Re: [PROPOSAL] update-binfmts - manages the binfmt_misc kernel module
On Sun, Apr 02, 2000 at 04:36:00PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > 3) Where should this go? The obvious place is dpkg, but am I being too >arrogant there? It feels too small for its own package, though. I like the idea, but I think it should go in its own package, like menu. For one thing, a lot of admins may not like the arbitrary enabling of executable formats in the kernel. This is true especially in its experimental phase (sort of like debconf is now.) -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only a nerd would worry about wrong parentheses with square brackets. But that's what mathematicians are. -- Dr. Burchard, math professor at OSU
Re: Paradise
On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 03:53:22PM -0600, Jeffrey Watts wrote: > Hello, I'm a member of the Paradise Netrek development team. Paradise > Netrek is a X based game that started as Xtrek back in 1986. It is a > multiplayer, real-time, Internet game. > > Paradise has undergone a revival recently, and active development has > resumed. > > The Paradise Netrek developers would like to work with Debian to get > Paradise included in Debian GNU/Linux. > > Please let me know what I need to do or who I need to contact. I should > be on debian-devel but feel free to CC me. It's simple really. There's two ways: one, you get a developer to jump up and say "I want to package Paradise!". If this doesn't success in doing that, the other is to package it yourself (there's plenty of documentation and thousands of examples.) Then ask this list for someone to sponsor it into Debian. Assuming that it has a DFSG (Debian Free Software Guidelines) compliant license and it's packaged right, someone should be willing to do that. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only a nerd would worry about wrong parentheses with square brackets. But that's what mathematicians are. -- Dr. Burchard, math professor at OSU
Re: ITP: cmatrix
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 11:08:10AM -0600, David Starner wrote: > On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 05:32:13PM +0100, Edward Betts wrote: > > Did this message mess with GnuPG on any one else's system? > I had to kill gpg (1.0.1-2) to get mutt to continue, and then > I got > [-- PGP output follows --] > ... > Good signature from ... > ... > gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... > gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... > gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... > gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... > gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... > gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... > [-- End of PGP output --] > > GnuPG bug or local configuration problem? Okay, sorry. I looked in the bug list, but didn't get down to the wishlist bugs. (FYI: it's caused by GnuPG being killed and leaving a lock file in ~/.gnupg. Do rm ~/.gnupg/*.lock to fix it. Considering that gpg can check that there is no process 829 as well as I can, why doesn't it deal with it?) -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only a nerd would worry about wrong parentheses with square brackets. But that's what mathematicians are. -- Dr. Burchard, math professor at OSU
Re: ITP: cmatrix
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 05:32:13PM +0100, Edward Betts wrote: Did this message mess with GnuPG on any one else's system? I had to kill gpg (1.0.1-2) to get mutt to continue, and then I got [-- PGP output follows --] ... Good signature from ... ... gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... gpg: waiting for lock (hold by 829 - probably dead) ... [-- End of PGP output --] GnuPG bug or local configuration problem? -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only a nerd would worry about wrong parentheses with square brackets. But that's what mathematicians are. -- Dr. Burchard, math professor at OSU
Re: Release-critical Bugreport for March 18, 2000
On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 09:10:08PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 02:41:45AM -0800, Kevin Dalley wrote: > [sth] > > Is it just me or did something make this message go out like 12 times? Just you. At least, I didn't get more than one copy of it, so I would guess it's something on your side. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only a nerd would worry about wrong parentheses with square brackets. But that's what mathematicians are. -- Dr. Burchard, math professor at OSU
Re: better RSYNC mirroring , for .debs and others
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 12:26:30PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > differences very, very small. This is particularly true for .debs when you > add in the fact that gcc never produces binary identical output on > consecutive runs. I'm not arguing the rest of your points, but I'm curious about this one. IIRC, the last thing a full bootstrap of GCC does, after building stage one binaries with the native compiler, stage two binaries with the stage one binaries and stage three binaries with the stage two binaries, is compare the stage two and stage three binaries. If they're not the same, then you have a problem. I don't see how this fits with what you're saying. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only a nerd would worry about wrong parentheses with square brackets. But that's what mathematicians are. -- Dr. Burchard, math professor at OSU
Re: Release-critical Bugreport for March 3, 2000
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 05:25:42PM +0100, Michael Bramer wrote: > application: fetchmail 5.3.1 > > Changes: > Fixes for a number of minor bugs, including two reported from the RH6.2 > beta and a dozen or so from the Debian bug-tracking system. > > Is someone working on it? If no, I download the sources and make a new > packages... If you look in woody, you'll find this version of fetchmail. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only a nerd would worry about wrong parentheses with square brackets. But that's what mathematicians are. -- Dr. Burchard, math professor at OSU
Re: Is XEmacs nonfree?
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 12:54:32AM +, David Coe wrote: > Is that still an accurate description of the legal status (from > FSF's perspective) of XEmacs, and if so, shouldn't we move it to > non-free? Huh? RMS is just complaining that they chose not to assign copyright to the FSF. It's still GPL. There's no real question on the freedom of XEmacs. David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 04:32:08PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: > Thomas Schoepf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 12:18:01PM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote: > > > I'm packaging tkpgp, from munitions.vipul.net archive. The > > > upstream maintainer doesn't want reveal his real name and wants only > > > "tftp" as name and an email address. The package is release under > > > GPL. Is this possible? > > > > The upstream author seems to be a bit strange (or paranoid) but > > technically/legally that's no reason to not include the software. > > This should probably be looked at be the debian-legal folks, but it > strikes me that putting the GPL on something, without having a real > copyright holder, either means that nobody has been granted permission > to distribute it, or that the GPL conditions could never be enforced > (since there is no author to sue people that infringe against the GPL) There is an author, who goes by the name of "tftp". At least in the US, it's entirely legal for tftp to go by any name he wants for whatever purpose, as long as he's not out to defraud anyone. Do you think you could have made copies of "Primary Colors", just because the author went by Anonymous? Or that the publisher couldn't make copies, because they didn't know his real name (assuming they didn't)? > If of course Christian doesn't know who he is either, then I think > we'd have to be rather suspicious of this person, since this might > enable him to anonymously introduce Trojans into Debian, which would > be bad. If Christian is willing to put his reputation on the line, > then fair enough, but I'd hope that he reads the code very carefully > when new upstream versions are released. I think you're being really paranoid here. Anyone who really wanted to sneak trojans into Debian would go by a name, e.g. Phillip Hands, which no one would know wasn't real until everything was over. David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mtools
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 06:08:48PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > Correction: mtools in slink does *not* depend on anything but libc6, so > there is still time to do it, cleanly. > > Maintainer, please do it. The bug tracking system has a weird X-Debian-CC system set up so you don't create several bugs through people replying to messages like this, and messages like this get added to the bug. First, I believe this is against policy. "Do not create two versions (one with X support and one without) of your package." Second, shouldn't this be wishlist anyway? It's not like it's an error in the program, it's just something you don't like. David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Useless packages (was Re: anarchism_7.7-1.deb)
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 11:43:50AM +0100, Matthew Vernon wrote: > David Starner writes: > > Instead of each developer chose what packages are and aren't useful > > to them, why don't we look at the popularity contest? A simple, bias-free > > way of seperating programs on to the CD's, by actual use. That is what > > it was made for. > > And how difficult would it be to fiddle the results of this??? Not very. So? It shouldn't be hard to detect, and it's not a big deal for the most part. As for the other guy, talking about world domination - that's what you have to do to get world domination. If it ever gets near that point, then Debian will have to consider whether that's what the developers want to be working on. As for a realistic, near term (next 3 years) event it's rather implausable. David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Useless packages (was Re: anarchism_7.7-1.deb)
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 08:18:04PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: > On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 02:51:36AM -0500, David Starner wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 07:28:57AM +, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > > > David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Instead of each developer chose what packages are and aren't useful > > > > to them, why don't we look at the popularity contest? A simple, > > > > bias-free > > > > way of seperating programs on to the CD's, by actual use. That is what > > > > it was made for. > > > > > > http://www.debian.org/~apenwarr/popcon/ says > > > > > > *** THIS IS EXPERIMENTAL!! *** Try not to get upset if the > > > results are incorrect, but be sure to e-mail me if you think > > > there's something funny going on. > > > > > > I wouldn't base decisions on it yet. > > i wouldn't base any decisions on it ever. that's not it's purpose. IIRC, it was designed in part to simplify the decision of what packages to put on which CD. > > > > > Is there any reason to think it's not correct? > > more to the point, is there any reason to think that it matters whether > it is correct or not? the popularity contest is for informational > (entertainment) purposes only, not for decision making. > > the usefulness of a package has nothing at all to do with it's > popularity - it may be "unpopular" because it is an obscure and > specialised tool but to those who know and need it, it is essential. Okay, if you need the complete suite of geda tools, you're probably going to need the full set of Debian CD's. That's life. Almost every program is going to be essential to someone, and putting all the games on the last CD is not going to go over well. > the survey was never intended to be a means of deciding whether packages > are useful or not. nor was it intended for deciding whether to include a > package in debian or not. I wasn't claiming anything of the sort. > at most, it is a tool for *helping* to order > packages on a CD It's a nice way to order the packages with little to no arbitary decisions, and it's much harder to argue your favorite program was left off arbitrarily. You could set up goals for the CD instead (all Emacsen and a complete Gnome setup on the first CD, for instance), but think about the amount of arguing _those_ goals could cause. > (and even that is of limited use because it mostly > shows the popularity of old packages in the last release but not new > ones in the current unstable). Over half the people who report are running Potato (libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1 is installed by 355 people, while textutils (the top of base) is installed by 612). Still, many of the people who install by CD are running Slink, and would appreciate having the upgraded versions of their current programs on the CD. Does any one have a script to produce a CD listing from the popularity contest? That might produce interesting fuel for the discussion. David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Useless packages (was Re: anarchism_7.7-1.deb)
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 07:28:57AM +, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Instead of each developer chose what packages are and aren't useful > > to them, why don't we look at the popularity contest? A simple, bias-free > > way of seperating programs on to the CD's, by actual use. That is what > > it was made for. > > http://www.debian.org/~apenwarr/popcon/ says > > *** THIS IS EXPERIMENTAL!! *** Try not to get upset if the > results are incorrect, but be sure to e-mail me if you think > there's something funny going on. > > I wouldn't base decisions on it yet. Is there any reason to think it's not correct? More importantly, even if it is somewhat wrong, is there any reason to think it's not better than what we have? Assuming it works, popcon takes into account dependencies (because if a depends on b, then at least as many people have b installed as have a installed.) If there are any standard packages that popcon wouldn't put on the first CD, I would question whether they really should be standard. The biggest problem with popcon is that it gives more weight to a program in Slink than to a program new with Potato (assuming there are a significant amount of people running popcon on straight Slink systems.) David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Useless packages (was Re: anarchism_7.7-1.deb)
On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 05:59:27PM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote: > Nevertheless it is moot point because we are running out of room and there > has to be a third CD. It might as well contain all the documents and > other packages non-essential to using an OS. > > Here's another idea. What about putting all the non-essential compilers, > includes and other development tools on the extra CD too. They take up a > lot of room and does the average Debian user really need an eiffel > compiler or the IMAP development kit? Instead of each developer chose what packages are and aren't useful to them, why don't we look at the popularity contest? A simple, bias-free way of seperating programs on to the CD's, by actual use. That is what it was made for. David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: history (Was Re: Corel/Debian Linux Installer)
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 07:30:37AM -0500, David Starner wrote: > one apt-run - nothing in the cache, slink -> potato. /tmp is usually on > the / partition, which probably has less space than anything (and on > many installs ends up on the / partition - at least that's how I was ^ > show to do it.) On many installs /var ends up on the / partition - sorry. David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: history (Was Re: Corel/Debian Linux Installer)
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 11:38:29AM +0100, Chris Rutter wrote: > On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, David Bristel wrote: > > > 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. > > Yes, either this or a FIFO expiration policy on /var/cache/apt/packages > which gets automatically applied when space runs out. Or possibly > the option of using /tmp/.apt, with a warning message that the > packages are in there and need to be moved into the cache. Neither of these will help most people. Space running out can happen on one apt-run - nothing in the cache, slink -> potato. /tmp is usually on the / partition, which probably has less space than anything (and on many installs ends up on the / partition - at least that's how I was show to do it.) > I *don't* think that `apt' (or any other package) should use any > undefined directories (such as /home) for temporary storage. > If people want that, they'll symlink /tmp -> /home/.tmp or something. Not on a general basis. But it would be nice to be able to tell it to use /home or whereever for it. (/home is a bad idea - just for saftey's sake, I'd give it a directory where it has complete control of the contents.) > Alternatively, is there any other, er, `in bits' way that the > upgrade can be done? Check available space, download one bunch of files, install, delete the .debs, interate. David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: An 'ae' testimony
Sven LUTHER wrote: > Every Unix system is distributed with a working vi, and most people know how > to > use vi. So finding a non standard editor on the base system is not so nice, > and > can cause lots of confusions. and ae is a lot confusing, and don't behave Read the instructions on the top of the screen in ae. RTFS. Not everyone knows vi, and it's very confusing if you don't know it. It's also too large to go on the base floppies.
Re: Netscape under unstable...
Branden Robinson wrote: > > > Alternatively, if egcs 2.95 is out and packaged before I release -5 > > > (probably next week), that may have the fix. > > Not likely. GCC 2.95 (formerly EGCS 1.2) just made a stable branch and > > is complete code freeze. The first of July is the target release date > > (all Debian users know, of course, that it will be released excatly on > > that date.) > > Well, there's no point freezing if you're not going to fix SOME bugs, > otherwise you might as well release the day you freeze. The question is > whether this optimization error is considered critical enough to fix before > release. Having never written an LALR parser, let alone a code generator, > I wouldn't presume to dictate standards of bug severity to the GCC > developers. I didn't mean that the bug wasn't fixed, just that it wasn't likely to be packaged before next week. I assume the bug has been reported? It's been a long time since egcs 1.1 and many bugs were only fixed in the mainline sources, so it may have been fixed for a while. If you're interested enough, the egcs-ss packages in experimental should show you whether it's been fixed in the most recent version.
Re: Netscape under unstable...
Branden Robinson wrote: > There is apparently an egcs optimization bug that miscompiles a few object > files that are included in the X libraries. Could you just compile those object files with optimization off? > Alternatively, if egcs 2.95 is out and packaged before I release -5 > (probably next week), that may have the fix. Not likely. GCC 2.95 (formerly EGCS 1.2) just made a stable branch and is complete code freeze. The first of July is the target release date (all Debian users know, of course, that it will be released excatly on that date.)
Re: Time to rewrite dpkg
Aaron Van Couwenberghe wrote: > Polymorphism is such an obvious pillar of structured programming that I > can't understand how anybody could live without it. Polymorphism is not a pillar of structured programming languages. The major structured programming languages - the Algols, Pascal, C, Modula-2, Ada 83 - didn't have polymorphism. And judging from the number of lines of code in those languages, many people could live with the degree of polymorphism implementable in those languages - which is quite a bit. > > > In particular, there are established ways of linking programs written in > > any language against C based libraries. As far as I'm aware doing the same > > to C++ (or other object-oriented languages) is a pain in the neck. > > This is simply not true. Why? Tell me how I pass a C++ object to C, Fortran or Pascal. > I have grown increasingly aware of FUD of this type about C++ and OO > languages. OO is designed to *increase* interoperability, flexibility, and > extensibility -- definately not the other way around. Windows NT was designed to be a stable operating system, the best in the world. Designs fail. So far I haven't seen where OO increases interoperability between languages.
Re: GTK oops?
Jules Bean wrote: > > On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote: > > > On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote: > > > > > Dear overworked gtk maintainer... > > > > > > Did you deliberately upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused > > > to me.. > > > > Doh! > > > > I'll shut up now. > > > > Lesson - read the changelog.. > > Going for the record in self-sustaining threads.. > > There *is* a problem here: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] zcat /usr/doc/libgtk1.1.13/changelog.Debian.gz | head -8 > 7:43PM > gtk+1.1.13 (1.1.14-1) unstable; urgency=low > > * New upstream version. Note source name did not change, as the > soname is still .13, because .14 and .13 are binary compatible. > * Make absolutely sure the postinst for libgtk1.1.13 only calls > ldconfig on 'configure' calls > > -- Ben Gertzfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fri, 29 Jan 1999 21:11:44 -0800 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] dpkg -L libgtk1.1.13 | grep /usr/lib > 7:44PM > /usr/lib > /usr/lib/libgdk-1.1.so.14.0.0 > /usr/lib/libgdk-1.1.so.14 > /usr/lib/libgtk-1.1.so.14.0.0 > /usr/lib/libgtk-1.1.so.14 > > So it does in fact provide a library with soname .14. This breaks > programs linked against .13.. > > Jules According to the newest changelog (off debian-devel-changes) the maintainer realized this after he uploaded and uploaded a new and correct .13. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dullard: someone who, wanting a piece of information, takes down the appropriate volume of the encyclopedia, looks up the item they need, and then puts the volume away without reading anything else. - Peter Dell'Orto, paraphrased from Philip Jose Farmer
Re: Call for mascot! :-) -- flying pigs
"Alexander N. Benner" wrote: > > hi > > Ship's Log, Lt. Phillip R. Jaenke, Stardate 300199.2241: > > > > Why a dolphin? Well, they're intelligent. Definitely intelligent. They're > > pretty cute. :) And they're definitely flexible. (I'd like to see *you* > > burst out of the water, do a backflip or two midair, and make a perfect > > reentry.;) > > ok .. beat me for this .. but it does not realy meen 'good bye and thankyou > for the fish' ! Dolphins are not more intelligent then paes or other animals. > Intelligence referes also to somewhat of abstract thinking which no animal > has. Intelligence does not refer to "abstract thinking which no animal has". Intelligence refers to the capacity for thought, which even animals such as ants or fleas have to some minor extent. I've never heard it referred to as "abstract thought" only. Also why don't they have abstract thinking? I'm not up on cetacean biology, so let me discuss primates and analogize back. Primates have enough abstract thinking to speak and assemble objects in search of a future goal. Not much, but not non-existent. Cetaceans are a bit harder to study, as primates think alike, and in different ways from cetaceans. If they have enough intellegence to say "good bye and thanks for all the fish", then it wouldn't be at all suprising we missed the intellegence before. > > Greetings > -- > Alexander N. Benner > > And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; > The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all > thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy > strength: this is the first commandment. -*- The Bible (Mark 12:29-30) But here's the real crux of the matter - we appear to be starting from two different ideological standpoints that each hold part of the answer as postulate. (Atheism over here, which holds that we are merely an evolutionary step from the primates, and are soulless animals oursleves.) As further argument would be fruitless and off topic, I will respond no further on list. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dullard: someone who, wanting a piece of information, takes down the appropriate volume of the encyclopedia, looks up the item they need, and then puts the volume away without reading anything else. - Peter Dell'Orto, paraphrased from Philip Jose Farmer
Re: List of bugs that *must* be fixed before releasing Slink
Michael Stone wrote: > > chameleon 32522 chameleon in slink depends on too-new libs [0] > > ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sean E. Perry)) > > Looks like it just needs a recompile against the right libs; or does it not > work against the older glib? The (former) maintainer just did a new upload that fixes this (according to the changelog.) > > lyx 32299 LyX Copyright problems [0] (Stuart Lamble <[EMAIL > > PROTECTED]>) > > Fixed? No. The maintainer needs to get the new license (or clarification of the old, depending on how you split your hairs) from the LyX website and change the copyright file. Being more or less error-proof, it seems to call for a simple NMU. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dullard: someone who, wanting a piece of information, takes down the appropriate volume of the encyclopedia, looks up the item they need, and then puts the volume away without reading anything else. - Peter Dell'Orto, paraphrased from Philip Jose Farmer
