Re: "Debian women may leave due to 'sexist' post"
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 02:31:16PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 09:04:24PM +0100, Norbert Preining wrote: > > Bummer, please stop that bullshit. I don't know your origin, but Lisi > > Reisz doesn't sound like an Arabic, nor Indian, nor African name, so > > probably your marriage was not arranged. > > > If it was indeed, sorry for the "bullshit" above. > > > If it wasn't, what the hell are you talking??? Get a life! > > "by law down-moted to second class citizenship when we married" > > It was *YOUR* decision, and in the countries I am imagining you living > > there is parity between spouses. If it wasn't in your case, it was a > > wrong choice of yours. > > > Rights for women, yes, but femminist bullshit like the above, please > > don't unload your personal (ex-)marriage problems on "men-in-general", > > go to a therapist. > > > > > But who are you to decide what the rest of us may or may not do? > > > Here I agree with Lisi, you can discuss whatever you want. > > Please spare the rest of us from being subjected to your discussion and take > it off list. It has nothing to do with Debian development, and I'm > embarrassed to read such comments from a fellow Debian developer. I never thought when I left that I'd be compelled to either a) post to -devel, or b) agree with vorlon, but here we are. AOL. Cheers, Daniel signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: dpkg semi-hijack - an announcement (also, triggers)
[Not subscribed, Cc if you want me to see it.] On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 01:19:58PM -0800, Mike Bird wrote: > Ian hijacked his own program back from the people who had been blocking > updates for six months So Ian Murdock would be perfectly entitled to kick out the DAM, DPL, TC, DSA, and all others to really fix Debian? > including the triggers enhancement which is needed for boot time > improvements No, it isn't (better documented by other replies). > By blocking > functionality for six months the old dpkg team has actively harmed Debian. I was going to ask on which grounds exactly you were judging the dpkg team's competence (and that of iwj's: have you reviewed the branch yourself? can you confidently say that it's all fine?), but instead I'll ask this: How have you helped Debian in the last six months, if the dpkg team has actively harmed it for the last six? > He has chosen to > do neither, which for me personally means I can no longer trust Raphael. Tragedy. Daniel signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: GCC 4.1 now the default GCC version for etch
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 03:49:01PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 02:59:37PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote: > > The fix should be somehow unclumsified, though. Currently I inject > > some horrible runtime testing in the configure script to find out > > whether the clib supports the %zu format of C99, but that breaks > > crosscompilability (which I'm not sure worked before, but still...) > > What is the problem with just assuming that %zu works? C99 is not 7 > years old and this is one of the easier things. Not all of us have the luxury of assuming C99 systems. One major project recently bumped its minimum toolchain requirements from K&R to C89, and is quite a ways from being able to assume C99 features yet. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Sun Java available from non-free
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 09:41:27AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: > Anthony Towns > > [...] If people have > > weighed the costs and benefits of contacting -legal and decided not to, > > that's entirely their choice. > > Yes, that package maintainer may choose to ignore all of policy. It's > entirely my choice how to respond to that. Everyone happy with that? Yes, but policy is generally sensible, edited by DDs, and each change is carefully vetted. debian-legal, OTOH, claims that not only is the stock MIT/X11 licence 'non-free', but 'it is impractical to work with such software'. It is mandated that all Debian packages follow policy. It is no more mandated that developers run everything past -legal, than that they run every change they make past #debian-devel. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFH: problems building against libradius1-dev with libtool-aware packages?
On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 06:42:40AM -0400, sean finney wrote: > the latest upstream version of nagios-plugins has incorporated libtool > into the build process, and no longer successfully builds in a pbuilder > chroot with the following error: The real fix there, is to not install the .la file, ever. It's a world of hurt, and gains us nothing on Debian systems. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Please revoke your signatures from Martin Kraff's keys
On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 04:18:15PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Friday 26 May 2006 00:50, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > Le jeudi 25 mai 2006 à 02:36 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit : > > > It has come to my attention that Martin Kraff used an > > > unofficial, and easily forge-able, identity device at a large key > > > signing party recently. > > > > FWIW, I'm pretty sure Martin presented me an official German ID card. > > > > But should I revoke signatures from developers who showed me a US driver > > license, a piece of plastic I could fake with my inkjet printer? > > I'd be inclined to say yes if they look like the new Oregon or California > ones > due to the lack of security features. OTOH, I live in a region with some of > the highest meth consumption in the world, and I have had my identity stolen > once. Damn you, social security administration... But what does it matter? Can you spot a fake Victorian drivers' licence? Fake German ID card? Do you know the distinguishing marks that differentiate a real Australian passport from fakes? Daniel, sensing misdirected enthusiasm signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Sun Java available from non-free
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:08:17AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > By reading your email, I feel you are acknowledging the fact the > ftp-masters cabal (I can't name it otherwise after seeing their behavior > IRL) is treating other developers as second-class contributors who > should just do as they say. Actually, Josselin, in this regard you are second-class, by simple virtue of not being an FTP master. Just like I don't get to dictate how GNOME gets packaged in Debian, and you don't get to dictate how X gets developed in Debian, without the aid of a GR: the ultimate tool of democracy. Hope that helps, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Easy way to incorporate Ubuntu improvements back into Debian?
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 12:09:01AM -0700, Dustin Harriman wrote: > Ubuntu benefits alot from Debian. They have custom development tools > for streamlining the process of taking Debian packages and making them > into Ubuntu packages. > > I'm curious: does the reverse of this exist for the convenience of > Debian Developers somehow? For example (just a thought): how about a > Debian Developer receiving an email every time Ubuntu has added > something (possibly juicy) to a Debian package (that the DD maintains) > upon Ubuntu adding it? In this way, the juicy bits that Ubuntu adds > could possibly get back to into Debian quicker. > > What processes, infrastructure and tools are in place to streamline > Debian integrating improvements Ubuntu makes? See the Utnubu project (on Alioth). Having automatic mail notifications and the like was discussed, but many DDs did not want anything to do with it, so the idea was quickly dropped. > The reason I ask is that there are several huge usability improvements > that Ubuntu has over Debian that I would love to see in Debian. What > are the chances of Debian catching up to the quantum leap in usability > that Ubuntu has added in Etch? Has Ubuntu been consistent in sending > all these goodies back upstream to Debian (or farther)? > > It seems to me that Ubuntu is getting alot more out of their friendship > with Debian, than Debian gets out of Ubuntu. Anyone have comments on > this? Please correct me if I'm wrong, and examples would be great. > Does Debian get lots of benefits from Ubuntu (in the software) that I'm > unaware of? ... GNOME, Xorg, et al. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Re: XOrg transition, status of libxaw8
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 10:15:36AM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote: > On Wed, 2006-05-03 at 15:23 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:26:21PM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote: > > > Wouter asked: > > > > Just out of curiosity, could you point me to arguments in favour of > > > > Xprint? > > > > > > http://www.dailynews.co.th/ > > > > > > QED > > > > Err. You're saying Xprint is the only print implementation that can > > print non-latin stuff properly and reliably? > > > > Yes, that's right. > > Unless you've taken particular pains to install your non-latin fonts the > right way and get them used by mozilla the right way, the default > mozilla printer just renders them with empty boxes, making the text a > tad difficult to read. Xprint manages to print them legibly without > making further particular efforts to set up the fonts. I won't claim the > result is always picture perfect (I'm expecting quality to improve with > X11R7.1), but at least you can read it. > > There is apparently some new FreeType support in mozilla printing which > might change things (see http://www.jw-stumpel.nl/stestu.html#T9.3.2), > but Xprint works where the default mozilla postscript driver does not. I didn't set Mozilla up with anything special at all, and you might remember me showing you dailynews and Russian/Japanese/etc sites rendering correctly, all the way back at LCA 2005, I think it was. ;) Cheers, Daniel signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Possible conflict with XFree 4.5
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 09:03:19AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > There is no xorg 7.0 backport yet, and I fear it will not be easy to > add one (as the Debian xorg 7.0 introduced _major_ packaging changes, > if somebody puts up a backport it will probably be completely made > from scratch to behave as close as xfree 4.3 as possible). That would be basically the worst-case scenario, and completely tank all upgrades, given the huge number of versioned conflicts et al needed to ensure even a vaguely smooth upgrade. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#365010: Xserver G5 usb keyboard not loaded ...
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 04:13:10PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > So, with all that said, do you still believe it is normal that a perfectly > running daily build was rejected in maybe a few minutes/hours after i sent > that email, while i had offered to continue running it until a proper > replacement was found, and some unstable solution has been used ever since, > which doesn't even include to this day the miboot support ? If you're going to attempt to drag other people into your petty personal tiffs, you might as well at least try to rope in people who are sympathetic to your cause. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: fonts prbl in sid
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 11:22:42AM +0200, A Mennucc wrote:
> I use sid and Gnome ; I upgraded my box (after 3 weeks in which I did
> not have time to) ; now I have serious problems with fonts.
>
> Symptoms: some programs fail to find and use the fonts ,and are then
> almost unusable ; including 'emacs-snapshot-gtk' 'display' 'xmms'
> ('xmms' is missing fonts for the menus but not for the main display);
> 'gpr' 'gnomecal' .
Sounds like the libfontenc issue. Try rebuilding it with
\$${datadir}/fonts/X11, instead of \$${datadir}/X11/fonts, in
debian/rules.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Possible conflict with XFree 4.5
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 02:51:08AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > >- So the answer is right, why would you want to use XFree now? > I guess, he has unsupported hardware, ugly proprietary drivers, etc. I don't know of any hardware supported by XFree86 4.5 that X.Org 6.9/7.0 doesn't support. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#365010: Xserver G5 usb keyboard not loaded ...
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 08:28:11PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > Notice also that both you and Colin Watson, where donated pegasos machines, > (and guess who arranged that), so the unavailability of a decent build machine > is no excuse. I can't speak for the other guys, but I have a Pegasos machine (sitting under my desk at the moment, actually), sent to me by yourself. You offered it to me when I told you that I had no powerpc machines, and thus couldn't test X with PowerPC. I made it very, very clear to you that I could not guarantee that the machine would ever get turned on, let alone used productively. Repeatedly. You said that was fine. However, you then got upset when Pegasos support lapsed, and ripped into me for not doing enough to fix it, given that you sent me an ODW. So, I can't help but think, maybe this is another case where people explicitly told you that they couldn't ensure the machine was used productively, but you still got upset when it wasn't? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Apache 2 maintenance status?
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 05:58:58PM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > On 10/29/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi. > > > > Does anyone know the Apache2 maintenance status? > > Lots of bug reports appear to be 'ignored'. > > > > Examples are: > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=267477 > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=288615 > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=289868 > > Does anyone have any updates on this? > It appears not much has changed in the past six days. > > I heard that Apache 2.2 is about to be uploaded, but I've no idea > which bugs that fixes. Given that 2.2 packages are about to be uploaded (no mean feat: tons changed between 2.0 and 2.2), I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it's being maintained in this point in time. I only looked at the first bug you quoted, but you have conversed with the current active maintainers on that bug, and it's not a groundbreaking omgwtf-everything-is-broken bug. It's wishlist. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: X11R7 and what this transition means for you
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 06:18:21PM +0800, Eugene Konev wrote: > This part is broken now. So I ask you please _do not_ yet upload rebuilt > packages if you use dh_installxfonts. Or you should handle your > maintainer scripts by hand. The required (as from X11R6) changes are: > * place your *.scale and *.alias files in > /etc/X11/fonts/X11R7// instead of /etc/X11/fonts// I'd imagine this will be fixed. > * call update-fonts-dir (-scale, -alias) with --x11r7-layout (or -7) > switch. This is a bug in xfonts-utils that will be fixed. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: X11R7 and what this transition means for you
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 06:44:20PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > 6) Finally, in addition to everything else that's moving out of /usr/X11R6/, > packages providing fonts for X should now install to /usr/share/fonts/X11 > instead of to /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts. The heirarchy is the same as > before, as are the commands to manage fonts; to ensure your font package's > compatibility with the installed Xorg system, you should only need to bump > your dependency on xutils to xutils (>> 1:7.0.0). The plan is that > xorg.conf will support both the old and new paths by default for this > transition. If you're using debhelper's dh_installxfonts to install fonts for you, rather than doing it by hand, you need to explicitly Build-Depends on debhelper (>= 5.0.29), in addition to fixing any references to /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts, or /usr/lib/X11/fonts, in your package. Cheers, Daniel signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#354674: What on earth?
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 07:19:40PM +0200, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote: > I'm complaining because *you* created the huge load of bugs you have > to cope with, and a lot of other you don't warn other packagers about > (what pissed me, and made me write my previous mail is yet-another-RC > bug because of X we received on kdm recently...). And also in your > answer to me, you ask to be sanctified because you are currently in a > hurry to fix them ? In the interests of science, I dived into the debian-qt-kde archives[0]. I count: * 'Still happening?' pings from Adam Porter: 19. + Responses to same: 14. + Total: 33. * Testing migration mails: 9. * Spam: 7. * X-related bugs you were warned about via d-d-a: 2. * X-related bugs you weren't warned about via d-d-a: 2. * Other BTS: I stopped counting. I have better things to do. Again, if you're going to make outlandish claims in the name of chastising others, for god's sake, at least have the decency to be *right*. 'Oh my god, I'm drowning in bugs', indeed, Daniel [0]: http://lists.debian.org/debian-qt-kde/2006/04/threads.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#354674: What on earth?
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 07:19:40PM +0200, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote: > In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 10:52:21AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: > > I'd like for you to back this claim up. So far I've fixed dozens of bugs > > over the course of the past week at great personal and professional cost of > > my time, energy, and health. And I plan to keep whittling away at the bugs > > until the transition is as clean as I can possibly make it. > > well, like said, it's a bit late for that. And about your bug load, > let me say it loud clear: the current load you are experiencing was > created by your way to package X.org 7.0, not anticipating any of the > problems. I won't say your current rate of bug fixing isn't remarkable > outside from the current contexte. But please, when someone run into a > wall, nobody will think that his survival is a remarkable thing. It's a bit late to back your claims up? Come on man, lay off the guy. David made a couple of mistakes in handling X in Debian. So did I. I made a ton more handling X outside of Debian. So what? He's apologised *repeatedly* for what he feels he needs to apologise for. Just move the hell on and stop being such a dick. > > I communicated, to the best of my knowledge, what the transition meant in > > the past [0]. I wasn't aware that I would be breaking a large amount of > > packages until after I uploaded to unstable. These packages have largely > > been in use in Ubuntu for several months already. They have been in > > experimental for several months as well, during which time I fixed every > > bug that came in about them. I communicated with the release team what my > > plans were at all stages, and while I didn't realize the scope of the > > disruption, I did my absolute best to keep everyone involved informed. > > Every single change I've done to these packages has been documented on > > debian-x via the svn commits, so everyone could see what I've been doing if > > they cared to look. > > I'm shocked that you didn't anticipate *any* of the problems you ran > into. after all, you've broken : *dm, fonts, made FTBFS a lot of > programs linking against xlibs, ... That looks to me like beeing an > reasonnably complete coverage of the things X.org is supposed to > achieve. The affirmation "This worked fine in ubuntu" looks like a very > loose quality quality test for a first upload of a totally new layout of > an X server. It worked fine in Ubuntu, across a couple of releases. It worked fine in experimental -- where I notice you haven't been testing. If you're concerned about xlibs-dev, maybe you should try subscribing to this list called debian-devel-announce? There were *two* posts to d-d-a about xlibs-dev, including a co-ordinated mass bug (and patch!) filing. I thought your complaint was both annoying and petty in the first place, but now you're provably wrong, to boot. > > Anyway, I'm going to continue to work hard on this. If you want to help dig > > us out of it, I'll welcome any patches you care to submit that are up to > > your standards of quality. > > I'm already fixing a huge load of RC bugs doing NMU to clean packages > that are in a loosy shape since a lot of time, and that does not seem to > have an active enough maintainer. I hope X.org does not qualify yet to > those criteriums. Are you seriously suggesting that you would be a better X maintainer than David, assisted by his team? Are you suggesting that, under the circumstances, you could've done a better job with X11R7? Or (and I suspect this is more likely) are you just saying this because you like flaming people into the ground on mailing lists, for no apparent reason? If you want to do something productive[0], how about you go and fix some of these issues, instead of whining on debian-devel? > In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > - /usr/X11R6/bin/X disapearing broke login managers (gdm, kdm) > > > > This is being rectified, as a perfunctory glance at -x will tell you. > > Are you serious ? Do you read debian-glibc@ each time you upload a > package ? please, if something has te be known related to a migration, > it has to come from the team that launched that migration. It's not to > the others developpers to go read -x, it's up to you to inform them. It's not as much a migration issue as a bug. /usr/X11R6/bin should be a symlink to /usr/bin. Right now, in *some* cases, that doesn't happen. In most cases, it does. I don't expect to get personalised updates from seb128 every time Metacity introduces some bug which results in focus behaving very weirdly. I just expect that, in due course, the bug will get fixed and that the fix will work its way into unstable. If this is a little too much for you, may I suggest the testing branch? It's much less ... well ... unstable. > So I really expect that in a really near future I'll hear from you (as > a team member of the QT-KDE team that packages kdm), that gdm maintainer > will
Re: Bug#354674: What on earth?
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 10:52:21AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: > As for the build-depends, pbuilder is, as far as I've been able to > understand it, completely incapable of handling such a massive beast as > this. You can't point it easily at a custom repository in order to have it > pull from there. If this has changed recently, I'd love to hear it, but > when I was investigating this during the development of the packages I was > unable to do it. Furthermore, the packages I pulled were autobuilding just > fine on Ubuntu, so I had little reason to believe that they didn't have > proper build-depends for Debian. Indeed, very few of the packages ftbfs'ed, > and most of these were fixed within hours of being reported. I should point out that the FTBFSing packages were ones that were repackaged from the ground up to be more sensible, not pure imports from Ubuntu. That being said, I agree with the thrust of David's mail. And, on my behalf, apologise to the release team for any disruption incurred to Etch. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#354674: What on earth?
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 04:31:10PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > I welcome the fact that you bear your responsabilities, that's a quality > fewer of us have. Though, the .la problem is not the sole one the > modular Xorg raised. > > - /usr/X11R6/bin/X disapearing broke login managers (gdm, kdm) This is being rectified, as a perfunctory glance at -x will tell you. > - fonts transition was unanounced and users have either : > * only non transitionned fonts if their xorg.conf was modified > * only xorg ones if they use dexconf >that's a mess. This is being rectified. > - a lot of build depends were missing, something that the first build >on autobuilders revealed, which makes me wonder if the XSF knows >about pbuilder and friends ? This is being rectified, obviously, but I'm sure the people doing the packaging appreciate your slight at their skills. > Well, knowing to apology is good, but knowing how to prepare a > transition is also needed. I just can quote steve on this : > > » So far I'm very unimpressed with the resultant bug count from the > » Xorg 7 transition. > > I can predict that the Xorg 7.0 will be the messiest debian will have to > face in years, because everything is done in a hurry, and that each new > uploads adds as many bugs (if not twice as many) as it solves. > > So maybe it's now time to calm down the upload rate (yeah unstable is > broken, but it's too late for that anyway, and after all it's not > called unstable for nothing), let's have some communication to have it > fixed, instead of pile of clumsy patches. So, let me get this straight: on one hand you're complaining about bugs, and on the other hand, you're complaining about bugs being fixed? The workload of the XSF members getting things fixed is very admirable. > Could please the XSF communicate, and announce what that damn transition > implies for *everybody*, instead of letting anybody finds out that > their package is broken. I suggest [1] as a very good template for what > communicating about a transition means. Thanks a lot for your help. David has posted a couple of messages on debian-devel-announce discussing the transition (including xlibs-dev), and what it means for everyone. Most of the transition was co-ordinated in excruciating detail, including a long time in experimental where testing failed to uncover these sorts of problems. The rest are purely transitive. You don't need a plan to tell you that fonts are being migrated, that Build-Depends are being added as they're being caught, or that the /usr/X11R6/bin situation is nearly totally fixed. This is unstable. Sometimes the name rings true. With regards the .la files: mea culpa. I was partially unaware of the full extent of the damage, and partially unaware that the release team considered it such a problem. If you really don't like it, wait a few days until the transition blows over and the coast is clear. It's one of the biggest transitions Debian has had, and sometimes the problems aren't always clear. (Hence the delay in experimental, waiting for testers.) Daniel signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Lintian package-has-a-duplicate-relation
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 12:18:58PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is there a way to force a specific library version known in
> ${shlibs:Depends} ?
>
> Using "Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}" is not really fine, if I want to
> force the library to be upgraded when the primary binary package is
> updated.
>
> However,
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, libmypackage1 (= ${Source-Version})
> Will make lintian scream.
>
> I could abandon the use of ${shlibs:Depends}, and list each dependencies
> manually, but this is a bit annoying.
>
> Any clever suggestions ?
Why? If your library's ABI is changing with every revision, you should
be bumping the soversion.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: libgtk2.0-0: changelog.Debian.gz is not an upstream changelog
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 12:02:42PM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote: > Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > * Christian Marillat: > >> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [...] > > >> Where are you reading that ? > > > > An upstream change is a change to the Debian package, too, and listing > > them is expressly allowed under the "other changes" option. > > I'm sorry but no. Read again. The Debian changelog is for Debian changes > not upstream. For that we have a changelog file and a NEW file. > > Changes in the Debian version of the package should be briefly > explained in the Debian changelog file `debian/changelog'.[1] This > includes modifications made in the Debian package compared to the > upstream one as well as other changes and updates to the package. Does it say that everything else is specifically excluded? Do you really have nothing better to do with your life than argue semantics about an ambiguous sentence[0]. Please get off this list and do something more productive with your time. [0]: One could well read it as, the Debian-specific changes, and also the upstream changes and anything else done to the package as a whole. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Possible conflict with XFree 4.5
On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 04:17:28PM +0300, gustavo halperin wrote: > I think that we have a problem when the common library between XFree and > /usr/lib are update in /usr/lib. > I currently have XFree 4.5, when the library libfontconfig1 was update > to version 2.3.2-1 was also updated > the file libfontconfig.so to the version 1.0.4 but in the XFree > (/usr/X11R6/lib/) this library still be the version 1. > The problem came we we use programs like Gimp that must at least version > 1.0.2 of this library. I solve this > problem by link the libfontconfig in /usr/X11R6/lib to the newest > library in /usr/lib. That is the solution or that > is a Bug in Debian System ?? I assume that you're installing XFree86 4.5 by yourself, since it wasn't packaged for Debian. In that case, local installation conflicts are your problem to sort out. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What on earth?
On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 06:52:52PM +0200, Marco Cabizza wrote: > I experienced the issue while recompiling some gnome packages. Is sed > "s##/usr/lib/libXrender.la ##g" (in the .la references, ie > libgdk-x11-2.0.la) the "best" temporary solution by now? s##/usr/lib/libXrender.la##-lXrender##g, I believe. Cheers, Daniel signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#354674: What on earth?
On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 11:12:06AM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> Please tell me if I have this right:
> * You don't like .la files
Yes.
> * So you're unilaterally removing them from a core package
> (libxcursor) with dozens of reverse-depends, breaking all of
> them
Yes.
> * Even though they're a years-old and very well established
> technology
.la files? I wouldn't call them 'very well established'.
> * Which upstream libtool has not yet decided to eliminate ("It's
> already under discussion")
And X.Org upstream are currently seriously discussing whether or not to
eliminate libtool, at which point you get broken away. This, believe it
or not, a) improves portability, and b) makes you immune to further
changes.
> * And which has not been discussed on debian-devel or any other
> Debian list as far as I can tell (Google search).
Yes.
> Can you really be serious?
Yes.
> For example, if the maintainer of GLib decides (s)he doesn't like the
> way it handles modules, and upstream *might* at some point change the
> behavior, is that alone enough justification to change it and break all
> of its dozens of reverse-depending packages?
If the dependent packages can be fixed with a rebuild, and the reason is
solid, rather than, 'I'm bored'? Yes.
Is a rebuild really that phenomenally onerous for you? In the time
spent arguing this point, tons of packages could've been simply rebuilt.
I don't see where the problem lies, unless you happen to enjoy random
flamebait more than actual productive work.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: per-architecture Provides field
On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 12:13:57AM -0700, Erast Benson wrote: > On Thu, 2006-04-13 at 00:04 +0200, Loïc Minier wrote: > > Why not simply Provide: sunwlxsl all of the > > time, doesn't it provide sunwlxsl on other arches? > > But how? sunwlxsl is something which is only present in > OpenSolaris-based derivatives, such as NexentaOS? And I'd like to > putback libxslt change (and similar) to upstream, so other derivative > will not be polluted with mis-provided packages. So why not have an OpenSolaris core set of metapackages, with a sunwlxsl package that Depends on libxslt1, instead of polluting every package with this port-specific stuff? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: removal of svenl from the project
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 02:34:27PM +1100, Brian May wrote: > I can't help but get the impression Daniel may have prematurely > discounted the patch - admittedly I may not understand the issues > though. I dismissed the X patch Sven sent me because it was fundamentally wrong. No amount of changes to it would've influenced the fact that I rejected the entire premise behind the patch. I had nothing to do with the kernel patch. > Most likely all parties involved from room for improvement. Making a > developer a scapegoat on a public mailing list isn't going to make > anybody improve their behaviour FWIW, I do not think public mailing lists are the place for these kinds of arguments. > I get the impression Sven has contributed a lot to get Linux working > on Pegasos. Yes, he has. > Do we really want to force him to leave? I think not. Apparently the people behind this motion do. Debian seems to have this peculiar disease where people think that the other side just can't possibly have understood what they're actually doing, so if you explain it in condescending tones on mailing lists, then surely they'll see the error of their ways and back down. 'Well, I *was* going to expel Sven, but someone on -devel asked a rhetorical question, followed by "I think not", so I'm withdrawing my support.' Unfortunately for this school of thought, (most) Debian developers are capable of rational thought and reasoning, so this doesn't actually work. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: removal of svenl from the project
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:39:42PM +0100, Julien BLACHE wrote: > So, this expulsion process looks more like a good way to hurt Sven > than anything else. If it fails (hint: it will) Andres will be > kind of singled-out, > and this whole thing will turn into "I can't bear this > guy, please kick him out". > > In the meantime, we are wasting precious DD and DAM time to satisfy > Andres' need for a revenge on Sven. > > [...] > > My statement was expressing this: > getting singled-out as Andres will get > once this process will have officially failed is a strong > indication that maybe, just maybe, you'd better leave now. Isn't your whole mail just a rather petty waste of time designed only to hurt Andres? Not to mention, if this fails, you'll still have to work on the same project (i.e., Debian) with Andres, so if you fail in your attempt to kick him out in revenge for him attempting to kick Sven out, will *you* leave the Project? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: removal of svenl from the project
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 08:08:27PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> I am still a bit disgusted of seeing a bug report i provided to ubuntu, with
> patch and all the proper research immediately after the breezy beta go
> unanswered and uncared for though, so this may color my relationship with
> ubuntu, but i did also personally remove myself from all ubuntu channels and
> lists in order to not bother you with my personal issues, so seeing matthew
> bring this in here is i believe not correct.
Sven,
The following is technically a well-formed diff:
--- init/main.c.orig2006-03-15 23:11:48.0 +0200
+++ init/main.c 2006-03-15 23:12:23.0 +0200
@@ -653,6 +653,9 @@
static int init(void * unused)
{
+char *foo = NULL, *bar = NULL;
+strdup(bar, foo);
+
lock_kernel();
/*
* init can run on any cpu.
However I don't think you'd be right to hold a grudge against anyone
who refused to apply it. If Matthew raised some issues with your patch,
why did you not fix them? Surely removing a debugging printk and moving
the #include to the head of the file would've been pretty obvious.
It's not an isolated event, either. My refusal to apply a patch which
was unprecedented in the xorg packaging, for an issue that I feel (with
not insignificant justification) is a purely hardware issue was
presented as me hating on Pegasos. Similarly, your refusal to fix the
patch you provided was also presented as the kernel team despising you
and the Pegasos. (Money being paid or no. Principles are principles,
mmm?)
You seem to have this horrendous victim syndrome, exacerbated by bizzare
claims you have better things to do with your time[0] when you throw a
hissy fit and leave. Turning everyone's legitimate concerns into your
code into hate crusades against you and Genesi isn't in the least
productive, and I really wish you'd grow up and let it go.
Daniel
[0]: I say 'bizzare' because I guarantee it took you longer to write
that mail than it would've to fix up the kernel patch Matthew
pointed out legitimate issues in.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: removal of svenl from the project
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 12:29:49PM +0100, Julien BLACHE wrote: > Andres Salomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am going through the expulsion process to have Sven Luther removed > > from the project. > > I want to see you leave the Project if this expulsion process fails. There's a defined process to do that. Start it, if you believe so strongly that Andres's behaviour has been offensive to the project. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: removal of svenl from the project
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 09:48:11AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > Andres Salomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2) Yes, I have tried talking to him. After a number of blowups on the > > debian-kernel list, myself and a number of kernel team members have > > talked to him to calm him down (and in some cases getting him to > > apologize). The behavior he displays happens repeatedly, despite > > warnings and requests that he behave himself. The rest of the IRC log > > from when he threatened Jonas is basically me attempting to show Sven > > how destructive his behavior is. The fact that, a week later, he > > continues w/ this behavior (after years of doing the same thing) is why > > you're seeing this request. > > Have you considered banning him from the lists/channel? Right there, in the original mail ... On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 09:01:09PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: > Sven's behavior has always been combative (and some might argue > hostile), but this is beyond what is acceptable. He threatens bodily > harm upon another developer in a public forum, and then a week later > publically insults/taunts a developer (one of the Release Managers, > even), behind his back. This is incredibly childish, aggressive > behavior, and should not be tolerated within the project (IMO). Cheers, Daniel signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: dpkg update
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 09:31:29PM +0100, Michael Koch wrote: > On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 12:06:40PM -0800, John Gee wrote: > > Guys honestly why aren't we as developers doing a massive overhaul on dpkg? > > I feel we are running on pre-historic machines here. There needs to be at > > least a little looking toward the future in our blood. > > What exactly are you missing in dpkg that isnt already addressed by the > dpkg maintainers? Please do not feed the troll. This has been a community service announcement. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: For those who care about stable updates
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 10:18:22PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > I haven't answered the question because it wasn't one. You are > implicitly answering it the line after, and I already know we disagree > on this matter. Let me rephrase: 'Who exactly are the candidates claiming there are no problems, and we should all just be excessively nice to each other?'. But I'm sure you're intelligent enough to deduce that question from my statement. > I was reacting to your calling me an idiot. That must be your own way of > following the code of conduct [1] you are campaigning for [2]. I didn't call you an idiot. I have every reason to believe you're a relatively intelligent person. I was labelling your actions on this list. People can do stupid things without being fundamentally stupid: people can do immature or ill-considered things without generally being same. And so on, and so forth. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: For those who care about stable updates
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 08:06:33PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le jeudi 09 mars 2006 à 20:49 +0200, Daniel Stone a écrit : > > I think you'll find what they're saying is, 'don't be an idiot on > > mailing lists'. And here you are, being an idiot on a mailing list, > > which is pretty fitting, I guess. (But it is a problem.) > > If pointing at problems is idiot, I prefer to be an idiot. I will not be > the one to shut up when we are losing again to a group of individuals > who are deliberately hurting the project by keeping their power > positions safe. I don't see how your message follows from mine (and I notice you cleverly failed to answer the main question posed there), so I'm going to let it go. > If you want to start an expulsion procedure against idiots, go ahead. If only ... signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: For those who care about stable updates
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 07:05:24PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le jeudi 09 mars 2006 à 16:39 +0100, Amaya a écrit : > > > but when will we try to solve some of the real problems we have > > > > Hey! It's DPL election time! Lobby around. I really am biting my tongue, > > but you don't have to. > > Who are you going to lobby? The candidates who are playing an active > role in "the problem", or the ones who are just claiming there is no > problem and that we should all be friends? Joss, Please point me to a candidate who is claiming that 'there is no problem and that we should all be friends'. I think you'll find what they're saying is, 'don't be an idiot on mailing lists'. And here you are, being an idiot on a mailing list, which is pretty fitting, I guess. (But it is a problem.) Cheers, Daniel signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: the latest gnome
On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 07:05:34PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Anyway, I don't think GNOME bashing is really on-topic here. > > It's not gnome "bashing", it's just airing of a very common gripe with > gnome. If there were indeed a viable fork that improved on some bad > thing about gnome, but kept the good things, I think it would be an > appropriate topic for this list (however, it seems that there is not). Why on earth are you doing it on debian-devel, then? This list doesn't need any more pointless noise: take it somewhere else, please. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: On binary compatibility
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 07:56:42PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote: > The solution would be to convince Ubuntu to branch from stable instead > of sid. The problem is that this creates a lot of work for Ubuntu > because they have to backport all of the desired bleeding-edge stuff. > However, Debian developers could work with and contribute more to > backports.org making it easier for Ubuntu. This is not useful. If Ubuntu branches from sid, and, hypothetically, their packages work to produce new packages for X.Org and GNOME, then these can be contributed straight back to sid. If they're done against sarge, then the packages are not immediately useful to Debian. I don't see which problem you're trying to solve. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main (was: Bug#353277: should be in contrib)
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 06:12:36PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > la, 2006-02-18 kello 10:43 -0500, Michael Poole kirjoitti: > > What's the purpose of an assembler without assembly code to use it on? > > It can be used, for example, to assemble code you write yourself. That > is, after all, the primary purpose of programming tools: to help > programmers develop programs. Surely ndiswrapper can also run drivers you write yourself. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: architecture-specific release criteria - requalification needed
On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 17:05 +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote: > Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > > I'm starting to suspect you do not trust the release team nor the > > porters to make good judgement [...] ^^^ > Nono... of course not! > It's just my personal experience that this sort of guidelines need > either to be precise or need to be judged by a common sense. ^^^ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mesag3 <-> xlibmesa-gl / libgl1-mesa-dri <-> xlibmesa-dri / libglu1-mesa <-> libglu1-xorg
On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 09:04 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 02:58:19PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
>
> > Right. My solution for that was to split them into a separate
> > mesa-utils source package, with a slightly hacked Makefile. They
> > build just fine independently.
>
> Ah, you mean the utils! The demos are shipped in a separate tarball.
Ah, yes, sorry.
> The programs in progs/util are not generally useful. I could include
> them as examples in mesa-common or something like that.
>
> And I don't know where glxinfo is going to end up. It's certainly not
> included with mesa atm.
Hm? progs/xdemos/glxinfo.c.
> > The problem with Mesa Build-Depping on glut is so:
> > * mesa depends on glut to build, which depends on libgl1-mesa-dev
> > * buildd goes to install libgl1-mesa-dev to fulfill B-Ds
> > * libgl1-mesa-dev deps mesa-common-dev (= ${Source-Version})
> > * mesa-common-dev version n is in the archive from the maintainer
> > upload
> > * but libgl1-mesa-dev for, say, hppa, is still n-1
> >-> uninstallable B-Ds
>
> Uhm, are we talking about mesa (not "mesademos")?
Yeah.
> Mesa-6.3.2$ find ! -type d -print0 | xargs -r0 grep glut.h
> ./Makefile: $(DIRECTORY)/include/GL/glut.h \
> ./docs/download.html: href="http://www.opengl.org/resources/libraries/glut.html";
> ./docs/README.WINDML:- src/ugl/ugl_glutshapes.c
> ./include/GL/gl.h: * including only glut.h, since glut.h depends on windows.h.
> ./include/GL/gl.h: * glut.h or gl.h.
> ./include/GL/uglglutshapes.h:/* uglglutshapes.h - Public header GLUT Shapes */
> ./progs/util/dumpstate.c:#include
> ./progs/util/glstate.c:#include
> ./progs/util/glutskel.c:#include
>
> Like I said before, those programs are not generally useful, at least
> not in compiled form.
Hrm. glxinfo still wants to link against libglut; I guess this is just
an artefact of the build system.
> > As a short-term move, since we don't have Glide support in 6.3
> > anyway, I just disabled the Glide packages and moved the headers
> > across.
>
> I decided that Glide is too much of a hassle. It will probably work
> again in 6.4, that's true, but I have decided to carry with the plan I
> had sketched a couple of years ago:
>
> * Regular drivers are built from the mesa package
> * Troublesome drivers (not being kept up to date, etc) are built
> from a second source package (mesa-legacy)
> * Whenever a new Mesa upstream is released, I look at it, if nothing
> breaks (and this has happened multiple times -- recall that mesa
> uses a x.y.z scheme, where odd y means "in development") then I
> make an upload of the source package "mesa" to unstable
> * If one of the "weird" drivers breaks in the new upstream, then
> figure out if it's because of some small change. If that's the
> case fix it. If not (as is the case with glide in 6.3) then
> "move" the driver to the "mesa-legacy" package.
> * Once I figure the driver is being actively maintained, move it
> back to "mesa"
>
> In this way I keep the same set of binary packages, meaning that users
> won't be missing functionality, and I can keep the maintained drivers
> up to date.
>
> The mesa source package is structured in such a way that it allows for
> building either mesa or mesa-legacy, after tweaking debian/control, of
> course. There's a small duplication of code (the mesa and mesa-legacy
> tarballs are sometimes the same file, sometimes not), but taking into
> account that the binary packages are *much* larger than the source I
> don't think that's something to gripe about.
Okay, this sounds fine to me.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: migrating wiki content from twiki (w.d.net) to moinmoin (w.d.org)
On Sat, 2005-09-03 at 01:34 +0200, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > The wiki markup languages of twiki and moin-moin are not > compatible. Still it would be nice to have some content moved > from the old .net wiki to the new .org one. (the debconf team for > one is interested in using the features of moin-moin for easier > cooperation and to keep the existing pages.) > > The wiki admins (DSA) would be willing to untar a tarball with > the converted content to depoly it on the new system. > > I did not find migration scripts between the two wikis. Do they > exist? Is someone who is familiar with both wikis interested in > writing one? Carl Worth wrote one for fd.o; I'll try to dig it up. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mesag3 <-> xlibmesa-gl / libgl1-mesa-dri <-> xlibmesa-dri / libglu1-mesa <-> libglu1-xorg
On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 22:00 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 12:07:46PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I've really just not had any time recently, and there are some
> > things I wanted to clean up before I fired off to you (e.g. the
> > Build-Dep on glut, which introduced horrible Build-Deps and other
> > hilarity which meant that the Arch: all build *had* to come last,
> > etc). I'll try to get it to you this week.
>
> Oh, you got me there.
>
> On GLUT? I didn't spot that one. The demos depend on GLUT, but I
> haven't updated those yet.
Right. My solution for that was to split them into a separate
mesa-utils source package, with a slightly hacked Makefile. They build
just fine independently.
The problem with Mesa Build-Depping on glut is so:
* mesa depends on glut to build, which depends on libgl1-mesa-dev
* buildd goes to install libgl1-mesa-dev to fulfill B-Ds
* libgl1-mesa-dev deps mesa-common-dev (= ${Source-Version})
* mesa-common-dev version n is in the archive from the maintainer
upload
* but libgl1-mesa-dev for, say, hppa, is still n-1
-> uninstallable B-Ds
As a short-term move, since we don't have Glide support in 6.3 anyway, I
just disabled the Glide packages and moved the headers across.
> But don't rush, I was just wondering if the email got lost :-)
No, not at all.
> Please do check the 6.3.2 packages, I suspect we have fixed the same
> things each on our own. I introduced another of those .map hacks for
> the drivers. I also tried to make it easier to disable building some
> of the targets, guessing that other distros aren't interested in the
> more exotic ones.
Oh, excellent. We're still building all the targets, but yeah. I did a
bit of .map hacking for the drivers, allowing you to restrict things to
prefix and postfix.
I'll hopefully get to having a look at your packages tomorrow. Again,
sorry I've been so slack, but I just haven't had any time.
Cheers,
Daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mesag3 <-> xlibmesa-gl / libgl1-mesa-dri <-> xlibmesa-dri / libglu1-mesa <-> libglu1-xorg
On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 17:25 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > Daniel also said he'd send a package via email which I never got, so I > went ahead and did my own thing. (No Matt, I'm not happy with the idea > of fishing patches out of some random, cluttered, and very unusable > webpage; everything I've fixed in Mesa over the years has found its way > to Brian Paul in the format he wants it over the channels he wants it, > so I expect the same from my downstreams). Sorry, I've really just not had any time recently, and there are some things I wanted to clean up before I fired off to you (e.g. the Build-Dep on glut, which introduced horrible Build-Deps and other hilarity which meant that the Arch: all build *had* to come last, etc). I'll try to get it to you this week. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: arch, svn, cvs (was: Bug#323855: ITP: opencvs -- OpenBSD CVS implementation with special emphasis in security)
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 02:33:31PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.08.19.1422 +0200]: > > Compared to SVN from the view of somebody who is acquainted with CVS, > > arch sucks badly. I tend to agree with most of the things that Florian > > Weimer lists on http://www.enyo.de/fw/software/arch/design-issues.html > > I won't go through the trouble to compile the extensive list of > problems and design issues with SVN. vim! emacs! zsh! bash! something else! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Multi-User X machine (Was: runlevels remodeled)
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 09:50:41PM +0200, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > wasnt it me who included the interesting patches into the > *debian* kernel a year ago? Depends if you want multiseat X or multiseat VTs, but hearty congratulations in any case. Well done. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Multi-User X machine (Was: runlevels remodeled)
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 06:19:08PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > [Daniel Stone] > > Ubuntu implements this from the installer down (although only for > > the special cases of four nVidia, MGA, or ATI cards, and even then > > you may need to fiddle with the configuration a little bit), with a > > bunch of patches to xorg -- no kernel patches required. Those > > patches are now in X.Org HEAD. > > Cool. Any URL with info on the details involved in this > configuration? Check out the multiseat and multiseat-udeb packages: http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/m/multiseat/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Multi-User X machine (Was: runlevels remodeled)
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 02:59:17PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > [Steinar H. Gunderson] > > How do you make this work? Last time I tried it, X would only show > > the one connected to the ???active??? virtual console, and blanked > > the other. > > It need some patches to the kernel and X. I'm not sure how many of > these are included in the mainstream kernel and X implementation yet. > Check out > http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,64163,00.html> > and http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7852> for the story of > HPs system making four desktop seats available from one machine. Ubuntu implements this from the installer down (although only for the special cases of four nVidia, MGA, or ATI cards, and even then you may need to fiddle with the configuration a little bit), with a bunch of patches to xorg -- no kernel patches required. Those patches are now in X.Org HEAD. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dependency problems with Xorg
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 04:28:56PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote: > I know, but as written before, IMHO the abi version number should > not be encoded in the package name. Usually you just get a new > abi, but no new functionality, so why introduce a new name? Just > to work around the limitations of dpkg? It is my suggestion to > extend dpkg instead. Look, nice theory, but we're dealing with the realities of Debian today. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: congratulations to the X team!!
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 11:43:50AM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote: > On 7/14/05, Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The server hasn't been modularised yet, it's just that I split up all > > the packaging. I've been working closely with Josh Triplett on the > > libraries, and keeping David fully in the loop with everything I'm doing > > in Breezy, and I'm pretty sure that we're going to arrive at a common > > base for packaging when Debian gets over to the modular tree. > > Hi Daniel, > > Thank you for clarifying the topic. No worries. > About the split up, is there a consensus in what to install exactly ? See, > the user will install all the packages related to video drivers and dexconf > will do its job and it's up to the user remove what is not needed ? I'm asking > about Debian, because i guess that in Ubuntu you'll autodetect as much as > possible in the install and just keep there what's necessary maybe using a > different approach if the user change his video card, plug a new input device > or whatever. > > Closing, what are the side effects (if any) that this split up and > modularization will > put on the loop for stuff like lessdisks and ltsp ? For the time being -- both in Debian and in Ubuntu -- everything will continue to be installed. It's more about not having to update everything at the same time, really. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: congratulations to the X team!!
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 11:02:09AM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote: > I see that yesterday a modularized xserver (xorg) entered ubuntu > breezy (the current development branch) archives. > > I've some questions: Is XSF coordinating its work with them or what ? > Is modularized xorg a goal for us ? I think that it's easy to do since > some if not all xorg ubuntu maintainers are DDs too. > > Closing, congratulations for both teams anyway. The server hasn't been modularised yet, it's just that I split up all the packaging. I've been working closely with Josh Triplett on the libraries, and keeping David fully in the loop with everything I'm doing in Breezy, and I'm pretty sure that we're going to arrive at a common base for packaging when Debian gets over to the modular tree. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian concordance
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 12:54:08PM -0500, Ian Murdock wrote: > Daniel Stone wrote: > > libc6 added interfaces between 2.3.2 and 2.3.5 and made several other > > major changes, so all packages built with .5 depend on .5 or above, > > in case you use one of the new interfaces. > > > > A binary built with 2.3.2 can run with .5, but a binary built with .5 > > can't necessarily run with .2. > > Then why not build your packages against 2.3.2? That would ensure > maximum compatibility with Debian proper (which to most of the > world is sarge, *not* sid, so don't answer that you're almost the > same as sid). Hoary (like sarge) is built against 2.3.2. Breezy (like current sid) is built against 2.3.5. > I don't begrudge your attempt to innovate, but I doubt your > users consider a slightly newer libc innovation, particularly when > it introduces problems like this. Ironically, the problem in this case stems from sid innovating too fast for Hoary, the latest stable Ubuntu release. Ho hum. > I strongly suspect they're > more interested in your X.org and GNOME 2.10. Given > that, a lot of this divergence seems pretty gratutious to me. Yes, these are both very interesting to users. Which 'divergence' do you mean when you reference that -- X.Org/GNOME 2.10, or glibc? Cheers, Daniel signature.asc Description: Digital signature
X SI in Debian and Ubuntu (was: Re: Is Ubuntu a debian derivative or is it a fork?)
[Please CC me: I'm not subscribed.] On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 09:45:42AM -0700, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 10:36:25AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: > > I'm sorry, this turned out to be very long-winded, but since many people > > are interested in what's going on with X.Org, I may as well explain to a > > larger audience than debian-x what's in store. > > Thanks for bringing concrete information to the discussion. Yeah, one which was definitely not in need of any more hot air ... > > What I've decided to do with X.Org is a compromise. I'm using the Ubuntu > > packages as a base, but I've spent the last month doing as careful an > > audit of them as I can, comparing them to the XFree86 packaging, and > > reverting what changes I don't agree with, keeping the ones that I like, > > etc. > > Did you discuss these plans with any Ubuntu developers? How much have you > changed relative to the Ubuntu packages? > > From what I can tell from the changelog, Daniel merged a batch of > changes from Debian XFree86 SVN into the Ubuntu packages in 6.8.2-16, but I > don't know what portion of your changes this represents. I've been talking to David a lot both via email and IRC, and we've been feeding back to each other via both of these mechanisms. So far the delta has been minimal, and I'm confident we can keep it incredibly small. > > Furthermore, Branden has had plans to shift the packaging to a different > > patch system, and we plan to move ahead with that as soon as we have X.Org > > packages in the archive. We'll be branching off the trunk which is derived > > from the modified Ubuntu packaging, so while we're using the Ubuntu > > packages as a base (which were the Debian packages originally anyway) > > we're going to make some radical changes to the system. This packaging can > > potentially be used for the X.Org 6.9 release, which will be the last > > monolithic version to be releaseed during the transition to a modular > > tree. We may never release 6.9 packages in Debian, but this will provide > > us with a good foundation for it if we do. This work will be done > > independantly of Ubuntu (as no one from Ubuntu seems interested in > > helping) so we'll go it alone. > > Ubuntu isn't likely to spend time on another monolithic release, given that > we're in the process of going modular right now. If your eventual goal is > to use the modular tree as well, why wouldn't you do it immediately, given > the opportunity to use Ubuntu's work as a base? I'm not bothering with 6.9, personally. I'll continue to maintain the 6.8 tree and make sure that the bits of it that aren't modularised are still usable and great quality, but I'm rapidly hacking bits off. > > As the upstream X.Org tree gets modularized, we're going to begin to work > > on packaging that instead. My personal preference is to use the modular > > tree (which will be entirely equivalent to the 6.9 release otherwise, > > except called 7.0) but if it's not ready for us, we can stick with 6.9, so > > as to get the latest drivers to our users. Members of both the XSF, > > including myself and Josh Triplett (who's already begun this work) and > > Ubuntu developers (Daniel Stone) will be working on this together. My goal > > is to have as close a tree for both Ubuntu and Debian as possible, > > preferrably the same tree, but again we'll have to see what happens. > > Again, I'd be interested to hear details of what you needed to change > relative to the Ubuntu packages in order to achieve a result which you found > suitable. Josh and I both started from different bases (me from a set of templates I'd written, largely based off my packages from mid-last year, and Josh from his own set of templates), but we're converging with the aim of having at least the entirety of xlibs in perfect harmony between the two. Right now, the only sticking point of any significance whatsoever is cdbs vs debhelper+dpatch. > > I plan to use the patch system Branden and I will develop for the > > monolithic tree in the modular tree, and if the Ubuntu developers decide > > that this isn't the best option then they can go their own route, unless > > they can demonstrate that an alternate system is preferrable. > > We would of course evaluate this decision based on technical merit, but my > knee-jerk reaction would be "why write yet another patch system"? I've seen the patch system, and my comments on debian-x was that it was absolutely insane, and utterly doomed to failure. Nothing's changed. In short, we're
Re: my thoughts on the Vancouver Prospectus
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 09:07:52AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 02:57:23AM +0100, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote: > > > > * Three bodies (Security, System Administration, Release) are given > > > > independent veto power over the inclusion of an architecture. > > > > A) Does the entire team have to exercise this veto for it to be > > > > effective, or can one member of any team exercise this power > > > > effectively? > > > > > > It's expected that each team would exercise that veto as a *team*, by > > > reaching a consensus internally. > > > > This is obviously unacceptable. Why would a small number of people be > > allowed to veto inclusion of other people's work ? > > And a non-elected, non-properly-delegated, self-apointed group of people at > that. Are you suggesting replacing the entire release and ftp-master teams? If so, please suggest who you would like in that role instead (or if we should all vote on it -- because hey, every position in Debian needs to be elected). Are you suggesting that everyone in Debian who has not been elected to their position should be elected so? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#219163: ITP: synaptic-touchpad -- Synaptics TouchPad driver for XFree86
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 01:58:44PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 11:32:14AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:58:15PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > I think it would be really dumb for a driver author to re-use an > > > existing name for a different purpose. > > > > Well, Synaptics could branch out and start making graphics cards, for > > example. > > I think it would probably be a bad design to have input drivers and > display drivers stuffed into the same object. > > That doesn't mean it won't happen, but it should be rare enough that an > ad-hoc approach will work. Right, but I'm just saying that you'd then have to have xfree86-driver-synaptics-input and xfree86-driver-synaptics-graphics, or whatever ... a more realistic example is Intel, who seem to be enjoying their current i8??G hegemony. Ad-hoc should still, as you say, work. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian X Strike Force:http://people.debian.org/~branden/xsf/ pgph2KDhZ9jbK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#220347: ITP: xlibs-freedesktop -- X libraries (client-side) from freedesktop
Package: wnpp Version: unavailable; reported 2003-11-12 Severity: wishlist * Package name: xlibs-freedesktop Version : (unreleased) Upstream Author : Jim Gettys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, and other freedesktop.org hackers * URL : http://xlibs.freedesktop.org * License : MIT/X11 Description : X libraries (client-side) from freedesktop The freedesktop.org X client-side libraries (originally from XFree86), are a collection of various essential client-side libraries for using X11; these are a replacement for the XFree86 libraries that currently reside under the 'xlibs' package. This will not be able to be uploaded until the xlibs build is separated from that of the rest of XFree86; maintainence will fall under the auspices of the X Strike Force (as will that of xserver-freedesktop). -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux aedificator 2.4.22-pre6 #1 Wed Jul 16 15:23:20 EST 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Bug#220345: ITP: xserver-freedesktop -- freedesktop.org X server (nee KDrive)
Package: wnpp Version: unavailable; reported 2003-11-12 Severity: wishlist * Package name: xserver-freedesktop Version : (unreleased) Upstream Author : Keith Packard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and other freedesktop.org hackers * URL : http://xserver.freedesktop.org * License : MIT/X11 Description : freedesktop.org X server (nee KDrive) The freedesktop.org X server is a faster, more featureful alternative to the XFree86 X server. It has features like the XDamage and aXe extensions, and a full composite model for aRGB windows. However, it does not yet have 3D support, and currently relies on VESA/framebuffer support. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux aedificator 2.4.22-pre6 #1 Wed Jul 16 15:23:20 EST 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Re: Bug#219163: ITP: synaptic-touchpad -- Synaptics TouchPad driver for XFree86
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:58:15PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 03:59:48PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 11:56:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > I thought about the latter as well. It's not too long-winded if we > > > expect having input and video modules with identical names. > > > > I can't particularly see this at the moment, but I'm sure something will > > rise up and prove us wrong. > > Yeah, well, if something turns out to be that perverse we'll just ad-hoc > it. > > I think it would be really dumb for a driver author to re-use an > existing name for a different purpose. Well, Synaptics could branch out and start making graphics cards, for example. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian X Strike Force:http://people.debian.org/~branden/xsf/ pgpDmVSBJAQcZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: using freedesktop.org libs
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 12:11:22PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 01:14:30AM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote: > > > > I found this idea very interesting. I think that the debian project > > > > should > > > > take more advantage of the freedesktop.org libs. > > > > > > Glancing briefly at the packages in sid, we've been using the ones > > > they have released for a while. Unreleased libraries do not belong in > > > unstable. > > > > It's not about released vs. unreleased but XFree86 vs. freedesktop.org. > > Presumably you think freedesktop.org will do a better job of > maintaining them. So why are you so eager to use things which they say > aren't ready for release, if you trust their skills so much? Personally, I've come to believe that Jim Gettys has a vague idea of what he's doing. Also, note I specified no timeframe. I would've ITPed it already if I wanted it nownownow, only I don't. I want to wait until fd.o deems it ready. Getting tired of this, Daniel -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian X Strike Force:http://people.debian.org/~branden/xsf/ pgptpPMZhrwjn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: using freedesktop.org libs
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 01:14:30AM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote: > On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 00:39, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:44:20PM +, Anthraxz __ wrote: > > > The freebsd developpers are making some changes to the XFree86 ports to > > > reduce the pain associated with upgrading and maintaining XFree86. > > > > > > http://www.freebsdforums.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=16052 > > > > Debian doesn't share freebsd's bug of building everything on the > > target system, so this doesn't really apply. > > That's not the only point, there's also 'I also expect the > freedesktop.org libraries to stay better maintained and release more > frequently than XFree86's', e.g. I, personally, am all for using the fd.o libs, instead of xfree86. It might be worth noting that fd.o/xlibs upstream is Jim Gettys. He has a clue or twelve. The main pain is in breaking it out, confwise, and then packaging-wise. OTOH, it could make the xlibs transition that much easier, if we're not doing it in the framework of a massive, massive package anyway. > > > I found this idea very interesting. I think that the debian project > > > should > > > take more advantage of the freedesktop.org libs. > > > > Glancing briefly at the packages in sid, we've been using the ones > > they have released for a while. Unreleased libraries do not belong in > > unstable. > > It's not about released vs. unreleased but XFree86 vs. freedesktop.org. And about how responsive/cluey the upstreams are, specifically. Daniel, dreaming of source package Xu-ification (no really; it would be a good thing). -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "The programs are documented fully by _The Rise and Fall of a Fooish Bar_, available by the Info system." -- debian/manpage.sgml.ex, dh_make template pgp4wtEMkbfW6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#219163: ITP: synaptic-touchpad -- Synaptics TouchPad driver for XFree86
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 11:56:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:03:14AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > There is one unreachable person; IIRC, he was a reasonably major > > contributor. > > Double bummer. Aye; sort of condemns it to external DDKdom. > > I was thinking about xfree86-driver-synaptics, or > > xfree86-driver-input-synaptics, but the last one is too unnecessarily > > longwinded. (I was going to package this as an XSF project, post-exams). > > I thought about the latter as well. It's not too long-winded if we > expect having input and video modules with identical names. I can't particularly see this at the moment, but I'm sure something will rise up and prove us wrong. > Is the XFree86 driver namespace subdivided in practice (i.e., in a > name-resolution sense), or merely cosmetically via directory layout? I don't believe it's subdivided in a name-resolution sense, but I could be wrong. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "The programs are documented fully by _The Rise and Fall of a Fooish Bar_, available by the Info system." -- debian/manpage.sgml.ex, dh_make template pgpE01UhCz8i7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#219163: ITP: synaptic-touchpad -- Synaptics TouchPad driver for XFree86
On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 02:52:09PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 08:04:21PM +0100, Mattia Dongili wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 01:23:09PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > Er, actually, last I heard, the author was still looking into > > > relicensing it in a manner consistent with XFree86's requirements. > > > (They don't accept GPLed code.) > > > > that's what he told me too. He also said he is still unable to contact > > every single contributor to confirm the license change. > > Bummer. There is one unreachable person; IIRC, he was a reasonably major contributor. > > hummm... I know... It took me a while to choose it :) Any suggestion? > > synaptic-touchpad-driver? > > synaptic-driver? > > What's the module name? "synaptic"? "synaptics". > If so, I recommend: > > xfree86-driver-synaptic > > Please be sure to mention in the package description that this is a > driver module *for* the XFree86 X server, not a driver module *from* the > XFree86 Project, Inc. I was thinking about xfree86-driver-synaptics, or xfree86-driver-input-synaptics, but the last one is too unnecessarily longwinded. (I was going to package this as an XSF project, post-exams). > > I'll package it. I'm a bit unsure about XFree configuration after > > installation. I'll simply provide a sample configuration and big fat > > README.Debian The synaptics README has sample configurations in it. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "The programs are documented fully by _The Rise and Fall of a Fooish Bar_, available by the Info system." -- debian/manpage.sgml.ex, dh_make template pgp74J9T3Qxu7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#198602: ITP: debbackup -- Backup and restore Debian specifics (package status, conffiles)
Package: wnpp Version: unavailable; reported 2003-06-24 Severity: wishlist * Package name: debbackup Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://www.trinity.unimelb.edu.au/~dstone/debbackup/ (not functional yet) * License : GPL Description : Backup and restore Debian specifics (package status, conffiles) debbackup is a supplemental, Debian-specific, backup program. It backs up only what is needed to restore from a fresh install, with data recovered - package information (including holds/etc), conffile changes, Debconf information, and more. debrestore will restore this information - installing/updating required packages, restoring configuration files, and more. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux nanasawa 2.5.72-mm3 #1 Mon Jun 23 21:43:29 EST 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne pgpYc1ZAUSf7Q.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ATI Linux Driver Packages
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003 23:16:12 -0500, Adam Majer wrote: > On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 09:42:10PM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote: > > Are these drivers much better then than XFree ones or is there a reason > > to be promoting nonfree drivers? I orginally packaged up the nvidia ones > > in the way they are done due to the fact the XFree ones had no 3d > > acceleration at all and that it was illegal to distribute nvidia's > > binaries directly. Also binary only drivers will taint the kernel and > > can cause the user to have trouble getting help with kernel related > > issues. I got rid of my nvidia cards (some poor sucker took them) and > > now use only ATI cards. 8) > > I think you might be the "sucker". :) [ok, it's not a flame thing]. > Does the radeon driver support 3D accel for cards beyond the R1xx level? > ie. something like Radeon 7500. I don't think that Radeon 8500, 8800, etc..a > are supported since they use the former FireGL GPU. The drivers from > ATI fill the gap to support FireGL, and yes they are better. They > can be used with Maya etc.. [at least it says that on ATI's site.] 3D acceleration exists for r[12]xx and r250; I'm not sure whether it exists for the rv280. Indeed, it's in the stock XFree86 4.3 debs previously distributed by myself, now distributed by the XSF. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/music/mixMasterMike/spinPsycle% glxinfo | grep OpenGL OpenGL vendor string: Tungsten Graphics, Inc. OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI R200 20020827 AGP 4x x86/MMX/3DNow! TCL OpenGL version string: 1.2 Mesa 4.0.4 OpenGL extensions: > BUT, ATI doesn't have any drivers for new cards like Radeon 9800 and I > do not think they will have any Linux drivers. The r3xx series is currently only supported (in both 2D and 3D form) by ATI's binary drivers. However, ATI have a standing offer of specs, hardware and developer access to any DRI developer who wants to write a driver for the r3xx series. > On the other hand, I installed Debian for a frried and he had a > GeForce 4 MX card. The driver from nVidia worked perfectly. > Futhermore, I think that they only distribute the X driver that's > precompiled. The kenrel part has to be compiled by hand (which is good). Binary-only drivers are best avoided, but when you have no other option, sure. > Futhermore, I believe that nVidia have _much_ better support in X > from nVidia than radeon ever had from ATI. The free 3D driver > hacked together does not give good performance as does nVidia's > propriatory driver. Frankly, I very much prefer that nVidia has > in-house support for their cards while ATI has none (the ones for > Radeon 8500, 8800, etc.. are just FireGL drivers). Uhh, that's utterly incorrect. My Radeon 9000 has out-of-the-box 3D support, as do original Radeons, and all Radeon 7xxx, 8xxx, and 9[01]00 cards. The 9200 *may*, but I'm unsure. Hell, GATOS will even give you VIVO support. The reason why you only get FireGL drivers is because you don't *need* those drivers for the cards I mentioned above. As for support, I've had pretty amazing support from ATI. ATI have developer contacts who regularly feed patches into XFree86 upstream and packagers (the entire 030 patch series was sent through ATI), and they have the standing offer I mentioned above. The only thing preventing capital-F-Free drivers being written right now is DRI developer time constraints, AIUI. nVidia have never offered any such deals to developers, or Free drivers (the current ATI driver was originally donated by ... yep, them - ATI). I personally buy ATI because not only are they currently the best card around (even when wrapped in OpenGL, the demo optimized for nVidia cards, by nVidia, to show off nVidia cards, runs over 15% faster on the 9800 Pro than the GeForce FX, and the 9800 Pro has been out longer than the FX. Not only that, but ATI have offered outstanding support to XFree86, and I can do my acceleration with a Free driver, not needing to depend on nVidia to fix my bugs, or make the kernel module not use up 1mb RSS, or whatever. Daniel, happily with his Freely out-of-the-box 3D-accelerated r250. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgpseTCKzQvX8.pgp Description: PGP signature
ignore (misdirected) parent (was: Re: Galeon 1.2.x on pila (finally!))
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 10:07:07PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: > [stuff utterly irrelevant to -devel] Please ignore the parent post; somehow, mutt managed to take a mail sent to 'oldk, bhat', and reply to -devel. *shrug*. Sorry, Daniel -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgpEjF9F6KrKk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Galeon 1.2.x on pila (finally!)
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 09:06:40PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: > Gentlemen, > I've restored Galeon on pila to its former 1.2.x glory. A few packages > (galeon, galeon-common, mozilla-browser, mozilla-psm, libnss3, libnspr4) > are now on hold: don't touch them (and watch apt quietly playing with > the hold), unless you want Galeon 1.3 again. And I've outdone myself. ;) Shortly after doing this, someone pointed out to me that there's actually a Galeon 1.2 rebuild against Mozilla 1.3, latest sid, etc. So, you can upgrade now, flagrantly disregarding the holds (there are none), but be aware that the package name is now galeon1.2, not galeon. :) d -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgpFJTRWIOPjT.pgp Description: PGP signature
dbtcp RFP->ITP
retitle 114398 ITP: dbtcp -- A client for the MS Windows ODBC proxy server thanks [Please reply to me, Cc'ing the list, as per the M-F-T header]. Hi all! Just a quick note to say that I've packaged up dbtcp, and am thus taking over the RFA (#114398). It was pretty fun to package - a PHP4 module that ostensibly needs to be built in-tree. However, it took a nice hand-hacked Makefile to make it build out-of-tree, and even then it has some fun issues. PHP4 installs to /usr/lib/php4/, where date is probably the release date (it's 20020429, currently). I can work out the directory to install to (php-config --extension-dir), but how should I handle this in package relationships? If the date changes, php4-dbtcp suddenly becomes useless - PHP's looking in a different directory for its extensions. Anyway, the debs are at: deb http://www.trinity.unimelb.edu.au/~dstone/debian/ dbtcp/ deb-src http://www.trinity.unimelb.edu.au/~dstone/debian/ dbtcp/ Cheers! :) d -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne pgpIMvUk8ZAZH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: X Strike Force SVN commit: rev 69 - branches/4.3.0/sid/debian
On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 01:54:57PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > 1) Should libstdc++-dev dependencies be made "artificially" strict in > packages destined for sid so that it's harder for packages built > against, say, libstdc++3 to accidentally sneak in and start regressing > the C++ ABI transition progress? Well, this isn't a problem for buildds, because I made libstdc++5-dev the preference. > 2) Is libstdc++5-3.3 ABI-compatible with libstdc+5? Does the former > have any symbols that the latter lacks? I *believe* it's completely ABI-compatible, but I could be wrong. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgphpDyejfWsS.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDEE3 question
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 10:02:34AM +0100, Michael Meskes scrawled: > On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 05:17:19PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Secondly, ftpmasters have to add overrides for new packages, in case you > > didn't realize. That takes time: their time adding them, and our time > > waiting. We're trying to minimize the problems by ramming KDE3.1 in with > > gcc 3.2 and killing two birds with one stone. Not doing so just adds a > > I see the logic behind this, don't get me wrong. The problem just is > that the gcc movement is slowing down the KDE packages for quite some > time. After all we could have had 3.0.3 or 3.0.4 in Debian for months > now. Nope - the 3.0.x packages just were not ready to go into sid. Any package where the upgrade strategy is to purge the old and install the new just doesn't work. 3.1.x will be the first packages where upgrades from 2.2.x are clean. > > stupid amount of work to both us (the Debian KDE maintainers - Chris, > > Ben Burton, Daniel Schepler, David Pashley, Ralf Nolden, and myself), > > and the ftpmasters. > > I can understand that you want to minimize your workload, but then the > packages are there. Ralf spend quite some time on the packages and I'm > sure the others did as well. The only difference right now is that the > packages are stored elsewhere and yes, the ftpmasters don't have to add > them so far. I have not spent a huge amount of time, only a little bit of time preparing 3.0b[12] and 3.0rc[12345], as well as 3.0.3 and 3.0.3a. Karolina has been doing some unofficial packages, as has Ralf, and Ben, Daniel, David and, of course, Chris, have been spending a lot of time making sure current CVS (i.e. what's essentially 3.1), works fine; I have the packages on my laptop and they work flawlessly, thanks to the buildd a co-worker and I setup to do nothing but cvs up and debuild, 24x7. > > Until then, you'll just have to wait. More work also still has to be > > done on 2.2->3.1 upgrades before it goes into sid, but that's a > > completely moot point, because it probably won't go in for over a month, > > even if gcc 3.2 on SPARC is finally fixed. > > But then this work has to be spend anyway. Why not starting the testing > cycle now with 3.0.5 so 3.1 goes in cleanly? Not without revamping debian/control. I'm also somewhat ... uncomfortable about putting 3.0.x in. If you know why 3.1 has been held up, then you'll know that 3.0.x is quite possibly a worse choice than 2.2.x with regards to that issue. Then again, I'm just an occasional package monkey who ceased to be authoriative with my disastrous 3.0rc5 packages (the last set I made), and, to a lesser degree, long before 3.0b1 when Chris and I divvied up the packages, and I devised my exit strategy. :) d -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne pgpbGZ3uikeE7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDEE3 question
[Excuse the dodgy quality, I'm trying to construct a reply from DWN]. On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 15:03:05 +0100, Michael Meskes scrawled: > but since gcc 2.95 is still standard in Debian I guess the switch to 3.2 > will take much longer than the release of KDE 3.1 which is due next > week. > > And the explanation "we have no KDE 3 since we are still using gcc 2.95" > doesn't sound too good because there is no technical reason to couple > these two. First thing: KDE 3.1 will not be released this week. Expect a public announcement on this soon, but until then, I can say no more. Sorry, but it's out of my control. Secondly, ftpmasters have to add overrides for new packages, in case you didn't realize. That takes time: their time adding them, and our time waiting. We're trying to minimize the problems by ramming KDE3.1 in with gcc 3.2 and killing two birds with one stone. Not doing so just adds a stupid amount of work to both us (the Debian KDE maintainers - Chris, Ben Burton, Daniel Schepler, David Pashley, Ralf Nolden, and myself), and the ftpmasters. Until then, you'll just have to wait. More work also still has to be done on 2.2->3.1 upgrades before it goes into sid, but that's a completely moot point, because it probably won't go in for over a month, even if gcc 3.2 on SPARC is finally fixed. Daniel, occasional KDE package monkey -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne pgpvej4IVvfI5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [ANNOUNCE] Debian Developer Packages Overview
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 2:43:29PM +0100, Daniel Silverstone wrote: > Also, if you search for my GPG key id (20687895) then I get a listing of my > packages and also those maintained by [EMAIL PROTECTED] We've had issues of > my being mistaken for Daniel Stone in the past, and I don't appreciate it :) > (Neither does he I should imagine :) You poor, poor bastard. I recommend a name change post-haste. I'd like to sincerely apologize to you for any humiliation caused for being confused with me. Cheers, The real DanielS (o/~ I'm the real DanielS ...) -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://raging.dropbear.id.au KDE Developer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://www.kde.org Kopete: Multi-protocol IM client http://kopete.kde.org pgpL5mBQbfWYr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: bind9-chroot again
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 02:04:54AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > remember: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/debian-devel-200109/msg01393.html > > well, i have just installed a couple of bind9, and i am *tired* of > chrooting them by hand. can we please have a final vote on whether > chrooting bind should be a debconf option of the bind9 package, or > whether i could create such a pseudo package, which would chroot an > existing installation. i tend for the package just because it's modular, > but Bdale said he'd want this functionality in the main package. I vote yes for the Debconfy bit. I chroot it by hand, and I find it insanely nifty, even though bind9 isn't plagued by the same security problems bind is. Helps me sleep better at night, or something. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> who needs a girlfriend i have a tamagotchi pgpywWtGUmcFJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
[security] What's being done?
Considering that an upload hasn't been made to rectify this root hole, why hasn't something else been done about it - regular or security NMU? One would think that this is definitely serious. Oh and BTW, Slackware released an update today. Without trolling, I can say that I was honestly surprised to note that Debian, a distro with ~850 developers and a dedicated security team, is behind Slackware on security issues. d -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WARNING: The consumption of alcohol may make you think you have mystical Kung Fu powers, resulting in you getting your arse kicked. pgpXT5bGXE3PE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [kde] and, for my next trick ...
On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 12:29:34AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 12:00:30AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > I'll stop posting to -devel when you come up with the guideline that > > says "don't post important stuff about one of the two major desktop > > environments breaking hardcore". Gladly. > > > > It was an important issue that affected many. > > Nonsense. It's not of general interest to developers in their > role as developers. I'm not interested in SILC debs, the fact that Musixtex isn't going into testing, or a bug in libgd-perl, in my role as a developer, yet they're the threads immediately surrounding this one. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Kamion practices the ancient and traditional Debian art of annoying release managers pgp9Fi03X7kWs.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [kde] and, for my next trick ...
On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 01:13:53PM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote: > Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Oh, there *appears* to be one? You mean the one I sent this message to, > > and the one that I'm subscribed to? Right! Thanks for the information! I > > sent it to -devel because not all KDE users are subscribed to -devel. > > And since when has users generally been subscribed to -devel? If we > have a KDE-specific development list then please use that instead of > -devel. > > If you want to reach users -devel is the wrong list anyways. I'll stop posting to -devel when you come up with the guideline that says "don't post important stuff about one of the two major desktop environments breaking hardcore". Gladly. It was an important issue that affected many. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Centrx: Who are you? Are you a Debian Developer? Are in the New Maintainer queue? Who is your sponsor? What is your GPG public key ID? Do you understand the Social Contract? Wow. This is just like checking into a French youth hostel. pgpUUFcwz3CPN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: serious bug. Evolution and Microsoft mentality.
On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 12:24:11PM +0100, Paul Slootman wrote: > On Sat 12 Jan 2002, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 01:12:37PM +1100, Steve Kowalik wrote: > > > At 10:30 am, Saturday, January 12 2002, Rob Bradford mumbled: > > > > I'm now a happy evolution user, to converyt my mail i did cat > > > > Mail/lists/* | cat /var/spool/mail/rob > > > > > > > Congratulations, you get today's "Most Useless Use Of cat" award. Plague, > > > and LART will be forthcoming. > > > > If you're going to be a pedant, so am I. > > Of course, Steve *is* right. Yeah, I'm not arguing that, but he has a habit of making stupid mistakes when being a pedant. *shrug*. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "can NE1 help me aim nuclear weaponz? /MSG ME!!" pgp2drp6NuiCR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: serious bug. Evolution and Microsoft mentality.
On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 01:12:37PM +1100, Steve Kowalik wrote: > At 10:30 am, Saturday, January 12 2002, Rob Bradford mumbled: > > I'm now a happy evolution user, to converyt my mail i did cat > > Mail/lists/* | cat /var/spool/mail/rob > > > Congratulations, you get today's "Most Useless Use Of cat" award. Plague, > and LART will be forthcoming. If you're going to be a pedant, so am I. Firstly, your quoting style is wrong wrong wrong. Let me show you: BAD - on bar, foo wrote: > don't fuck with me bitch > i'll send the boys over, shithead GOOD - on baz, bar wrote: > let's all sit around the fire and sing lesbian seagulls i love you man You see the difference? You don't leave a > on the line trailing the quotation. That's just bad form. Also, wrt, "Plague, and LART will be forthcoming": you're either missing a comma, or you've put an extra in. Should be either, "Plague and LART will be forthcoming," or, preferably: "Plague, and LART, will be forthcoming." But wait! Still more errors! You really mean, "are forthcoming", not "will be forthcoming", right? I hope so. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> subtle? and Overfiend in the same sentence? pgpeZ4UVRAScm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Work-needing packages report for Jan 11, 2002
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 11:26:01PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > * > > |libqt3-psql (#127709), orphaned 7 days ago > > Uhm, shouldn't Daniel Stone or Cheney (sp?) take this one as well, I > guess it builds with the rest of qt3. I'm not sure if Chris is taking this along with libqt3. > |qt-embedded (#127696), orphaned 7 days ago > | Description: Embedded version of QT > | Reverse Depends: libqt-emb-dev > | > |qt-embedded-free (#127697), orphaned 7 days ago > | Reverse Depends: libqt3-emb-dev > | > |qt-x11-free (#127695), orphaned 7 days ago > | Description: QT Gui Library > | Reverse Depends: libqt3-mysql libqxt0 libqt3-odbc view3ds qt3-tools > | libqt3-mt-dev libqt3-dev kascade psi > > And those? qt-x11 is qt2, qt-x11-free is qt3. Chris has been busy getting Qt2 and KDE2.2 working fully before he turns his attention to Qt3 and KDE3. His hard drive just also died, so give him a little breathing room. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * wiggy points people to arcanum.co.nz apparently it's fun wiggy: the last time you said that we lost an entire weekend of useful activity to cocklefighting pgpI3Wyl2F7Mg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [kde] and, for my next trick ...
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 09:14:21AM -0800, Aaron Lehmann wrote: > There appears to be a list named debian-kde. PLEASE use that. -devel > is already clogged enough, and should be reserved for extremely > general or miscellaneous discussion. Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 17:17:08 +1100 From: Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: debian-kde@lists.debian.org Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: [kde] and, for my next trick ... Oh, there *appears* to be one? You mean the one I sent this message to, and the one that I'm subscribed to? Right! Thanks for the information! I sent it to -devel because not all KDE users are subscribed to -devel. Aaron, try thinking before you open your mouth to spurt shit. It can and will work wonders. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> the UI SUCKS GOAT TESTICLES! oh c'mon Robot101, don't hold back... tell us what you *really* think yeah, do you feel that way all over or just in spots? pgpparspz7MLz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [kde] and, for my next trick ...
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 10:19:52AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 05:17:08PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > The libpng[23] screwup in unstable is now more or less resolved with
> > kde{base,graphics,network} in incoming. Now, the only packages that need
> > rebuilding are kdeaddons, kinkatta, kmerlin, koffice, and maybe kdetoys
> > (not sure on that one - Ben?). kdelibs was installed last night.
> >
> > Thanks muchly to calc for dealing with dodgy Build-Depends, hurried
> > patches, huge builds, many uploads, and me. He's been absolutely
> > invaluable; KDE3 is in good hands.
> >
> > On another note, I think it's a credit to the sponsorship system that
> > I'm actually able to maintain KDE2.2; it's in fact quicker for calc to
> > build KDE than it is for me (AthlonXP 1800 vs P2 350; I'll have access
> > to some P3 Xeons soon). Obviously DDness would be far preferable, but
> > ya.
> >
>
> Please, have a look at #127948 (should merge #128195)
> which should be grave bugs IMHO.
> Is this solved also now? I removed KDE at all in my sid.
> To reinstall it, kpackage issue needs to be solved.
> This is a PIV 1400Mhz, maybe I could help :)
An upload is pending.
--
Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
asuffield: you are about as helpful as a broomstick up the arse.
yes
pgpanycu8IJKh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
[kde] and, for my next trick ...
The libpng[23] screwup in unstable is now more or less resolved with
kde{base,graphics,network} in incoming. Now, the only packages that need
rebuilding are kdeaddons, kinkatta, kmerlin, koffice, and maybe kdetoys
(not sure on that one - Ben?). kdelibs was installed last night.
Thanks muchly to calc for dealing with dodgy Build-Depends, hurried
patches, huge builds, many uploads, and me. He's been absolutely
invaluable; KDE3 is in good hands.
On another note, I think it's a credit to the sponsorship system that
I'm actually able to maintain KDE2.2; it's in fact quicker for calc to
build KDE than it is for me (AthlonXP 1800 vs P2 350; I'll have access
to some P3 Xeons soon). Obviously DDness would be far preferable, but
ya.
Have at it.
--
Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: PERL MAINTAINERS SUCK - COMPLETE MORONS
pgpbU43aca8ts.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Fw: Bug#128089: kdegraphics: Build failure: including non-PIC code in shared object (ia64/unstable)
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 04:38:20PM +, James Troup wrote: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 08:20:00PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > Can someone please help me with this? > > > > Have you identified why libkcm_karea.so is linking against libgphoto2.a > > instead of against libgphoto2.so? > > It's a broken symlink; I seem to recall having this conversation with > Daniel at least once already... Somewhere in the mists of time, which I forgot about, which is mainly why I've been trying to find you for the last week. So does the problem lie in libgphoto2? -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> hmm, someone remind me, what's the English term for startup lag? "netscape effect" pgpUgtCY7Kl6J.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#127252: kmerlin: Nope, it broke it
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 08:43:40PM +1100, Mark Purcell wrote: > On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 07:38:31PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > kdebase will be uploaded today and kdemultimedia tomorrow; the rest > > should be OK. > > I still need to upload a libpng2 version of kmerlin as I jumped the > gun and uploaded a libpng3, which no longer works after libqt2 > jumped there. Don't worry; the fact that half of KDE is broken shows that it wasn't really planned. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * asako launches into a great fable of love, desperation, honor, and coffee spilled on motherboards. pgpr8oAG08Yoq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Fw: Bug#128089: kdegraphics: Build failure: including non-PIC code in shared object (ia64/unstable)
Can someone please help me with this? :) d - Forwarded message from LaMont Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Subject: Bug#128089: kdegraphics: Build failure: including non-PIC code in shared object (ia64/unstable) From: LaMont Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 23:42:43 -0700 (MST) Package: kdegraphics Version: 4:2.2.2-6 Severity: serious Build fails on ia64. Serious because this is keeping kdegraphics out of woody. Build log at: http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=ia64&pkg=kdegraphics libgphoto.a has non-PIC code in it, and gets used in the link of libkcm_kamera.so -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Kernel Version: Linux smallone 2.4.9-pa79 #2 Thu Nov 8 18:18:02 MST 2001 parisc64 unknown - End forwarded message ----- -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> hmm, someone remind me, what's the English term for startup lag? "netscape effect" pgpWvm9iQlTeI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Processed: Fixed in NMU of tkstep8.0 8.0.4p2-4.1
On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 11:30:49PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, LaMont Jones wrote: > > > > Additionally I see that you did other changes to unix/tkstepConfig.sh that > > > aren't even mentioned in the changelog! > > > > Here is the complete diff between what I uploaded, and what was in the > > archive. Dunno what change you're seeing in tkstepConfig.sh, but it > > was there in 4p2-4. > > I see why I saw the changed file: The file is generated during the buld of > the package. My mail was perhaps a bit too fast because I was (and I'm > still a bit) very angry that you did NMU less than 24 hours after I got > the bug report and without contacting me before - being angry is > unfortunately not the best thing for thinking rationale about why > something happened... Let me note that this is *at least* the second time lamont did this. He did a no-notice NMU to kdegraphics to fix a couple of small bugs, without informing anyone. Can someone please beat him upside the head with a copy of the Developer's Reference? -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> what does wu-ftpd do that proftpd doesn't (other than reveal new security holes every couple of months) pgpoWFPAPy48W.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#127252: kmerlin: Nope, it broke it
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 07:38:47AM +1100, Mark Purcell wrote: > Ok I see what has happened now. > > The libpng2/3 fiasco continues. > > It appears that after having to recompile kmerlin to work with libqt2/libpng3 > that they (maintainers of those pacakages) have decided that I again > have to recompile, but this time with libqt2/libpng2. :-( Ivan decided that libpng3 was the way forward for libqt2 people, but then Chris (rightly, IMHO) decided that libqt2 would keep libpng2, and libqt3 would have libpng3. > I'll upload something in the next couple of days. If you are really > desperate an `apt-get build-dep && apt-get source -b kmerlin` will > build your own kmerlin package for you which is usable. kdebase will be uploaded today and kdemultimedia tomorrow; the rest should be OK. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> hmm, someone remind me, what's the English term for startup lag? "netscape effect" pgpQdq7kxre67.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [ccheney@cheney.cx: libqt2 libpng2 resolution]
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 12:11:40AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On 7 Jan 2002, Philippe Troin wrote: > > How do you plan to prevent programs that link with libqt2 to also link > > with libpng3 ? Manual check ? > > Another possiblility is the following (only the new dependencies are > listed): > > Package: libqt2-dev > Conflicts: libpng3 > Build-Conflicts: libpng3 > > [note that libpng3 is the library package _not_ the -dev package] > > > This way neither a program that links with libqt2 nor a library libqt2 is > linked with can be linked with libpng3. What? That means that you can't have a libpng3 program on a machine with libqt2-dev installed ... icky. -d -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Craig Sanders isn't a real man; he's a social degenerate. -- Branden Robinson to debian-devel pgpw6NaFE7bDB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [ccheney@cheney.cx: libqt2 libpng2 resolution]
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 10:07:13AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit: > > > > It's only the -dev package, which is only required > > > for the compile time, and I believe it is quite small, only > > > with the symlinks and the static link files... > > > > > > Or better, libqt2-dev depend on libpng2-dev. > > > > They generally Build-Depend on libpng2-dev, I believe. > > If libqt-dev depends on libpng2-dev, and libpng2-dev > conflicts with libpng3-dev, whic is the case, > any package build-depending on libqt-dev AND libpng3-dev > will not build, which is probably the thing > we want. Isn't it? Right. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> NEW YORK (CNN) -- Internet users who spend even a few hours a week online at home experience higher levels of depression and loneliness than if they had used the computer network less frequently, The New York Times reported Sunday. The result ... surprised both researchers and sponsors, which included Intel Corp., Hewlett Packard, AT&T Research and Apple Computer. pgpYat7x2L9Vu.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [ccheney@cheney.cx: libqt2 libpng2 resolution]
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 01:27:04AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > "Steve M. Robbins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit: > > > How about libqt2-dev conflicting with libpng3-dev, or something like that. > > > > That's a bit obnoxious. Some folks might like to be developing code > > that uses libqt2 and *other code* tha uses libpng3, on the same debian > > box. > > It's only the -dev package, which is only required > for the compile time, and I believe it is quite small, only > with the symlinks and the static link files... > > Or better, libqt2-dev depend on libpng2-dev. They generally Build-Depend on libpng2-dev, I believe. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> hello? flood-join bots on the loose. ack it's the irc equivelant of slashdot users pgpMHj5tqFHSh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [kde] anti-aliasing is *NOT* supported!
On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 07:45:48PM +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote: > * Daniel Stone schrieb am 08.01.02 um 12:50 Uhr: > > Hi guys, > > Just to let you know that I will *not* support anti-aliasing. You can > > use it, but don't expect me to urgently follow up on bug reports > > involving AA, as it causes problems such as #123264. If you report an AA > > bug, I'll probably downgrade its severity and tag wontfix, because it's > > too buggy. > > > > That said, *please* make mention of whether you're using AA or not in > > your bug reports, because it makes my life easier. > > > > > Does this mean I've to rebuild the packages if I want to use AA? Is > there a compile option that turns AA-Support on or off? It's just a checkbox in the KDE config. > I think AA will be nice in KDE3 since then AA-Fonts should be > supported to live near non-AA fonts (QT3)... I hope you understand > what I mean ;) Support will be much better in qt3, but suckssuckssucks in qt2.2. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Overfiend_ can't recall reading about Francois MITTERAND or Georges CLEMENCEAU, let alone Napoleon BONAPARTE. Or Louis THE FOURTEENTH Overfiend_: None of them were Japanese. pgp53xANiw9Ks.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [kde] anti-aliasing is *NOT* supported!
On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 12:57:07PM +0100, Noel Koethe wrote: > On Die, 08 Jan 2002, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > Just to let you know that I will *not* support anti-aliasing. You can > > use it, but don't expect me to urgently follow up on bug reports > > involving AA, as it causes problems such as #123264. If you report an AA > > bug, I'll probably downgrade its severity and tag wontfix, because it's > > too buggy. > > Why not report it upstream? I may upstream it, but it's at the bottom of my TODO. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> the thing you forget is that all yanks are armed to the teeth you forget my Mutant Healing Factor. I forgot he was a freak with his bones made of unobtanium pgpROASdgVTaU.pgp Description: PGP signature
[kde] anti-aliasing is *NOT* supported!
Hi guys,
Just to let you know that I will *not* support anti-aliasing. You can
use it, but don't expect me to urgently follow up on bug reports
involving AA, as it causes problems such as #123264. If you report an AA
bug, I'll probably downgrade its severity and tag wontfix, because it's
too buggy.
That said, *please* make mention of whether you're using AA or not in
your bug reports, because it makes my life easier.
-d
(no, this is nothing new, as it was Ivan's policy too; I completely
agree with it and am just re-stating it)
--
Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
liiwi: printk("CPU0 on fire\n");
pgputnp15jnMF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: do what? kdm installs gnome?
On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 05:58:56AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.08.0309 +0100]: > > > how does kdebase fix this? by providing x-session-manager? > > the kdm binary package is part of the kdebase source package... > > kdebase already provides x-session-manager > > exactly. so how does kdebase want to fix this? As kov said, kdm is part of the kdebase source package. So, tomorrow, the kdebase source package will be uploaded, complete with the new version of kdm. BTW, you didn't need to file #128208. So, in short: * kdebase source upload tomorrow, with fix in kdm's Depends: field. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * asako launches into a great fable of love, desperation, honor, and coffee spilled on motherboards. pgpTvBJkFaLo5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: do what? kdm installs gnome?
On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 01:33:24AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.08.0105 +0100]: > > I think kdm should depend on: > > > > kdebase | x-session-manager | x-window-manager > > file bug should i? > bug should i file? > should file i bug? > bug file i should? > file should i bug? > > okay, that suffices. No, because a kdebase upload will be made today to fix it. :) -d -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wtf is pants? solomon: what goes on the floor of your girlfriend's floor pants - prevent computing without pants solomon: Blame thom, he made it. but wtf is it :) solomon: It's an init script that says 'Putting on pants' at startup, and 'Taking off pants' at shutdown. That's about it. pgpBmFJUpiSTx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [ccheney@cheney.cx: libqt2 libpng2 resolution]
On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 01:04:27PM -0800, Philippe Troin wrote: > Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 10:07:23AM -0800, Philippe Troin wrote: > > -snip- > > > > > > Sounds good to me. > > > > > > How do you plan to prevent programs that link with libqt2 to also link > > > with libpng3 ? Manual check ? > > > > yes manual check > > Ok. Excellent. > > Would you mind closing #126829, #126904, #127180, #127185, #127282 > with your libqt2 upload? These are all KDE/png related bugs which > should be solved by linking (again) libqt2 with libpng2. Actually, > closing only one of these ought to be enough (they are all merged). KDE packages for libpng2 will be uploaded today. -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> the UI SUCKS GOAT TESTICLES! oh c'mon Robot101, don't hold back... tell us what you *really* think yeah, do you feel that way all over or just in spots?
Adopting these packages
retitle 127711 ITA: kde-designer - Qt GUI Designer (with KDE Widget support) retitle 127707 ITA: kdemultimedia - Multimedia applications for KDE retitle 127706 ITA: kdebase - Core applications for KDE retitle 127705 ITA: kdelibs - Core libraries for KDE retitle 127698 ITA: meta-kde - KDE meta-package retitle 124184 ITA: kdoc - C++ and IDL source documentation system thanks (BCC'ed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]). I will adopt the KDE packages, while Chris "calc" Cheney will take Qt, and will also be the KDE3 maintainer when it comes around to it; by the time KDE2.2 is phased out in favour of KDE3, I won't have the time to maintain KDE, so it works out nicely. :) d Please CC all replies to me; the MX for the domain I get all list mail on is down, so I'm reduced to reading lists through the archives. If you don't, I reserve the right to have a long, flaming, thread about the fact. Oh, and sorry about the line wrapping - LookOut! Express doesn't have it. :\
Re: (forw) [ardo@debian.org: proposal for an Apache (web server) task force]
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:01:49AM -0500, Ardo_Vanrangelrooij wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 12:36:37AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > From: Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: Johnie Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org > > > Subject: proposal for an Apache (web server) task force > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I would like to propose to form an Apache (web server) task force to > > > maintain the > > > Apache packages currently maintained by Johnie Ingram (netgod) (and > > > potentially > > > related packages if the need arises). The current state of Apache and > > > the recent > > > need to fix at least some of the outstanding bugs led me to the > > > conclusion a more > > > active maintenance of these packages is needed. The intend of this > > > proposal is > > > not to simply take over the packages (although it might come to that), > > > but to help > > > in the maintenance of them. > > > > Yes, the bug list is huge. I'm not subscribed to -devel, but this thread > > was mentioned on IRC and thus forwarded to me. > > > > > As the first step I propose to add an Uploaders field to the package > > > (once we have > > > a list of people). > > > > > > Some of the other things this task force would do are > > > > > > - writing up guidelines for packaging Apache modules (a kind of policy > > > doc) > > > - migration to Apache 2 (IIRC an ITP for this has already been filed by > > > somebody) > > > > "What is 'not on a cold day in hell'?" ;) > > And you react like this exactly why? Perhaps I should have said 'could' > instead of > 'would' and make the second item 'support in migrating to Apache2'. I > certainly didn't > want to imply that you and Thom would be out of business because of this. > But I'm sure > that we cannot drop Apache2 in place and assume everything keeps working fine > without > a hitch. I was merely thinking that this task force could participate in > testing and > porting stuff over. There's no need to feel threatened by this proposal. > You're work > is appreciated. No, I don't feel at all threatened, it's just that apache2 is still in alpha and nowhere near ready to replace apache; not by a long shot. > > Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and myself are maintaining apache2. If you > > want to > > email anything related, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the address; that > > goes to both of us. Currently it's not in Debian because Thom's laptop > > has blown up. He did very extensive hacking on said laptop (which was > > really cool), and it's back in the UK (irony, since he's a Pom > > backpacker here in .au) getting fixed. There were no backups or > > anything, so I'm just waiting from some stuff from Thom's tree. > > > > In the meantime, I've toyed with modperl-2.0 and php4 for apache2. I got > > a successful install of php4 after an apache2 install, but I need to do > > silly build and apache2 voodoo to get it integrated. I'm currently > > working on it, but I don't exactly have a lot of time. > > > > The current place for my packages is > > http://kabuki.sfarc.net/apache2/README. Note that this is strictly > > non-US due to modules/ssl and modules/tls in the apache2 source. These > > packages don't include mod_perl2 and php4; if you want you can grab them > > from CVS and attempt to build. > > > > > I also propose to set up a mailing list for this. > > > > Feel free, but apache2 is nowhere near ready for prime-time. Hell, they > > haven't even agreed on a release that should be a beta candidate since > > 2.0.18, which was ... a long time ago. I'd give it probably more than a > > year before I even thought about letting it loose in production. > > I didn't expect the migration to happen overnight. But there are certainly a > lot of gotchas when moving to Apache2 which need to be sorted out and > resolved. > If we have a year to do this, all the better given the time certain things > might take. I think that we need to maintain them separately for quite some time; even when apache2 *does* replace apache, we should still have an apache1 package. > > I also got bored a while ago, and discovered that 2.0.24 builds cleanly > > (and works) on Progeny. > > Cool! > > > :) d > > (CC all replies to me as I'm not on -devel). > > Done. Thanks :) -d -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I got Linux for Christmas... but it don't work... I'm taking it back to the shops I got Debian from Dad, RedHat from Mum, and slackware from my brother... he's no brother of mine no more
Re: (forw) [ardo@debian.org: proposal for an Apache (web server) task force]
> From: Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Johnie Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org > Subject: proposal for an Apache (web server) task force > > Hi, > > I would like to propose to form an Apache (web server) task force to maintain > the > Apache packages currently maintained by Johnie Ingram (netgod) (and > potentially > related packages if the need arises). The current state of Apache and the > recent > need to fix at least some of the outstanding bugs led me to the conclusion a > more > active maintenance of these packages is needed. The intend of this proposal > is > not to simply take over the packages (although it might come to that), but to > help > in the maintenance of them. Yes, the bug list is huge. I'm not subscribed to -devel, but this thread was mentioned on IRC and thus forwarded to me. > As the first step I propose to add an Uploaders field to the package (once we > have > a list of people). > > Some of the other things this task force would do are > > - writing up guidelines for packaging Apache modules (a kind of policy doc) > - migration to Apache 2 (IIRC an ITP for this has already been filed by > somebody) "What is 'not on a cold day in hell'?" ;) Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and myself are maintaining apache2. If you want to email anything related, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the address; that goes to both of us. Currently it's not in Debian because Thom's laptop has blown up. He did very extensive hacking on said laptop (which was really cool), and it's back in the UK (irony, since he's a Pom backpacker here in .au) getting fixed. There were no backups or anything, so I'm just waiting from some stuff from Thom's tree. In the meantime, I've toyed with modperl-2.0 and php4 for apache2. I got a successful install of php4 after an apache2 install, but I need to do silly build and apache2 voodoo to get it integrated. I'm currently working on it, but I don't exactly have a lot of time. The current place for my packages is http://kabuki.sfarc.net/apache2/README. Note that this is strictly non-US due to modules/ssl and modules/tls in the apache2 source. These packages don't include mod_perl2 and php4; if you want you can grab them from CVS and attempt to build. > I also propose to set up a mailing list for this. Feel free, but apache2 is nowhere near ready for prime-time. Hell, they haven't even agreed on a release that should be a beta candidate since 2.0.18, which was ... a long time ago. I'd give it probably more than a year before I even thought about letting it loose in production. I also got bored a while ago, and discovered that 2.0.24 builds cleanly (and works) on Progeny. :) d (CC all replies to me as I'm not on -devel). -- Daniel Stone<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I got Linux for Christmas... but it don't work... I'm taking it back to the shops I got Debian from Dad, RedHat from Mum, and slackware from my brother... he's no brother of mine no more
[PATCH] kernel-image-2.4.4-i386's flavours
If you have not read #96854, please do so now. With that in mind, here's the following patch. IMHO this is the right solution, the only other one I could think of is having kernel-headers-2.4.4-i386-common, providing all except config-specific files, and kernel-headers-2.4.4-$(flavour), providing flavour-specific files, but that way still sucks, IMHO. d -- Daniel Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- rules.crap Sun Apr 22 11:50:02 2001 +++ rules Wed May 9 20:52:26 2001 @@ -30,22 +30,15 @@ cp debian/changelog kernel-source-$(version)/debian cp debian/control kernel-source-$(version)/debian > kernel-source-$(version)/debian/official - for i in $(flavours); do \ - cp -al kernel-source-$(version) build-$$i; \ - cp config/$$i build-$$i/.config; \ - cd build-$$i; \ - cd ..; \ - done cp config/default kernel-source-$(version)/.config touch unpack-stamp build: build-stamp build-stamp: unpack-stamp - for i in $(flavours); do \ - cd build-$$i; \ - make-kpkg --flavour $$i build; \ - cd ..; \ + cd kernel-source-$(version); \ + make-kpkg build; \ + cd ..; \ done touch build-stamp @@ -70,15 +63,9 @@ cd kernel-source-$(version); \ make-kpkg kernel-headers mv kernel-source-$(version)/debian/files debian - for i in $(flavours); do \ - cp -al build-$$i install-$$i; \ - cd install-$$i; \ - make-kpkg --flavour $$i kernel-headers; \ - make-kpkg --flavour $$i --initrd kernel-image; \ - cd ..; \ - cat install-$$i/debian/files >> debian/files; \ - rm -rf install-$$i; \ - done + make-kpkg --initrd kernel-image; \ + cd ..; \ + cat kernel-source-$(version)/debian/files >> debian/files; \ mv *.deb .. binary: binary-indep binary-arch
Re: why dig ? I wanna use nslookup !
On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 06:21:58PM +0200, David N. Welton wrote: > Adding readline support, while you're at it, would be really nice:-) And alias "quit" to "exit". :) -d, who now uses dig -- Daniel Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
