Re: UPS setup problems (apcuspd and genpower)
If you buy a Smart-UPS, it COMES with the cable to make it work with the right cable. Sure, not all cables will support it, but that's a non-issue if you use what comes with your UPS. Dave Bristel On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Andreas Tille wrote: Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 08:45:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: David Bristel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Thomas R. Shemanske [EMAIL PROTECTED], Debian Development liste debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: UPS setup problems (apcuspd and genpower) On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, David Bristel wrote: This is one of the reasons why I've been happy I bought a Smart-UPS, not only does it provide more information(ammount of battery power and UPS load as well as other information), but the apcd package for APC monitoring worked on it out of the box for slink. May be I wasn't explaining my point in clear words: Yes, I *own* a Smart-UPS, but *not* every cable is able to support that mode. Check your cable facilities to get a working UPS daemon! Kind regards Andreas.
Re: UPS setup problems (apcuspd and genpower)
This is one of the reasons why I've been happy I bought a Smart-UPS, not only does it provide more information(ammount of battery power and UPS load as well as other information), but the apcd package for APC monitoring worked on it out of the box for slink. Dave Bristel On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Andreas Tille wrote: Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 08:51:51 +0200 (CEST) From: Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Thomas R. Shemanske [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Debian Development liste debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: UPS setup problems (apcuspd and genpower) Resent-Date: 27 Mar 2000 07:01:59 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Thomas R. Shemanske wrote: A few days ago, I posted this to the debian-users list, but got no takers. Perhaps someone here has some ideas. OK, if noone else replied I'll give it a trial. Consider me as a fool with the fortune to get a running UPS daemon and not as an expert in this field!! Once I tried *every* single UPS daemon package of the Debian system without any success. The reason was (if I remember right) that they were talking to the UPS via SMART connection (please read more in your documentation about that topic). Unfortunately the cable shipped with my UPS didn't support this mode. It only supportet SIMPLE connection. (Note: Possibly you have to swap the words SMART and SIMPLE in the previous text. They are possibly confused by my unSMART memory :-). ) Please read all the documentation (of the daemon and the hardware) very carefully, which cables you need or how you can build the right cable yourself. After failing with all I tried to package ssd from the APC site. I was successfull in packaging it but it failed to work because of the same reason I stated above. Because I couldn't test it I uploaded it to experimental. May be you give it a triel. But don't blame me if it don't work!! Take it or ask me to remove it from there. Finally I took the smupsd which is shipped with RedHat and happyly I was successful. The package is available in potato. Please check the configuration file very carefully. It needs investigation by hand! (Any volunteers to add debconf stuff to the package??? Unfortunately I have no time for this. May be anyone more experienced than me takes over the package. It is in a works for me state.) May be you can gain more information in a Hardware related mailinglist or newsgroup as I did. Kind regards Andreas. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
Do you remember GNOME 0.30? I do because it was in stable after 1.0 was released. What would YOU call the more stable version? Just because something makes it into stable doesn't mean it's really a fully stable package. And just because something is NEWER doesn't mean it's not stable, or even bleeding edge. Now, running unstable is the bleeding edge, and probably everyone on devel has done a fair ammount of bleeding because of it. It's what we accept. But, the general trend on software updates is that, major version changes aside, they FIX problems and make using that package easier. People who call for the release version when all that was previously in stable was an alpha or beta version arn't asking for bleeding edge stuff. The call for shorter development cycles will fix this problem, but until Woody is frozen(which we can HOPE will be only another 3-4 months after Potato is released), people will be looking for XF86 4.0, possibly Kernel 2.4(full, not pre-release), and so on. If Debian does a stable release each time a major package comes out, sure, we will end up with releases very quickly, but to prepare a new release will also be EASIER, since not every single package will change between releases. Dave Bristel On Sun, 12 Mar 2000, Steve Greenland wrote: Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 15:53:41 -0600 From: Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger! Resent-Date: 12 Mar 2000 21:53:48 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On 12-Mar-00, 10:56 (CST), Ron Farrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I disagree! (surprise ;) I personally know of about ~4 people who were turned away from slink because GNOME and KDE were so OLD. I personally got around this by running potato (unstable then), but most people don't WANT to run unstable! Which is it? Do your friends want the newest bleeding edge stuff, or do they want stability? They can't have both at the same time! Oh, I see, the want the newest, but they want us to call it stable. Sigh. Why is is this basic distinction so hard to explain to people? Testing and reliability take time. During that time, new features are going to show up in various parts of the system. Along with those new features come compatibility and reliability problems. You can either have the new features, or you can have a tested, stable, reliable *system*. *YOU* *CAN'T* *HAVE* *BOTH*. Steve -- Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read every list I post to.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
Joey, I can't take credit for the idea, it's been mentioned on -devel at least 5 times in the past since slink was released. I'd avoid doing a semi-stable though. But what we do is make Woody a, Potato with the following updates. Call it a point release seperate from the normal unstable. Basically, an extended frozen period for packages that didn't make it into Potato due to bugs, as well as a time to get the big release packages into the distribution with proper testing. Other big changes can wait for after, but we don't want to RELEASE something we can't feel comfortable with calling stable. And semi-stable may as well be an image of either unstable Woody, or frozen Woody. Dave Bristel On Sun, 12 Mar 2000, Joey Hess wrote: Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 18:18:25 -0800 From: Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: David Bristel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger! David Bristel wrote: The solution to this is that we ignore woody for the moment, and begin an all out effort to get the 2.4 kernel, XF4.0, and Apache 2.0 into Debian as STABLE. The work for these things can also incorporate the work needed to re-add the packages that were removed because of bugs. I know people LOVE to work on unstable, and I don't recomend we delay potato's release, so this is the alternative. We release potato when it's ready, then prepare a point release for the major packages. Call the maintenance release potato mk 2 or something. Seems we've independently reached the same conclusion -- that's what I was going to post! I'd like to propose that we make a committment to getting an update to potato out within a month of the release of the 2.4 kernel or the release of potato, whichever comes last. (I did a similar thing for slink in a 3 week time-frame, and so I think this is a reasonable time-frame.) This update would NOT be blessed as stable, it would be a semi-stable release with: - 2.4 kernel and support utilities - X 4.0 drivers (but probably just X servers, to minimize changes; Branden has huge reorganizations in mind for X) This would be a full Debian release, with a version number, boot floppies, CD images, etc, etc. After it ages for a few months, we may choose to call it stable but at first it would be called something that denotes it is semi-stable. Please speak up if you like this idea. -- see shy jo
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
The solution to this is that we ignore woody for the moment, and begin an all out effort to get the 2.4 kernel, XF4.0, and Apache 2.0 into Debian as STABLE. The work for these things can also incorporate the work needed to re-add the packages that were removed because of bugs. I know people LOVE to work on unstable, and I don't recomend we delay potato's release, so this is the alternative. We release potato when it's ready, then prepare a point release for the major packages. Call the maintenance release potato mk 2 or something. Dave Bristel On Sat, 11 Mar 2000, Jacob Kuntz wrote: Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 16:06:01 -0500 From: Jacob Kuntz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger! Resent-Date: 11 Mar 2000 21:05:46 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; our biggest handicap is that we're always a year behind everyone else. being a year behind is suicide in any industry. being a year behind in an industry that moves as fast as open source software, is idiocy. our stable release is using 2.0.36. most people are afraid of our 'unstable' tree. you've seen all the threads about people trying to upgrade from slink to potato and having all sorts of problems. why do they do it? because slink is so far behind that it isn't usefull anymore. IMHO, leaving out 2.4 is a bad idea. there were problems with 2.0 - 2.2. there was an incompatible build of lsof, as well as some networking problems. i feel the same way about xf86 4.0 and apache 2.0. all of these releases are going to generate a lot of press, not to mention the fact that these are very usefull products. yeah, it will be a lot of work. building a good distribution *is* a lot of work. this thread brings up an interesting topic: how can we keep up? the debian project is huge. no one is going to contest that it could be difficult to pump out a stable release of this size every 3 months. or any interval for that matter. but something really does have to be done, or debian will fall into laughability. i think i have the beginning of a good idea. please flame/comment as you see fit. make a release every 3 months with an official cd image, fanfair on the website, the whole shebang. only include enough on the cd to do a basic install. only consider 'release critical' bugs release critical if they're against required base pacakges. the rest of the distribution would remain on the archive sites. with this pattern, we produce four releases per year. three interim releases (2.3, 2.4, 2.5) and one major release (3.0). in order to figure out what packages to include on the interim release, we probably should get statistics on what most people use. perhaps analize logs from the archive sites, and encourage more people to use popularity-contest.deb. what do you folks think? Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 01:57:49PM -0500, SCOTT FENTON wrote: OK, Linus has just put out 2.3.51, the next patch will be a pre-2.4 one. To avoid the problems we've had with slink not being 2.2, I reccomend that, even if it's not the default, we include a 2.4 /binary/ in potato. You could even put a note in the potato release notes saying you don't reccomend putting it on, but please /please/ PLEASE put potato out with a 2.4, or even pre-2.4 binary. What problems have we have with slink not being 2.2? I don't see any. In fact, I protest profusely, since 2.4 will require a great deal of work to work out the pcmcia kinks. There is nothing wrong with 2.2. What I want is 2.2.15 in potato, nothing more. -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- (jacob kuntz)[EMAIL PROTECTED],underworld}.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] (megabite systems) think free speech, not free beer. (gnu foundataion) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
I agree, we shouldn't care about keeping up with the other dists when stability may suffer because of it. At the same time, as you have noticed, there are a number of commercial packages out there that may require the newer kernel versions, or apps. We do NOT want people to choose Redhat over Debian just because they can't run the Linux apps they want to. I'm not saying that I care for these commercial apps, but a business that WANTS to run Debian, as well as run a commercial app should be able to. Dave Bristel On Sun, 12 Mar 2000, Jacob Kuntz wrote: Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 01:02:42 -0500 From: Jacob Kuntz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger! Resent-Date: 12 Mar 2000 06:01:56 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Hamish Moffatt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 04:06:01PM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote: our biggest handicap is that we're always a year behind everyone else. being a year behind is suicide in any industry. being a year behind in an industry Have you listened to yourself? Depends on what your aims are; if you want to be hip, cool, most popular etc then I guess 'new' is a higher priority than 'stable'. Otherwise, let's stick with the proven 2.2 series. aarrgghh. you are missing the point. what i'm trying to get across here is that we aren't keeping up with what's going on in the rest of the world. linux and other free software projects are rapidly becoming something very good. in order to facilitate and encourage this, we distribution coordinators need to pull not neccicarily the latest but certianly the greatest free software together in a usefull, functional way. the issue at hand here is not the kernel. the issue is the release practice. i think there should be an initiative to bring out stable releases more often. if we don't, it will be just another excuse to use commercial software. i don't think any of us want that. on the other hand, bringing out any software package prematurly will also discourage use of free software. i was really hoping the we could get past the knee-jerk reactionary comments like hell no, we won't put in an untested kernel and get on with here's how we could make more stable releases. i see no problem at all with waiting for 2.4.10 (or so) before shoving that in the users lap. just so long as we do get it in before it too is obsolete. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB. CCs of replies on mailing lists are welcome. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- (jacob kuntz)[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED],underworld}.net (megabite systems) think free speech, not free beer. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: /usr/etc and /usr/local/etc?
On 5 Oct 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: 05 Oct 1999 23:39:05 +0200 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Richard Kaszeta [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: /usr/etc and /usr/local/etc? Resent-Date: 5 Oct 1999 21:39:55 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Richard Kaszeta [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Martin Schulze writes (Re: /usr/etc and /usr/local/etc?): Aaron Van Couwenberghe wrote: Just a quick inquiry -- Why is it that we exclude /usr/etc from our distribution? FHS and FSSTND Because configuration belongs to /etc. Period. Good point, but etc blows up to quite a size and can´t be shared across hosts. ... Config files are, by their nature, host-specific, and should not be in /usr They are not. e.g. /etc/hosts should be the same across a pool. Nearly all files in /etc can be shared and none should be rewritten on the fly. This is what NIS and NIS+ are for, to share these files across hosts. A lot of UNIX derived systems end up modifying the normal placement of files because a few people feel they have a better way to do things. The end result is the mess /etc has become over the years. I would LOVE to see /etc become configuration files only, with NO binaries in there at all. To be able to do an rgrep in /etc to find a config, and never have binary garbage fly across the screen would make life a LOT easier. Programs such as gated which install themselves in /etc as the default also drive me crazy. Now, back on topic, if you need to share a file NIS/NIS+ will work. Someone else may have a better solution, such as Samba. David Bristel Apart from /etc/mtab (which can be linked to /proc/mounts) normaly nothing gets written to /etc and / can be ro. For diskless systems /usr/etc and /usr/share/etc could reduce the size of the ramdisk or root fs needed to boot and more data could be shared across a pool. Alternatively /etc/share/, /etc/arch and /etc/local could be used. Just as one likes. May the Source be with you. Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unstable release
apt-get update apt-get dist-upgrade These two lines should be run after you update your /etc/apt/source.list to point to unstable. Dave Bristel On Mon, 4 Oct 1999, [iso-8859-1] Staffan Hämälä wrote: Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 20:44:48 +0200 From: [iso-8859-1] Staffan Hämälä [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Unstable release Resent-Date: 4 Oct 1999 18:45:06 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Hi, I'm just curious about how other people succeed in installing the potato release. Myself, I have always had _lots_ of trouble when trying that. First, I installed it at home, and dselect freaked out and started complaining over files that didn't exist. This was due to the fact that ftp downloads the softlinks that point to slink packages instead of the actual files. That time I had downloaded the whole lot with ncftp. I downloaded another time using wget with the option to get real files. That worked better, and dselect found all files. Still, the big problem was dselect because it complained about so many things it flipped out and refused to install any more packages (I barely got a working system). Last week I tried the same thing at work, installing over ftp, and I thik the installer also downloaded just the links, but not the actual files, so this time I wasn't even able to boot the system after running dselect. After this I installed slink instead, and it worked like a charm. Of course, I know that it's an unstable release, but is it really this hard to install, or is it me doing something wrong? If I could just get it installed properly (I run it at home, but had to do a lot of manual tuning, and adding all packages I wanted using dpkg --force* instead of dselect), I would be glad to report problems, and also fix some, but as it is now that the installation doesn't seem to work at all for me I really don't feel like reporting problems because the fault probably lies in my installation anyway. How are you installing potato? Is there some magic way to make ftp install work when there are soft links on the server? Is there a way to make dselect go on installing other packages even though it finds ten faulty packages first in the list? (This way I could add those ten manually afterwards). Thanks, Staffan Hamala -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How not to be a nice person (Was: Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality)
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Hamish Moffatt wrote: Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 15:05:22 +1000 From: Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: How not to be a nice person (Was: Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality) Resent-Date: 2 Oct 1999 05:05:34 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 12:46:46PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: Excuse me. I work for TurboLinux. the implication here is that you know what you are talking about because you work for a real (i.e. commercial) linux distribution. When in fact the opposite is true? :-) Please don't add fuel to the fire. While almost all those on -devel(including myself) feel that Debian is the best distribution out there, it's not good to start putting down other distributions. I myself have a severe dislike of Redhat, but I'd not go to the point of saying it's not a real distribution. Anyone who works in the computer industry in any area knows that it is a difficult task to create even the most basic product and support it. This is why being a developer holds such high regard by those technically knowledgeable. There have been a number of arguments that have shown up on this list, and this is only the most recent. The only way to stop these arguments from getting out of control is to keep them off the list, and in personal e-mail if you feel you need to insult them, or defend yourself against them. If they can't respond rationally, or if the argument gets out of hand, go to someone about your problem who MIGHT be able to help settle the argument. I hope this helps in some way, as I do not wish to see Debian get ripped apart because of personal differences between people. Debian has continued to grow, and gain support through the hard work of MANY people, not just one or two, or even a handful. So, let's keep the good of the distribution in mind, work through any differences we may have, and continue on. David Bristel Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB (ex-VK3TYD). CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How not to be a nice person (Was: Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality)
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Hamish Moffatt wrote: Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 15:10:23 +1000 From: Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: How not to be a nice person (Was: Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality) Resent-Date: 2 Oct 1999 05:10:33 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 09:06:59PM -0500, The Doctor What wrote: On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 08:47:20PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: In short, a summary (admittedly from my point of view) follows: In a discussion on whether network daemons should do one of the following: a) Simply start up, grabbing any ports it needs (most do this) b) Not start up (a few do this) c) Ask about what ports to grab and whether to start up (some do this) This letter is to make it public that I think Craig has gone too far. He has hurt my feelings and has been very insulting to everyone in debian-devel. And this is not the way to get things done. Did you consider his point, though? Why would you install a service if you don't want it to run? Simple answer here, if you install a group of packages during the install, you may not realize what packages you have installed. For those who do custom installs as the only way, you probably have never experienced what Scientific Workstation may end up installing. If you are in a hurry, you may choose that option, then not spend the time picking through all the packages to remove the ones you want. A possible solution would be a daemon flag to go on a package, and after the install, the installed daemons are listed. This is just an idea, but that's another subject. David Bristel
Re: How not to be a nice person (Was: Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality)
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Craig Sanders wrote: Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 20:06:10 +1000 From: Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Doctor What [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: How not to be a nice person (Was: Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality) Resent-Date: 2 Oct 1999 10:06:43 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 11:52:59PM -0500, The Doctor What wrote: You on the other hand show no thought for anyone else. i show no regard for those who demonstrate they are fools. i show contempt for those who demonstrate that they are annoying fools. guess which category you fall into. This is where you are at fault, Craig. If you feel someone is a fool, or an annoying fool, then you should either make your point, and show CLEARLY that your point is the right one. You should do so without insults, and without any comments that would lead to an argument rather than debate on an issue. Further, you harm Debian by going off topic to make your opinion of a PERSON on the list, rather than keeping it off the list. If you feel the need to insult someone, then PLEASE, do it in private e-mails so it doesn't get out of hand. David Bristel
Re: slink - potato
Strange, I've never had a hard time with a dist-upgrade when I am remote. Of course, it's best to open a new telnet window once the upgrade is complete, and to not do a final reboot until you are on site, since if it doesn't boot, you are stuck. But that behavior of losing connection is generally only a problem if you use dial-up. If you use ethernet, you won't lose connectivity unless your connection dies. Dave Bristel On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, John Lapeyre wrote: Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 11:43:17 -0700 From: John Lapeyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [iso-8859-1] andreas pålsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian developers debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: slink - potato Resent-Date: 1 Oct 1999 18:43:30 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Something I have noticed several times. If you are doing a remote upgrade (probably a crazy idea), the telnet daemon (maybe inetd or something) becomes unavailble for quite some time. Maybe it is between the time that netbase is unpacked and when it is configured. There are usually problems with a broken package or two so that apt-get upgrade does not work on the first try. If I lose my telnet connection, I can't telnet again to fix things. *andreas pålsson wrote: Hello. I'm about to make an update of a base Slink-system to the unstable Potato. Is there anything I should think of or preperations to be made before updating? Why I do this is because I want to become a Debian-developer, and any hints and tips are much appreciated. Sincerely... Andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- John Lapeyre [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tucson,AZ http://www.physics.arizona.edu/~lapeyre -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: pine in other distributions?
You may have noticed that the other distributions also have KDE included in them. Because of the license flaw, Debian does not allow KDE in main. Redhat and others include it because there is little chance of legal action against them for this inclusion. The same applies here, Redhat seems to include as many good packages as it can, but will also ignore any potential legal issues if the risk of a lawsuit is low. From a business standpoint, this is good behavior, but doesn't speak very highly of the morals of those who select what goes into their distributions. Dave Bristel On Tue, 28 Sep 1999, Piotr Roszatycki wrote: Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 22:48:08 +0200 (CEST) From: Piotr Roszatycki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Development Mailing List debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: pine in other distributions? Resent-Date: 28 Sep 1999 20:48:12 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; I'm a little suprised. I found pine package in redhat-contrib which has a few additional patches. The most interesting is pine4.10-qtcolor-0.1.patch. pine.README.colours: --- To turn on the pretty colours patch set the PINECOL environment variable to true. 08/02/99 Simon Liddington [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- BTW, other pine's version is a part of official RedHat distribution, but I don't know is it legal? Will the pine return back to distribution? Well, this is the mostly used mailer by my users (and me). -- Piotr Dexter Roszatycki mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Censoring :) (was: Re: anarchism_7.7-1.deb)
I agree with you on this one, we do NOT need html, or text versions of the Bible, or other non-technical or computer related documents in main. As it is, potato is HUGE, larger than ANY other distribution. My thought is that if it is not a program, or does not enhance or assist in the use of a program, then it should probably not go into main. Note that documentation on Linux and Debian assist in the use of these programs. On the same note, debates about Linux vs. other operating systems and environments, these also fall under the, Leave it out since it won't help with the use of what we provide. That is to be fair. Many people already put contrib and non-free into their sources.list, so it won't hurt anyone by putting these sort of things in contrib. Dave Bristel On 27 Sep 1999, Siggy Brentrup wrote: Date: 27 Sep 1999 11:46:39 +0200 From: Siggy Brentrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Censoring :) (was: Re: anarchism_7.7-1.deb) Resent-Date: 27 Sep 1999 11:11:42 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; *** Please _don't_Cc:_ me when following up to the list *** Sorry for responding late, had a mail hickup on sunday :( Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] it's irrelevant whether other debian developers or users agree with me or disagree with me about the relative utility of these two packages. by not censoring packages, by refusing to censor packages, we create a distribution which is good and useful for everyone - not just those whose needs are the same as the censors. some find the bible package useful and i don't begrudge them that - if it makes debian more useful to them then it is a good thing that it is included. we should not be censoring, we should not be saying the bible is good but the koran or bhagavid gita or even the anarchist faq is worthless. or vice-versa. Is it really censoring to keep all non-technical packages out of main? I don't say don't package it nor don't make it available. if something is free and someone does the work to package it then we accept it in the distribution. There should be one for the main distribution. Assume I want to go into the CD business providing support for packages in the main dist. No major problem with most of the packages, but I am not willing to support packages with philosophical, political or religious contents. The way it is, I can't say Support for all of Debian's main dist. My point is, should there be subjective stuff in the main dist? CU Siggy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Conference! - around the world with Debian
Or crossover cable. Dave Bristel On 24 Sep 1999, Ruud de Rooij wrote: Date: 24 Sep 1999 17:16:06 +0200 From: Ruud de Rooij [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Conference! - around the world with Debian Resent-Date: 24 Sep 1999 15:16:16 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Ben Pfaff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Peter Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Russell Coker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: For those of us who attend in multiple countries we could book plane flights together (hopefully get a good deal), play network Quake in the plane, etc. Then we need a sponsor with a big wallet. ...or a battery-powered hub :-) Have people forgotten about coax? :-) - Ruud de Rooij. -- ruud de rooij | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://ruud.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Running daemons without asking for permission on install
This is also a very big issue for those who install groups of packages during the install. I know that I was recently bitten by this when I chose to install a number of groups of packages, and didn't realize that the masquerading and redirecting versions of inetd were installed. It took some investigation to figure out what was happening. Dave Bristel On Sat, 25 Sep 1999, Lars Wirzenius wrote: Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 22:01:29 GMT From: Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Running daemons without asking for permission on install Resent-Date: 25 Sep 1999 22:03:47 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Martin Bialasinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [If] I install a daemon, I want to use it. However, if you install a daemon by mistake, or without knowing it, it would be nice to be alerted to this fact. Such things might happen because you didn't know that, say, linuxconf or Gnome run daemons, or because the program you want to install requires a daemon to be running. I'm not sure if the correct solution to this is to ask a question on install, but at least it's better than to do things without warning. Which reminds me, it might be nice for Debian to run something akin to a port scanner locally from cron.daily or something, so that the sysadmin will notice such problems better. (Optionally, and not reporting ports that the sysadmin knows are OK.) -- Stupid little mailer under construction, sorry for any problems. pgpWaiabG9l7H.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ProFTPd being lame
I was refering to the equivilant of a VirtualServer section in Apache...to just send Roxen the information for a new account, including IP address and directories, and have it do it automatically without admin intervention. While it CAN be done, it would be a pain in the ass. Dave Bristel On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Hirling Endre wrote: Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 20:30:40 +0200 (CEST) From: Hirling Endre [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: David Bristel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Anders Arnholm [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chris Rutter [EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: ProFTPd being lame On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, David Bristel wrote: Off topic The only feature it lacks is the ability to do automated account setup from another script. (Which is the ONLY thing that apache does better than Roxen). Maybe I'll tinker a bit and make a module for auto-creation of new web accounts from a shell script or something. Until then, for web hosting, Apache is the better choice. /Off topic Hmmm... what about SQL user auth module, user filesystem, and creating web accounts into a mysql table? You can authenticate your web, ftp, pop3 servers from it, and with a few lines of RXML/Pike the user can change his password from a browser via https. I think this can be very well automated. If you want a virtualhost per user, even a siple shell/perl script can fill a server template (or Pike script if you'd better like creating users from a web interface :)) (or I'm misunderstanding what you mean as 'web account'..) greetings endre -- ..all in all it's just another rule in the firewall. /Ping Flood/
Re: Roxen virtual servers, was: Re: ProFTPd being lame
Hm, I didn't see that the config files were in text format. From this, I'll need to look again. Thanks. Dave Bristel On 21 Sep 1999, Martin Bialasinski wrote: Date: 21 Sep 1999 13:21:56 +0200 From: Martin Bialasinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Developerslist debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Roxen virtual servers, was: Re: ProFTPd being lame Resent-Date: 21 Sep 1999 11:23:17 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; * David == David Bristel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David I was refering to the equivilant of a VirtualServer section David in Apache...to just send Roxen the information for a new David account, including IP address and directories, and have it do David it automatically without admin intervention. While it CAN be David done, it would be a pain in the ass. Why this? Virtual servers in Roxern are defined in seperate files. So copy a template into the conf dir, do some sed or perl to replace name and other things you want, do a reload of the configs, Voila. No manual intervention on the steps, fully scriptable. Ask on the Roxen Mailinglist for example implementations, if you want to do this. Ciao, Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Move proftpd to contrib
I was thinking more that, if we are going to remove a buggy package because of the bugs, we should still provide it, since there are some people that are looking for that package. Maybe a section of main called buggy if it's still included for completeness? Dave Bristel On Sat, 18 Sep 1999, Robert Stone wrote: Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 15:49:37 -0700 From: Robert Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: David Bristel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Move proftpd to contrib On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 07:52:24AM -0700, David Bristel wrote: Or a new section for packages removed from main due to bugs, but possibly still desired by some people? It's safer to have a clear message that Debian considers these packages to contain too many bugs for inclusion in the main distribution, but we are aware that there are some who want to use these packages anyway. Something like this would eliminate any blame if people use those buggy packages, and then have their systems crash or go unstable, or get hacked. Any opinions? I would fear it would come across like were pointing fingers at bad software developers in the community, as though we were putting a package on probation for being too buggy. I don't think our goal is to seperate good software from bad software. It might be within our scope to publish bugs per code lines per year statistics or other hard number observations to make that decision easier for others, and possibly avoid dependencies on software that has too high a ratio of bugs to code lines or some other weighted but objective comparision. A good bug vector would also give credit to software more widely deployed (1 in every X persons sees a bug in package Y every Z months). Our goal is in a general sense to make free sofware easier to install, use, and maintain. If that software has problems, it's not our place to single it out. At most it might be worthwhile to help identify where more developer effort needs to go, but if we don't have the resources to devote that effort, it could be harmful to point fingers. -Robert
Re: ProFTPd being lame
You are correct. Of course, many people forget about this since they think of Roxen as a web server, and ftp being a secondary feature. Of course, with all the Apache fanatics out there, many have never even checked out Roxen. Dave Bristel On Sun, 19 Sep 1999, Raul Miller wrote: Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 00:29:10 -0400 From: Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Robert Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Chris Rutter [EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: ProFTPd being lame Resent-Date: 19 Sep 1999 04:29:14 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 04:21:34PM -0700, Robert Stone wrote: Virtualhosting in proftpd is far easier than with wu-ftpd. As it stands now, I don't believe any debian ftp server supports virtual anon ftp sites as provided besides proftpd. roxen does. -- Raul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ProFTPd being lame
On Sun, 19 Sep 1999, Anders Arnholm wrote: Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 12:18:53 +0200 From: Anders Arnholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Robert Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Chris Rutter [EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: ProFTPd being lame Resent-Date: 19 Sep 1999 10:19:02 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Robert Stone wrote: Virtualhosting in proftpd is far easier than with wu-ftpd. As it stands now, I don't believe any debian ftp server supports virtual anon ftp sites as provided besides proftpd. Roxen does, at least if you have different IP numbers, I can't get IP-less vistual hosting to work with ftp sessions. And as a ISP the security issues of Proftpd shuold be a realy big consern. Well, FTP isn't designed to work with the HTML 1.1 standard for the client sending the server which site to go to. Aside from that, Roxen has done a very good job for both web server and ftp server uses. Off topic The only feature it lacks is the ability to do automated account setup from another script. (Which is the ONLY thing that apache does better than Roxen). Maybe I'll tinker a bit and make a module for auto-creation of new web accounts from a shell script or something. Until then, for web hosting, Apache is the better choice. /Off topic Dave Bristel Proftpd also has a config file syntax that less experienced admins find easier to work with (since they've all mucked with apache configs by the time the're dealing with ftp servers). Roxen has a nice http interface for configuring. This software is not essential, but it's certainly not useless. The suggestion was to move it to contrib allot of the software in contrib are wery usefull. / Balp -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Move proftpd to contrib
Or a new section for packages removed from main due to bugs, but possibly still desired by some people? It's safer to have a clear message that Debian considers these packages to contain too many bugs for inclusion in the main distribution, but we are aware that there are some who want to use these packages anyway. Something like this would eliminate any blame if people use those buggy packages, and then have their systems crash or go unstable, or get hacked. Any opinions? Dave Bristel On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Josip Rodin wrote: Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:44:46 +0200 From: Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Move proftpd to contrib Resent-Date: 17 Sep 1999 14:45:46 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 10:42:36PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote: This package has been a major source of serious security bugs and indicatiosn are that it will remain as such. Our Policy states that packages that are not sufficiently free of bugs to meet our standards should not be in main and should be moved to contrib. The contrib section should not be a dumpyard for buggy packages. project/experimenal seems to be the right place for those. The Policy should be changed. -- enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian 2.1r3
That's strange, since r3 can be found on a number of mirrors. Dave Bristel On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Josip Rodin wrote: Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:51:03 +0200 From: Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Chris Rutter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Debian developers list debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Debian 2.1r3 Resent-Date: 17 Sep 1999 14:55:08 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 03:44:36PM +0100, Chris Rutter wrote: The current `sub-release' (whatever) of Debian 2.1 is r3, right? I was just wondering, as all references on the web site are to r2, but I thought I received a message from the security team about r3 last week somtime. Just wanted to check before I filed a boring bug report, or something. /pedant Nope, r2 is still official, apparently there have been some problems with syncing packages on some architectures. -- enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: history (Was Re: Corel/Debian Linux Installer)
With this in mind, I think that having a configuration variable for apt that would allow the downloaded .deb files to be put in a user defined place. This way, if your /var is close to being full, you could, for example, drop it into a temporary directory on /home for the upgrade. This isn't the best place, but on many systems, /home is one of the largest partitions on a system, and tends to have a good ammount of free space on it because users may use a large ammount of space. Dave Bristel On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Alexander N. Benner wrote: Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 11:14:44 +0200 From: Alexander N. Benner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: deb-devel debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: history (Was Re: Corel/Debian Linux Installer) Resent-Date: 16 Sep 1999 14:47:19 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Hi Ship's Log, Lt. Steve Dunham, Stardate 160999.0113: /var 96M BTW, your /var might not be big enough to handle an upgrade from slink to potato. (Depending on whether the source of the packages is net or CD, I think.) That's right, but I think it might be more a 'bug' in apt-get then in the partitioning. I had problems with my 1GB /var when I tried to do a compleat upgrade within potato. Greetings -- Alexander N. Benner - The Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper: -5- A Promise Keeper is committed to supporting the mission of his church by honoring and praying for his pastor, and by actively giving his time and resources. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: why one rescue boot disk? (was Re: An 'ae' testimony)
Well, for as long as I've been using Debian(shortly after 1.3.1 came out), the CD has been bootable, and useable as a rescue disk. Sure, it's not completely useful, but you can boot from it, get a shell, etc...for compatability with older systems without the boot from CD in their BIOS, we need to continue development of the floppy install method, but I agree that the CD boot could give more features than the floppies. Dave Bristel On 24 May 1999, Christian Leutloff wrote: Date: 24 May 1999 17:42:21 +0200 From: Christian Leutloff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mark Blunier [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-boot@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: why one rescue boot disk? (was Re: An 'ae' testimony) Resent-Date: 24 May 1999 17:57:07 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Mark Blunier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My latest recovey floppy is not a floppy at all, but a bootable CD, that runs root the root fs in a ram disk, and then links back to the CD which is a complete copy of a working debian image. This gives me vi, emacs, X, copies of all the library files, and anything I'd might need to repair something thats broke. superb, IMHO that's called a Live-CD. Would it be possible to integrate the creation stuff into the debian-cd script? It would be really nice if people can test Debian on a CD-ROM first. Bye Christian -- Dipl.-Ing. Christian Leutloff, Aachen, Germany [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oche.de/~leutloff/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux - http://www.de.debian.org/ pgpyF2yEeyCHo.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Paying for trade show booths?
Well, if we paid, maybe we could get space in a somewhat more populated area of the show, hence more publicity. If we can get around 3000 SETS of CDs(maybe potato if it's out by the next LinuxWorld), and make a display of the release, then it would definately help. Dave On Thu, 20 May 1999, Joseph Carter wrote: Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:03:11 -0700 From: Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: David Bristel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Tyger Sunshine-Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Paying for trade show booths? On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 02:53:21PM -0700, David Bristel wrote: I'd like to think we could use it to pay or help pay for booths to the trade shows. LinuxWorld, for those who were there was evidence that a small booth just isn't big enough for all the Debian folks who want to help out, and for all the cool stuff that people brought down. Also, Debian CD's are always needed to give out, electric, insurance, the booth space itself. Rather than go on a show to show basis, large donations COULD pay for the booth, or for a larger booth than a 10x10. Okay, next question would be then: Do we want to be paying for large booths at trade shows? I agree, LinuxWorld was a _MADHOUSE_, but is it something we want to spend donation money on? ie, do people think the trade shows are that terribly important to us? (I was at LinuxWorld and I must say it was cool! Worth going, and even worth the financial nightmare it created in my life that is just now getting resolved a couple months later..) Ahh, the psychic sig generator strikes again! -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED]Debian GNU/Linux developer PGP: E8D68481E3A8BB77 8EE22996C9445FBEThe Source Comes First! - * Culus thinks we should go to trade shows and see how many people we can kill by throwing debian cds at them pgpcBW0kCH0kM.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Paying for trade show booths?
Perhaps, but if we could get a better location, it would help a LOT, or to do something to draw more attention, which really needs more space so people can realize we exist. Perhaps getting 50 coppies of the Debian book to sell, with the free CDs and more of the T-shirtsthe shirts were in HIGH demand. Yes, we are non-profit, but to gain some attention would help gain Debian more donations if the corporations see we are getting attention. A small booth in the corner makes Debian seem smaller than it really is. Dave On Fri, 21 May 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 09:07:02 -0400 (EDT) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Paying for trade show booths? Resent-Date: 21 May 1999 13:06:45 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Okay, next question would be then: Do we want to be paying for large booths at trade shows? I agree, LinuxWorld was a _MADHOUSE_, but is it something we want to spend donation money on? ie, do people think the trade shows are that terribly important to us? (I was at LinuxWorld and I must say it was cool! Worth going, and even worth the financial nightmare it created in my life that is just now getting resolved a couple months later..) We talked about this at the Expo last night over IBM's free wine. The consensus was that it was important for us to have a face. However money was not really worth spending. A small booth was good enough. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: evan leibovitch and the LPI certification tests
I'd like to think we could use it to pay or help pay for booths to the trade shows. LinuxWorld, for those who were there was evidence that a small booth just isn't big enough for all the Debian folks who want to help out, and for all the cool stuff that people brought down. Also, Debian CD's are always needed to give out, electric, insurance, the booth space itself. Rather than go on a show to show basis, large donations COULD pay for the booth, or for a larger booth than a 10x10. David Bristel On Thu, 20 May 1999, Joseph Carter wrote: Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 13:04:44 -0700 From: Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tyger Sunshine-Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: evan leibovitch and the LPI certification tests Resent-Date: 20 May 1999 20:04:57 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 07:09:28AM -0700, Tyger Sunshine-Hill wrote: RH isn't competition to debian except in the most positive sense of friendly rivalry. We have different aims, different goals. Their goal is to produce and market a linux distribution which keeps their company financially viable. Our goal is to produce a distribution which does what we want with entirely free software. Sometimes these goals co-incide or complement each other. sometimes they don't. They certainly don't conflict or harm each other. Well, maybe, but the fact is that Debian could use some sponsorships or major donations, and as long as RH keeps the spotlight, guess who they go to? Eventually, we have to get Debian out of its shell and get the average linux user (If there is such a thing) to use Debian more. If we don't, what is the point of pouring so much work into making such a useful and _flexible_ distribution? First question: If some major cash was donated to Debian, what would we do with it? Seriously, do we have a purpose for it, or would we just re-donate it to other projects? Sure that might look good for a story on Slashdot, but I'm more interested in making headlines for Debian because we actually accomplished something cool rather than making them just to make the average Slashdot reader think that Debian is as good as Redhat. Sure PR is important, but I think we should be working harder to target our PR to the people it will do the most good. -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED]Debian GNU/Linux developer PGP: E8D68481E3A8BB77 8EE22996C9445FBEThe Source Comes First! - james abuse me. I'm so lame I sent a bug report to debian-devel-changes pgp8dQl26VTSC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: evan leibovitch and the LPI certification tests
Think about it though, if Debian were the OS of choice, those who are involved now would be considered the regional gurus, and that means we get paid more by companies who want the most experienced and knowledgeable people. Then we WOULD have the masses groveling. Dave Bristel On 20 May 1999, Chris Waters wrote: Date: 20 May 1999 13:32:06 -0700 From: Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: evan leibovitch and the LPI certification tests Resent-Date: 20 May 1999 20:34:49 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I can't speak for others, but *I* do it cause it pleases my muse. Getting Debian out to the great unwashed masses rouses little but mild curiosity in me, and certainly not eough to warrant the amount of effort I put into my packages. Hear hear! I also like the idea of sharing my work with other *developers* so that *we* all have a better system. I'm not interested in cramming my work down anyone's throat, however. Anyone who *wants* to use it should feel free, but aside from that Market share and World domination are not goals I strive to achieve. Market share, no. But world domination? C'mon, admit it would be fun to have the downtrodden of the world grovelling at your feet. Dogbert has the right attitude. Oh wait, you mean world domination for Debian? Never mind. I don't care about the rest of you bums, I want those downtrodden grovelling at *my* feet! :-) -- Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] | I have a truly elegant proof of the or[EMAIL PROTECTED] | above, but it is too long to fit into http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: VA Research and linux.com
Yep, that's my thought as well. Now, a boxed Debian/book set that gets sold in the software, not just the book section of stores. THAT would not only increase sales of the book, but would make Debian a LOT more popular, and get us more publicity as a distribution. It wouldn't even constitute selling Debian, since they are really just selling the book. Just my 2 cents. Dave Bristel On Tue, 18 May 1999, Steve Lamb wrote: Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 22:30:04 -0700 From: Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Development debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: VA Research and linux.com Resent-Date: 19 May 1999 05:29:14 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 19 May 1999 00:27:16 -0500, David Welton wrote: Wow... Debian gets *lots* of publicity on linux.com. Very cool! Not that it does any good. Wow, this site runs on Debian. *click* Cool, a Linux computer. *click* Whoa, I can only get Red Hat. Huh? - -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. - ---+- -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPsdk version 1.0 (C) 1997 Pretty Good Privacy, Inc iQA/AwUBN0JMXHpf7K2LbpnFEQJA4gCfUHyVPq9jyW4zzEtA92xJ7OQC+5cAn243 JYhePM5fcKodAeEfe3AgknYm =hOnb -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: better /etc/init.d/network
Not a bad idea, as long as we don't fall into the trap of having seperate files for each interface configs the way Redhat does. If you DO want to make seperate files for the configs of each interface, as long as the data isn't put in some obscure place like /etc/sysconfig/network, you shouldn't get much of a complaint. David Bristel On Mon, 17 May 1999, Erik wrote: Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 16:44:18 -0700 From: Erik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: better /etc/init.d/network Resent-Date: 17 May 1999 23:52:37 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Sun, May 16, 1999 at 10:15:48PM +0200, Massimo Dal Zotto wrote: Hi, I have written a generic network interface management command, net, which can be used to start/stop/show/configure network interfaces, and a smarter replacement for the /etc/init.d/network script. The net command makes use of configuration files stored in /etc/network/ which contain the various interface options. For example my eth0 is: # /etc/network/eth0 IPADDR=192.168.0.1 NETMASK=255.255.255.0 NETWORK=192.168.0.0 BROADCAST=192.168.0.255 GATEWAY=192.168.0.1 Howabout instead of having eth0, eth1, etc. have like home, work, etc. the files could then have an extra section, called DEVICE or something, that would be eth0, eth1, etc. It could also have multiple DEVICE sections, so that it would setup all the adapters related to that network. This would be most usefull on laptops, but usefull on desktop machines too. I know some people take their desktop machines arround with them every once in awhile(I take mine to the local LUG every other month or so). You could then add the ability to do like, net start home eth0, to start individual parts of your home network, while net stop eth0 would still disable eth0. The advantage is that you can now start/stop specific interfaces with simple commands using predefined configs, while the old script could only be used to start the entire network and couldn't stop or restart it or part of it. The new /etc/init.d/network script just calls the /usr/sbin/net command, which does all the real work, with the proper args, just start or stop, and all the configuration options are now stored as separate config files. The package can be installed over an slink system because the preinst script can convert automatically the old network file to the new eth0 config. The package is available at the following location: http://www.cs.unitn.it/~dz/debian/net_1.0-1_all.deb Please have a look and see if it can added to the main debian distribution. -- Massimo Dal Zotto Overall it sounds pretty good to me, something just a little better, to make things just a little easier. Erik Bernhardson [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [T]he last thing I want to do is spread fear, uncertainty and doubt in [the users'] minds. - Don Jones, Microsoft's Y2K Product Manager pgprid1fncfpE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Solaris NFS problems with potato / Release Notes
I remember a while back when looking at using NFS to share files between Linux and Solaris 2.6 under the Linux 2.0.x kernels. There was mention of there being no NFS.lock daemon running on the Linux side when trying to use Linux as the NFS server. From the limited experience I have had with the 2.2 kernels(still havn't gotten around to upgradeing to them), there is now support for NFS locking similar to the Solaris behavior. From your problems, this(with appropriate software support), may be your answer. David Bristel On Mon, 17 May 1999, Tim (Pass the Prozac) Sailer wrote: Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 09:24:07 -0400 From: Tim (Pass the Prozac) Sailer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Solaris NFS problems with potato / Release Notes Resent-Date: 17 May 1999 13:24:21 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Mon, May 17, 1999 at 10:30:52AM +0300, Rainer Dorsch wrote: It is nearly impossible to compile a large software package on a NFS mounted partion on potato, when it is exported by Solaris 2.6 (UltraSPARC). A search in Deja News (Solaris NFS patch in comp.os.linux.*) found a couple of controversal postings. After installing the patch recommended by Linus 105379-05 ( stopping and starting the NFS-server on Solaris) the problems did not disappear. To illustrate the problem, I use the cvs source package and compile it on a local disc. Works well. Now I do it on an NFS mounted partition: $debuild [...] gcc -I. -I.. -I. -I../lib -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -g -O2 -c vers_ts.c gcc -I. -I.. -I. -I../lib -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -g -O2 -c subr.c gcc -I. -I.. -I. -I../lib -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -g -O2 -c filesubr.c gcc -I. -I.. -I. -I../lib -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -g -O2 -c run.c gcc -I. -I.. -I. -I../lib -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -g -O2 -c version.c gcc -I. -I.. -I. -I../lib -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -g -O2 -c error.c gcc -I. -I.. -I. -I../lib -I../zlib -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -g -O2 -c ./zlib.c gcc add.o admin.o buffer.o checkin.o checkout.o classify.o client.o commit.o create_adm.o cvsrc.o diff.o edit.o entries.o expand_path.o fileattr.o find_names.o hardlink.o hash.o history.o ignore.o import.o lock.o log.o login.o logmsg.o main.o mkmodules.o modules.o myndbm.o no_diff.o parseinfo.o patch.o rcs.o rcscmds.o recurse.o release.o remove.o repos.o root.o rtag.o scramble.o server.o status.o tag.o update.o watch.o wrapper.o vers_ts.o subr.o filesubr.o run.o version.o error.o zlib.o ../lib/libcvs.a ../diff/libdiff.a -lz -lcrypt -o cvs checkin.o: file not recognized: File truncated collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[2]: *** [cvs] Error 1 The error message is missleading, it is nearly random per run! Is anybody using potato with NFS exported Solaris partitions? Which patches did you apply? Did you try to compile large programs? Hello world programs work! We were having the same problem, but with NFS AIX. Here at [EMAIL PROTECTED], we are using AIX and Solaris for NFS servers. Trying to compile trivial programs worked, but something like cvs source failed with the same errors you have there only on the AIX servers running NFSv3. We went to 2.2.7 with the NFS 3 patches, the problem went away... Tim -- (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] / (home) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.buoy.com/~tps The quality of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. G.B. Shaw ** Disclaimer: My views/comments/beliefs, as strange as they are, are my own.** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10)
My own reasons for wanting these updates in there is that we go frozen, and then a major release comes out. Suddenly, Debian may be more stable, but MAJOR packages are out of date. If we have the updated section available on the ftp site, we can have these packages there for people to install, without ruining the integrity of the stable release. It also gives people a feeling of not needing to wait for the next major release for new software. Sure, once the new version comes out, it wouldn't make sense to build for the OLD versions, but potato isn't out. Because of that, we shouldn't abandon those who run slink. Note that if linus did that, the 2.2.7 and 2.2.8 would never have come out because work had already begun on the 2.3 kernels. Dave Bristel On Wed, 12 May 1999, Branden Robinson wrote: Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 23:29:10 -0400 From: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: David Bristel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10) On Wed, May 12, 1999 at 02:06:24PM -0700, David Bristel wrote: It seems to me that since there will always be patches and updates to packages between releases, and since we have the proposed updates, perhaps we could add an updates area, in addition to the non-free, contrib, and main sections. This would work VERY nicely for users who want to grab the latest patches. A good example of why this would be good is the XFree 3.3.2 being released in slink, and everyone wanting 3.3.3. I am perfectly willing to package a version of XFree86 3.3.3.1 for slink (and thus built against glibc 2.0), if I can get assurance that these will be accepted. Except for the Unix98 pty problem which just popped up with xterm, and some kind of strangeness with detecting a particular IBM RAMDAC chip in the I128 X server, reports appear to be that the potato 3.3.3.1 packages are better than the 3.3.2.3 ones in slink in every respect. Namely, there are several packaging-level bugs that I have fixed in the potato version of X. None of these are security matters, however, and that is typically the sole criterion upon which packages for stable-updates are judged. I've been told that this is pretty much Christian Hudon's decision. Perhaps an exception could be made for X, given that it is so huge and onerous to download, and requires gargantuan amounts of space and time to build. But my feelings won't be hurt if he decides against it. In the meantime, Johnie Ingram has been making glibc 2.0 versions of my potato XFree86 packages available at http://www.netgod.net/x/. -- G. Branden Robinson |Yesterday upon the stair, Debian GNU/Linux |I met a man who wasn't there. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |He wasn't there again today, cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |I think he's from the CIA. pgpi8xY1E17Q1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10)
This is why I suggested the new area, apart from main, non-free, and contrib. People who want the updates should have a nice, easily accessable place to find these packages. From a system administration standpoint, it's nice to know EXACTLY where to go to update the entire distribution automatically(via apt-get), if there's been a major package release since the dist went frozen. If the developer wants to make a slink version, because of either personal reasons, or because of requests, then, once the new package(s) have been tested, let them be added into updates. Dave Bristel On Wed, 12 May 1999, Aaron Van Couwenberghe wrote: Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 19:03:29 -0700 From: Aaron Van Couwenberghe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED], Debian Development debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10) Resent-Date: 13 May 1999 04:42:00 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Wed, May 12, 1999 at 11:29:10PM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote: I've been told that this is pretty much Christian Hudon's decision. Perhaps an exception could be made for X, given that it is so huge and onerous to download, and requires gargantuan amounts of space and time to build. But my feelings won't be hurt if he decides against it. In the meantime, Johnie Ingram has been making glibc 2.0 versions of my potato XFree86 packages available at http://www.netgod.net/x/. Which work quite well, by the way ;P. I was forced to get them for my laptop. -- ..Aaron Van Couwenberghe... [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Berlin: http://www.berlin-consortium.org Debian GNU/Linux: http://www.debian.org ...Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing... -- Ralph Waldo Emerson -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10)
It seems to me that since there will always be patches and updates to packages between releases, and since we have the proposed updates, perhaps we could add an updates area, in addition to the non-free, contrib, and main sections. This would work VERY nicely for users who want to grab the latest patches. A good example of why this would be good is the XFree 3.3.2 being released in slink, and everyone wanting 3.3.3. Also, for potato, since it WILL be glibc 2.1 based, I suspect a large number of people would want versions of XFree, gnome, and other packages without having to upgrade their systems. By setting up an extension to our current directory structure for updates, we make it VERY simple for people to add these in. I THINK it might also make it easier to release maintenance releases in this manner. Simply have all the updated packages in the updates section. If apt and dselect do their jobs, it should grab the proper NEWer version of the package. Dave On Wed, 12 May 1999, Darren O. Benham wrote: Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 13:10:53 -0700 From: Darren O. Benham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-gtk-gnome@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10) Resent-Date: 12 May 1999 20:13:09 - Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; On Wed, May 12, 1999 at 02:42:16PM -0500, Ossama Othman wrote: Hi Richard, I'm cross-posting to debian-gtk-gnome since we are trying to organize an effort to update GNOME for slink. It'd also be nice to get GNOME for slink out too. All that really needs to be done is to build all of the packages we built for potato for slink. The current GNOME slink packages are not all up-to-date with the potato packages. Many of us don't have slink installed or don't have a chrooted slink setup so any help with getting GNOME slink up-to-date would be greatly appreciated. Do you mean make GNOME 1.0 available for slink, separately? It's far too large a change to be part of a stable revision. Hmm. I didn't think of it that way. I've just been going with the flow in terms of what I thought most people felt. However, what you say makes sense. What do you suggest we do? How should we go about making GNOME available for slink? Do we _not_ want to do that? Opinion: probably not. That's what a release is.. that's what next versions of releases are for... Security fixes are a special issue but 'the next/latest/newest widgit' are not.. -- Please cc all mailing list replies to me, also. = * http://benham.net/index.html[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * ---* * Debian Developer, Debian Project Secretary, Debian Webmaster * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] * = pgpSKcGqpXzkD.pgp Description: PGP signature
