Re: packages missing from sarge

[Andreas Tille]

On Sat, 7 May 2005, Joey Hess wrote:
bb
I did not checked your complete list but our most frequently used
programs at exhigition boothes.  It currently has no RC bug (the only
grave bug was solved two weeks ago.
So something is wrong either with your list of with the removal.
Kind regards
 Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: debian sarge is 3.2 or 4 ?

[Peter Samuelson]

[Andrea Mennucc]
> me, I do my part of the work in Debian
> 
> and nobody ever contacted me regarding the choice of the number

What that...?  Why on earth would you think you should be contacted
before this sort of decision is made?


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

debian package of cogito-0.9 available

[Sebastian Kuzminsky]

Hi folks, I'm a wanna-be new maintainer.  With the helpful guidance
of Anibal, I've been working on a Debian package of Cogito.  Cogito is
Pasky's distributed revision control system on top of Linus Torvalds'
GIT directory tracker.


I know there's an ITP for Cogito (#304602), I've tried to contact the
people involved but I have not heard back from them yet.  I hope I'm
not stepping on anyone's toes here!


I think the package is ready for a wider audience.  I just updated it
to the just-released upstream version 0.9, it's available here:

http://highlab.com/~seb/debian


It's lintian & linda clean, _except_ for missing manpages.  There are
no manpages in the upstream, I'll be working to write them over the next
week or two and I'll offer them to the upstream maintainer.


What do you think?




--
Sebastian


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GPL and linking

[Michael K. Edwards]

On 5/7/05, Batist Paklons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Note: IALNAP (I am lawyer, not a programmer), arguing solely in
> Belgian/European context, and english is not my native language.]

It's really cool to have an actual lawyer weigh in, even if TINLAIAJ.  :-)

> On 07/05/05, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Again, that's not how it works.  In the presence of a valid license
> > contract, one is entitled to contract-law standards of the
> > reasonableness of one's attempts to cure a breach when notified.  The
> > "automatic termination" clause is probably unenforceable in most
> > jurisdictions; I think (IANAL) few would even read it as authority to
> > terminate on inadvertent (non-material) breach, let alone on the
> > licensor's idea of breach if the licensee's (reasonable) construction
> > makes it not a breach.
> 
> Automatic termination clauses are quite common, and generally held
> valid. It is often only what constitutes a breach that can lead to
> such termination that is disputed in court. In my opinion that is one
> of the few GPL license terms that is quite sound, only the grounds on
> which that termination happens seem extremely flakey to me.

You're quite right; I didn't really mean "unenforceable", I meant
"ineffective as a means of circumventing a court's authority to
interpret the contract and set standards of breach and remedy".  As in
the MySQL case, where the judge decided that the definitional issue
was a matter of fair dispute, and thus MySQL could not meet the
standard of "likely to prevail on the facts"; and even if MySQL's
interpretation was upheld the breach might well have been cured
(leaving the contract intact) by Progress's conduct subsequent to
notice of breach; and even if it weren't cured, MySQL could show
neither the prospect of irreparable harm nor that the balance of harms
favored it, given the conduct pledged by Progress.  Hence the already
pledged conduct would constitute sufficient remedy pending a full
trial of fact, even though the only remedy specified in the GPL is
termination.

What I really should have written is that automatic termination
clauses only affect the date from which the license is deemed to have
been terminated in the event that a court determines material breach,
but don't give the offeror or drafter any additional authority to
interpret whether a breach has occurred.  From this perspective, an
automatic termination clause isn't so much a way of strengthening the
licensor's authority to terminate as it is a declaration that the
licensee waives any waivable statutory provisions about notice of
termination in the event of breach.  It might also affect whether a
court-ordered remedy at the conclusion of a full trial includes
license termination (i. e., an injunction against continued exercise
of rights granted by the license) or merely damages for any conduct to
date that fell outside the license.

This is in contrast to "in the sole judgment of the licensor"
language, which as I understand it can only take effect upon notice in
most jurisdictions, and amounts to "termination at will" plus a
covenant not to terminate without a reasonable belief that one of the
termination conditions has been met.  Such language (which is not
present in the GPL) places the burden upon the licensee to
demonstrate, in the event of notice of termination, that the licensor
did not have a reasonable basis for belief that there was reason to
terminate.

Is that how it works in your jurisdiction, more or less?

> As to the whole derivative work discussion, my opinion is that a judge
> would rather easily decide something isn't a derived work. The linux
> kernel, e.g., wouldn't need those notes of Linus to allow use of the
> API and so on, on the simple reason that the kernel is designed to do
> just that. In Europe at least one has an automatic license to do
> everything that is necessary to run a program for the purpose it is
> intended to, unless explicitly otherwise agreed to. I believe for the
> GPL to rule this out, it has to draft a clause that says: you cannot
> link to this program in such and such a way, unless it is also GPL'ed.
> In general exceptions to a rule have to be very precise, lest they
> become the rule and the rule the exception.

Woohoo.  Yes, that's how I understand it under US law as well
(IANALIAJ), with a couple of asterisks about estoppel and laches.

> I am reasoning from a legal background, and I believe that is also wat
> a judge would do. It is my general opinion, following Michael, that
> large portions of the FSF FAQ are simply wrong. I have written some
> more elaborate papers on that topic, albeit discussing intellectual
> property in more general terms, focussed on Open Source. See
> http://m9923416.kuleuven.be for that (unfortunately, the most
> interesting one is written in dutch, and I do not have time to
> translate).

I suppose that if I profess to be able to read legalese, I ought to be
able to tackle Dutch, with

packages missing from sarge

[Joey Hess]

The release team has been fairly agressive for many months now about
removing RC buggy packages from sarge. I'm glad of this policy since we
now have a maneagable number of RC bugs. However, there's the
possibility this means some packages that are important to many people
have been dropped and there may still be time to fix it before sarge is
released.

So here is a list (from update-excuses) of all 491 packages that is
being held out of sarge[1]. If you've already done all you can on the RC
bugs on packages in sarge, take a look over it and if you spot anything
important or generally worth fixing, point it out, or just work on it.
Remember that due to the freeze you'll need to ask on debian-release to
get any fixed packages accepted back into sarge.

For example, lftp is a big item on this list but already (mostly) dealt
with; doom-wad-shareware is a good example of a package that was removed
due to an easily fixable problem (nmu in progress); bb is a good example
of a package that seems fit to re-enter sarge but hasn't yet due to the
freeze (RA now reviewing); boot-floppies is a good example of a package
we really don't want in sarge.

abuse-frabs
abuse-lib
abuse-sdl
abuse-sfx
adonthell
adonthell-data
amavis-ng
amule
aoetools
approx
apt-proxy
apt-rpm
argouml
aspectj-anttasks
aspseek
asterisk-chan-misdn
asterisk-spandsp-plugins
autorespond
avalon-excalibur
avifile
babel
baghira
bandersnatch
barrendero
battfink
bayonne
bb
bbconf
blam
blootbot
bookview
boot-floppies
boot-icons
boson-base
boson-data
boson-music
cabot
cce
ccs
cegui-mk2
charva
chdrv
childsplay
childsplay-plugins
cl-photo
cman
cman-kernel
coco-cs
configlet
convertfs
coq-doc
crystalspace
crystalspace-data
cursel
cxx
cycle
daapd
darcs-buildpackage
dbmail
debbuggtk
debget
debpartial-mirror
dhcp-dns
directory-administrator
divine
dlm-kernel
doctorj
doodle
doom-wad-shareware
doomlegacy
doomlegacy-data
doxymacs
dresden-ocl
drip
drpython
dvr
ec-fonts-mftraced
eclipse
eclipse-nls-sdk
eglade
ejabberd
elastic
erlang
eroaster
evolution-data-server1.2
ext2resize
f-spot
falconseye
fcalendar
fence
fenris
filler
fmultivar
forrest
fportfolio
freebsd-sendpr
freewrl
fyre
gabber2
gal2.4
gambas
gamin
gcc-m68hc1x
gcc-snapshot
gcjwebplugin
gecko-sharp
gerris
gfs
gfs-kernel
ggz-client-libs
ggz-docs
ggz-gnome-client
ggz-grubby
ggz-gtk-client
ggz-gtk-games
ggz-kde-client
ggz-kde-games
ggz-server
ggz-txt-client
ggz-utils
gkdial
gkrelldnet
glob2
gnat-gps
gnbd
gnbd-kernel
gnome-art
gnome-chess
gnome-pim
gnu-smalltalk
gnue-appserver
gnumach
gnumach1
gnuradio
gnuradio-examples
gnurobbo
gnutls10
gnutls7
goldedplus
golem
gonzui
gpsim-led
gr-audio-alsa
gr-usrp
gr-wxgui
graph-includes
grub2
grubconf
grunch
gsnes9x
gtk-sharp
gtkhtml3.6
gtksourceview-sharp
gutenbrowser
gwydion-dylan
gwydion-dylan-sgml
gxine
haskell-http
horgand
howl
ibm-jdk1.1-installer
icheck
icukrell
id-utils
iddev
ifrit
ikvm
imapsync
imgtex
inform
innovation3d
innovation3d-plugins
interchange
ion3-mod-ionflux
ipac-ng
ipmenu
irssi-plugin-icq
irssi-snapshot
jabberoo
jakarta-log4j
jetty
jmeter
jmp
jpilot-mail
jswat
jswat2
kannel
kernel-image-2.4.25-amiga
kernel-image-2.4.25-atari
kernel-image-2.4.25-bvme6000
kernel-image-2.4.25-mvme147
kernel-image-2.4.25-mvme16x
kernel-image-2.4.26-amiga
kernel-image-2.4.26-atari
kernel-image-2.4.26-bvme6000
kernel-image-2.4.26-mvme147
kernel-image-2.4.26-mvme16x
kernel-image-2.4.26-q40
kernel-image-2.4.27-hppa
kernel-image-2.6.10-alpha
kernel-image-2.6.10-amd64
kernel-image-2.6.10-hppa
kernel-image-2.6.10-i386
kernel-image-2.6.10-ia64
kernel-image-2.6.10-s390
kernel-image-2.6.10-sparc
kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64
kernel-image-2.6.11-i386
kernel-image-2.6.11-ia64
kernel-image-2.6.11-s390
kernel-image-2.6.9-amd64
kernel-image-sparc-2.4
kernel-latest-2.6-s390
kernel-patch-2.4.19-arm
kernel-patch-2.6.10-hppa
kernel-patch-acl
kernel-patch-exec-shield
kernel-patch-nfs-swap
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.10
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.11
kernel-patch-scanlogic
kernel-patch-uml
kernel-source-2.4.24
kernel-source-2.4.25
kernel-source-2.4.26
kernel-source-2.6.10
kernel-source-2.6.11
kimberlite
kstart
ktrack
kurush
l2tpd
langband
langband-data
lasso
ldmud
lftp
libaqbanking
libaqhbci
libcddb
libcgi
libchipcard2
libflash
libgcrypt
libgd-perl
libgdiplus
libgef-java
libggz
libgig
libgwenhywfar
libi18n-java
liblingoteach
libmail-cclient-perl
libnsuml-java
libopengl-dylan
libpam-ccreds
libpng-dylan
libroxen-floatingcode
libsafe
libsdl-erlang
libsem
libspoon-perl
libspork-perl
libstatgrab
libsvn-notify-perl
libtext-wikiformat-perl
libvpopmail-perl
libxmerl-erlang
licq-plugin-jonsgtk
lids-2.4
lingoteach-lesson
lingoteach-sound
lingoteach-ui
linphone
linux-kernel-di-hppa
linux-kernel-di-m68k-2.6
linux-wlan-ng
linuxsms
lmbench
localechooser
ltp
magma
magma-plugins
mailscanner
manderlbot
mcs
mdbtools
mercury
micro-inetd
micro-proxy
mig
minit
mldonkey
mmix
mnemo2
mod-mono
modxslt
mol-modules
mol-modules-2.6.10
mol-modules-2.6.11
mono
monodevelop
monodoc
mooix
mozilla-locale-it
mozilla-locale-lt
mozilla-locale-z

Bug#308101: ITP: gstreamer0.8-pitfdll -- DLL/QTX loader plugin for GStreamer

[Dan Korostelev]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dan Korostelev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* Package name: gstreamer0.8-pitfdll
  Version : 0.8.1
  Upstream Author : Ronald Bultje <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/pitfdll/
* License : GPL
  Description : DLL/QTX loader plugin for GStreamer

 Pitfdll is a GStreamer plugin that allows the use of binary files,
 such as Quicktime QTX or Directshow/DMO DLL files, for use as a playback
 codec in GStreamer-based media applications, such as Totem. With this
 plugin, people can playback proprietary file formats for which no free
 software implementation exists yet.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (990, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.11-1-k7
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: debian sarge is 3.2 or 4 ?

[Joey Hess]

Marc Haber wrote:
> The actual decisions are made in the background without even trying to
> talk to the body of developers. For example, the exim 4 maintainers
> were not even contacted by whoever made the decision to move the
> "default MTA" property from exim to exim4. We just found our package
> to be at "important" priority some day.

Start of thread on this mailing list, "default MTA for sarge" (also the
first hit on google for that):

Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Your participation on that same thread:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/07/msg01187.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/07/msg01261.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/07/msg01194.html

Massage in thread prior to that, CCed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

-- 
see shy jo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

[no subject]

[Asociacion Cooperativa Linux Solutions]

I would like to know a goo solution for Proxy, Antivirus and antispan.
I need too block messenger and yahoo message app.




 Alfonso J. Santana
 Asociacion Cooperativa Linux Solutions, RL.
 Caracas - Venezuela
 URL://www.linuxsolutions.com.ve
 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Email2: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Telefonos: (0212) 8617129 Cel: (0414)-1515461




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Upcoming removals

[Bruno Barrera C.]

On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 14:54 +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> I intend to ask for removal of the following packages in the next few
> days unless someone is willing to step up as maintainer.  All of these
> packages have been orphaned for over 60 days and have never been part
> of a stable release; none of them have any reverse (build-)dependencies.
> 
> 
> #259581: O: bbconf -- A Blackbox configuration utility
> Reported by: Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 291 days old.

As Maintainer of blackbox and bbkeys, I'm interested to know what is 
going on with this package.

Like I said, I don't want to maintain bbconf, but the blackbox and
bbkeys upstream is alive again, and they incorporated into its
description that bbconf should work with that programs.

So, I recently sent an email to the bbconf upstream to know if they're
going to keep working on it. Therefore, I think that we should wait a
bit to know his answers and then I will reply.
-- 
Bruno Barrera C.
"I'm a soldier, not a monster. Even though if I sometimes work for monsters."


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: debian sarge is 3.2 or 4 ?

[Roger Leigh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Andrea Mennucc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 May 2005, Marc Haber wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>Their fault for releasing a book about unreleased software which is
>>>bound to be outdated the day that sarge will actually release.
>> 
>> 
>> Uh-uh and when will that day be?  And don't give me any of that "when it
>> is ready" nonsense.  The release version number was ready a long time ago.
>> The problem isn't a concern for quality, it is people like you and Andrea
>> who don't follow process, 
>
> me, I do my part of the work in Debian and nobody ever contacted me
> regarding the choice of the number

No-one contacted me, either.  But that's OK, since it wasn't my
choice.  I really couldn't care less what the number was, in any case.

FWIW, I've noticed that "3.1" is already used in quite a lot of
documentation and on websites with articles relating to Debian.  It
was announced quite some time ago, and so it would be rather
inconsiderate [gross understatement] to change it at this late stage.

Have you considered the huge impact of changing the version number?
It's to no-one's advantage to do this.


Regards,
Roger

- -- 
Roger Leigh
Printing on GNU/Linux?  http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
Debian GNU/Linuxhttp://www.debian.org/
GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848.  Please sign and encrypt your mail.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 

iD8DBQFCfQ8sVcFcaSW/uEgRAnVKAJ9w0BGmEqX1G09ki0wYhUlomeWIewCgpkLR
/DXbURBIm2niQSIYeDp1cEI=
=R/6k
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RFS: I'm looking for a sponsor for xlogmaster (an orphaned kackage).

[Patryk Cisek]

Hello all.

I've ITAd it (see #192676) and looking for a sponsor. I have fixed some 
warnings and bugs that lintian reported. 
The errors were:

E: xlogmaster binary:E: xlogmaster binary:  
file-in-etc-not-marked-as-conffile /etc/xlogmaster/entries/README
E: xlogmaster binary: 
file-in-etc-not-marked-as-conffile /etc/xlogmaster/scripts/README

I've fixed them by moving their installation to postinst script. A'd like 
someone experienced to look at this and say if this is "elegant" enough. :)
The source package (.dsc diff and .orig.tar.gz) and binary (.deb 
with .changes)  are at:

http://poczta.prezu.one.pl/xlogmaster/

--
Regards.

-- 

Pozdrawiam.


pgp55hVoXzGh6.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: debian sarge is 3.2 or 4 ?

[Andrea Mennucc]

Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Fri, 6 May 2005, Marc Haber wrote:
> 
> 
>>Their fault for releasing a book about unreleased software which is
>>bound to be outdated the day that sarge will actually release.
> 
> 
> Uh-uh and when will that day be?  And don't give me any of that "when it
> is ready" nonsense.  The release version number was ready a long time ago.
> The problem isn't a concern for quality, it is people like you and Andrea
> who don't follow process, 

me, I do my part of the work in Debian

and nobody ever contacted me regarding the choice of the number

a.

>who don't contribute when the actual decisions
> are being made,

on the opposite, I am happy to contribute : I always vote,
for example

a.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Dualing banjos

[Brad and Billie Fick]

do you know how I can get the sheet music to this? 
If so I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you

Bug#308047: ITP: gobby -- A collaborative editor

[Philipp Kern]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Philipp Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* Package name: gobby
  Version : 0.1.0 (currently 0.0+20050506)
  Upstream Author : 0x539 dev group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://darcs.0x539.de/gobby/
* License : GPL
  Description : A collaborative editor

Gobby is a free collaborative editor based on libobby, a library which
provides synced document buffers. It supports multiple documents in one
session and a multi-user chat. It is portable to both Windows and
Unix-like platforms.

It uses GTK+ 2.6 as its windowing toolkit and thus integrates nicely
into the GNOME desktop environment.

An own website for this project is not yet available. The repository is
browsable on .

This application depends on net6, for which an ITP is filed as #303811,
and libobby, with #304652 as its ITP.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: debian.org email forwarding

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.07.1555 +0200]:
> Why bother to forward those messages to your mail server at all?
> The same base64 string you are using in postfix's body_checks will
> surely serve in your .procmailrc in master.

Because master is not the only machine that forwards to my main mail
server, so the choice is between maintaining the list on X servers,
or one central list.

But you are right, I should probably just drop them at the server,
not reject them.

I wonder why I even reject them at all. It's not like "bounce spam"
is something I am not familiar with. Weird. Must have been
a momentary lapse of reason.

> Thanks to base64, I never forward any windows virus to myself, they
> are kept in my ~/mail directory. See my ~/pmrc/executables in master
> for generic anti windows-executable recipes.

Nice. I will gladly check those out.

-- 
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 
 .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :'  :proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
 
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
 
why do they sterilise the needle for lethal injections?


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: problem creating pbuilder environment

[Andreas Fester]

Thanks for all the answers :-)
Creating a sarge environment works well ...
Best Regards,
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: problem creating pbuilder environment

[Goswin von Brederlow]

Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Am Samstag, den 07.05.2005, 14:49 +0200 schrieb Andreas Fester:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I am trying to create a pbuilder environment. Since the default
>> server ftp.nara.wide.ad.jp is *really* slow, I used the command
>> 
>> # pbuilder create --mirror http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian
>> 
>> However, this ends with an unmet dependency message:
>> 
>> ...
>> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>>passwd: Depends: debconf (>= 0.5.00) but it is not installed
>> E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
>>   -> Aborting with an error
>>   -> unmounting dev/pts filesystem
>>   -> unmounting proc filesystem
>>   -> cleaning the build env
>>  -> removing directory /var/cache/pbuilder/build//9136 and its 
>> subdirectories
>
> I guess, this is a problem with debootstrap, which misses to install a
> few packages. The dependency on debconf seems to a new one. I ran

Can't someone change pbuilder to use cdebootstrap? This static package
list in debootstrap is insane.

MfG
Goswin


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: problem creating pbuilder environment

[Daniel Leidert]

Am Samstag, den 07.05.2005, 14:49 +0200 schrieb Andreas Fester:
> Hi,
> 
> I am trying to create a pbuilder environment. Since the default
> server ftp.nara.wide.ad.jp is *really* slow, I used the command
> 
> # pbuilder create --mirror http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian
> 
> However, this ends with an unmet dependency message:
> 
> ...
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>passwd: Depends: debconf (>= 0.5.00) but it is not installed
> E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
>   -> Aborting with an error
>   -> unmounting dev/pts filesystem
>   -> unmounting proc filesystem
>   -> cleaning the build env
>  -> removing directory /var/cache/pbuilder/build//9136 and its 
> subdirectories

I guess, this is a problem with debootstrap, which misses to install a
few packages. The dependency on debconf seems to a new one. I ran
pbuilder update some minutes ago and it told me, that debconf will be
installed as a _new_ package. You can do the following. Create a sarge
environment. In sarge, there is currently no passwd-dependency on
debconf. Then change in /etc/pbuilderrc to DISTRIBUTION=sid and update
your image with 'pbuilder update'. Maybe you need to run it as

pbuilder update --override-config --configfile /etc/pbuilderrc

to make pbuilder recognize the changes in the
config-file /etc/pbuilderrc or ~/.pbuilderrc.

> Any hints?

HTH and Regards, Daniel


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: debian.org email forwarding

[Santiago Vila]

On Sat, 7 May 2005, martin f krafft wrote:

> also sprach Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.07.1506 +0200]:
> > You should really accept messages from master before trying to
> > reject spam, i.e. use some kind of whitelist for master. If that's
> > not possible, don't forward email to such address.
> 
> The stuff my mail server rejects is 100% spam. master is whitelisted
> for most checks. The only checks that reject mail from master are
> those generated automatically with a Sober or whatever virus in the
> attachment, and among those only the ones that had such a huge hit
> that my virus scanners couldn't cope anymore, so I extracted
> a typical line from the Base64 string and use postfix's body_checks
> now.

Why bother to forward those messages to your mail server at all?
The same base64 string you are using in postfix's body_checks
will surely serve in your .procmailrc in master.

Thanks to base64, I never forward any windows virus to myself, they
are kept in my ~/mail directory. See my ~/pmrc/executables in master
for generic anti windows-executable recipes.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: problem creating pbuilder environment

[Anibal Monsalve Salazar]

On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 02:49:56PM +0200, Andreas Fester wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am trying to create a pbuilder environment. Since the default
>server ftp.nara.wide.ad.jp is *really* slow, I used the command
>
># pbuilder create --mirror http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian
>
>However, this ends with an unmet dependency message:
>
>...
>The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  passwd: Depends: debconf (>= 0.5.00) but it is not installed
>E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
> -> Aborting with an error
> -> unmounting dev/pts filesystem
> -> unmounting proc filesystem
> -> cleaning the build env
>-> removing directory /var/cache/pbuilder/build//9136 and its 
>subdirectories
>
>I tried both pbuilder from testing (0.123) and from unstable
>(0.127), both with the same result.
>If it's of any use, the complete log of the pbuilder run is
>available at http://littletux.homelinux.org/debian/pbuilder.log

I had the same problem a few hours ago.

>Any hints?

In /etc/pbuilderrc I put:

DISTRIBUTION=sarge

and run 'pbuilder create --distribution sarge'.

I couldn't get pbuilder to use sid.

>Thanks & best Regards,
>
>   Andreas
>
>-- 
>Andreas Fester
>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>WWW: http://littletux.homelinux.org
>ICQ: 326674288

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Anibal Monsalve Salazar
--
 .''`. Debian GNU/Linux
: :' : Free Operating System
`. `'  http://debian.org/
  `-   http://v7w.com/anibal


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: problem creating pbuilder environment

[Sebastian Kuzminsky]

Andreas Fester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
] # pbuilder create --mirror http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian


I had the same error when making a pbuilder Sid environment, but Sarge
works for me.  Add "--distribution sarge" to that command line.




--
Sebastian


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: debian.org email forwarding

[martin f krafft]

> > :0
> > |/usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f'<>' [EMAIL PROTECTED]

procmail: Executing "/usr/sbin/sendmail,-f'<>',[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
exim: '<>' - bad address: malformed address: ' may not follow '<>

It seems to work without quotes though.

-- 
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 
 .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :'  :proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
 
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
 
"this week dragged past me so slowly;
 the days fell on their knees..."
-- david bowie


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: debian.org email forwarding

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Miquel van Smoorenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.07.1451 +0200]:
> Why not configure your mailserver to just /dev/null spam/viruses
> that originate from your debian.org address.
> 
> You could put this in your .procmailrc:
> 
> :0
> |/usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f'<>' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> .. then mail will be forwarded with the empty envelope-sender,
> which means no bounces will be generated.

This would trash all envelope data, but it's essentially no worse
than what happens now. Thanks for the tip.

-- 
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 
 .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :'  :proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
 
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
 
"there's someone in my head but it's not me."
-- pink floyd, the dark side of the moon, 1972


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: debian.org email forwarding

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.07.1506 +0200]:
> You should really accept messages from master before trying to
> reject spam, i.e. use some kind of whitelist for master. If that's
> not possible, don't forward email to such address.

The stuff my mail server rejects is 100% spam. master is whitelisted
for most checks. The only checks that reject mail from master are
those generated automatically with a Sober or whatever virus in the
attachment, and among those only the ones that had such a huge hit
that my virus scanners couldn't cope anymore, so I extracted
a typical line from the Base64 string and use postfix's body_checks
now.

I don't think I will change this, because master does relay those
(still) at an unacceptable rate, so I need to protect my virus
scanners.

The solution, as you pointed out, is to tighten the policy of
master's SMTP acceptance.

-- 
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 
 .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :'  :proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
 
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
 
i've not lost my mind. it's backed up on tape somewhere.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: debian.org email forwarding

[Santiago Vila]

On Sat, 7 May 2005, martin f krafft wrote:

> also sprach Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.07.1403 +0200]:
> > Why are you so much worried about the envelope sender, when it is
> > usually forged? You are not trying to bounce messages that you
> > didn't want to receive back to the sender, are you? (that would be
> > bounce-spam).
> 
> Well, sure. The point is that right now, my server rejects a lot of
> spam, so the bounces end up in my regular mailbox. I am effectively
> boune-spamming myself. So I'd rather have the bounce generated by
> master go elsewhere.

You should really accept messages from master before trying to reject
spam, i.e. use some kind of whitelist for master. If that's not possible,
don't forward email to such address.

What we would really need is some procedure in master to reduce the
level of spam we have to receive, in a way what it is either rejected
at SMTP time (using cbl.abuseat.org, for example), or simple vanished
because of lack of RFC 2821 compliance (greylisting).

I still hope that the Debian project (i.e. all of us) realize some day
about how stupid is to accept each and every message when we could
easily get rid of a large portion of spam with virtually no harm to
anybody.

> > I'm more worried about "! [EMAIL PROTECTED]" rewriting the message body,
> 
> You mean the payload? It rewrites the 822 header, but not the
> message body.

Oops, yes, I meant "message content", not message body.

> > so I usually do something like "formail -R Sender: X-Master-Sender:"
> > in master and then "formail -I Sender: -R X-Master-Sender: Sender:" on
> > the machine where I actually receive the message.
> 
> okay, that's also an interesting solution, but it won't solve my
> problem: if the final recipient server rejects the message which
> procmail forwarded, I get the bounce.

Don't forward your email to a server that might bounce it back to
master, then, that would be really rude.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: debian.org email forwarding

[Miquel van Smoorenburg]

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
martin f krafft  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>also sprach Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.07.1403 +0200]:
>> Why are you so much worried about the envelope sender, when it is
>> usually forged? You are not trying to bounce messages that you
>> didn't want to receive back to the sender, are you? (that would be
>> bounce-spam).
>
>Well, sure. The point is that right now, my server rejects a lot of
>spam, so the bounces end up in my regular mailbox. I am effectively
>boune-spamming myself. So I'd rather have the bounce generated by
>master go elsewhere.

Since the sender-address of most spam/viruses is forged, you're
very likely sending the bounce to an unrelated victim. That's not
a nice thing to do.

Why not configure your mailserver to just /dev/null spam/viruses
that originate from your debian.org address.

You could put this in your .procmailrc:

:0
|/usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f'<>' [EMAIL PROTECTED]

.. then mail will be forwarded with the empty envelope-sender,
which means no bounces will be generated.

Mike.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

problem creating pbuilder environment

[Andreas Fester]

Hi,
I am trying to create a pbuilder environment. Since the default
server ftp.nara.wide.ad.jp is *really* slow, I used the command
# pbuilder create --mirror http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian
However, this ends with an unmet dependency message:
...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  passwd: Depends: debconf (>= 0.5.00) but it is not installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
 -> Aborting with an error
 -> unmounting dev/pts filesystem
 -> unmounting proc filesystem
 -> cleaning the build env
-> removing directory /var/cache/pbuilder/build//9136 and its 
subdirectories

I tried both pbuilder from testing (0.123) and from unstable
(0.127), both with the same result.
If it's of any use, the complete log of the pbuilder run is
available at http://littletux.homelinux.org/debian/pbuilder.log
Any hints?
Thanks & best Regards,
Andreas
--
Andreas Fester
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://littletux.homelinux.org
ICQ: 326674288
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: debian.org email forwarding

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.07.1403 +0200]:
> Why are you so much worried about the envelope sender, when it is
> usually forged? You are not trying to bounce messages that you
> didn't want to receive back to the sender, are you? (that would be
> bounce-spam).

Well, sure. The point is that right now, my server rejects a lot of
spam, so the bounces end up in my regular mailbox. I am effectively
boune-spamming myself. So I'd rather have the bounce generated by
master go elsewhere.

> I'm more worried about "! [EMAIL PROTECTED]" rewriting the message body,

You mean the payload? It rewrites the 822 header, but not the
message body.

> so I usually do something like "formail -R Sender: X-Master-Sender:"
> in master and then "formail -I Sender: -R X-Master-Sender: Sender:" on
> the machine where I actually receive the message.

okay, that's also an interesting solution, but it won't solve my
problem: if the final recipient server rejects the message which
procmail forwarded, I get the bounce.

-- 
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 
 .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :'  :proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
 
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
 
"sobald man über niveau spricht
 ist man längst darüber hinweg."
  -- thomas krafft


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: debian.org email forwarding

[Santiago Vila]

On Sat, 7 May 2005, martin f krafft wrote:

> I am trying to switch to procmail on master, which involves putting
> a proper ~/.procmailrc in place and nothing else.
> 
> However, a major problem arises due to spam. My last rule forwards
> remaining mails to my normal email address, using the standard mail
> forwarding syntax:
> 
>   :0
>   ! [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Any message forwarded will then be sent with [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> overriding the original envelope sender.
> 
> The best way to deal with this is to set
> 
>   SENDMAIL="/usr/sbin/sendmail -f $SENDER"
> 
> in the .procmailrc file, and the db.debian.or email forwarding page
> [0] seems to suggest at the bottom, that $SENDER is in fact passed
> in the environment.
> 
> This does not seem to be the case. By the time that procmail is
> invoked, the environment is pretty much cleared of most everything,
> so I cannot get at the original sender address anymore, at least not
> with trivial/robust means.
> 
> Is this a problem in the mail configuration of exim? If yes, it
> would be great to get this fixed. If no, then the db.debian.org page
> [0] should be updated. Or am I just overlooking a trivial detail?
> 
> 0. http://db.debian.org/forward.html

Why are you so much worried about the envelope sender, when it is
usually forged? You are not trying to bounce messages that you didn't
want to receive back to the sender, are you? (that would be bounce-spam).

I'm more worried about "! [EMAIL PROTECTED]" rewriting the message body,
so I usually do something like "formail -R Sender: X-Master-Sender:"
in master and then "formail -I Sender: -R X-Master-Sender: Sender:" on
the machine where I actually receive the message.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

debian.org email forwarding

[martin f krafft]

I am trying to switch to procmail on master, which involves putting
a proper ~/.procmailrc in place and nothing else.

However, a major problem arises due to spam. My last rule forwards
remaining mails to my normal email address, using the standard mail
forwarding syntax:

  :0
  ! [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Any message forwarded will then be sent with [EMAIL PROTECTED]
overriding the original envelope sender.

The best way to deal with this is to set

  SENDMAIL="/usr/sbin/sendmail -f $SENDER"

in the .procmailrc file, and the db.debian.or email forwarding page
[0] seems to suggest at the bottom, that $SENDER is in fact passed
in the environment.

This does not seem to be the case. By the time that procmail is
invoked, the environment is pretty much cleared of most everything,
so I cannot get at the original sender address anymore, at least not
with trivial/robust means.

Is this a problem in the mail configuration of exim? If yes, it
would be great to get this fixed. If no, then the db.debian.org page
[0] should be updated. Or am I just overlooking a trivial detail?

0. http://db.debian.org/forward.html

-- 
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 
 .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :'  :proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
 
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
 
"life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans."
-- john lennon


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: GPL and linking

[Batist Paklons]

[Note: IALNAP (I am lawyer, not a programmer), arguing solely in
Belgian/European context, and english is not my native language.]

On 07/05/05, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Again, that's not how it works.  In the presence of a valid license
> contract, one is entitled to contract-law standards of the
> reasonableness of one's attempts to cure a breach when notified.  The
> "automatic termination" clause is probably unenforceable in most
> jurisdictions; I think (IANAL) few would even read it as authority to
> terminate on inadvertent (non-material) breach, let alone on the
> licensor's idea of breach if the licensee's (reasonable) construction
> makes it not a breach.

Automatic termination clauses are quite common, and generally held
valid. It is often only what constitutes a breach that can lead to
such termination that is disputed in court. In my opinion that is one
of the few GPL license terms that is quite sound, only the grounds on
which that termination happens seem extremely flakey to me.

As to the whole derivative work discussion, my opinion is that a judge
would rather easily decide something isn't a derived work. The linux
kernel, e.g., wouldn't need those notes of Linus to allow use of the
API and so on, on the simple reason that the kernel is designed to do
just that. In Europe at least one has an automatic license to do
everything that is necessary to run a program for the purpose it is
intended to, unless explicitly otherwise agreed to. I believe for the
GPL to rule this out, it has to draft a clause that says: you cannot
link to this program in such and such a way, unless it is also GPL'ed.
In general exceptions to a rule have to be very precise, lest they
become the rule and the rule the exception.

I am reasoning from a legal background, and I believe that is also wat
a judge would do. It is my general opinion, following Michael, that
large portions of the FSF FAQ are simply wrong. I have written some
more elaborate papers on that topic, albeit discussing intellectual
property in more general terms, focussed on Open Source. See
http://m9923416.kuleuven.be for that (unfortunately, the most
interesting one is written in dutch, and I do not have time to
translate).

Kind Regards
Batist