riku Voipio|[EMAIL PROTECTED] | kirkkonummentie 33 |+358 40 8476974 --+-- 02140 Espoo| | Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. |
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:41:45PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: Something is seriously wrong, if a single bug that affects a single arch can stop everyone else from forward. We need a way to get packages that are broken on some platform into the distrubution while the developers of the arch sort out the problem. Not the way it is happening currently, that everyone has to wait the platform to fix itself before updated packages get into distribution. That brings up a whole different set of problems, none of which are any easier to fix. For example: We would then basically have a separate, potentially out of sync, testing distribution for each platform. If a package is allowed to move in to testing on e.g. i386 without the same package moving to testing on one of the other platforms, then the archive will blow up to unmanagable size. Keeping things coordinated would be really difficult, and we'd probably end up slowing the release cycle even further. noah -- ___ | Web: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/ | PGP Public Key: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/mail.html pgpTyaoSWvyWB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:41:45PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: Something is seriously wrong, if a single bug that affects a single arch can stop everyone else from forward. We need a way to get packages that are broken on some platform into the distrubution while the developers of the arch sort out the problem. Not the way it is happening currently, that everyone has to wait the platform to fix itself before updated packages get into distribution. i have a very different opinion on that. i don't any box that's not x86 but i still like all the ports, because it gets debian a bigger audience which means more testing, fixes and potential developers. and this audience is not only bigger but also wider spread, which means debian is put to much more different uses and therefore bugs that might slip unnoticed are discovered. on top of that it is a good thing to support other architectures to avoid monopolies. a lot of the bugs that show up on one architecture are a bug on x86 as well, but just don't show up. we can for example be pretty sure that our software is 64-bit clean because of things like the alpha port, which means that supporting x86-64 and ia64 is a breeze (which is a nightmare for proprietary software vendors, that never thought their software has to run on anything but a pc). if we want to support these architectures, then we have to support them together with mainline architectures, and not treat them as second-class spinoffs of x86-linux. if we don't release on all architectures at the same time and thus force the developers to fix bugs on less-used arches as well, we will basically give up on supporting them at all. which is something i definitely would not like. on a bit wider perspective, there are many examples where non-mainline uses lead to improvements for all. a very prominent example is the 2.5 kernel, which brings a lot of scalability improvements for small x86 servers done by people who give shit about computers like these. cu robert
Re: Possible mass filing of bugs: don't use libxaw-dev
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:51:00PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: If you mean that these Build-Depend on pure virtual packages, then they should be changed. If they work with Xaw 7, they should B-D on libxaw7-dev | lixaw-dev. If they don't work with Xaw 7, they should B-D lixaw6-dev | libxaw-dev. Erm... if they don't work with xaw7, and you know it doesn't, then they should probably B-D on libxaw6-dev only, and not libxaw-dev. If a client: 1) works with Xaw6; AND 2) doesn't work with Xaw7; AND 3) wasn't using Xaw 6 internals I'd like for a bug to be filed against libxaw7 with lots of details. I'll pass them along to Paulo Cesar Pereira de Andrade upstream. In theory, Xaw7 is supposed to be compatible with Xaw6, though a few app-defaults might have to change. (Xaw7 doesn't support the whenNeeded value of a scrollbar resource, but that's not a big deal since Xaw6 only supported it in a buggy way.) Also see Xaw(3x). -- G. Branden Robinson| Software engineering: that part of Debian GNU/Linux | computer science which is too [EMAIL PROTECTED] | difficult for the computer http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | scientist. pgpr6sgrEYtCm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:41:45PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:07:47PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:46:20PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote: Debian's support for so many arches slows down development in other areas as well. For example, getting gcc-3.2 working on all arches has [...] the key issue. We have one outstanding issue with gcc-3.2 at the moment, which is that cmath on sparc doesn't work. Something is seriously wrong, if a single bug that affects a single arch can stop everyone else from forward. You obviously didn't read all of aj's message. How about you postpone your bitching along these lines until you've helped fix all the RC bugs in gcc 3.2 and glibc 2.3.1 that *do* affect i386? -- G. Branden Robinson| Never underestimate the power of Debian GNU/Linux | human stupidity. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Robert Heinlein http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | pgp53DaViklnJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#170809: ITP: libgphoto2 -- The gphoto2 digital camera library
Package: wnpp Version: unavailable; reported 2002-11-26 Severity: wishlist * Package name: libgphoto2 Version : 2.1.1 Upstream Author : The gphoto2 team * URL : http://www.gphoto.org/ * License : LGPL Description : The gphoto2 digital camera library I am the maintainer of gphoto2. The upstream has splitted gphoto2 in two: libgphoto2: the library gphoto2: the command-line front-end I will follow the upstream and starting with the next release (coming soon) the gphoto2 package will contains only the command-line front-end and the lib will comes from the libgphoto2 source package. Christophe -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: powerpc Kernel: Linux philly 2.4.20-rc1-ben0 #1 Thu Nov 14 22:18:04 EST 2002 ppc Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 22:46, Brian Nelson wrote: What I fail to understand is why Debian insists on supporting every single arch itself. Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower. But it's one thing that really differentiates Debian from the competition. Being the most portable Free OS is worth something, in my opinion. Instead of trying to move Debian, a better approach is probably to make another OS built on Debian, where you ignore everything but ia32 or whatever. In fact, that's exactly what a number of OSes out there do.
Re: Bug#170761: ITP: zope-translationservice -- A location-aware translation service for Zope
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 01:23, David Coe wrote: Package: wnpp Version: N/A; reported 2002-11-26 Severity: wishlist * Package name: zope-translationservice Version : 0.2 Upstream Author : Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://www.zope.org/Members/efge/TranslationService/TranslationService-0.2.tgz * License : GPL-2 Description : A location-aware translation service for Zope In the future, could you please include the long description here too?
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:46:20PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote: Noah L. Meyerhans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 08:41:43PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: That's an interesting comparison. If you look at NetBSD, you'll see that they have a very similar problem to us: They have a really slow release cycle. I think at some point it really does come down to the size of the OS. At some point, I suspect that the Debian community is going to have to decide what it wants. Will it be frequent, up-to-date releases, or will it be support for every platform we can get our hands on? I don't think we can have both. What I fail to understand is why Debian insists on supporting every single arch itself. Why not pick a handful of arches we do give a flying fuck about, support those, and if some organization wants to port Debian to another arch, then let them fork and support it themselves (like Redhat-Yellow Dog)? We have, there just happen to be 11 architectures we give a flying fuck about. I personally have Debian/sid on 4 1/2( x86, PPC32, SPARC, UltraSPARC, MIPSel) and I enjoy them all. - Nick Lopez [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Besides, a sysadmin without a condescending attitude is like a donut without jam. You can do it, but why bother?
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:39:41AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower. But it's one thing that really differentiates Debian from the competition. Being the most portable Free OS is worth something, in my opinion. I think NetBSD still has us beat on that point. -- John
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
In chiark.mail.debian.devel, you wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:39:41AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower. But it's one thing that really differentiates Debian from the competition. Being the most portable Free OS is worth something, in my opinion. I think NetBSD still has us beat on that point. This depends on your definition of portability to some extent. Debian defines platforms in terms of userspace compatibility, whereas NetBSD does so in terms of kernel compatibility. Both support approximately the same number of CPU types, and Linux supports a wider range of platforms within x86 and PPC (excepting the BeBox). On the other hand, NetBSD runs on /way/ more strange old M68k and Alpha things. I think their Vax port is probably further along, too. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:08:54AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: http://www.distrowatch.com/stats.php?1#04 The shows that the top 4 Distributions are: 1) Mandrake 2) Red Hat 3) Gentoo 4) Debian No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently viewed distribution pages on distrowatch.com are: 1) Mandrake 2) Red Hat 3) Gentoo 4) Debian And the sample size is approximately 56000 page views. Now that we have X 4.2.1 in testing, maybe its a good time to do a point release? Get stable up to date, as testing is fairly up to date and seems stable at least on my boxes (x86). Radical thinking I know ;-) If you had lived through a stable Debian release cycle, you would realize that what you are asking for is not a point release. You may not care about people's perception, but that was due, partically, to UNIX's down fall when MS turning up with Windows. Everyone perceived UNIX to be complex and where quite happy to dump it in favour of NT. Perception, unfortunately, counts for a lot, technical excellance gets forgotten. Its crap I know, but that the way of the world. Your version of computer history is rather twisted. Care to provide a reference? -- - mdz
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:41:21PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote: [snip] No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently viewed distribution pages on distrowatch.com are: 1) Mandrake 2) Red Hat 3) Gentoo 4) Debian And the sample size is approximately 56000 page views. [snip] And with enough obsessively reloading Debian users, we can easily skew the figures in Debian's favor. But that doesn't mean that Debian has suddenly become more popular. T -- Doubt is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 21:30:30 +1100 Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:48:15AM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote: But I have performed many debian installs with the boot floppy setup, and I found that it still suffers from problems. One problem faced by all dists is that of teaching people about partitioning and backing up. At least the installer says don't do this unless you're backed up. debian-installer might solve that problem by offering to make all the partitioning decisions. I don't see how automated partitioning avoids the need for a backup. It doesn't, of course. What it does do is help the very new user to just do it, so that he can just start installing. Perhaps this should have a warning that the option should only be tried on new drives. The thing is, this represents an alteration of workflow of the install process, and also involves additional software which would know how to make partitioning decisions. I think these changes would be harder to implement in boot-floppies and easier in debian-installer. Things can still go wrong. The power could go down at the wrong time and take the partition table with it. The software could be buggy in some circumstances, or the kernel is, or something. Agreed, but that's universal, and your thought could be continued as and even if the software has no bugs, an individual computer owner's hardware could be flaky. You certainly shouldn't assume that nobody wants to partition their disk manually, either. You're right, one should not assume that. And indeed, when I said OFFER to make partitioning decisions, you can read into that an additional offer to NOT do so. (This could be summarized as you misread my statement; I would have assumed a developer could read into the word offer the possibility of offering to alternatively do something else.) dselect, for all its use once a person gets used to it, is not suitable for a new person. Its interface is hostile in friendly clothes as well You are not forced to use dselect during the boot-floppies installation process. Yes, that is true, but I feel that the interface of dselect is so bad that it should not be even offered as a choice. (And before someone misreads again (that would be third time), I said -interface-, NOT the actual functionality. That of dselect is quite solid, but that's mostly just dpkg. The newer a user is, the greater importance there is on interface, and the more attention paid to its design.) By comparison, boot-floppies looks like kludges atop and beneath other kludges, and I get the impression this is not easy to change without affecting other aspects of the installer. I think that unless boot- That may be a correct impression from the code, but it isn't my experience as a user of the process. I find it quite smooth; predictable, certainly. Easy once you've done a few. Absolutely. It's a snap once you've had some practice and know some things about disks, netcards and other hardware that might be involved in installation of an operating system. My concern is for the people who have never done a debian install, and/or have little or no hardware knowledge. Hamish -Jim
Re: How to programm a Windowmanager ?
Hallo Andreas, Am 16:34 20/11/02 +0100 hat Andreas Rottmann geschrieben: Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: First of all, this is not the right list for this question. debian-devel is about the development of the Debian distribution. Sugestion ? I am on djgpp (dos32) but I need a Linux-related one... It would make sense to say what TD-Desk is... 'TD' is only my birthname and 'Desk' mean a Windowmanage WITH Desktop-Enhancement. It is like seal und dos... You can take a look at the many existing window managers and desktop environments. aewm++ and xfce would be probably be worth a look. OK, I try it out... There is GTK+/Gnome Application development - even available as a debian package. You can just use GTK+, if you think GNOME is too heavy. I will look for the deb Regards, Andy Schoene gruesse Michelle
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:10:18AM -0500, Sean Proctor wrote: [ snip ] ... Anyway, Gentoo has a much different niche than Debian, so I don't understand why people are arguing about changing Debian because of it. If Gentoo serves their needs better, good. Perhaps Debian can then focus less on those people and more on others? Why duplicate work, right? (BTW, sorry for the anecdote, I know how much they're hated here. ;-) mode=rant No way! Debian has to be all things to all people Specifically, it has to be what I[1] want it to be!! If you don't agree, you must be defective or something!! /mode [1] You know who you are. -- Nathan Norman - Incanus Networking mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You can have Peace, or you can have Freedom. Don't ever count on having both at the same time. -- Robert A. Heinlein
Re: Debian Accessibility Project was: Re: linux for blinds
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Branden Robinson wrote: Neither. I was simply wondering if you felt free software in particular which is needed by a user of Debian had a stronger claim to inclusion in Debian than non-free software, even if also needed by a user of Debian. Because if you don't, it's misleading to say free software when one means just software. Yes, I'm trying to draw you out about something. Gathering more anecdotes, one might say. ;-) Clear statement here: I'm in favour of keeping non-free as is. I like to support Debian users who just need non-free software. On the other hand my opinion is this clear that I do not need to waste my time in following this damn non-free discussion and I hope that this thread will not be drawn in this direction. Kind regards Andreas.
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:08:54AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: http://www.distrowatch.com/stats.php?1#04 The shows that the top 4 Distributions are: 1) Mandrake 2) Red Hat 3) Gentoo 4) Debian No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently viewed distribution pages on distrowatch.com are: 1) Mandrake 2) Red Hat 3) Gentoo 4) Debian Indeed, the Debian home page is so well organized and so easy to find and get around in, that people don't *need* so many secondary sources of information. Our success at doing our job well has meant that the distrowatch counter is especially inaccurate in our case.
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
Colin Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower. But it's one thing that really differentiates Debian from the competition. Being the most portable Free OS is worth something, in my opinion. I don't think it's all that clear that it makes the release process very much slower.
Re: Discussion - non-free software removal
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ahh but John is not working in the interests of our users but rather a higher body known as the Free Software Community. It is not known whether any actual Debian user is a member of that group at this time (the answer to THAT question when asked was just as obtuse). I'm a member of that group. Indeed, one of the faculty here at UCI, Aldo Antonelli is a die-hard member of the Free Software community. When I told him about Debian's commitment to the principles free software he immediately decided to switch his computers from Red Hat to Debian.
Re: Processed: no longer using osk@hem.passagen.se
Hello, On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:13:33PM +, Colin Watson wrote: There's now a 'submitter' command, so you can do something like: submitter 34363 Oskar Liljeblad [EMAIL PROTECTED] It notifies the original submitter, and doesn't affect merged bugs in the way close/reopen does. Unless you have specialized requirements and know what you're doing, it's probably now best to use submitter wherever you'd previously have used close/reopen. Thank you, this sound really useful. I think this should be documented at http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control.html Jochen -- Omm (0)-(0) http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/privat.html pgpWPWm3ZAGmu.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
--- Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently viewed distribution pages on distrowatch.com are: I did say they were not great figures, just interesting, but I expect this sort of comment from you. If you had lived through a stable Debian release cycle, you would realize that what you are asking for is not a point release. I been using Debian since 2.1, what about you? Your version of computer history is rather twisted. Care to provide a reference? Not really, its too much effect to put in for some one who has a problem with constructive feedback. Jon __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Processed: no longer using osk@hem.passagen.se
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 10:24:03PM +0100, Jochen Voss wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:13:33PM +, Colin Watson wrote: There's now a 'submitter' command, so you can do something like: submitter 34363 Oskar Liljeblad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank you, this sound really useful. I think this should be documented at http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control.html Don't worry, it will be as soon as one of the web team mirror the changes I've made in the debbugs repository. I don't have direct webwml access so can't do it myself. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:20:18AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:39:41AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower. But it's one thing that really differentiates Debian from the competition. Being the most portable Free OS is worth something, in my opinion. I think NetBSD still has us beat on that point. TINC And thus, our evil plans to subvert it in the name of our cause to RULE THE WORLD! /TINC Er, wait. Did I say that in my out-loud voice? Damn. Now I'll have to feed you all to the sharks with lasers on their heads. -- *** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/ pgpTkeWohCNJt.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:04:48AM -0600, Zed Pobre wrote: Something is seriously wrong, if a single bug that affects a single arch can stop everyone else from forward. You obviously didn't read all of aj's message. How about you postpone your bitching along these lines until you've helped fix all the RC bugs in gcc 3.2 and glibc 2.3.1 that *do* affect i386? Not to defend Riku here, but I would point out that a mechanism to shunt very buggy packages into experimental and replace them with a previous known working version from snapshots would be a very useful thing, and would have severely cut back on the amount of damage caused by things like the recent libc6 transition. And no, I don't have the skill or the time to write such a mechanism. Please don't suggest that that removes any validity or value of the suggestion. This way the version of packges installed will bounce back and forward again. And I'm sure there is more problems I cannot see. AH! If that package is a lib, you must also move all packages that depends on that lib also back. -- Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpgdQ9kgIyFn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
Hello folks, my answer to the subject: a few! Dear everyone in the Debian community, The question I want to pose today is Are we losing users to Gentoo? I hate to sound like a marketing departmen drone, but I'm becoming more and more disturbed since I'm noticing more and more 'random' outbursts on message boards about how 'cool' Gentoo is. Whatever happened to all the Debian evangelists? I think (even all) Debian evangelists are still on the side of Debian and have not converted themselves into Gentoo evangelists. Whenever someone rants about Gentoo's processor optimisations and states some overinflated performance boost such as 10%-20%, all I can do is make a a feeble rebuttal stating that it's more like (insert low figure without much solid evidence - e.g.. 5%) with exceptions such as glibc, X, multimedia applications, mozilla and OpenOffice. So then they counter that it's still an increase. Ok, so what strengths does Debian have to make a comeback with? Unlike Gentoo, Debian has quality assurance and security teams. We have a strict policy and bug resolution procedures. But they won't listen and still say Gentoo. Hmm, I've tried Gentoo 1.2 (from stage 1) cause of there's no i686 Debian tree. I've tried, nothing more - I'm still using Debian stable for my servers and testing for my workstation. As well as you start from stage 3 - the compile time takes longer as the speedup saves time .. that's my opinion. I mean take X .. it takes 1 hour to compile (guess) on my Athlon 1,4 GHz. In a half year there is a new release and I've to compile again. Does the performance boost of 10%-20% bring in the difference between 4 minutes installation on Debian and 1 Hour with gentoo. Imagine your system is a PIII 500 ... and you only have X! I know that there is a way to build an ISO on your fast machine optimized for your (slow) target machine. But think of a security expoit in any packege of your target machine ... you have to emerge(?) the new fixed sources which takes time. Yes, it's a waste of time more often than not supporting your favourite distribution in web forums, but shouldn't Debian just be good enough on its own that it speaks for itself? Perhaps this is what is making Gentoo so popular of a sudden: /me now points to Gentoo's About page prologue: http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/about.xml He discovered lots of up-to-date packages that could be auto-built using the optimizations settings and build-time functionality that he wanted, rather than what some distro creator thought would be best for him. All of the sudden, Larry the Cow was in control. And he liked it. Most users changing from SuSE, RedHat or Mandrake to Debian are happy if they can get Debian running and the system is providing the same profit as that provided by their old Distribution. These users are in superior number as users which have the know-how in compiler optimizations and are changing from Debian to Gentoo. Silly, perhaps, but it still conveys the message that the Gentoo user is in control. Do the cutting edge enthusiasts in Debian have the same amount of control? Have we become so complacent at believing that since we have the some of the strictest policies and heaviest bug resolution/testing procedures around that we're the best distribution around that we no longer need to seek improvements? I'm not involved into Debian development but if it would be true it would be sad. I assume that improvements on the policy as well as on the technical side are taking place. I know that there's plenty of logistical/mirroring reasons as to why we shouldn't duplicate a lot of the i386 tree by creating a i686 tree, but could we seriously not consider a partial i686 optimised tree as a compromise to attract some of the Gentoo users back with our strengths in policy and testing? If not, then we need to find something else to offer to attract the cutting-edge enthusiast. The worst thing we could do is dismiss this completely. Remember the days when Slackware and Yggdrasil were the 'elitist's choice'? I certainly don't ever want to see Debian even come close to sinking. I'm working for a mid-range ISP in germany. It would be nice to have binary-i686 but in our case - who cares. Perhaps a shared i686-http-Server can handle 1-n customers more but anytime we have to put up a new machine. The advantages of saving time with provided binary packages, secutity.debian.org (hmm, bad example these days) stability in opposite to cutting edge version numbers will point to Debian. I would say that if we consider Gentoo for our system environment, the answer would be obvious _no_. /me throws in obligatory social contract quote to finish off: http://www.debian.org/social_contract Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free-software community. We will place their interests first in our priorities. We will support the needs of our users for operation in many
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:03:12AM -0500, Michael Stone wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:43:03PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: Certainly it will have a hard time working on any of the BSDs anytime soon, if it relies on devfs more than trivially; they have no concept of it, nor are they really likely to anytime soon. Use of /proc should also, prefferably, be limited to traditional /proc items and not the Linux view of using it as a sysctl area (though there is Another option is for the bsd port to write their own installer module. If something is radically easier to do using devfs or proc I don't think it's reasonable to forbid it because of a hypothetical bsd port. In principle, agreed. In practice, I find that once such assumptions creep in, it can be very, very hard to remove them without yanking out a lot of entrails to go with. This can be handled, but the worth of being careful to properly keep these things from creeping out beyond where they can be replaced is still there. -- *** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/ pgpsgaV71ohba.pgp Description: PGP signature
PostgreSQL 7.3 about to be released
PostgreSQL 7.3 is expected to be released tomorrow, and Debian packages for unstable will follow shortly after. I uploaded 7.3rc2-1 to experimental today; these packages can also be found at people.debian.org/~elphick/postgresql. I also uploaded pgaccess, which is newly separated into its own source package If anyone has tried these packages and has any comments, please let me know very soon. -- Oliver Elphick olly@lfix.co.uk LFIX Limited signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
testing excuses script doesn't run?
Hi all, Is it true, that the testing script doesn't run at all? It isn't a depends relationship, because the too young line also not changed. The status of both of my packages doesn't change. jacky% lynx -dump http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/update_excuses.html | grep Generated Generated: 2002.11.20 00:15:35 + ^^^ idesk: # [2002-11-22] Accepted idesk 0.3.5-2 (i386 source) jacky% grep-excuses idesk idesk (- to 0.3.5-1) Maintainer: Thorsten Sauter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Too young, only 0 of 10 days old ^^^ Not considered Depends: idesk imlib Depends: idesk glibc Depends: idesk libpng3 I have checked other packages and the same happens. Thanks Thorsten -- Thorsten Sauter [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Is there life after /sbin/halt -p?) pgpIo22IRXkkA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Intent to NMU: dvidvi
I've tried to contact David A. van Leeuwen via two email addresses that are listed on BTS and db.d.o, regarding a possible NMU of his package, dvidvi. However, both emails bounced. Should I just go ahead and upload the NMU? T -- Always remember that you are unique. Just like everybody else. -- despair.com pgp6zUsXX0u2L.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:58:25PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: I did say they were not great figures, just interesting, I don't see how these figures are interesting for debian development. Could you please enlighten me? Michael -- The very first use of Unix in the 'real business' of Bell Labs was to type and produce patent applications -- Dennis Ritchie
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:58:25PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: --- Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, it doesn't. It shows that the most frequently viewed distribution pages on distrowatch.com are: I did say they were not great figures, just interesting, but I expect this sort of comment from you. No, you simply ignored what the numbers represent, and presented a list to try to paint Debian as relatively unpopular. I don't see what your objective is, other than to start and prolong pointless arguments. I been using Debian since 2.1, what about you? If true, this would mean that you upgraded through all 7 point releases of potato, and then to woody. Given your comments so far, this would indicate that you did not notice the functional difference between the potato point releases and the woody release. Your version of computer history is rather twisted. Care to provide a reference? Not really, its too much effect to put in for some one who has a problem with constructive feedback. It's surely a lot more effect[sic] than inventing history to suit your needs. -- - mdz
Bug#170848: pstotext: copiousoutput support for Lynx
Package: pstotext Version: 1.8g-5 Severity: minor Tags: patch Lynx does currently not honor the copiousoutput flag in /etc/mailcap. See http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.flora.org/lynx-dev/html/month042000/msg00531.html for the only evidence I could find about why it doesn't work. The message implies that it will not get fixed very soon. Since it appears a quite correct test can be made to detect pstotext usage under Lynx, I've attached a patch against debian/mime. Tested, and works fine. No longer watching thousands of lines scroll by after you've waited for a 4MB pdf file to download! :) --- mime2002-11-26 22:54:30.0 +0100 +++ /usr/lib/mime/packages/pstotext 2002-11-26 22:54:13.0 +0100 @@ -1,3 +1,6 @@ -application/postscript; pstotext %s; copiousoutput; description=PostScript document; priority=4 -application/ghostview; pstotext %s; copiousoutput; description=PostScript document; priority=4 -application/pdf; pstotext %s; test=expr `gs --version` = 3.51 /dev/null 21; description=Portable Document Format document; priority=2 +application/postscript; pstotext %s; test=test -z $LYNX_VERSION; copiousoutput; description=PostScript document; priority=4 +application/postscript; pstotext %s | /usr/bin/pager; test=test -n $LYNX_VERSION; description=PostScript document; priority=4 +application/ghostview; pstotext %s; test=test -z $LYNX_VERSION; copiousoutput; description=PostScript document; priority=4 +application/ghostview; pstotext %s | /usr/bin/pager; test=test -n $LYNX_VERSION; description=PostScript document; priority=4 +application/pdf; pstotext %s; test=test -z $LYNX_VERSION expr `gs --version` = 3.51 /dev/null 21; copiousoutput; description=Portable Document Format document; priority=2 +application/pdf; pstotext %s | /usr/bin/pager; test=test -n $LYNX_VERSION expr `gs --version` = 3.51 /dev/null 21; description=Portable Document Format document; priority=2 -- CYa, Mario | Debian Developer URL:http://debian.org/ | Get my public key via finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44
Re: Discussion - non-free software removal
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:22:42AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
What you seem to be implying is that there is something wrong with the
desire to preserve the way things are now (regardless of the
motivation). Is this your position?
There is not necessarily anything wrong with it. However, I cannot find
Preserve the Way Things Are Now in Debian's list of committments in
its Social Contract with the Free Software Community.
No, but the subject of debate is clearly called out in that document.
At this point in time I don't see any gain to keeping, or removing
non-free. In the past I saw this as an example of what we considered
non-free (I mean, get a grip. Whatever is there is freely available in
lots of other places on the net. It is the DFSG alone that declares such
software anathema. {and then takes it all back in the non-free clause...})
Of all the things that confuse me, this was not one of them, although I
understand some folks confusion. We have a definition of Software
Freedom in the DFSG, and example code for what constitutes non-free in
the designated section called out in that very same document. Makes sense
to me, but offends the sensabilities of others.
So someone feels unfulfilled no matter which way the decission turns.
Maybe we should all give up and go back to working on software ;-)
Waiting is,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of Dwarf's Guide to Debian GNU/Linux _-_-_-_-_-_-
_-_-
_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769 _-
_- Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road _-
_- e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308_-
_-_-
_-_-_-_-_- Released under the GNU Free Documentation License _-_-_-_-
available at: http://www.polaris.net/~dwarf/
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:20:40PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: In practice, I find that once such assumptions creep in, it can be very, very hard to remove them without yanking out a lot of entrails to go with. Which is the price to be paid for using a different kernel. An installer, by its nature, is going to be kernel dependent. It also needs to be small and maintainable. I don't think it's imediately obvious that coming up with a kernel-independent hardware detector and module loader (for example) is worth the trouble. If you want to write one, great--but don't impose that as a requirement on others. Mike Stone
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:18:18PM +0100, Volker Dierks wrote: Silly, perhaps, but it still conveys the message that the Gentoo user is in control. Do the cutting edge enthusiasts in Debian have the same amount of control? Have we become so complacent at believing that since we have the some of the strictest policies and heaviest bug resolution/testing procedures around that we're the best distribution around that we no longer need to seek improvements? I'm not involved into Debian development but if it would be true it would be sad. I assume that improvements on the policy as well as on the technical side are taking place. Yes, this seems to be random, unfocused ranting. If there is a belief that Debian is failing to improve itself technically, no evidence is offered in support of it (except Gentoo does some stuff that we don't, and which some people think is cool). Also, note the progression: there are a thousand Debian developers whose responsibility is to maintain and increase the technical excellence of the Debian distribution (or at least their part of it); Debian is not improving technically, due to developer complacence; therefore, I'll exhort developers to be more interested in things they apparently don't care about, by pointing out to them that they're losing users. Unfortunately for this line of reasoning, the interest of DDs tends to be biased in favor of technical excellence even at the *expense* of userbase; so if DDs are not already motivated to work on these issues of their own accord (which happens to be false -- there *are* DDs working on all of the issues discussed, each according to his interests and priorities), cries of we need to get more users! are not likely to sway. :) In truth, there is no shortage of work to go around in the project. It remains that the best way to ensure that the things *you* want to see worked on get attended to is by working on them. Otherwise, our finite resources guarantee that there will always be room for improvement. If our priorities for improving Debian disagree with yours, your challenge is to make it *your* priority to work on fixing the problems you see, rather than to try making it someone *else's* priority. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer pgpPxVhzs41yY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
--- Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:58:25PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: try to paint Debian as relatively unpopular. I don't see what your objective is, other than to start and prolong pointless arguments. What distrowatch tries to achieve is gauging interesting in a distro, anything in the top 5 can be considered to be rather well. I _not_ putting down Debian at all (last time I say that). I supplied in a helpful information, not more. If you want to stressed about it that up to you. I been using Debian since 2.1, what about you? If true, this would mean that you upgraded through all 7 point releases of Sorta yes and no. With 2.2 I moved over to testing after r3 as I needed stuff that was available only in testing. With 3.0 and did the usual dist-upgrade, but as I been really using testing and unstable for quite awhile I can't say I noticed anything major. That said I'll be doing a clean install of 3.0 next week maybe it'll be more obvious then. It's surely a lot more effect[sic] than inventing history to suit your needs. Very quickly then, I worked in a consultancy begin of the 90s doing UNIX stuff (Solaris/SunOS/SCO/SGI) in the City (London). UNIX stuff slowly started to slowly dry up after Win 95 came out and more so when NT arrived properly. There is a reverse trend now thank goodness and Linux is right at the front :-). My history is based around the banking world, yours maybe differant. Jon __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:58:06PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:20:40PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: In practice, I find that once such assumptions creep in, it can be very, very hard to remove them without yanking out a lot of entrails to go with. Which is the price to be paid for using a different kernel. An installer, by its nature, is going to be kernel dependent. It also needs to be small and maintainable. I don't think it's imediately obvious that coming up with a kernel-independent hardware detector and module loader (for example) is worth the trouble. If you want to write one, great--but don't impose that as a requirement on others. I must admit to some confusion, here. Should I take this as implying that there is no particular intent to try to make Debian-Installer play nicely on anything but Linux kernels? Whatever the answer is, fine, but it would be nice to know so that those of us involved with the rest can decide to either not waste our time on something that won't benefit us at all, and build something that will, or so that the folks working on it know that making such assumptions *will* cause problems when they become invalid. -- *** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/ pgpC9xI1ub1lJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:21:27PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote: What distrowatch tries to achieve is gauging interesting in a distro, Wouldn't it be gauging people going to distwatch to find a *different* distro? I mean, why go to distwatch if you're happy with what you're running and don't care about any of the others? Mike Stone
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:26:16PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: I must admit to some confusion, here. Should I take this as implying that there is no particular intent to try to make Debian-Installer play nicely on anything but Linux kernels? I'm saying that some things that an installer does are by their nature specific to a kernel. Others are not. If the people writing the software decide that a particular piece is better written to use /proc or /devfs, then they should use /proc or /devfs without losing a lot of sleep over it. (I can think of one trivial example--devfs makes it really easy to tell which disks are available to the partitioning program. Can you describe a simple method to do that, which is guaranteed to work on any kernel? Likewise, can you describe a kernel-independent way of parsing the pci device table and loading relevant drivers?) If you want to support the same functionality on whatever other kernel you want to use, you'll have to write some (kernel-specific) code to do so. Does that mean you can't leverage the partitioning tool once a device is given? Or that you can't use the network config tool once the network drivers have been loaded? Of course not--so why are you trying to start some sort of kernel jihad? Mike Stone
Re: debconf template translations from ddtp
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:21:28AM +0100, Michael Bramer wrote: We've started the translation of debconf templates some weeks ago. See http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/gnuplot/ddts-stat.png The debconf template translation is still in a beta stage and only few translators from 2-3 language teams are making translations every now and then. But now the first translated debconf templates from the ddtp is downloadable from the ddtp web site. At http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/maintainer/new.all.txt you'll get a list of all packages including new translated debconf templates. (File http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/maintainer/new.all.sort.txt is sorted by number of new translated templates) The ddtp server has 84 new translated templates for the base-config package (first line). The package uses 33 templates of which: - 29 are translated into German, and - 12 are in ddtp's db only (not in the unstable base-config package) You can download translated template files from http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/template_unstable/$PACKAGE (like http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/template_unstable/base-config/templates-de for German) Comments? Is it your intention for these translations to only be made available on the ddtp website, instead of being submitted directly to maintainers as bug reports? -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer pgpgJhR2JZpvR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 06:37:50PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:26:16PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: I must admit to some confusion, here. Should I take this as implying that there is no particular intent to try to make Debian-Installer play nicely on anything but Linux kernels? I'm saying that some things that an installer does are by their nature specific to a kernel. Others are not. If the people writing the software decide that a particular piece is better written to use /proc or /devfs, then they should use /proc or /devfs without losing a lot of sleep over it. In the origional message, I merely pointed out that keeping such things properly encapsulated is crucial, if you EVER want to be able to run on any other kernel. (I can think of one trivial example--devfs makes it really easy to tell which disks are available to the partitioning program. Can you describe a simple method to do that, which is guaranteed to work on any kernel? Likewise, can you describe a kernel-independent way of parsing the pci device table and loading relevant drivers?) To run with your example... I could care less how it's done on a Linux kernel, if the API says Calling this routine will return a list of device names which can be safely handed to the partitioning subsystem. Maybe that's devfs on Linux, a Perl script on NetBSD, and green cheese on some other system. *As long as the API does not assume anything about the system underneath*, it *becomes* the 'simple system to do that on any kernel'. That's all I'm asking for - careful API design, that tries very hard to *not* make any assumptions about such things, and breaks things down far enough that one can safely encapsulate OS-specific ways of doing it such that they can be replaced. If you want to support the same functionality on whatever other kernel you want to use, you'll have to write some (kernel-specific) code to do so. Does that mean you can't leverage the partitioning tool once a device is given? Or that you can't use the network config tool once the network drivers have been loaded? Of course not--so why are you trying to start some sort of kernel jihad? Have you stopped beating your wife yet? It isn't about a 'kernel jihad', or saying that Linux sucks. It's saying If you want a Linux specific installer, fine, but tell those of us working on non-Linux ports so we can dump Debian-Installer and work on something that will someday actually install our ports. On the other hand, if it *is* supposed to support non-Linux ports, all I'm asking for is that people try to be mindful of such assumptions and keep them hidden as implementation details, rather than core assumptions. Three examples: 1) 'Core' /proc, which appears to be the same on all known ports. Still good to have things that use it be tied behind an API (in case there is ever a port that doesn't have it), but whatever is written for the Linux version will probably work just fine on the rest. 2) Sysctl, which on Linux can be found either via 'sysctl' or /proc/sys, but on other OSes is generally only 'sysctl'. If if was written as /proc/sys, I'd probably just rewrite it when I came to it, and suggest that it was a more portable way to access it all (bringing it back into the realm of example #1). 3) Devices for partitioning, which Linux can find via devfs, and the others may or may not be able to imitate so easily - but which, if bound behind an API, becomes an implementation detail, so we write modules to handle this on other OSes. Don't forget to keep assumptions about what is a valid device name out of this, though; what you call /dev/hda (or /dev/discs/disc0) I might call 'wd0', or even 'wd0a' (partitions within slices, and other quirks). -- *** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/ pgpXDZZgKw3pz.pgp Description: PGP signature
orbit/evolution/linux2.5 bug #168188
Unless I'm doing something wrong, I'm still having to rebuild orbit0 in sid to get evolution to work with a 2.5 kernel. The one line patch (in the bug report) to the orbit sources works for me. Anyway, my question is seems that sometimes(1) when I run apt-get update apt-get upgrade it seems to re-install the current broken Nov 4th orbit 0.5.17-4 packages from /var/cache/apt/archives/. I used apt-src to install and build the packages with the patch and then I install them with dpkg -i. Is there a more correct way to maintain my own repository? Should I use apt-build instead of apt-src perhaps? (As I noticed that it creates it's own entry in /etc/apt/sources) Jeff
Re: Discussion - non-free software removal
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:20:06PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: Indeed, one of the faculty here at UCI, Aldo Antonelli is a die-hard member of the Free Software community. When I told him about Debian's commitment to the principles free software he immediately decided to switch his computers from Red Hat to Debian. Of course you realize, this sort of anecdote is not welcome in the discussion. :-P -- G. Branden Robinson|Kissing girls is a goodness. It is Debian GNU/Linux |a growing closer. It beats the [EMAIL PROTECTED] |hell out of card games. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |-- Robert Heinlein pgpAf4QV9oASr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 12:20, John Goerzen wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:39:41AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower. But it's one thing that really differentiates Debian from the competition. Being the most portable Free OS is worth something, in my opinion. I think NetBSD still has us beat on that point. Debian runs on 11 distinct CPU architectures; NetBSD runs on 10. As Matthew says though, you can have different views on what defines portability, but those numbers are hard fact.
Re: orbit/evolution/linux2.5 bug #168188
This one time, at band camp, Jeff Carr said: Unless I'm doing something wrong, I'm still having to rebuild orbit0 in sid to get evolution to work with a 2.5 kernel. The one line patch (in the bug report) to the orbit sources works for me. Anyway, my question is seems that sometimes(1) when I run apt-get update apt-get upgrade it seems to re-install the current broken Nov 4th orbit 0.5.17-4 packages from /var/cache/apt/archives/. I used apt-src to install and build the packages with the patch and then I install them with dpkg -i. Is there a more correct way to maintain my own repository? Should I use apt-build instead of apt-src perhaps? (As I noticed that it creates it's own entry in /etc/apt/sources) Jeff When I do this sort of thing on my local mirror, I usually pretend it's an NMU - so your package would be 0.5.17-4.1 or something. This prevents apt from preferring the Debian distributed pakage over yours. Either that or you can use pinning to give your local repository a higher preference. -- -- | Stephen Gran | There's no use in having a dog and | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | doing your own barking. | | http://www.lobefin.net/~steve | | -- pgpsb0T5LtGuY.pgp Description: PGP signature
debian jabber packages
Hello, a few days ago I offered the debian packages up for adoption. Thanks to all who have responded. I want to contribute a bit to the expansion of Debian with new and skilled maintainers, therefore I follow the recommendation from Dirk Eddelbuettel who is willing to sponsor Jamin W. Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] in this. Jamin, _Michel Onstein_ also volunteered and did some work for the Jabber Packages. You might find him a _great help_. I will send the latest jabber diff with some comments to Jamin and ask him to quickly make an upload with changed maintainer field. After that he can start to work on the new Version. Jamin, I have an (yet unused) CVS repository access on the jabber server for a debian sub repository. I will hand that over to you if I can find the details :) Thanks to Grzegorz Jaskiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] (running 2 servers) Sami Haahtinen [EMAIL PROTECTED] (running a server) Mats Rynge [EMAIL PROTECTED] (waiting for DAM aproval, do not forget him!!) and Joerg Jaspert [EMAIL PROTECTED] (running 1 server in co) for offering help. Very apreciated. Greetings Bernd PS: the diff will go to jdev list, too. -- (OO) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ( .. ) [EMAIL PROTECTED],linux.de,debian.org} http://home.pages.de/~eckes/ o--o *plush* 2048/93600EFD [EMAIL PROTECTED] +497257930613 BE5-RIPE (OO) When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl!
[desktop] foomatic-gui is born
After about 10 hours of me pulling my hair out due to the complete and utter lack of documentation for GNOME2 and its Python bindings, I have produced foomatic-gui. It does some rudimentary autodetection (click on Add, make sure you have parport_pc or the kernel USB printer driver loaded, choose the interface, click Forward a lot). Download URL: http://blog.lordsutch.com/foomatic-gui-0.1.tar.gz (probably not permanent). License: GPL. Probable future features/TODO: - Packaging as a .deb - Use GtkHTML (or whatever it's called) to render add foomatic database info for printers and drivers in the druid. - Better error handling - i18n; the code is marked, it just needs to actually have the po stuff run on it. - Managing instances for CUPS - A proper test page (instead of swiping the one from CUPS) There's nothing inherently Debian-specific about it, although the detect.py module is probably a bit Linux-centric. Chris -- Chris Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://blog.lordsutch.com/
Re: debconf template translations from ddtp
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:54:21PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: We've started the translation of debconf templates some weeks ago. See http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/gnuplot/ddts-stat.png It seems that you don't use po-debconf: isn't it? AFAIK we all should switch to po-debconf for a better translation system. Is it your intention for these translations to only be made available on the ddtp website, instead of being submitted directly to maintainers as bug reports? I would like to recive the translation as bugs, so i hope you'll set it up in this way sooner or later. ciao, -- Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis | Elegant or ugly code as well aliases: Luca ^De [A-Z][-A-Za-z]*[iy]'?s$ | as fine or rude sentences have Infinite loop: see `Loop, infinite'.| something in common: they Loop, infinite: see `Infinite loop'.| don't depend on the language.
Re: [desktop] foomatic-gui is born
Are there plans to create a debian-desktop list? This group sure does have a lot of traffic, and as an official subproject, they should have their own list. On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 06:42:46PM -0600, Chris Lawrence wrote: After about 10 hours of me pulling my hair out due to the complete and utter lack of documentation for GNOME2 and its Python bindings, I have -- michael cardenas | lead software engineer, lindows.com hyperpoem.net | GNU/Linux software developer people.debian.org/~mbc | encrypted email preferred Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one's values. - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged pgpQHRWVp5OiW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: debconf template translations from ddtp
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:41:34AM +0100, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:54:21PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: We've started the translation of debconf templates some weeks ago. See http://ddtp.debian.org/debconf/gnuplot/ddts-stat.png It seems that you don't use po-debconf: isn't it? AFAIK we all should switch to po-debconf for a better translation system. If we're going to do that I think it would be a good idea to get po-debconf into a stable update, so that backporting packages to woody doesn't become more difficult than it needs to be. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debconf template translations from ddtp
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:41:34AM +0100, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote: Is it your intention for these translations to only be made available on the ddtp website, instead of being submitted directly to maintainers as bug reports? I would like to recive the translation as bugs, so i hope you'll set it up in this way sooner or later. I think it's even more important that these be submitted as bug reports for those maintainers who /don't/ particularly like to receive them: the criticism that DDTP description translations should not be filed as bugs stands because maintainers are not currently empowered to make use of these translations, but in the case of debconf templates, maintainers can make use of them -- and *must* do so for them to be of benefit to users. Debconf translations that aren't delivered into the maintainers' hands become a waste of translators' time. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer pgpVNb5RXSUpN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:07:51PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: In the origional message, I merely pointed out that keeping such things properly encapsulated is crucial, if you EVER want to be able to run on any other kernel. Which original message? The one I saw said Certainly it will have a hard time working on any of the BSDs anytime soon, if it relies on devfs more than trivially and Use of /proc should also, prefferably, be limited to traditional /proc items and not the Linux view. You didn't say anything about encapsulating them, or using them only where appropriate, you just said to avoid them. That's all I'm asking for - careful API design, that tries very hard to That's what you're asking for now, and it doesn't seem nearly as controversial as what you asked for the first time. (Seems pretty close to what I said when I suggested you'd have to plug in some kernel-specific code for certain functions.) Mike Stone
Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:54:29PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:07:51PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: In the origional message, I merely pointed out that keeping such things properly encapsulated is crucial, if you EVER want to be able to run on any other kernel. Which original message? The one I saw said Certainly it will have a hard time working on any of the BSDs anytime soon, if it relies on devfs more than trivially and Use of /proc should also, prefferably, be limited to traditional /proc items and not the Linux view. You didn't say anything about encapsulating them, or using them only where appropriate, you just said to avoid them. I suppose it boils down to what you consider relies on to mean. If things are hidden behind a module that can easily be replaced so that it never touches devfs, then I don't consider it rely on devfs. I said to avoid *relying on* them, not to avoid *using* them when possible. That's all I'm asking for - careful API design, that tries very hard to That's what you're asking for now, and it doesn't seem nearly as controversial as what you asked for the first time. (Seems pretty close to what I said when I suggested you'd have to plug in some kernel-specific code for certain functions.) Which came later. But I suggest that, at this point, we write it off as a failure of communication; it would appear that we both want more or less the same result, and just picked different words for it. Which is unfortunate, but it happens. Sorry. -- *** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/ pgpXsan2MxJkr.pgp Description: PGP signature
testing upgrade today broke output redirection (sometimes)
I'm unable to redirect stdout sometimes, eg program out fails. I had to move a machine, so first I upgraded: deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib non-free Linux version 2.2.20 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 2.95.4 20011002 (Debian prerelease)) #2 Sun Aug 18 20:06:45 EDT 2002 Now I'm having a problem with redirected output. A small script, jr, runs an SUID c program (cpage) with embedded perl. cpage prints to stdout and that works. When I try to redirect that output into a file, I get nothing. Same failure when I run it not SUID. A simple test case seems to work, so there is something more complicated going wrong and I really need some suggestions as to what to try first! I tried upgrading another dev machine and it broke the same way. -- Script started on Tue Nov 26 20:24:16 2002 This works fine: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/w/jr/journal/.cache/bug# /usr/cgi/cpage -c journal -q minerva:mysql:slash:links:*:status 0 AND org_name 'Error' ORDER BY org_name -f templated_links -n -FD TABLE BGCOLOR=#A...[much deleted normal output].../TABLE This does not; there is nothing in 'out'. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/w/jr/journal/.cache/bug# /usr/cgi/cpage -c journal -q minerva:mysql:slash:links:*:status 0 AND org_name 'Error' ORDER BY org_name -f templated_links -n -FD out [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/lib# echo $? 0 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/w/jr/journal/.cache/bug# cat out out is empty [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/w/jr/journal/.cache/bug# echo foo bar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/w/jr/journal/.cache/bug# cat bar foo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/w/jr/journal/.cache/bug# ls -l -rw-r--r--1 root root4 Nov 26 20:24 bar -rw-r--r--1 root root0 Nov 26 20:24 out [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/w/jr/journal/.cache/bug# exit exit Script done on Tue Nov 26 20:24:48 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/w/jr/journal/.cache/bug# ldd /usr/cgi/cpage libcrypt.so.1 = /lib/libcrypt.so.1 (0x40019000) libm.so.6 = /lib/libm.so.6 (0x40047000) libmysqlclient.so.10 = /usr/lib/libmysqlclient.so.10 (0x40068000) libperl.so.5.8 = /usr/lib/libperl.so.5.8 (0x4009d000) libdl.so.2 = /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x401a1000) libpthread.so.0 = /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x401a4000) libc.so.6 = /lib/libc.so.6 (0x401f4000) libz.so.1 = /lib/libz.so.1 (0x40308000) libnsl.so.1 = /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x40316000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 = /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) -- Christopher F. Miller, Publisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] MaineStreet Communications, Inc 208 Portland Road, Gray, ME 04039 1.207.657.5078 http://www.maine.com/ Content/site management, online commerce, internet integration, Debian linux
