Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

Peter Samuelson wrote:
>>>Yes, I'm aware that if it's possible to revoke the GPL, it fails
>>>the Tentacles of Evil test, and GPL software would be completely
>>>unsuitable for any serious deployment.
> 
> 
> [Roberto C. Sanchez]
> 
>>But it can't be done, period.
>>
>>Reference: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
> 
> 
> That I am not legally trained does not make me completely unschooled in
> these things.  Believe it or not, I actually did already know the FSF's
> position on the revocability of the GPL.  That is why I opened my
> message with a sentence you helpfully did not quote:
> 
> 
>>>It seems to me that this is another of those things everyone takes
>>>for a postulate just because the FSF said so.
> 
> 
> I'm much more interested in arguments that do not start with "well, the
> FSF says..." or "this is ridiculous, everyone knows that..." or even
> "for 12 years we've all assumed...".  It seems to me that the FSF
> position on the irrevocability of free software depends on the
> interesting dual notions that the license is not a contract, but
> nonetheless the copyright holder is bound by it.  Michael Edwards
> disputes the former notion; this seems to be a productive line of
> reasoning.

Point taken.  However, the GPL clearly states the conditions in
section 6:

  6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the
original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to
these terms and conditions.  You may not impose any further
restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to
this License.

To me, that says "Once the cat is out, it's out for good."  So,
if you as the author of GPL software, try to restrict someone that
has already received your software under the terms of the GPL, then
you violate the license.  Since you are the author, it doesn't
affect you so much, since you are also the copyright holder.

The only other alternative is that the GPL is not enforceable.
That would probably call into question the validity of all software
licenses.  However, I am not lawyer (I'm sure you guessed that by
now), so I will refrain from speaking further on this subject.

Incidentally, if there was so much controversy about this and the
origins and rights to the code have been in question, why has
SourceForge let the project continue for 2 years?  I imagine that
it is not their responsibility that to comb through every piece
of code housed on their servers.  However, I would imagine that
it would be part of their due diligence to verify whether a project
like this can even exist on their servers in the first place.

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Peter Samuelson]

> > Yes, I'm aware that if it's possible to revoke the GPL, it fails
> > the Tentacles of Evil test, and GPL software would be completely
> > unsuitable for any serious deployment.

[Roberto C. Sanchez]
> But it can't be done, period.
> 
> Reference: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

That I am not legally trained does not make me completely unschooled in
these things.  Believe it or not, I actually did already know the FSF's
position on the revocability of the GPL.  That is why I opened my
message with a sentence you helpfully did not quote:

> > It seems to me that this is another of those things everyone takes
> > for a postulate just because the FSF said so.

I'm much more interested in arguments that do not start with "well, the
FSF says..." or "this is ridiculous, everyone knows that..." or even
"for 12 years we've all assumed...".  It seems to me that the FSF
position on the irrevocability of free software depends on the
interesting dual notions that the license is not a contract, but
nonetheless the copyright holder is bound by it.  Michael Edwards
disputes the former notion; this seems to be a productive line of
reasoning.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Entries in Packages files that lack a Source field

[Anthony Towns]

Adeodato Simó wrote:
  As you probably know, entries in the Packages file only have a Source
  field if the name of the source package is different from the name of
  the binary package being described. This is an inconsistency that makes
  it a bit harder to massage this data, e.g. with grep-dctrl.
Why not add a patch to grep-dctrl instead?
Cheers,
aj
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Brian May]

> "Peter" == Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Peter> [Thomas Bushnell BSG]
>> Um:
>> 
>> /bin/mount foo:whatever /bin

I was considering commenting on this, I think if you want to start
going down this track it would be simpler to write/adapt a script that
automatically creates an initramfs.

This initramfs would not only initialise the network, but mount the
appropriate file, including /etc (non-shareable), /lib (shareable
except perhaps /lib/modules), /sbin, /bin, /proc, /dev. Some people
consider this approach cleaner as it doesn't require the kernel to do
the initialisation stuff that can be done is user land. It fact, it
wouldn't surprise me if the kernel NFS-root stuff is either obsolete
or planned to become obsolete, for this reason.

Also you automatically get updated files when you update the kernel,
and you don't have to mess around with the package system.

Peter> That's a huge administrative hassle.  Not only do you have
Peter> to figure out what programs and libraries /bin/mount
Peter> depends on so you can make sure they're on your real root
Peter> partition, but the packaging system doesn't - and shouldn't
Peter> - do anything to help you keep the two copies of /bin in
Peter> sync.

Not to mention the extra mess (at least IMHO) of mounting two copies
of /bin. Sure, it is possible though. I am not sure what the point
would be.

Peter> You would put up with all *that* for a 6-megabyte savings
Peter> on your root filesystem?

It would be more then 6 megabyte savings on the root file-system if
/usr was moved to /. That was the original point I responded to.
-- 
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


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

Bug#309723: ITP: webcpp -- configurable utility to convert source code to HTML

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* Package name: webcpp
  Version : 0.8.4
  Upstream Author : Jeffrey Bakker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://webcpp.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
  Description : configurable utility to convert source code to HTML

 A command line utility that takes your source code, and converts it
 into an HTML file using a fully customizable syntax highlighting engine
 and color schemes. This is useful if you want to post your code online
 and make it easier to read, or to make online programming tutorials.
 .
 Converts Ada95, ASP, Assembler, Basic, C, C#, C++, Cg, CLIPS, Fortran,
 Haskell, Java, Markup, Modula2, Objective C, Pascal, Perl, PHP, Python,
 Renderman, Ruby, SQL, Tcl, Unix shell, UnrealScript & VHDL into HTML
 with syntax highlighting and themes.
 .
 http://webcpp.sourceforge.net/

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-miami-15.3
Locale: LANG=es_ES, LC_CTYPE=es_ES (charmap=ISO-8859-1)


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

Bug#309722: ITP: xwc -- lightweight Explorer-like file manager

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* Package name: xwc
  Version : 0.91.5a
  Upstream Author : Maxim Baranov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://xwc.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
  Description : lightweight Explorer-like file manager

 A lightweight file manager with an Explorer-like interface.  Most
 suitable for low resource window managers that do not have their own
 native file manager (e.g., IceWM, WindowMaker, etc.), but can be used
 with any window manager.
 .
 Supports association by file name and file type, tree view and device
 mounting and unmounting.  Supports a wide variety of confifuartion
 options.  Very useful for new users that are accustomed to the legacy
 operating systems still out there.
 .
 Homepage: http://xwc.sourceforge.net/

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-miami-15.3
Locale: LANG=es_ES, LC_CTYPE=es_ES (charmap=ISO-8859-1)


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

big usermem kernel patch

[Camm Maguire]

Greetings!  It seems that we are in need of a 'big usermem' kernel
patch in Debian, so I am considering contributing such a package.  It
appears there are two approaches on the net, both in various
incarnations of redhat:

1) user-tunable /proc/self/mapped_base -- this allows setuid processes
   to move the base address at which shared libs are mapped from the
   default (on x86) of 0x4000, allowing for much larger contiguous
   brk *or* mmaped space (up to 2.7 GB -- the oracle docs appear to
   refer to this.  See also WOLK).

2) In RHEL3, the kernel maps PROT_EXEC maps below the executable, and
   other maps down from the stack, giving an undivided brk/mmap area.
   this seems best, but I can't yet find the RH patch anywhere.  (See
   RH bugzilla 104583).

Ideas?  I'm looking to allow users procs in Debian to allocate the
largest continuous block possible, either through brk or mmap (at the
user's choice).

Take care,

-- 
Camm Maguire[EMAIL PROTECTED]
==
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah


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

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Raul Miller]

On 5/18/05, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That is completely not possible.  Once you offer (and someone accepts)
> code under the terms of the GPL, they are for evermore entitled to use
> *that* code under the GPL.

There are some exceptions to this.  For example, if you're not the copyright
holder, your offer doesn't count.  Worse, in the U.S., copyright can
be revoked after 35 years (with lots of legal fine print which makes this
difficult to talk about simply).

But none of that seems relevant here.  (And none of it seems specific
to the GPL -- I think this would be just as true for BSD.)

Or, at least... the assertion by nullsoft that nullsoft wasn't authorized 
to release WASTE seems to raise the question of whether they're 
authorized to claim it wasn't released.  [If they weren't authorized
to release it, who would have been?]

The only reason I can see for Debian to not want to package WASTE 
is that as a general rule we try to go along with the wishes of upstream
developers.  But, ultimately, that kind of issue is up to the package
maintainer.

-- 
Raul

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Michael K. Edwards]

On 5/18/05, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Samuelson wrote:
[snip]
> > Yes, I'm aware that if it's possible to revoke the GPL, it fails the
> > Tentacles of Evil test, and GPL software would be completely unsuitable
> > for any serious deployment.  Note, however, that "but it *can't* be
> > that way because if it is, we're all in trouble" is not a very strong
> > argument.
> 
> But it can't be done, period.
> 
> Reference: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
> 
> "In order for these freedoms to be real, they must be irrevocable as
> long as you do nothing wrong; if the developer of the software has the
> power to revoke the license, without your doing anything to give cause,
> the software is not free."

I would advise you to be very, very wary of assertions made by the FSF
about the legal import of the GPL.  Philosophy is strong stuff and has
been known to cloud the mind.  Case law is a more trustworthy guide to
what is and isn't legally possible, not to mention what can and can't
be construed into the terms of the GPL.

Cheers,
- Michael

Re: [Fwd: RFS: eaccelerator - PHP script cacher]

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

Jonathan Oxer wrote:
> [CCd to relevant parties including the eAccelerator developers]
> 
> Hi Roberto,
> 
> Just a quick update on distributability of Turck-MMCache / eAccelerator:
> I've now contacted Jeremy Malcolm of iLaw (who also happens to be a DD!)
> and provided him with a brief history of the two projects, and asked him
> to provide legal advice on how to proceed. I'm happy to pay for his time
> to help sort it out, especially if it results in Debian being able to
> distribute eAccelerator.
> 
> After an informal chat with him I'm hopeful that given the demise of
> TurckSoft it will be possible to relicense the Turck-MMCache code in
> eAccelerator to allow it to be linked against PHP, but I'll let you know
> the outcome in any case.
> 
> Cheers   :-)
> 
> Jonathan Oxer

Thanks for the update.  I was this close, ->  <-, to whipping up a -src
package that just included the source and a script to crank out a .deb
from it.

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Michael K. Edwards]

On 5/18/05, Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> I know at least one developer on a prominent open source project who
> believes otherwise, and claims to be prepared to revoke their license
> to her code, if they do certain things to piss her off.  Presumably
> this is grounded on the basis of her having received no consideration,
> since it's a bit harder to revoke someone's right to use something they
> bought and paid for.  It is also possible that she's a looney.

If the GPL were the creature of copyright law that the FSF proclaims,
or the unilateral contract that some apologists believe, that would be
a real problem.  Talk about the Law of Unintended Consequences! 
Happily, there is no defect of consideration in the GPL, as the
covenants of return performance (principally the obligation to offer
source code) are non-trivial promises with some value to the licensor.
 Thread at http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/12/msg00209.html
; note references to Planetary Motion v. Techplosion 2001 later in the
thread.

> Yes, I'm aware that if it's possible to revoke the GPL, it fails the
> Tentacles of Evil test, and GPL software would be completely unsuitable
> for any serious deployment.  Note, however, that "but it *can't* be
> that way because if it is, we're all in trouble" is not a very strong
> argument.

It's not a meaningless argument, though; there's a doctrine of
reliance that can substitute for acceptance under some circumstances,
and might be used to estop a copyright holder from yanking an
ostensibly perpetual license if all else failed.  IANAL, etc.

Cheers,
- Michael

Re: [Fwd: RFS: eaccelerator - PHP script cacher]

[Jonathan Oxer]

[CCd to relevant parties including the eAccelerator developers]

Hi Roberto,

Just a quick update on distributability of Turck-MMCache / eAccelerator:
I've now contacted Jeremy Malcolm of iLaw (who also happens to be a DD!)
and provided him with a brief history of the two projects, and asked him
to provide legal advice on how to proceed. I'm happy to pay for his time
to help sort it out, especially if it results in Debian being able to
distribute eAccelerator.

After an informal chat with him I'm hopeful that given the demise of
TurckSoft it will be possible to relicense the Turck-MMCache code in
eAccelerator to allow it to be linked against PHP, but I'll let you know
the outcome in any case.

Cheers   :-)

Jonathan Oxer
-- 
The Debian Universe: Installing, managing and using Debian GNU/Linux
http://www.debianuniverse.com/


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

Re: Release update: freeze progress, closing date for non-RC fixes

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 12:55:12AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 04:42:35PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >...
> > According to , the official
> > count of release-critical bugs affecting testing is 61.  Since security
> > bugs are an, er, "renewable resource", and can be fixed out-of-band, we
> > can exclude them from our reckoning and get the number at the bottom of
> >  instead,
> > which is 41.  This is pretty good progress, but it's still a far cry
> > from the estimate of 15 RC bugs that our timeline called for by this
> > Wednesday.  We fortunately did put a little bit of padding into this
> > timeline, but being off on the RC count by a factor of 2-3 is stretching
> > things a bit, y'know?
> >...

> I'm not a big fan of your metric, but if you are using it please note 
> that at least the following issues make your numbers at the URL you are 
> referring to [1] lower than they actually are:

> - relevant pseudo-packages are not listed (the "kernel" pseudo-package 
>   alone has 3 RC bugs)

Fair point, thanks.

> - the exclusion of bugs that are tagged both "sarge" and "sid"
>   (e.g. #303860) is obviously wrong

Actually, it's the tags that are now wrong on that bug, because celestia has
been removed from sarge.  'ignore=sid' ignores bugs that *only* apply to
sid.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Release update: freeze progress, closing date for non-RC fixes

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 01:49:06AM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > - the exclusion of bugs that are tagged both "sarge" and "sid"
> >  (e.g. #303860) is obviously wrong

> BTW: is there a way to make unstable updates not close the bugs in question
> but mark them woody and/or sarge? If not, should the changelog simply
> contain unparseable bug numbers?

I would really prefer that maintainers upload as normal, closing bugs in the
changelog; they can be reopened afterwards if they need to be tracked
long-term.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: packages missing from sarge

[Anthony DeRobertis]

Steve Langasek wrote:
With the delays in getting
t-p-u built across architectures, that's not long enough for me to be
comfortable.
I didn't realize t-p-u took so long. But I suppose that's the way it is. 
Thanks for the explanation, and thank you for your work on getting Sarge 
out the door!

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

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

Peter Samuelson wrote:

> I know at least one developer on a prominent open source project who
> believes otherwise, and claims to be prepared to revoke their license
> to her code, if they do certain things to piss her off.  Presumably
> this is grounded on the basis of her having received no consideration,
> since it's a bit harder to revoke someone's right to use something they
> bought and paid for.  It is also possible that she's a looney.
> 
That is completely not possible.  Once you offer (and someone accepts)
code under the terms of the GPL, they are for evermore entitled to use
*that* code under the GPL.  About the only thing that can be done is
to quite releasing new versions of the software or release newer
versions under a more restrictive license.  That, or hope everyone
who receives the code violates the GPL (since that is about the only
you lose your rights under it after the fact).

> Yes, I'm aware that if it's possible to revoke the GPL, it fails the
> Tentacles of Evil test, and GPL software would be completely unsuitable
> for any serious deployment.  Note, however, that "but it *can't* be
> that way because if it is, we're all in trouble" is not a very strong
> argument.

But it can't be done, period.

Reference: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

"In order for these freedoms to be real, they must be irrevocable as
long as you do nothing wrong; if the developer of the software has the
power to revoke the license, without your doing anything to give cause,
the software is not free."

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Debian as living system

[Miles Bader]

Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> debian-devel has acquired a reputation for being rather unfriendly and
> intimidating place, but there's no need to perpetuate that.
> Politeness doesn't take much more effort than being rude.

I don't think one should judge debian-devel based on this though --
A.S. acts the same way on many mailing lists.  The average debian-devel
poster seems to be a lot better.

-Miles
-- 
Is it true that nothing can be known?  If so how do we know this?  -Woody Allen


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

Re: Release update: freeze progress, closing date for non-RC fixes

[Bernd Eckenfels]

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> - the exclusion of bugs that are tagged both "sarge" and "sid"
>  (e.g. #303860) is obviously wrong

BTW: is there a way to make unstable updates not close the bugs in question
but mark them woody and/or sarge? If not, should the changelog simply
contain unparseable bug numbers?

Gruss
Bernd


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

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Peter Samuelson]

[Charles Iliya Krempeaux]
> It seem to me that they got in trouble for doing so. And then tried
> to "take things back". But the GPL doesn't allow for that.

It seems to me that this is another of those things everyone takes for
a postulate just because the FSF said so.  Rather like the assumption
that copyright law gives the GPL scope over libraries whose interfaces
you use.

I know at least one developer on a prominent open source project who
believes otherwise, and claims to be prepared to revoke their license
to her code, if they do certain things to piss her off.  Presumably
this is grounded on the basis of her having received no consideration,
since it's a bit harder to revoke someone's right to use something they
bought and paid for.  It is also possible that she's a looney.

Yes, I'm aware that if it's possible to revoke the GPL, it fails the
Tentacles of Evil test, and GPL software would be completely unsuitable
for any serious deployment.  Note, however, that "but it *can't* be
that way because if it is, we're all in trouble" is not a very strong
argument.

> But yes,... all of it is based on the initial assumption that
> whomever originally released the code under the GPL was allowed to.

s/whomever/whoever/ (:

Peter


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> No.  Debian is figuring it out.  My whole point is that you've shifted
> the job of doing so to the site admin.  If you are expecting dpkg to
> take on the responsibility for peeking under people's mounted /bin
> directories and installing/upgrading things on the root partition that
> need to be on the root partition - then you're being absurd.

I'm not the least bit shifting it.  If you think Debian should figure
it out, we can do so!  Geez, make a package with the necessary
declarations so that it happens.  By saying "don't do it this way",
I'm not saying "don't do it at all."

> Suit yourself.  I know you're educated enough to understand the
> principle of burden-of-proof, and why this falls to the ones proposing
> change.  If you base arguments for change on a speedup which ought to
> be easily measurable, refusing to measure it degrades your position
> considerably, and makes you look silly.  But that's not my bailiwick.

Yes, and I haven't repeated that argument since, if you'll note.


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Peter Samuelson]

> > That's a huge administrative hassle.  Not only do you have to figure
> > out what programs and libraries /bin/mount depends on so you can make
> > sure they're on your real root partition, but the packaging system
> > doesn't - and shouldn't - do anything to help you keep the two copies
> > of /bin in sync.

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]
> Um, that "figuring out" is *exactly* the figuring out that you are
> *already* doing in maintaining a separate /usr.

No.  Debian is figuring it out.  My whole point is that you've shifted
the job of doing so to the site admin.  If you are expecting dpkg to
take on the responsibility for peeking under people's mounted /bin
directories and installing/upgrading things on the root partition that
need to be on the root partition - then you're being absurd.

> > You would put up with all *that* for a 6-megabyte savings on your
> > root filesystem?
> 
> My /usr is rather more than 6 MB.

Well, my apologies, I was confusing your proposal slightly.  My
existing /bin is just over 6 MB, so overlaying *that* with only
/bin/mount and its helpers would save me that much.  I guess you're
talking about moving all of /usr into the root hierarchy, like the hurd
does upstream.

> > I should mention that I'm still waiting for your benchmark results
> > on how a drastic reduction in /usr/lib size speeds up the runtime
> > linker.  On *any* filesystem, O(n)-lookups or not.
> 
> Your demand to run a benchmark does not translate to an obligation on
> my part to run it.

Suit yourself.  I know you're educated enough to understand the
principle of burden-of-proof, and why this falls to the ones proposing
change.  If you base arguments for change on a speedup which ought to
be easily measurable, refusing to measure it degrades your position
considerably, and makes you look silly.  But that's not my bailiwick.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Charles Iliya Krempeaux]

Hello,

Yes, you are correct.  I am assuming that.

As far as I can tell, even if AOL didn't approve it, NullSoft, being
the owners of the code, are "allowed" and able to release the code
under whatever license they want to release it under.  (Whether
they'll get in trouble or not from AOL, for doing so, is another
question.)

It seem to me that they got in trouble for doing so.  And then
tried to "take things back".  But the GPL doesn't allow for that.

But yes,... all of it is based on the initial assumption that whomever
originally released the code under the GPL was allowed to.



See yaOn 5/18/05, Steinar H. Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 11:40:06AM -0700, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:> Now, from what I understand, once you release something under the GPL, you> cannot un-release it. And if that is the case, then this software is "OK".
You're assuming the people who released it had the right to do that in thefirst place. I can _not_ take the leaked Windows 2000 source code, release itunder the GPL and then claim it is okay to distribute.
/* Steinar */--Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/--  Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ 
gmail.com___
Wikibooks, Free Open-Content
Books  http://wikibooks.org/

Someone has sent you a Rolex gift

[Wat]

election results - Rolex or Cartier or Breitling
http://reordering.t6i.net/rep/vron/unobserved.html
As seen on Fox News - Rolex Replicas

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

Re: Debian as living system

[Roger Leigh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Wed, 18 May 2005, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
>> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:46:33PM +0200, Rapha?l Pinson wrote:
>> >> I agree that the previous mail was not very easy to read, nor written in a
>> >> great english. But I don't think that being fluent in english should be a
>> >> requirement to be treated nicely on a development list...
>> >
>> > I *could* have simply ignored him.
>>
>> That would have been much better; please do so in the future.  If you
>> don't have anything worthwhile to contribute, silence is preferable.
>
> This applies to the original poster as well.  And how else are they going to
> know that what they want to discuss is worthless, after they've already done
> it, unless we tell them?

There are ways of telling people things without being unduly
offensive.

debian-devel has acquired a reputation for being rather unfriendly and
intimidating place, but there's no need to perpetuate that.
Politeness doesn't take much more effort than being rude.


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 v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 

iD8DBQFCi8gXVcFcaSW/uEgRArfUAKCVFKmTIeowAj+72lu3fHcneXY9DQCfRSvb
JuIArGKWP6quQnR5Dq2nepo=
=jwdV
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


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

Re: Release update: freeze progress, closing date for non-RC fixes

[Adrian Bunk]

On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 04:42:35PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>...
> According to , the official
> count of release-critical bugs affecting testing is 61.  Since security
> bugs are an, er, "renewable resource", and can be fixed out-of-band, we
> can exclude them from our reckoning and get the number at the bottom of
>  instead,
> which is 41.  This is pretty good progress, but it's still a far cry
> from the estimate of 15 RC bugs that our timeline called for by this
> Wednesday.  We fortunately did put a little bit of padding into this
> timeline, but being off on the RC count by a factor of 2-3 is stretching
> things a bit, y'know?
>...

I'm not a big fan of your metric, but if you are using it please note 
that at least the following issues make your numbers at the URL you are 
referring to [1] lower than they actually are:

- relevant pseudo-packages are not listed (the "kernel" pseudo-package 
  alone has 3 RC bugs)
- the exclusion of bugs that are tagged both "sarge" and "sid"
  (e.g. #303860) is obviously wrong

cu
Adrian

[1] http://bts.turmzimmer.net/details.php?ignore=sid&ignsec=on

-- 

   "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
   "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
   Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


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

Re: debian.org email forwarding

[Agustin Martin]

On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 03:55:36PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:

> 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.

I recently found this other source of procmail recipes, not tested by me

http://freshmeat.net/projects/yavr/

Cheers,

-- 
Agustin


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

Re: Debian as living system

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 06:53:59PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> > Certainly there would have been ways to tell Bluefuture that his mail
> > was hard to read/understand without becoming offensive.
> 
> No, really, there isn't. It is not possible to send mail to a Debian
> mailing list any more without offending somebody.

I'm not surprised you feel that way, really, but that doesn't make it
true.

You have a reputation for a reason.

-- 
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:38:33AM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
>> This just seems like change for the sake of change, with trivial benefits,
>> if any.
>
> I agree, and I admit to not having read this whole thread, but has anyone 
> made a serious argument as to why we need yet another directory for non-user
> executables?  It seems to me that /usr/sbin would serve just fine for this.

sbin is for things that should be in root's path.  The executables in
question are ones that shouldn't be in anyone's path.  (The standard
example is programs started only by inetd.)

Thomas


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> [Thomas Bushnell BSG]
>> Um:  
>> 
>> /bin/mount foo:whatever /bin
>
> That's a huge administrative hassle.  Not only do you have to figure
> out what programs and libraries /bin/mount depends on so you can make
> sure they're on your real root partition, but the packaging system
> doesn't - and shouldn't - do anything to help you keep the two copies
> of /bin in sync.

Um, that "figuring out" is *exactly* the figuring out that you are
*already* doing in maintaining a separate /usr.  If you want to
document this in a reliable way somewhere for the people who are doing
this, great!

> You would put up with all *that* for a 6-megabyte savings on your root
> filesystem?

My /usr is rather more than 6 MB.

> This is another absurdity brought to us all by the Committee for
> Considering Theoretical Angles Without Bothering to Look at Real
> Numbers.  I should mention that I'm still waiting for your benchmark
> results on how a drastic reduction in /usr/lib size speeds up the
> runtime linker.  On *any* filesystem, O(n)-lookups or not.

Your demand to run a benchmark does not translate to an obligation on
my part to run it.



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

Re: Debian as living system

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> No, really, there isn't. It is not possible to send mail to a Debian
> mailing list any more without offending somebody. Even if your mail
> contains nothing but trivially verifiable facts, somebody will still
> be offended (often inexplicably, and sometimes with no evidence of
> their having actually read the mail). So worrying about that is a
> complete waste of time.

That doesn't follow.  


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

Re: RFC on mysql 4.1 in sarge

[sean finney]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 11:00:29PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> 4 drop mysql-dfsg-4.1 from unstable/sarge

not exactly an attractive option, but i guess everything is on
the table at this point so it's worth bringing up...  the reverse
dependencies aren't nearly as severe as i had assumed, actually,
but it's still a rather drastic step to take.

> Other issues like #308762 are also still possible on direct
> mysql-server/woody -> mysql-server-4.1/sarge upgrade paths - and
> there will be users doing such upgrade paths.

i'm going to call you out on this again.  if there are problems, please stop
making vague asides report the bugs.

sean

-- 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Paul Perpich]

This topic has been beat to death and is the cause for most of the
devs bailing throughout the life of the project (legal concerns). 
There are a couple old articles on /. that should cover all the
arguments (in the comments)...but I'm sure you'll find them all over. 
here's one:

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/31/1259206&mode=nested&tid=120&tid=126&tid=187&tid=95




On 5/18/05, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>  
>  (Sorry for just intejecting into the discussion like this, but)
> 
>  From what I understand of the history of WASTE.  At one time, NullSoft did
> infact release WASTE under the GPL.  However, AOL (NullSoft's parent
> company) didn't like this, and that message on NullSoft's website is because
> of that.  (And thus, it was origianlly authorized by NullSoft, but not
> authorized by AOL.)
>  
>  Now, from what I understand, once you release something under the GPL, you
> cannot un-release it.  And if that is the case, then this software is "OK".
>  
>  
>  See ya
>  
>  
>  See ya
>  
> 
> On 5/18/05, Mirco Bauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 14:20 +0200, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> > >   Hi all!
> > >
> > > I'm on the way of making a debian package for Waste, and I would have
> the
> > > folowing two questions about your software:
> > >
> > > Does the licence really reflect GPL?
> > > This arise because of this:
> > >
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/waste/waste/license.cpp?rev=1.1&view=auto
> > > "WASTE - license.cpp
> > > Copyright (C) 2003 Nullsoft, Inc.
> > > Copyright (C) 2004 WASTE Development Team"
> > > -> What does Nullsoft have to do with Waste?
> > >
> > > And also this: 
> > > "//ADDED Md5Chap - THIS PART IS GPL LICENSE!!! TOUCH AND DIE!"
> > > Followed by a full binary array.
> > > ...
> > >
> > 
> > I googled for WASTE I found this:
> > http://www.nullsoft.com/free/waste/
> > According to Nullsoft this is UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE and is not allowed
> > to be distributed!
> > Please delete all source and package copies you may have and do not let
> > it enter debian! 
> > 
> > --
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Mirco 'meebey' Bauer
> > 
> > PGP-Key:
> >
> http://keyserver.noreply.org/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xEEF946C8
> > 
> > -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
> > Version: 3.12
> > GIT d s-:+ a-- C++ UL$ P L++$>+++$ E- W+++$ N o? K- w++>! O M-
> > V? PS
> > PE+ Y- PGP++ t 5+ X++ R tv+ b+ DI? D+ G>++ e h! r->++ y?
> > --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- 
> > 
> > 
> > BodyID:12667657.2.n.logpart (stored separately)
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>   Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
> 
>  charles @ reptile.ca
>   supercanadian @ gmail.com
> ___
>  Wikibooks, Free Open-Content Books  http://wikibooks.org/
>

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Steinar H. Gunderson]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 11:40:06AM -0700, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
> Now, from what I understand, once you release something under the GPL, you 
> cannot un-release it. And if that is the case, then this software is "OK".

You're assuming the people who released it had the right to do that in the
first place. I can _not_ take the leaked Windows 2000 source code, release it
under the GPL and then claim it is okay to distribute.

/* Steinar */
-- 
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/


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

Re: RFC on mysql 4.1 in sarge

[Adrian Bunk]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 11:23:35AM -0400, sean finney wrote:
>...
> the following upgrade paths work:
> 
> mysql-server/woody -> mysql-server/sarge
> mysql-server/woody -> mysql-server/sarge -> mysql-server-4.1/sarge
> 
> but this does not:
> 
> mysql-server/woody -> mysql-server-4.1/sarge
> 
> so at this point, we're not sure what to do to cover this last problem,
> as we have no guarantee the preinst of mysql-server-4.1 will even run
> before mysql-server/woody is removed.  the only fix we can think of is
> to remove the two directories from the files.list of the woody package.
> 
> so we've come up with three options, none of which are great:
> 
> 1 the most recenty woody security update caused problems for some
>   people, and there's a package already waiting to go in to fix this
>   problem.  we could put a fix into the woody mysql-server package into
>   this package before the security team handles it.
> 2 if there's going to be a final woody point release, we could put a 
>   fixed version in there


You must not assume that users have the latest security fixes or the 
latest point releases installed.


> 3 give up on trying to fix it, assume that symlinks might get lost, and
>   put something in a README file telling users what they have to do
>   in order to fix up their database after restoring the symlinks.
> 
> i don't see 1 happening, i don't know if the prerequisite (woody release
> update) for 2 is going to happen, and 3 doesn't make me all too happy
> as a "solution".
> 
> 
> so, questions, comments, suggestions all welcome,


4 drop mysql-dfsg-4.1 from unstable/sarge


Other issues like #308762 are also still possible on direct
mysql-server/woody -> mysql-server-4.1/sarge upgrade paths - and
there will be users doing such upgrade paths.

The whole mysql-dfsg/mysql-dfsg-4.1 setup is really ugly in some corner 
cases.

Is shipping MySQL 4.1 with sarge really worth all the troubles, 
especially considering that MySQL 4.0 is quite usable? Also consider 
that some weeks from now MySQL 4.1 will also soon be no longer current 
when MySQL 5.0 will be released.


>   sean

cu
Adrian

-- 

   "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
   "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
   Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


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

Re: Debian as living system

[Michael K. Edwards]

On 5/18/05, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 01:41:34PM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> > On 5/18/05, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Yeah, well. But he's still right. This once.
> >
> > Is there some reason why "eat a dictionary" had to be copied to all of
> > debian-devel in order to inform "bluefuture" of his linguistic
> > difficulties?
> 
> I never said so. On the contrary. Please read my post again.

Check.  I was getting my pots and kettles backwards.  Thanks for the correction.

Cheers,
- Michael

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Andrew A. Gill]

On Wed, 18 May 2005, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
>
> >From what I understand of the history of WASTE. At one time, NullSoft did
> infact release WASTE under the GPL. However, AOL (NullSoft's parent company)
> didn't like this, and that message on NullSoft's website is because of that.
> (And thus, it was origianlly authorized by NullSoft, but not authorized by
> AOL.)
>
> Now, from what I understand, once you release something under the GPL, you
> cannot un-release it. And if that is the case, then this software is "OK".

It's a little more complex than that, but essentially, if Debian
doesn't want to include it, it doesn't have to.  Let them do the
same as MPlayer--I'm never going to use Debian, so why should I
care?

-- 
|Andrew A. Gill   |I posted to Silent-Tristero and|
|<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |all I got was this stupid sig! |
|alt.tv.simpsons CBG-FAQ author   |   |
|  (Report all obscene mail to Le Maitre Pots)|
|Yet:  Temporary sig: --

Why are there so many CCs?


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

Re: Debian as living system

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 01:41:34PM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> On 5/18/05, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yeah, well. But he's still right. This once.
> 
> Is there some reason why "eat a dictionary" had to be copied to all of
> debian-devel in order to inform "bluefuture" of his linguistic
> difficulties?

I never said so. On the contrary. Please read my post again.

-- 
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond


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

Re: Debian as living system

[Michael K. Edwards]

On 5/18/05, Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sure. And this list subscribers deserve some apologies for myself
> being annoyed enough to be impolite to them and write ununderstandable
> prose hereeven if obviously on purpose.

Well, I enjoyed it immensely, despite my execrable French.  And Google
Translation / Babelfish are pretty easy to use, though their
literalist translations often lack that je ne sais quoi.

> So, let's go back to my awful English.

If you would like to do a little penance, you might drop by
debian-legal and check how badly I have mangled the sense of a couple
of French court decisions relating to droits morals de l'auteur.

Cheers,
- Michael

Re: Debian as living system

[Michael K. Edwards]

On 5/18/05, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah, well. But he's still right. This once.

Is there some reason why "eat a dictionary" had to be copied to all of
debian-devel in order to inform "bluefuture" of his linguistic
difficulties?  (I ask this knowing full well that my own pot has black
spots.)

Cheers,
- Michael

Re: Debian as living system

[Christian Perrier]

> > Comme vous le voyez, la cuistrerie, cela se cultive...
> 
> Quelle verve :) A en faire pâlir Cyrano de Bergerac ma foi !
> La liste est cependant anglophone je pense, et nos pauvres collègues non 


Sure. And this list subscribers deserve some apologies for myself
being annoyed enough to be impolite to them and write ununderstandable
prose hereeven if obviously on purpose.

So, let's go back to my awful English.



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

Re: [WASTE-dev-public] Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Charles Iliya Krempeaux]

Hello,

(Sorry for just intejecting into the discussion like this, but)
>From what I understand of the history of WASTE.  At one time,
NullSoft did infact release WASTE under the GPL.  However, AOL
(NullSoft's parent company) didn't like this, and that message on
NullSoft's website is because of that.  (And thus, it was
origianlly authorized by NullSoft, but not authorized by AOL.)

Now, from what I understand, once you release something under the GPL,
you cannot un-release it.  And if that is the case, then this
software is "OK".


See ya


See ya
On 5/18/05, Mirco Bauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 14:20 +0200, Romain Beauxis wrote:>   Hi all!>> I'm on the way of making a debian package for Waste, and I would have the> folowing two questions about your software:
>> Does the licence really reflect GPL?> This arise because of this:> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/waste/waste/license.cpp?rev=1.1&view=auto
> "WASTE - license.cpp> Copyright (C) 2003 Nullsoft, Inc.> Copyright (C) 2004 WASTE Development Team"> -> What does Nullsoft have to do with Waste?>> And also this:
> "//ADDED Md5Chap - THIS PART IS GPL LICENSE!!! TOUCH AND DIE!"> Followed by a full binary array.> ...>I googled for WASTE I found this:
http://www.nullsoft.com/free/waste/According to Nullsoft this is UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE and is not allowedto be distributed!Please delete all source and package copies you may have and do not letit enter debian!
--Regards,Mirco 'meebey' BauerPGP-Key:http://keyserver.noreply.org/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xEEF946C8
-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-Version: 3.12GIT d s-:+ a-- C++ UL$ P L++$>+++$ E- W+++$ N o? K- w++>! O M-V? PSPE+ Y- PGP++ t 5+ X++ R tv+ b+ DI? D+ G>++ e h! r->++ y?--END GEEK CODE BLOCK--
BodyID:12667657.2.n.logpart (stored separately)-- 
 Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca
 supercanadian @ gmail.com___
 Wikibooks,
Free Open-Content
Books  http://wikibooks.org/

Re: Debian as living system

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 06:19:58PM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 04:36:18PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> > > > You would rather have silence than know why you are being ignored? 
> > > > Then silence you shall have.
> > > Well, its the tone that makes the music we use to say here in Germany.
> > > Certainly there would have been ways to tell Bluefuture that his mail
> > > was hard to read/understand without becoming offensive.
> > 
> > That would have been too easy 
> > asuffield seems to be a bored person that like starting flame wars by
> > getting offensive and doing ad hominem attacks with a very arrogant POV. So,
> 
> Pot. Kettle. Black.

Yeah, well. But he's still right. This once.

-- 
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Adam McKenna]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:38:33AM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> This just seems like change for the sake of change, with trivial benefits,
> if any.

I agree, and I admit to not having read this whole thread, but has anyone 
made a serious argument as to why we need yet another directory for non-user
executables?  It seems to me that /usr/sbin would serve just fine for this.

--Adam


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

Re: [debian-devel] Is SZALAY Attila MIA?

[Micah Anderson]

It is common for developers to be buried in other work, I know, I
often get this way, it is understandable.

However, it has now been several months and as section 3.4 of the
Developers Reference says: its important "... to let the others know
that you're unavailable." So, I think it is appropriate to follow the
procedure by sending a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"[VAC] " prepended to the subject of your message and state the period
of time when you will be [unavailable].

If overworked and people are offering to help, it might be worthwhile
to take the offer!

Micah

On Wed, 18 May 2005, Magosányi Árpád wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> He is just overworked a bit, just like me.
> Trying to do something soon.
> 
> Sorry.
> 
> -- 
> GNU GPL: csak tiszta forrásból


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian as living system

[=?iso-8859-15?q?Rapha=EBl_Pinson?=]

Le Mercredi 18 Mai 2005 18:02, Christian Perrier a écrit :
> Quoting Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > I really don't care. If somebody can't be bothered to write a mail in
> > comprehensible English, they shouldn't expect anybody else to bother
> > to read it. Most won't even bother to say why they didn't bother to
> > read it. He's lucky that I did, and should be grateful for that. I
> > *could* have simply ignored him.
>
> Cher ami, votre propension visiblement irrépressible à répandre votre
> bile dans les listes de diffusion est particulèrement agaçante.
>
> De nombreux contributeurs ne prendront certainement pas la peine de
> vous répondre : c'est pourquoi je me permets de le faire. Vous avez en
> fait une chance incroyable que je daigne même consacrer quelques
> lignes à répondre à un courrier particulièrement insultant adressé à
> un de nos collègues.
>
> Il me semblerait sain que vous fissiez quelques efforts pour amener
> dans votre vie personnelle quelque activité qui vous distraie plus
> souvent de vos occupations favorites consistant à répandre des
> attaques personnelles au fil de vos lectures électroniques.
>
> Il est fort probable que votre prose vous eusse valu quelque soufflet
> dans la vie réelle si vous aviez osé proférer ne serait-ce que le
> dixième des insanités que je reprends ci-dessus. Soufflet dont vous
> avez manifestement été privé dans les débuts de votre probablement
> encore jeune vie. Souffrez donc que je vous en adresse quelques-uns en
> avance pour les discussions à venir.
>
> Comme vous le voyez, la cuistrerie, cela se cultive...

Quelle verve :) A en faire pâlir Cyrano de Bergerac ma foi !
La liste est cependant anglophone je pense, et nos pauvres collègues non 
francophones ne peuvent malheureusement pas profiter pleinement de la qualité 
votre pamphlet ;)

Raphaël
-- 

Raphaël Pinson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://raphink.multiply.com
http://www.ichthux.org - Christian Linux Distribution


pgp9y6zbaLSQs.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian as living system

[Adam Heath]

On Wed, 18 May 2005, Roger Leigh wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:46:33PM +0200, Rapha?l Pinson wrote:
> >> I agree that the previous mail was not very easy to read, nor written in a
> >> great english. But I don't think that being fluent in english should be a
> >> requirement to be treated nicely on a development list...
> >
> > I *could* have simply ignored him.
>
> That would have been much better; please do so in the future.  If you
> don't have anything worthwhile to contribute, silence is preferable.

This applies to the original poster as well.  And how else are they going to
know that what they want to discuss is worthless, after they've already done
it, unless we tell them?


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

Re: Debian as living system

[Roger Leigh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:46:33PM +0200, Rapha?l Pinson wrote:
>> I agree that the previous mail was not very easy to read, nor written in a 
>> great english. But I don't think that being fluent in english should be a 
>> requirement to be treated nicely on a development list...
>
> I *could* have simply ignored him.

That would have been much better; please do so in the future.  If you
don't have anything worthwhile to contribute, silence is preferable.


- -- 
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 v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 

iD8DBQFCi5TXVcFcaSW/uEgRArdxAJ9O8LGLBAaUnHKDxhwIhSE5Z42quwCgxgCG
JYs1EZMm5UY/AGLe26SFqm8=
=1195
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


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

Re: [debian-devel] Is SZALAY Attila MIA?

[=?iso-8859-2?B?TWFnb3PhbnlpIMFycOFk?=]

Hi!

He is just overworked a bit, just like me.
Trying to do something soon.

Sorry.

-- 
GNU GPL: csak tiszta forrásból

Re: Debian as living system

[Michael K. Edwards]

On 5/18/05, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I really don't care. If somebody can't be bothered to write a mail in
> comprehensible English, they shouldn't expect anybody else to bother
> to read it. Most won't even bother to say why they didn't bother to
> read it. He's lucky that I did, and should be grateful for that. I
> *could* have simply ignored him.

Yes, and to be ignored by Andrew Suffield is a fate worse than death!

Cheers,
- Michael

(I have mostly ignored his "I killfiled him" nitwittery but this was
too good to pass up.)

Do not package WASTE! UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE [Was: Re: Questions about waste licence and code.]

[Mirco Bauer]

On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 14:20 +0200, Romain Beauxis wrote:
>   Hi all!
> 
> I'm on the way of making a debian package for Waste, and I would have the 
> folowing two questions about your software:
> 
> Does the licence really reflect GPL?
> This arise because of this:
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/waste/waste/license.cpp?rev=1.1&view=auto
> "WASTE - license.cpp
> Copyright (C) 2003 Nullsoft, Inc.
> Copyright (C) 2004 WASTE Development Team"
> -> What does Nullsoft have to do with Waste?
> 
> And also this:
> "//ADDED Md5Chap - THIS PART IS GPL LICENSE!!! TOUCH AND DIE!"
> Followed by a full binary array.
> ...
> 

I googled for WASTE I found this:
http://www.nullsoft.com/free/waste/
According to Nullsoft this is UNAUTHORIZED SOFTWARE and is not allowed
to be distributed!
Please delete all source and package copies you may have and do not let
it enter debian!

-- 
Regards,

Mirco 'meebey' Bauer

PGP-Key:
http://keyserver.noreply.org/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xEEF946C8

-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.12
GIT d s-:+ a-- C++ UL$ P L++$>+++$ E- W+++$ N o? K- w++>! O M-
V? PS
PE+ Y- PGP++ t 5+ X++ R tv+ b+ DI? D+ G>++ e h! r->++ y?
--END GEEK CODE BLOCK--


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

Re: Is SZALAY Attila MIA?

[Laszlo Boszormenyi]

Hi,

On Wed, 2005-05-18 at 19:38 +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> It's been 'only' a few months since nothing has been heard -- I've added
> your hint now to the MIA database for later followup, and will orphan
> when no reaction is forthcoming after a number of pings, so that you can
> take over.
 I used to know him, will try to get in touch with him as well. But Mag
should know more, let's see what happened with sasa.

Regards,
Laszlo/GCS


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

Re: Is SZALAY Attila MIA?

[Micah Anderson]

On Wed, 18 May 2005, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:

> On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 12:19:50PM -0500, Micah Anderson wrote:
> > At what point would it be appropriate to begin to actively maintain
> > syslog-ng?
> 
> It's been 'only' a few months since nothing has been heard -- I've added
> your hint now to the MIA database for later followup, and will orphan
> when no reaction is forthcoming after a number of pings, so that you can
> take over.

Thanks, as I have mentioned a couple times to both the maintainer and
the co-maintainer, I would be happy to give syslog-ng the attention it
deserves, so when orphan time comes, let me know so I can do some work
on it. So that I might have an idea for planning my work-load, what
time frame are you talking about?

> 
> For sarge, this is all just not relevant anyway, so there is no great
> hurry, and for urgent stuff one can NMU. I'd typically suggest to just
> be a bit patient after making sure QA/MIA knows about it (I now know),
> to prevent cases of premature hijacking.

No, it is not important now for sarge, although I would have preferred
to get the more stable version into sarge before the freeze. I have
performed a NMU on syslog-ng to fix a security bug already. I sent
this message because I did not want to prematurely hijack. It is my
understanding that the process is to attempt to contact the maintainer
a couple times, then if no response, contact debian-devel to see if
anyone else knows. This is why I am here.

> Thanks for noticing and taking care for now of syslog-ng!

No problem, I noticed because I make heavy use of syslog-ng and there
are many bugs that I think can be easily fixed.

Micah


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian as living system

[Andrew Suffield]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> Certainly there would have been ways to tell Bluefuture that his mail
> was hard to read/understand without becoming offensive.

No, really, there isn't. It is not possible to send mail to a Debian
mailing list any more without offending somebody. Even if your mail
contains nothing but trivially verifiable facts, somebody will still
be offended (often inexplicably, and sometimes with no evidence of
their having actually read the mail). So worrying about that is a
complete waste of time.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'  |
   `- -><-  |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Bug#309669: kscope: wishlist bug

[Martin Michlmayr]

reassign 309669 wnpp
retitle 309669 RFP: kscope -- Source Editing Environment for KDE
thanks

* Ritesh Raj Sarraf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-18 22:40]:
> Package: kscope
> Severity: wishlist
> 
> New wishlist bug.
> Please include kscope as a package.
> http://kscope.sourceforge.net

Anyone interested?
-- 
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/


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

Re: new cogito package, OpenSSL license issue resolved

[Sebastian Kuzminsky]

Andres Salomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For people trying this out, Zach Brown wrote some excellent
> documentation [1].  It would be nice to see this end up in the debian
> packages.


I'm hoping the upstream maintainer (Pasky) will pick up that patch.
If he doesnt in the next several days, I'll consider adding Zack Brown's
updated README alongside the official upstream README.




> If you need a sponsor for this, let me know; I'd like to see it in
> debian sooner rather than later.


I appreciate the offer, but it's already in Sid!  Anibal Monsalve Salazar
is sponsoring it.


Sid currently has version 0.10+20050513-2, but there's a newer version
in the queue (0.10+20050515-2).




-- 
Sebastian Kuzminsky

"Marie will know I'm headed south, so's to meet me by and by"
Townes Van Zandt


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Andrew Suffield]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 10:02:30AM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> I should mention that I'm still waiting for your benchmark
> results on how a drastic reduction in /usr/lib size speeds up the
> runtime linker.  On *any* filesystem, O(n)-lookups or not.
> 
> (In case you missed it, I explained how to do this benchmark back in
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/05/msg00648.html .)

I'll throw in that I tried briefly to concoct a meaningful benchmark
and was unable to get the run-time or build-time linkers to spend
appreciable amounts of time opening files. I got bored when /usr/lib
got up to 50k files and gave up, concluding that people were being
pointlessly whiny about nothing.

Even for tiny, trivial binaries, the linkers spend all their time
linking and no easily measurable time doing anything else.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'  |
   `- -><-  |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: new cogito package, OpenSSL license issue resolved

[Andres Salomon]

On Fri, 13 May 2005 23:44:05 -0600, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:

> I've updated the Cogito package to compile against the upstream-included
> GPL SHA1 implementation lifted from Mozilla, instead of the (possibly)
> GPL-incompatible OpenSSL code.  Thanks to Florian Weimer and Anibal
> Monsalve Salazar for bringing this issue to my attention.  I have a
> terrible head for this kind of legal stuff, "can't we all just get
> the code?"
> 
> 
> This is the last issue I know of keeping this package out of the Debian
> archives.  Yay!  There's still the manpage issue, but I expect it will
> be resolved upstream in the next few days.
> 

For people trying this out, Zach Brown wrote some excellent
documentation [1].  It would be nice to see this end up in the debian
packages.

If you need a sponsor for this, let me know; I'd like to see it in
debian sooner rather than later.

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/3338


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

Re: Is SZALAY Attila MIA?

[Jeroen van Wolffelaar]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 12:19:50PM -0500, Micah Anderson wrote:
> At what point would it be appropriate to begin to actively maintain
> syslog-ng?

It's been 'only' a few months since nothing has been heard -- I've added
your hint now to the MIA database for later followup, and will orphan
when no reaction is forthcoming after a number of pings, so that you can
take over.

For sarge, this is all just not relevant anyway, so there is no great
hurry, and for urgent stuff one can NMU. I'd typically suggest to just
be a bit patient after making sure QA/MIA knows about it (I now know),
to prevent cases of premature hijacking.

Thanks for noticing and taking care for now of syslog-ng!
--Jeroen

-- 
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl


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

Entries in Packages files that lack a Source field

[Adeodato Simó]

Hello all,

  As you probably know, entries in the Packages file only have a Source
  field if the name of the source package is different from the name of
  the binary package being described. This is an inconsistency that makes
  it a bit harder to massage this data, e.g. with grep-dctrl.

  Before submitting a wishlist bug against apt-utils (for apt-ftparchive),
  I'd like to know if there's a reason for which this behavior shouldn't
  be changed. If this has been previously discussed, pointer to threads
  would be nice, since I couldn't find any.

  Thanks.

  P.S.: Hum, I wish I had sent this mail long before. This won't make
  sarge, and as ftp-master runs woody (doesn't it?), Packages during
  etch development will suffer the above in any case.

-- 
Adeodato Simó
EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
 
You've come to the right place.  At debian-devel we are always willing
to argue over the meanings of words.
-- seen on [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[paddy]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 07:21:26AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > For me, this is a closed issue until you change the FHS.  (Something that
> > I don't think is very likely to happen, but best of luck to you.)
> 
> Since the FHS tries to be responsive to what different distributions
> want, this doesn't help in the question: Should Debian lobby to get
> the FHS changed.

That is an interesting question.

Is there already Debian policy or custom that has bearing on this question ?

or is this best left to the individual, or until a need presents ?

Debian is growing into more than just a Linux system, 
perhaps the FHS could grow with it ?

It seems to me that a good part of making any such change viable,
is in the implementation and at the tool level.

As things currently stand would it be a bug to ship a package that simply
provides the directory /usr/libexec ?  or even gives you then option of 
a symlink at install time ?  how does the Debian GNU/Hurd get round this ?

as it goes:
(the option for) distinct / and /usr makes sense to me
don't like /etc clutter.  perhaps /etc/usr or /usr/etc could be good ?
if /usr/lib isn't an index for the runtime linker, what is it ?

So while I agree that /usr/lib seems to be overloaded unnecessarily,
at the end of the day, even if we had /usr/libexec/ an occassional file
misfiled in /usr/lib/ would only be a very minor bug? or is there other
value to obtained further down the road in this program of reform ?

Regards,
Paddy
-- 
Perl 6 will give you the big knob. -- Larry Wall


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

Is SZALAY Attila MIA?

[Micah Anderson]

Is SZALAY Attila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIA?

His last upload was over three months ago (Feb 10th, 2005) and does
not respond to his emails. I've tried contacting him via his debian
email address with no success (first message sent April 13th, CC'd
co-maintainer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> who responded; sent a reminder message
May 11th, and now it has been over a week since I sent that, with no
response).

Looking at the BTS, it doesn't seem as if he is responding to bug
reports, there are many old bugs that have patches which fix the bugs
and there were a number of wishlist bugs for upgrading to various
versions as new versions came and went. Although there is nothing
wrong with only maintaining 3 packages, none of them are maintained by
himself (all are co-maintained) and zorp has a FTBFS that has a patch
to fix and I'm wondering if it ever will be

I've been cleaning up the BTS for syslog-ng there were multiple bugs
for an upgrade to a new version, I've merged all those together. One I
closed because the bug was requesting the version that was uploaded in
January. I did an NMU to fix a security bug which resolved 3 different
long-standing bugs reporting the same issue, the oldest being 168 days
old. 

I would like to take the syslog-ng package and give it the attention
that it deserves, but I did not wish to be rude. I have tried to
contact the maintainer to offer my help for over a month with a
reminder ping email, so I am now sending this message here as the MIA
procedure suggests. At what point would it be appropriate to begin
to actively maintain syslog-ng?

Thanks,
Micah



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: remove stale conffiles?

[Adeodato =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sim=F3?=]

* Joerg Sommer [Thu, 05 May 2005 20:39:57 +]:
> Hi,

> in an old version of jed-common two conffiles 00site.sl and 99debian.sl
> were included. But caused by some reason they aren't removed on upgrade.

> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=266981

> Becomes a conffile held if it was modified when it is removed in a new
> package version?

  If by "held" you mean, "not removed", yes, that's what happens, _even
  if_ the conffile was not modified.

> What does dpkg so with such conffiles they are removed
> from one to the next package version?

  Ignore them, and don't remove them on purge either (since the file is
  no longer a conffile of the package at the version the purge occurs).

  This is a bug in dpkg, see #108587 and its brothers.

> What to do with this bug report? Is this a problem of jed-common?

  Well, if you care you could do something similar to the proposed
  solution for #308252.

  Cheers,

-- 
Adeodato Simó
EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
Listening to: Johnny Cash - When the Roll Is Called Up Yon
 
A conclusion is simply the place where someone got tired of thinking.


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

Re: Debian as living system

[Christian Perrier]

Quoting Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

> I really don't care. If somebody can't be bothered to write a mail in
> comprehensible English, they shouldn't expect anybody else to bother
> to read it. Most won't even bother to say why they didn't bother to
> read it. He's lucky that I did, and should be grateful for that. I
> *could* have simply ignored him.


Cher ami, votre propension visiblement irrépressible à répandre votre
bile dans les listes de diffusion est particulèrement agaçante.

De nombreux contributeurs ne prendront certainement pas la peine de
vous répondre : c'est pourquoi je me permets de le faire. Vous avez en
fait une chance incroyable que je daigne même consacrer quelques
lignes à répondre à un courrier particulièrement insultant adressé à
un de nos collègues.

Il me semblerait sain que vous fissiez quelques efforts pour amener
dans votre vie personnelle quelque activité qui vous distraie plus
souvent de vos occupations favorites consistant à répandre des
attaques personnelles au fil de vos lectures électroniques.

Il est fort probable que votre prose vous eusse valu quelque soufflet
dans la vie réelle si vous aviez osé proférer ne serait-ce que le
dixième des insanités que je reprends ci-dessus. Soufflet dont vous
avez manifestement été privé dans les débuts de votre probablement
encore jeune vie. Souffrez donc que je vous en adresse quelques-uns en
avance pour les discussions à venir.

Comme vous le voyez, la cuistrerie, cela se cultive...



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

Re: RFC on mysql 4.1 in sarge

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

Quoting sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

so at this point, we're not sure what to do to cover this last problem,
as we have no guarantee the preinst of mysql-server-4.1 will even run
before mysql-server/woody is removed.  the only fix we can think of is
to remove the two directories from the files.list of the woody package.
so we've come up with three options, none of which are great:

I may be misunderstanding what you are saying.  But, I think that if 
you create
a package called mysql-server-4.1-upgrage (or something else suitable) 
and then
you make you make mysql-server-4.1 predepend on it, then
mysql-server-4.1-upgrade can check for the existence of the symlinks.  If the
symlinks exist, it can move them aside, create the requisite directories, and
then symlink in the new directories the contents of the directories pointed to
by the old symlinks.  This would at least ensure that people are not left with
only empty directories and a non-function DB.

-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian as living system

[David Weinehall]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 04:36:18PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> > > You would rather have silence than know why you are being ignored? 
> > > Then silence you shall have.
> > Well, its the tone that makes the music we use to say here in Germany.
> > Certainly there would have been ways to tell Bluefuture that his mail
> > was hard to read/understand without becoming offensive.
> 
> That would have been too easy 
> asuffield seems to be a bored person that like starting flame wars by
> getting offensive and doing ad hominem attacks with a very arrogant POV. So,

Pot. Kettle. Black.

[snip]


Regards: David weinehall
-- 
 /) David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /) Rime on my window   (\
//  ~   //  Diamond-white roses of fire //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/(/   Beautiful hoar-frost   (/


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

Most competent chemestry lab accept our pharmacy for US market.

[Drew]

Our generic medications are manufactured on government certified facilities and 
meet or exceed the highest US and international Food and Drug Administration 
standards.
Its safe for humans!!!
http://www.nebelanga.com/20023/Essence
Man cannot live by incompetence alone.



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

Change of Email Address

[Tamar Paltrow]

Change of Email Address

Do the significant increase in the amount of spam email received for this 
address, it will no longer be active.  The new email address is [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]

Sincerely,

Tamar Zwerdling


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

RFC on mysql 4.1 in sarge

[sean finney]

(please excuse the cross-posting, i felt it was necessary to get all
 affected parties' input)

hi,

for some time now, christian and i have been trying to build in a
workaround for a rather tricky bug in the mysql-server and
mysql-server-4.1 packages, and we'd like to field some comments
on what other people (namely the security and release team, though
others are welcome to chime in) think.

so, the executive summary:

- people often symlink the mysql datadir (/var/lib/mysql) and logdir
  (/var/log/mysql) to somewhere else, such as /usr/local
- because these two directories are in the files.list of woody's
  mysql server, upgrading to packages in sarge leads to the symlinks
  being removed and replaced with empty directories.  
- this leads to a lot of confusion and service outages for people
  upgrading.  worse, there are scripts that need to be run on the
  database during the upgrade process that could leave things in an
  even worse state by having a mysql 4.1 server trying to use a 3.23
  database.

so after a lot of teeth-gnashing and brainstorming we've come up
with a way to prevent this from happening for upgrades of the
"mysql-server" package (in the latest upload of mysql-server).
however, the same method isn't 100% guaranteed to work for a direct
mysql-server/woody -> mysql-server-4.1/sarge upgrade, depending largely
on in what order the packages are processed by the package management
software.

the following upgrade paths work:

mysql-server/woody -> mysql-server/sarge
mysql-server/woody -> mysql-server/sarge -> mysql-server-4.1/sarge

but this does not:

mysql-server/woody -> mysql-server-4.1/sarge

so at this point, we're not sure what to do to cover this last problem,
as we have no guarantee the preinst of mysql-server-4.1 will even run
before mysql-server/woody is removed.  the only fix we can think of is
to remove the two directories from the files.list of the woody package.

so we've come up with three options, none of which are great:

1 the most recenty woody security update caused problems for some
  people, and there's a package already waiting to go in to fix this
  problem.  we could put a fix into the woody mysql-server package into
  this package before the security team handles it.
2 if there's going to be a final woody point release, we could put a 
  fixed version in there
3 give up on trying to fix it, assume that symlinks might get lost, and
  put something in a README file telling users what they have to do
  in order to fix up their database after restoring the symlinks.

i don't see 1 happening, i don't know if the prerequisite (woody release
update) for 2 is going to happen, and 3 doesn't make me all too happy
as a "solution".


so, questions, comments, suggestions all welcome,

sean

-- 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Peter Samuelson]

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]
> Um:  
> 
> /bin/mount foo:whatever /bin

That's a huge administrative hassle.  Not only do you have to figure
out what programs and libraries /bin/mount depends on so you can make
sure they're on your real root partition, but the packaging system
doesn't - and shouldn't - do anything to help you keep the two copies
of /bin in sync.

You would put up with all *that* for a 6-megabyte savings on your root
filesystem?

This is another absurdity brought to us all by the Committee for
Considering Theoretical Angles Without Bothering to Look at Real
Numbers.  I should mention that I'm still waiting for your benchmark
results on how a drastic reduction in /usr/lib size speeds up the
runtime linker.  On *any* filesystem, O(n)-lookups or not.

(In case you missed it, I explained how to do this benchmark back in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/05/msg00648.html .)

Peter


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian as living system

[Ingo Juergensmann]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> > You would rather have silence than know why you are being ignored? 
> > Then silence you shall have.
> Well, its the tone that makes the music we use to say here in Germany.
> Certainly there would have been ways to tell Bluefuture that his mail
> was hard to read/understand without becoming offensive.

That would have been too easy 
asuffield seems to be a bored person that like starting flame wars by
getting offensive and doing ad hominem attacks with a very arrogant POV. So,
he usually disqualifies himself that way. Unfortunately he's (ab-)using his
@debian.org address for that, which result in a bad reputation of the whole
project. I'd wish the project (or the new DPL) would find a way, that he
won't do more harm to the project in the future.

-- 
Ciao...  //   Fon: 0381-2744150 
  Ingo \X/SIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Re: Debian as living system

[Benjamin Mesing]

> You would rather have silence than know why you are being ignored? 
> Then silence you shall have.
Well, its the tone that makes the music we use to say here in Germany.
Certainly there would have been ways to tell Bluefuture that his mail
was hard to read/understand without becoming offensive.

Greetings Ben


-- 
Please do not sent any email to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] - all email not
originating from the mailing list will be deleted automatically. Use the
reply to address instead.


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> For me, this is a closed issue until you change the FHS.  (Something that
> I don't think is very likely to happen, but best of luck to you.)

Since the FHS tries to be responsive to what different distributions
want, this doesn't help in the question: Should Debian lobby to get
the FHS changed.


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>> "Thomas" == Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Thomas> We've been told that /usr is necessary to allow network
> Thomas> sharing.  Of course, you can network share any directory,
> Thomas> not just /usr.  If you want executables to be shared, then
> Thomas> share /bin.  It's not a problem.  I've done it.
>
> If you want to share /bin, how do you run /bin/mount in order to mount
> /bin?

Um:  

/bin/mount foo:whatever /bin

Just because you mount something on top of /bin does not require it to
have been empty before.

Same for /lib.

Thomas


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> Wait, are you serious?  The bloat of /usr/lib having thousands of
>> files doesn't bother you, but the two dozen in /usr is bothersome?
>
> We dont talk about thousands, on a edium sized system it is a few hundred
> directories and up to thousand files/symlinks.

I just went to the /usr in front of me and did:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ls -l /usr/lib | wc
   2146   18942  189059
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ls -l /usr | wc
 25 2061629



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

Re: Debian as living system

[Andrew Suffield]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:57:12PM +0200, Rapha?l Pinson wrote:
> Le Mercredi 18 Mai 2005 15:48, Andrew Suffield a écrit :
> > On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:46:33PM +0200, Rapha?l Pinson wrote:
> > > I agree that the previous mail was not very easy to read, nor written in
> > > a great english. But I don't think that being fluent in english should be
> > > a requirement to be treated nicely on a development list... You are lucky
> > > enough to have this language as your mother tongue, consider this is not
> > > the case of most people, and that expressing oneself on a technical
> > > subject in a second language is not an easy thing. I hope you don't have
> > > to be treated this way if one day english comes to not be the main
> > > language used for development anymore.
> >
> > I really don't care. If somebody can't be bothered to write a mail in
> > comprehensible English, they shouldn't expect anybody else to bother
> > to read it. Most won't even bother to say why they didn't bother to
> > read it. He's lucky that I did, and should be grateful for that. I
> > *could* have simply ignored him.
> 
> Yes you could have simply ignored him. That wouldn't changed anything for 
> you, 
> and would have prevented you from sounding agressive in addition to being 
> intolerant.

I really don't care what you think I sound like.

> I'm glad most people didn't react this way when I was still learning english, 
> otherwise I would've been discouraged and would have never been able to speak 
> it properly.
> 
> Thank you for "ignoring him" next time ;)

You would rather have silence than know why you are being ignored? 
Then silence you shall have.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'  |
   `- -><-  |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Adrien Bissette

[Averyl Campbell]

Borojevic Corrine

Re: Debian as living system

[=?utf-8?q?Rapha=C3=ABl_Pinson?=]

Le Mercredi 18 Mai 2005 15:48, Andrew Suffield a ÃcritÂ:
> On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:46:33PM +0200, Rapha?l Pinson wrote:
> > I agree that the previous mail was not very easy to read, nor written in
> > a great english. But I don't think that being fluent in english should be
> > a requirement to be treated nicely on a development list... You are lucky
> > enough to have this language as your mother tongue, consider this is not
> > the case of most people, and that expressing oneself on a technical
> > subject in a second language is not an easy thing. I hope you don't have
> > to be treated this way if one day english comes to not be the main
> > language used for development anymore.
>
> I really don't care. If somebody can't be bothered to write a mail in
> comprehensible English, they shouldn't expect anybody else to bother
> to read it. Most won't even bother to say why they didn't bother to
> read it. He's lucky that I did, and should be grateful for that. I
> *could* have simply ignored him.

Yes you could have simply ignored him. That wouldn't changed anything for you, 
and would have prevented you from sounding agressive in addition to being 
intolerant.

I'm glad most people didn't react this way when I was still learning english, 
otherwise I would've been discouraged and would have never been able to speak 
it properly.

Thank you for "ignoring him" next time ;)

RaphaÃl


RaphaÃl Pinson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://raphink.multiply.com
http://www.ichthux.org - Christian Linux Distribution


pgpkuMEJnyKU7.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian as living system

[Andrew Suffield]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:46:33PM +0200, Rapha?l Pinson wrote:
> I agree that the previous mail was not very easy to read, nor written in a 
> great english. But I don't think that being fluent in english should be a 
> requirement to be treated nicely on a development list... You are lucky 
> enough to have this language as your mother tongue, consider this is not the 
> case of most people, and that expressing oneself on a technical subject in a 
> second language is not an easy thing. I hope you don't have to be treated 
> this way if one day english comes to not be the main language used for 
> development anymore.

I really don't care. If somebody can't be bothered to write a mail in
comprehensible English, they shouldn't expect anybody else to bother
to read it. Most won't even bother to say why they didn't bother to
read it. He's lucky that I did, and should be grateful for that. I
*could* have simply ignored him.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'  |
   `- -><-  |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian as living system

[=?utf-8?q?Rapha=C3=ABl_Pinson?=]

Andrew,

I agree that the previous mail was not very easy to read, nor written in a 
great english. But I don't think that being fluent in english should be a 
requirement to be treated nicely on a development list... You are lucky 
enough to have this language as your mother tongue, consider this is not the 
case of most people, and that expressing oneself on a technical subject in a 
second language is not an easy thing. I hope you don't have to be treated 
this way if one day english comes to not be the main language used for 
development anymore.

RaphaÃl


Le Mercredi 18 Mai 2005 15:39, Andrew Suffield a ÃcritÂ:
> Your mail was borderline incomprehensible and certainly not worth the
> effort it would have required for me to read it. Go and eat a
> dictionary.

-- 

RaphaÃl Pinson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://raphink.multiply.com
http://www.ichthux.org - Christian Linux Distribution


pgp6RFoFM0bVv.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian as living system

[Andrew Suffield]

Your mail was borderline incomprehensible and certainly not worth the
effort it would have required for me to read it. Go and eat a
dictionary.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'  |
   `- -><-  |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Get latest version, cds and download under $99

[Minna]

Save money on buying software!!!
http://vwe.ncr284ngkx5ck6n.orangeiagce.com

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

Re: distributed batch processing

[Tim Cutts]

On 18 May 2005, at 8:18 am, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mardi 17 mai 2005 à 23:47 -0700, Ron Chen a écrit :
All of those are opensource (even the EE mode) and can
be downloaded from the SGE homepage:
http://gridengine.sunsource.net
At first glance, this doesn't look DFSG-free.
Indeed not, but it's less non-free than LSF.  :-)
Tim
--
Dr Tim Cutts
GPG: 1024/D FC81E159 5BA6 8CD4 2C57 9824 6638  C066 16E2 F4F5 FC81 E159

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Bernd Eckenfels]

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Wait, are you serious?  The bloat of /usr/lib having thousands of
> files doesn't bother you, but the two dozen in /usr is bothersome?

We dont talk about thousands, on a edium sized system it is a few hundred
directories and up to thousand files/symlinks.

Greetings
Bernd


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Russ Allbery]

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Most packages had files in /usr/doc.  Most packages do not have files in
> /usr/lib at all, and most of those that do, wouldn't need to be changed.

Changing from /usr/doc to /usr/share/doc was a fairly simple and
straightforward change in a whole bunch of packages.

Changing from /usr/lib to /usr/libexec is not a simple change unless
upstream already supports it, and upstream support for it is, in my
experience, rare, restricted to a few BSD-derived programs and some core
GNU software.  Most Autoconf-based software I've built doesn't support it,
let alone the software that doesn't even use Autoconf, and adding support
is frequently going to require patching the upstream source.

Furthermore, it's a change that is far more likely to have backward
compatibility ramifications than the /usr/doc change.  Thinking it over, I
stand by my statement.  I think the /usr/doc phaseout was simpler.

Of course, this is all back-of-the-envelope speculation, and again, the
difficulty of the transition is not my primary objection.  My primary
objection is that Debian follows the FHS, for very good reasons as stated
in previous messages, and this isn't in the FHS.  My secondary objection
is that you've not clearly demonstrated why this is an improvement, either
through benchmarks showing the performance difference or through
statistical analysis showing how overall Debian packaging would be
simpler, although until you address the primary objection, that wouldn't
convince me anyway.

For me, this is a closed issue until you change the FHS.  (Something that
I don't think is very likely to happen, but best of luck to you.)

-- 
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 


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

Props, not prods [was: Prods to the ftpmasters]

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.18.0342 +0200]:
> > Thanks a lot for your work, and for making Debian a more pleasurable
> > place for developers!
> 
> That sounds like props, not like prods...

Lol. Well, I hope my intentions were clear. Sorry, 't was late.

-- 
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!
 
"when a gentoo admin tells me that the KISS principle is good for
 'busy sysadmins', and that it's not an evolutionary step backwards,
 i wonder whether their tape is already running backwards."


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Glenn Maynard]

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 12:14:19AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > I'm just not seeing any benefits that are worth bloating /usr.
>
> Wait, are you serious?  The bloat of /usr/lib having thousands of
> files doesn't bother you, but the two dozen in /usr is bothersome?

Huh?  Using libexec wouldn't reduce the file count of /usr/lib by thousands,
unless I'm grossly misunderstanding it--it'd reduce it by a tiny amount;
and as you said "most packages do not have files in /usr/lib at all", I
don't think I am.  (I have 846 files and directories in /usr/lib, and only
100 aren't .a, .la or .so, and I'm not sure how many of that 100 would be
moved to libexec.)

If having so many files in /usr/lib does bother you, then splitting out
libexec doesn't seem like a very effective fix.  (Moving soname symlinks
to a subdirectory, on the other hand, would cut it down, on my system,
by almost 40%.)

This just seems like change for the sake of change, with trivial benefits,
if any.

-- 
Glenn Maynard


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

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Brian May]

> "Thomas" == Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Thomas> We've been told that /usr is necessary to allow network
Thomas> sharing.  Of course, you can network share any directory,
Thomas> not just /usr.  If you want executables to be shared, then
Thomas> share /bin.  It's not a problem.  I've done it.

If you want to share /bin, how do you run /bin/mount in order to mount
/bin?

Presumably you would also want to do share /sbin and /lib, too. That
makes the issue more complex. /sbin/init is the first process that
boots (under most setups), and most programs use shared libraries from
/lib.

Yes, you could do this from initrd/initramfs, but this also becomes
harder to setup and debug.

I am not familiar with a tool that will generate such images (that
doesn't mean they don't exist).

AFAIK module dependency information is *still* stored under
/lib/modules/$version/, and updated on each boot. If you make a shared
version of this writable by each client, you risk (I assume) race
conditions on booting multiple clients at the same time. If you make
it read-only, you have to be sure it is kept accurate via some other
means.

You could argue based on this, /lib isn't designed to be shared, so
you still need to split it into /usr/lib and /lib. Alternatively you
could argue only /lib/modules isn't sharable, I guess.
-- 
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


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

Re: distributed batch processing

[Josselin Mouette]

Le mardi 17 mai 2005 à 23:47 -0700, Ron Chen a écrit :
> All of those are opensource (even the EE mode) and can
> be downloaded from the SGE homepage:
> 
> http://gridengine.sunsource.net

At first glance, this doesn't look DFSG-free.
-- 
 .''`.   Josselin Mouette/\./\
: :' :   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Most applications I've seen that use libexec make it entirely trivial
> to move it to /usr/lib: "./configure --libexecdir=/usr/lib".  (I don't
> think apps that don't do this, or something like it, should be a major
> consideration here--take apps out of the stone age, don't clutter my
> /usr ...)
>
> I'm just not seeing any benefits that are worth bloating /usr.

Wait, are you serious?  The bloat of /usr/lib having thousands of
files doesn't bother you, but the two dozen in /usr is bothersome?

Thomas


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

Re: distributed batch processing

[Ron Chen]

Just a few things to clarify:

With SGE 5.3, the FIFO is the default scheduling
policy. However, you can configure the scheduler to
run in SGE EE (Enterprise Edition) mode, which has the
4 additional scheduling policies (deadline, share
tree, override, and functional). With SGE 6.0, you get
resource reservation and urgency. There are also
"projects" and "departments" that you can setup to
group the jobs.

All of those are opensource (even the EE mode) and can
be downloaded from the SGE homepage:

http://gridengine.sunsource.ne­t

IMO, Maui is better for backfilling parallel jobs, but
SGE is better for the "compute farm" type of
workloads.

Also, the "array job" functionality parameterizes the
job group. To run 200 tasks, all you need to do is a
qsub:

% qsub -t 1-200 

And inside the jobscript:
foo -i file$SGE_TASK_ID.data -p 0.1

And you can monitor all the subtasks as one job.

Another advantage is that SGE offers failover
functionality, which allows you to have one or more
standby masters.

 -Ron






Discover Yahoo! 
Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM and more. Check it out! 
http://discover.yahoo.com/online.html


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