Oops: rename ITP title
retitle 825062 ITP -- Tk HTML widget thanks I should not re-use the old mail as a template :-) Just to add: I intend to put both packages under the hood of the TclTk team, using its git repository: http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-tcltk/packages/tkmpeg.git http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-tcltk/packages/tkhtml1.git Cheers Ole
Bug#772827: ITP: kerneloops -- kernel oops tracker
Package: wnpp Owner: Balint Reczey bal...@balintreczey.hu Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name: kerneloops Version : 0.12+git20140509-1 Upstream Author : Arjan van de Ven ar...@linux.intel.com * URL : https://github.com/oops-kernel-org/kerneloops * License : GPL-2 Programming Lang: C Description : kernel oops tracker kerneloops is a daemon that collects kernel crash information and then submits the extracted signature to the kerneloops.org website for statistical analysis and presentation to the Linux kernel developers. -- I would like to reintroduce the package into Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5489a860.3030...@balintreczey.hu
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
Hello, On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:44:07AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote: On 13/03/11 08:19, Ben Finney wrote: Shachar Shemeshshac...@debian.org writes: I am subscribed to lots and lots of mailing lists. All mail from those lists gets automatically delivered to dedicated folders automatically. This means I'm highly likely to miss a reply to my own emails to the list unless I get another, direct, copy (which doesn't have the list hidden headers, and therefor stays in my inbox). I *like* to get two copies, as it increases the chance that I actually get to see the replies to my own emails. If you like to get two copies, why can't you arrange to generate the extra copies you want without involving anyone else's configuration? Any suggestions on how to do it? I have a similar configuration with many separate folders for mailing lists. I receive mail with fetchmail and employ procmail for sorting mail out (probably, not a common setup nowadays). My trick to get extra copies of direct replies to my own mails in mailing lists (I place such copies into a dedicated folder) is to keep a local cache of Message-IDs of my own sent messages and then check In-Reply-To: header in the received mails against this cache. It is done with a couple of relatively simple rules in ~/.procmailrc that make use of formail and grep. -- Stanislav -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110402232947.GA13619@kaiba.homelan
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Stanislav Maslovski wrote: My trick to get extra copies of direct replies to my own mails in mailing lists (I place such copies into a dedicated folder) is to keep a local cache of Message-IDs of my own sent messages and then check In-Reply-To: header in the received mails against this cache. It is done with a couple of relatively simple rules in ~/.procmailrc that make use of formail and grep. Seems like one could do something similar with notmuch? If someone has done that I'd encourage you to blog about it and post a link here. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/banlktim8d3__3hrsuk_kjon3h889pnr...@mail.gmail.com
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
Hello Shachar Shemesh, Am 2011-03-13 19:54:01, hacktest Du folgendes herunter: If I set reply-to to myself, the mail won't go to the list. If I set it to the list, it won't go to me. Either way, the desired effect isn't achieved. Also, reply-to is the wrong tool for this job (this is NOT what it's for), as it prohibits distinction between replies to the list and reply to me. If I remember right another discussion in the past about Reply-To: and Mail-Followup-To: you can specify more then one E-Mail like Reply-To: shac...@shemesh.biz, debian-devel@lists.debian.org or Mail-Followup-To: shac...@shemesh.biz, debian-devel@lists.debian.org Note: I am not subscribed to any Debian Lists except whitelist and on mailinglists which support nomail, it is REALY annoying, if someone send me useless messages of several 100 kByte to my cell-phone. If I have the need for list-help/infos I read it from an archive, but my business E-Mail must be clean. And no, filtering of messages is no option, because I get to many false-positives du to my customers which are On-List too. Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening Michelle Konzack -- # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ## Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux itsystems@tdnet France EURL itsystems@tdnet UG (limited liability) Owner Michelle KonzackOwner Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 (homeoffice) 50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17 67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.flexray4linux.org/ http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.can4linux.org/ Jabber linux4miche...@jabber.ccc.de ICQ#328449886 Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
Hello Carsten Hey, Am 2011-03-12 10:50:03, hacktest Du folgendes herunter: If a message I reply to contains a Mail-Followup-To: set, I use it. If not, I guess if the person I reply to wants to receive a reply. To prevent me to Cc: you, you need to explicitly set Mail-Followup-To: to the list. Which is not supported by many MUAs expecialy on Smartphones, PDAs or MUAs Android which I use in my business. Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening Michelle Konzack -- # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ## Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux itsystems@tdnet France EURL itsystems@tdnet UG (limited liability) Owner Michelle KonzackOwner Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 (homeoffice) 50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17 67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.flexray4linux.org/ http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.can4linux.org/ Jabber linux4miche...@jabber.ccc.de ICQ#328449886 Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
On 13/03/11 08:19, Ben Finney wrote: Shachar Shemeshshac...@debian.org writes: Personally, I think the code of conduct should be amended, along with the list software. While this shouldn't turn into a counting of popularity, I'd like to register that there are people who think the list behaviour currently (leave the Reply-To field untouched) is correct. Never mentioned Reply-To, don't think Reply-To munging is correct, and don't understand why you brought it up. When talking about change to the list software, I was referring to the Avoid duplicates option, discussed below. I am subscribed to lots and lots of mailing lists. All mail from those lists gets automatically delivered to dedicated folders automatically. This means I'm highly likely to miss a reply to my own emails to the list unless I get another, direct, copy (which doesn't have the list hidden headers, and therefor stays in my inbox). I *like* to get two copies, as it increases the chance that I actually get to see the replies to my own emails. If you like to get two copies, why can't you arrange to generate the extra copies you want without involving anyone else's configuration? Any suggestions on how to do it? Conversely, I *don't* want any message to the forum to also be sent to me individually via email. In some cases that's because the individual message arrives first, is often read first, yet is the one that I want to avoid receiving. No filter can help with that, since it has no “other copy” to work with at the time it's needed. In other cases that's because I don't participate in the forum via email at all, so I don't want to receive any messages in that forum via email. I'm not trying to start an argument here, but I will point out that disregarding unwanted messages is easier to do with filters than generating new ones (and, more importantly, automatically figuring out for which messages duplicates should be generated). I understand and respect the fact that other people, due to using a mail client that does not allow filtering based on hidden headers, because they are only subscribed to a couple of mailing lists, or for whatever other reason, do not appreciate the extra copy. The problem is that I cannot tell them apart. Why do you need to tell those classes of people apart? Why is being unable to tell them apart a problem? As an example - the list charter clearly states that if someone indicates they wish to receive a copy you should CC him. I do not think I could have more clearly indicated my wish to do so than in my previous email, and yet you didn't. The reason I need to tell those apart from those is because that's what the list's charter says I should do. This is impossible to follow, and therefor should be amended. Since the default for all non-mailing list communication should be reply to all (after all, if someone decided to CC a third party on a conversation they started with you, it's a bit impolite to cut said third party off from the reply) I object to this idea quite strongly. The “forgot to include someone” mistake you identify is easily rectified after the message is sent; the “included someone whom I didn't intend” is impossible to rectify after the fact. For that reason among others, “reply to all” should not be the default but should be a deliberate decision in each instance. I totally accept that argument in the context of automatically adding reply to to lists, but not as a code of conduct for email at large. This is why I specifically said non-mailing list communication. If I wrote you an email, and thought it necessary to CC someone, then this discussion is obviously part of a discussion said someone need to be aware of. It would be impolite of you to exclude him from your answer unless there is a good reason to do so. In other words, the default (not the software's default - your default as a human) should be to reply to all. There is a growing trend to make hitting reply to all illegitimate under any and all circumstances, which I think is in error. The solution I propose is already implemented in mailing list software such as mailman. In it, there is a per-user settable flag called avoid duplicates. I'm not a “user” recognised by the mailing list servers of many of the forums in which I participate, so your proposal is not a solution for my case. I know I'm not the only one who participates in Debian (and other) mailing lists as non-email forums. But I believe that this is also something that can be resolved using technical means. I think the current policy is unnecessarily complex if followed, and in practice is not followed at all, leading to sub-optimal behavior. Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Lingnu Open Source Consulting Ltd. http://www.lingnu.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
Le samedi 12 mars 2011 à 10:50 +0100, Carsten Hey a écrit : I set Mail-Followup-To: on every mail I send to *@lists.debian.org. Most DDs just ignore it (though there are some exceptions) and this renders using Mail-Followup-To: to get a copy to be rather useless. Maybe this is because Mail-Followup-To is not part of any standard of any kind, making it unimplemented in a large number of MUAs. Add to this the fact that it is overly complex to implement in a sane and intuitive way; unless you know what it really means (which is different for each MUA on the receiving end), users just wouldn’t know what to put in it. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' “If you behave this way because you are blackmailed by someone, `-[…] I will see what I can do for you.” -- Jörg Schilling signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
On Du, 13 mar 11, 10:44:07, Shachar Shemesh wrote: On 13/03/11 08:19, Ben Finney wrote: If you like to get two copies, why can't you arrange to generate the extra copies you want without involving anyone else's configuration? Any suggestions on how to do it? By setting 'Reply-To:' appropriately, this is what it's for. Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
On 13/03/11 11:29, Andrei Popescu wrote: Any suggestions on how to do it? By setting 'Reply-To:' appropriately, this is what it's for. If I set reply-to to myself, the mail won't go to the list. If I set it to the list, it won't go to me. Either way, the desired effect isn't achieved. Also, reply-to is the wrong tool for this job (this is NOT what it's for), as it prohibits distinction between replies to the list and reply to me. Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Lingnu Open Source Consulting Ltd. http://www.lingnu.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d7d04b9.2050...@shemesh.biz
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
On Du, 13 mar 11, 19:54:01, Shachar Shemesh wrote: On 13/03/11 11:29, Andrei Popescu wrote: Any suggestions on how to do it? By setting 'Reply-To:' appropriately, this is what it's for. If I set reply-to to myself, the mail won't go to the list. If I set it to the list, it won't go to me. Either way, the desired effect isn't achieved. At least with mutt I distinctively recall it replied both to the list and CCd the poster on list-reply. Not sure about other mailers though and you could also set Reply-To: to both the list and your address. Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
On 13/03/11 20:55, Andrei Popescu wrote: At least with mutt I distinctively recall it replied both to the list and CCd the poster on list-reply. That is a specific Mutt work around for broken lists that add reply-to automatically. It is not generally available. Not sure about other mailers though and you could also set Reply-To: to both the list and your address. A. I'm not at all sure what the standard says about multiple Reply-To: headers. I don't think they are supported B. Even if they are, they still don't allow people to reply privately. Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Lingnu Open Source Consulting Ltd. http://www.lingnu.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d7d9e6f.1060...@shemesh.biz
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
* jida...@jidanni.org [2011-03-12 11:14 +0800]: Recently I replied to a certain message on this list with my familiar S W runs the command gnus-summary-wide-reply-with-original keystrokes, only to receive I'm subscribed to the list, no need to CC me: http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct No need to reply to this message. ... I set Mail-Followup-To: on every mail I send to *@lists.debian.org. Most DDs just ignore it (though there are some exceptions) and this renders using Mail-Followup-To: to get a copy to be rather useless. There are examples where we lost potential future maintainers because they never received a reply to an RFS. These replies were sent to the list, but they were not sent to those requesting sponsorship. Therefore perhaps http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct could be amended to mention that adding a Mail-Followup-To header might add an additional wall of defense for those who wish to cut down even further the possibility they might receive a courtesy copy from the less technically adept. I agree. If a message I reply to contains a Mail-Followup-To: set, I use it. If not, I guess if the person I reply to wants to receive a reply. To prevent me to Cc: you, you need to explicitly set Mail-Followup-To: to the list. Carsten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110312095003.ga17...@furrball.stateful.de
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
* Carsten Hey [2011-03-12 10:50 +0100]: There are examples where we lost potential future maintainers because they never received a reply to an RFS. These replies were sent to the list, but they were not sent to those requesting sponsorship. To clarify this: the problem was not that Mail-Followup-To: has been ignored, but the partly insane code of conduct. How should new people know that they don't get a copy of replies to their messages unless they explicitly request one? Regards Carsten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110312115729.gb17...@furrball.stateful.de
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 12:57:29PM +0100, Carsten Hey wrote:
[...]
How should new people know that they don't get a copy of replies
to their messages unless they explicitly request one?
Maybe it's a generational difference... as I expect did authors of
the code of conduct, I came up on bulletin boards and Usenet in the
80s, where it was common courtesy to read any FAQ, CoC or other
relevant documentation (and even lurk for a while if possible) to
get a sense of the community's prevailing practices and culture
before participating in discussion. Every culture, no matter its
size, has distinct conventions and taboos, and not endeavoring to
learn them first before attempting to interact often results in
friction.
--
{ IRL(Jeremy_Stanley); WWW(http://fungi.yuggoth.org/); PGP(43495829);
WHOIS(STANL3-ARIN); SMTP(fu...@yuggoth.org); FINGER(fu...@yuggoth.org);
MUD(kin...@katarsis.mudpy.org:6669); IRC(fu...@irc.yuggoth.org#ccl);
ICQ(114362511); YAHOO(crawlingchaoslabs); AIM(dreadazathoth); }
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110312154822.gx1...@yuggoth.org
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
Shachar Shemesh shac...@debian.org writes: Personally, I think the code of conduct should be amended, along with the list software. While this shouldn't turn into a counting of popularity, I'd like to register that there are people who think the list behaviour currently (leave the Reply-To field untouched) is correct. So far, my research shows that the difference between people (like myself) who prefer to get the two copies and people who don't does not depend on level of technical knowledge, but specifics of method of reading the lists. That sounds right. I am subscribed to lots and lots of mailing lists. All mail from those lists gets automatically delivered to dedicated folders automatically. This means I'm highly likely to miss a reply to my own emails to the list unless I get another, direct, copy (which doesn't have the list hidden headers, and therefor stays in my inbox). I *like* to get two copies, as it increases the chance that I actually get to see the replies to my own emails. If you like to get two copies, why can't you arrange to generate the extra copies you want without involving anyone else's configuration? Conversely, I *don't* want any message to the forum to also be sent to me individually via email. In some cases that's because the individual message arrives first, is often read first, yet is the one that I want to avoid receiving. No filter can help with that, since it has no “other copy” to work with at the time it's needed. In other cases that's because I don't participate in the forum via email at all, so I don't want to receive any messages in that forum via email. I understand and respect the fact that other people, due to using a mail client that does not allow filtering based on hidden headers, because they are only subscribed to a couple of mailing lists, or for whatever other reason, do not appreciate the extra copy. The problem is that I cannot tell them apart. Why do you need to tell those classes of people apart? Why is being unable to tell them apart a problem? Since the default for all non-mailing list communication should be reply to all (after all, if someone decided to CC a third party on a conversation they started with you, it's a bit impolite to cut said third party off from the reply) I object to this idea quite strongly. The “forgot to include someone” mistake you identify is easily rectified after the message is sent; the “included someone whom I didn't intend” is impossible to rectify after the fact. For that reason among others, “reply to all” should not be the default but should be a deliberate decision in each instance. The solution I propose is already implemented in mailing list software such as mailman. In it, there is a per-user settable flag called avoid duplicates. I'm not a “user” recognised by the mailing list servers of many of the forums in which I participate, so your proposal is not a solution for my case. I know I'm not the only one who participates in Debian (and other) mailing lists as non-email forums. -- \ “What is needed is not the will to believe but the will to find | `\ out, which is the exact opposite.” —Bertrand Russell, _Free | _o__) Thought and Official Propaganda_, 1928 | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8762rn4k4w@benfinney.id.au
oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
Recently I replied to a certain message on this list with my familiar S W runs the command gnus-summary-wide-reply-with-original keystrokes, only to receive I'm subscribed to the list, no need to CC me: http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct No need to reply to this message. And indeed lo and behold, my S W habit is in violation here, 100%. However the same keystrokes on a different message did not produce the complaint inducing courtesy copy. Was the first message boobytrapped? No. The second message I replied to it turns out contained Mail-Followup-To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, jida...@jidanni.org Therefore perhaps http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct could be amended to mention that adding a Mail-Followup-To header might add an additional wall of defense for those who wish to cut down even further the possibility they might receive a courtesy copy from the less technically adept. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/878vwlvxlh@jidanni.org
Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct
On 12/03/11 05:14, jida...@jidanni.org wrote: Therefore perhaps http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct could be amended to mention that adding a Mail-Followup-To header might add an additional wall of defense for those who wish to cut down even further the possibility they might receive a courtesy copy from the less technically adept. Personally, I think the code of conduct should be amended, along with the list software. So far, my research shows that the difference between people (like myself) who prefer to get the two copies and people who don't does not depend on level of technical knowledge, but specifics of method of reading the lists. I am subscribed to lots and lots of mailing lists. All mail from those lists gets automatically delivered to dedicated folders automatically. This means I'm highly likely to miss a reply to my own emails to the list unless I get another, direct, copy (which doesn't have the list hidden headers, and therefor stays in my inbox). I *like* to get two copies, as it increases the chance that I actually get to see the replies to my own emails. I understand and respect the fact that other people, due to using a mail client that does not allow filtering based on hidden headers, because they are only subscribed to a couple of mailing lists, or for whatever other reason, do not appreciate the extra copy. The problem is that I cannot tell them apart. Since the default for all non-mailing list communication should be reply to all (after all, if someone decided to CC a third party on a conversation they started with you, it's a bit impolite to cut said third party off from the reply), I think the current internet trend to treat the use of reply to all as a mistake is misguided. The solution I propose is already implemented in mailing list software such as mailman. In it, there is a per-user settable flag called avoid duplicates. If it is set, if the mailing list detects that a CC or To recipient is also a mailing list subscriber, that subscriber does not get mailed a copy of the mail. This allows everyone to always hit 'reply to all', and have those who wish to receive an extra copy get it, and those who do not (such as most other subscribers to this list) not. I should point out that several mailing lists I'm subscribed to where this topic was a constant cause of bickering among the mailing participants switched to mailman, and the result was quiet on the 'reply to all' front for several years now. Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Lingnu Open Source Consulting Ltd. http://www.lingnu.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d7aea4c.2060...@debian.org
Re: Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update
On 2010-11-22, Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org wrote: On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Steve M. Robbins wrote: The rtupdate script has since been changed (in unstable) to avoid this problem, but I'm not sure what can be done for stable users other than recommending to purge the above four packages prior to upgrade. Is there any way to do this automatically? [...] The release notes usually recommend to have the latest stable packages before proceeding with the upgrade. Are they? As far as I know we are targetting r0 users. But then I guess nobody tests that anyway... Kind regards Philipp Kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrniekgf4.5us.tr...@kelgar.0x539.de
Re: Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update
On 11/22/2010 11:11 AM, Philipp Kern wrote: On 2010-11-22, Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org wrote: On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Steve M. Robbins wrote: The rtupdate script has since been changed (in unstable) to avoid this problem, but I'm not sure what can be done for stable users other than recommending to purge the above four packages prior to upgrade. Is there any way to do this automatically? [...] The release notes usually recommend to have the latest stable packages before proceeding with the upgrade. Are they? As far as I know we are targetting r0 users. But then I guess nobody tests that anyway... It's a general recommendation that usually is only needed for a couple specific packages AFAICT. The upgrade from r0 is indeed usually not very well tested... Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cea4348.6010...@debian.org
Re: Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update
* Steve M. Robbins st...@sumost.ca, 2010-11-22, 01:08: I just received notice (bug 603579) that upgrade lenny to squeeze will break if a boost package containing an rtupdate script is installed. In stable there are four such packages: libboost-python-dev libboost-dbg libboost-python1.35-dev libboost1.35-dbg The issue is that the rtupdate script in stable only recognizes python 2.4 and python 2.5, and dies if any other version is supplied. Squeeze python default is 2.6 and so this blocks the upgrade of python, which is very bad. The rtupdate script has since been changed (in unstable) to avoid this problem, but I'm not sure what can be done for stable users other than recommending to purge the above four packages prior to upgrade. Is there any way to do this automatically? Python maintainers can make python2.6-minimal break (or conflict, if breaking is not enough) the old libboost* packages. Please test if Breaks/Conflicts will help here, and if it does, file a bug against python2.6-minimal requesting such addition. -- Jakub Wilk signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update
Philipp Kern wrote: On 2010-11-22, Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org wrote: The release notes usually recommend to have the latest stable packages before proceeding with the upgrade. Are they? They did: | 4.2 Checking system status [...] | This procedure also assumes your system has been updated to the | latest point release of sarge. If you have not done this or are | unsure, follow the instructions in Upgrading your sarge system, | Section A.1. http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html | 4.2. Checking system status | [...] | This procedure also assumes your system has been updated to the | latest point release of etch. If you have not done this or are | unsure, follow the instructions in Section A.1, “Upgrading your etch | system”. http://www.debian.org/releases/lenny/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html And they still do: | 4.2. Checking system status | [...] | This procedure also assumes your system has been updated to the | latest point release of lenny. If you have not done this or are | unsure, follow the instructions in Section A.1, “Upgrading your lenny | system”. http://www.debian.org/releases/squeeze/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#system-status Regards, -thh -- /�\ --- JOIN NOW! --- \ / ASCII ribbon campaign X against HTML / \in mail and news -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ldd.1011222317.3...@thorondor.akallabeth.de
Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update
Hi, I just received notice (bug 603579) that upgrade lenny to squeeze will break if a boost package containing an rtupdate script is installed. In stable there are four such packages: libboost-python-dev libboost-dbg libboost-python1.35-dev libboost1.35-dbg The issue is that the rtupdate script in stable only recognizes python 2.4 and python 2.5, and dies if any other version is supplied. Squeeze python default is 2.6 and so this blocks the upgrade of python, which is very bad. The rtupdate script has since been changed (in unstable) to avoid this problem, but I'm not sure what can be done for stable users other than recommending to purge the above four packages prior to upgrade. Is there any way to do this automatically? Brown-paper-bagged-ly yours, -Steve signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update
Hi, On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Steve M. Robbins wrote: The rtupdate script has since been changed (in unstable) to avoid this problem, but I'm not sure what can be done for stable users other than recommending to purge the above four packages prior to upgrade. Is there any way to do this automatically? No but you can release a fixed version in stable. Get in touch with the stable release team and prepare a fixed package. The release notes usually recommend to have the latest stable packages before proceeding with the upgrade. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English) ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101122071415.gh17...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com
Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-5.1 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 18:47:28 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-5.1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Christian Perrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - caching HTTP proxy server written for performance Closes: 408414 408566 408664 409528 Changes: oops (1.5.23.cvs-5.1) unstable; urgency=low . * Non-maintainer upload to fix pending l10n issues. * Debconf translations: - German. Closes: #408414 - Czech. Closes: #408566 - Dutch. Closes: #408664 - Russian. Closes: #409528 Files: c3ef0d6b57da49705291eb5f79f08d55 716 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.1.dsc 4702af80e9b2f39a549909f6d491f4bf 109587 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.1.diff.gz 9f0c105fe40237cb1ab9361e4f4367eb 330156 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFF5H8b1OXtrMAUPS0RAtOJAJ0W7X359qTVtFjciTubxqTCZ284ygCfXyTQ TjXmoQLxkTpcD8+ViCsYMic= =n/Mr -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.1.diff.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.1.diff.gz oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.1.dsc to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.1.dsc oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.1_i386.deb to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.1_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-5 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 09:26:47 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-5 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Reinhard Tartler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Reinhard Tartler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - caching HTTP proxy server written for performance Closes: 254703 406953 406972 408210 408324 408348 Changes: oops (1.5.23.cvs-5) unstable; urgency=medium . * check for existance of pid file in logrotate script. (Closes: #254703) * update french debconf translation (Closes: #406953) * update swedish debconf translation (Closes: #408210) * add Portuguese translation for debconf messages (Closes: #408324) * update danish debconf translation (Closes: #408348) * Revert the patch from #406491, so using the old private rwclock implementation do to reported problems. Will reinvestigate again for lenny. Closes: #406972, at least for now. Raising urgency because of this bug. Files: 40921d4349e1482a37bed77d70a5b3c0 737 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.dsc fdc4cd74d5e92d0b3fe57ec52651ad92 109414 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.diff.gz 9ee4d3fc2c8a0198c9d5c0fe723eadfa 351340 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-5_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Debian Powered! iD8DBQFFuIAemAg1RJRTSKQRAtxrAJwJhSHuXtaRjXSFHeW235BWWHiNOgCeIDXg oSyRdDkwnq6oNgGIWcBK7FI= =pTvq -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.diff.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.diff.gz oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.dsc to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-5.dsc oops_1.5.23.cvs-5_i386.deb to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-5_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-4 (source amd64)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 08:49:04 +
Source: oops
Binary: oops
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.5.23.cvs-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Reinhard Tartler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
oops - caching HTTP proxy server written for performance
Closes: 406491
Changes:
oops (1.5.23.cvs-4) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Don't use internal rwlock implementation. Use the one in glibc, which
fixes FTBFS with glibc 2.5 and Closes: #406491
* therefore regenerate ./configure with autoconf 2.61
* update config.{guess,sub}
* small cleanups to debian/rules
* use dh_installman instead of dh_installmanpages
* add po-debconf to build-depends
* make Init Script LSB-compliant, See
http://wiki.debian.org/LSBInitScripts and Policy 9.3.2
* preinst: use invoke-rc.d (policy 9.3.3.2)
* with the above changes, bump Standards Version to 3.7.2.2
Files:
ec49f23e35fa48fe26b4ea426372fdd6 737 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-4.dsc
34b801178f0364c59055f29e49faaf14 101889 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-4.diff.gz
d60d5658c7bb3bf4bb84588a3246ce3d 334432 web optional
oops_1.5.23.cvs-4_amd64.deb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Debian Powered!
iD8DBQFFp1h3mAg1RJRTSKQRAh8TAJ9TDi6sbjmtLWTDaIXB0QheIZhBZgCfR1LE
Itf1MO6Pt/3JPAKiS8CS3OM=
=elvn
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Accepted:
oops_1.5.23.cvs-4.diff.gz
to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-4.diff.gz
oops_1.5.23.cvs-4.dsc
to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-4.dsc
oops_1.5.23.cvs-4_amd64.deb
to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-4_amd64.deb
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-3 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:32:14 +
Source: oops
Binary: oops
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.5.23.cvs-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Reinhard Tartler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
oops - caching HTTP proxy server written for performance
Closes: 231923 245184 260775 314906 316513 330322 332052 342325 349848
Changes:
oops (1.5.23.cvs-3) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Acknowledge NMUs (Closes: #316513, #330322, #332052, #314906, #260775)
* Add myself to uploaders
* remove '--disable-static-modules' from debian/rules. This breaks the
package in severe ways. (no -fPIC, no oopsctl and initscript fails)
(Closes: #342325)
* english only template html files (Closes: #245184)
* don't update config.{guess,sub} on clean. Do this manually instead!
* make initfile aware that /var/run can be tempfs (Closes: #349848)
* call configure with variable CC set to gcc. This makes configure use gcc
as linker instead of ld. (Closes: #231923)
* Updated standards version to 3.6.2.0 (no changes needed)
* Use debhelper compat level 5
.
* Upload sponsored by Norbert Tretkowski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Files:
fd9c988ac3b8719263a333e16706b73c 700 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-3.dsc
957d1a659bc0abf1c05025911a11f7b9 107620 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-3.diff.gz
c54a502d99c43311cd7b047a7f4ba7eb 334610 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-3_i386.deb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFD2KkEr/RnCw96jQERAspaAKCVy8l8RMqiqBqtBDYJlDmUn3sHyACfb4NN
6RJNVOZ9Z3WleFrxFvCdxxA=
=vzrd
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Accepted:
oops_1.5.23.cvs-3.diff.gz
to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-3.diff.gz
oops_1.5.23.cvs-3.dsc
to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-3.dsc
oops_1.5.23.cvs-3_i386.deb
to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-3_i386.deb
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-2.2 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:09:20 + Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-2.2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Neil McGovern [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - caching HTTP proxy server written for performance Closes: 260775 307360 314906 316513 330322 332052 Changes: oops (1.5.23.cvs-2.2) unstable; urgency=high . * Non-maintainer upload. * Application of patch to fix CAN-2005-1121 (Closes: #307360) * Added vi.po. Thanks to Clytie Siddall [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Closes: #316513) * Added sv.po. Thanks to Daniel Nylander [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Closes: #330322) * Added debconf-updatepo to clean stanza of debian/rules to stop translations being lost. * Added alternate dependency on debconf-2.0 for cdebconf transition. (Closes: #332052) * Moved force-reload to reload stanza in init.d (Closes: #314906) * chmod/chowned config file to root:proxy 640 for added security if an admin adds credentials in there. (Closes: #260775) Files: 2d2aeaa80ec6d0abbe6774db6e3fb885 659 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.2.dsc 082d4fa1aa227010a57961b803784719 106703 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.2.diff.gz cef70e69b803a804da22fdb9cc9bc311 357998 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDlaGA97LBwbNFvdMRApGpAJ9FinW6rmV8W0d7Yoxvehigd7MHnACghB2r xFPj5BR36Ol0MOejKSXq3s8= =lkZC -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.2.diff.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.2.diff.gz oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.2.dsc to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.2.dsc oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.2_i386.deb to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted lambdamoo 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1 (i386 source)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 16:03:22 -0700 Source: lambdamoo Binary: lambdamoo Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: lambdamoo - a server for an online multiuser virtual world Changes: lambdamoo (1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1) unstable; urgency=low . * Fixing up lintian warnings. * CVS directories no longer in orig.tar.gz * Binary no longer static; you must make your own chroot jail to run it securely. * Better usage of debhelper. Files: 3bf7d0b6517a788f19f5c3575683caa6 723 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1.dsc b145a28bd2bf49afe82063a1d8227a7e 400551 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2.orig.tar.gz e976092a1de86c587a9ef50c24190208 6123 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1.diff.gz 8e3a3c5f477246c34e9704235fdd0b82 175248 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iQCVAwUBQgF5B8K9HT/YfGeBAQGRWQP+LwU76NFNH4pRC8ON2fzwVFlfsASi+wBJ DjpF6TIdOMZH+j6t+BichF+Rp2UdUSbwwo2x4YJrHU+wXQSG9d8a+EGQFIMSxlEo NtTtw/f3ZalBXknhQ8oXQkAyteWNyWBTQKKzZ9Q7g5zzQVI49YOPuIGA06iE/b7Q C8Jdj2EfLfk= =Vz5r -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1.diff.gz to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1.diff.gz lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1.dsc to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1.dsc lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1_i386.deb to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1_i386.deb lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted lambdamoo 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2 (i386 source)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 17:45:22 -0700 Source: lambdamoo Binary: lambdamoo Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: lambdamoo - a server for an online multiuser virtual world Changes: lambdamoo (1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2) unstable; urgency=low . * Cleaned up debian/rules file a little bit. Files: 35371d71b1f507528fc42d6351c8c680 723 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2.dsc 0a5417bcd53658cf9141dd39123f4fa5 6131 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2.diff.gz 20fd4580573595d4d921647bc024 175280 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iQCVAwUBQgGCm8K9HT/YfGeBAQFbJAP+JMM/878F4uLMm5CNEy2hH5ts756gplkE N5gzcA0O4FvGGC+wFRuOjVXWGMUnRors0AEZffVZgY4yyJn9Fcbh7kt5ySbWyLYO 0kFdmL8f1256FvpOMuiVnqyjnvuXCtGC4RRuis6HthwuQmEOO38xAj8kjeGjKzjz 3Fgu/QQ1C6o= =tn5A -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2.diff.gz to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2.diff.gz lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2.dsc to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2.dsc lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2_i386.deb to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted lambdamoo 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2 (i386 source)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2005 1:02:20 -0700 Source: lambdamoo Binary: lambdamoo Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: lambdamoo - a server for an online multiuser virtual world Closes: 224055 Changes: lambdamoo (1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2) unstable; urgency=low . * created orig.tar.gz (Closes: #224055) * bumped Standards-Version up to 3.6.1.1 Files: 0f0def882ffeb5fd37052b1331f94a64 717 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2.dsc 6c1434669cb9d323a43c46c6deb1aaf2 405580 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.orig.tar.gz ca1206006fd69fa4dcc841c52efbf4fc 5959 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2.diff.gz 4ea64160e39f54a502c16d7ec7c8d64f 411430 net optional lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iQCVAwUBQf31TsK9HT/YfGeBAQFYfgP9FwUh213l/rBvuAzHgGK2rOFRb7rsT1YW 9AQmxCN3R/bR7oTDuKTvN+bvN+q8onyi/ZSzL6e1z6rANKS/Q2vSZcJvC66pNBJO bjTSCL7f8Y96eEZ5PfjB5EQ6YasVTB8DayNlOnVTAt4JfGT7Xh5/q1Tho0YnmtlB AS+dmOC1Tdc= =jLas -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2.diff.gz to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2.diff.gz lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2.dsc to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2.dsc lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2_i386.deb to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2_i386.deb lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/l/lambdamoo/lambdamoo_1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-2 (i386 source)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 15:43:00 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 231923 231924 233489 248743 Changes: oops (1.5.23.cvs-2) unstable; urgency=low . * Test for -fPIC -shared first when checking link flags, add -fPIC to CFLAGS when detected. Thanks to Goswin von Brederlow (Closes: #231924) * Use $CC for linking if $CC = gcc*. Thanks to Goswin von Brederlow (Closes: #231923) * Link shared modules against shared libpcreposix.so and libpcre.so. Thanks to Goswin von Brederlow * Updated french po template (Closes: #233489) * New catalan po template (Closes: #248743) Files: c1a898e6ad06f8b1e320405e97c5e6fc 652 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.dsc 94ebdde1a76801d342828a22535e10f9 56418 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.diff.gz 714d70d5d6cfa77a35f272bf3fd6c21f 401564 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAr2Y1eBwlBDLsbz4RAtyNAKDGucyQsbW4QLd0skjOlOdYLjfPOQCgh0KX 8a5Syjy/NXhu3acP1FCTl48= =1s2l -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.diff.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.diff.gz oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.dsc to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-2.dsc oops_1.5.23.cvs-2_i386.deb to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-1 (i386 source)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2004 10:06:00 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 227959 228890 Changes: oops (1.5.23.cvs-1) unstable; urgency=low . * In sync with upstream version 1.5.23 * Fixed typo for debconf value in gettext templates (Closes: #227959) * Removed suggestion for unavailable package run (Closes: #228890) Files: b7c40f8e47e697444953dbe9c738c412 669 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-1.dsc f9392ea2070350669d0b7ec1a8959ee4 499700 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs.orig.tar.gz 23813ff040e9fb1d8b187a4b94fe08c5 54890 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-1.diff.gz 092eb2377362ead0ee8cc72143deeb60 393336 web optional oops_1.5.23.cvs-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAJsNWeBwlBDLsbz4RAoRMAJ9eAVGnjE9ueagkXsV2/3mKbsXlOACeIeJp TTxUpSfBnS1ok3St3eZI3/k= =w14P -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: oops_1.5.23.cvs-1.diff.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-1.diff.gz oops_1.5.23.cvs-1.dsc to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-1.dsc oops_1.5.23.cvs-1_i386.deb to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs-1_i386.deb oops_1.5.23.cvs.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.cvs.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted oops 1.5.23-1 (i386 source)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 12:18:05 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 98026 121154 137443 186951 193053 217197 217198 Changes: oops (1.5.23-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release, many thanks to the oops author Igor Khasilev, since there were many on-debian-demand changes. (Closes: #186951, #193053, #121154, #137443, #98026) * Switch to gettext-based debconf templates and french translation. Thanks to Michel Grentzinger. (Closes: #217197, #217198) Files: 7b4b648ab4a2867be7e30c4a69afaa4b 657 web optional oops_1.5.23-1.dsc f9392ea2070350669d0b7ec1a8959ee4 499700 web optional oops_1.5.23.orig.tar.gz 511a3cc7f5f87e777af054ea217db1ed 61859 web optional oops_1.5.23-1.diff.gz 0e80f5f33438e5adf7c863ae1dc94344 380674 web optional oops_1.5.23-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAAW+seBwlBDLsbz4RAvy4AJ91QAnj0g9r1wWnkXpxQxwy/ROwRgCgxh5M ILRCFjTMpgANEZYhQZc/8vM= =b6dH -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: oops_1.5.23-1.diff.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23-1.diff.gz oops_1.5.23-1.dsc to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23-1.dsc oops_1.5.23-1_i386.deb to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23-1_i386.deb oops_1.5.23.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.23.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOPS!: Re: UserLinux white paper
That's userlinux.com . I don't have the .org, some domain squatter has that. Thanks Bruce On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:04:31PM +, bruce wrote: I did a first pass at the UserLinux white paper, it's at http://userlinux.org/white_paper.html. I think I'll sleep for a while. Thanks Bruce -- -- Bruce Perens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-526-1165 Perens LLC / 1563 Solano Ave. / PMB 349 / Berkeley CA 94707 / USA
Accepted guile-oops 1.0.2-2.3 (i386 source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 18:26:10 -0500 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc libgoops5-dev goops libgoops5 Architecture: source all i386 Version: 1.0.2-2.3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Mikael Djurfeldt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Gunnar Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: goops - Guile interpreter linked with GOOPS. goops-doc - Documentation for goops libgoops5 - Shared libraries for goops. libgoops5-dev - Development headers and static libraries for goops. Closes: 204036 Changes: guile-oops (1.0.2-2.3) unstable; urgency=low . * NMU by Gunnar Wolf * Fixed debian/goops-doc.info so it will build with current version of texinfo (Closes: #204036) Files: 5269f7d20e192ed438607f42938546d8 582 interpreters optional guile-oops_1.0.2-2.3.dsc 507f2d37891befcfc08dc1e72fd76d38 798131 interpreters optional guile-oops_1.0.2-2.3.tar.gz 69ea5e77279b7caac9f124034a1f3a67 287162 doc optional goops-doc_1.0.2-2.3_all.deb 6b5d16768e0cc5f83aebc5c763ffe63f 72804 libs optional libgoops5_1.0.2-2.3_i386.deb c65ff61324489ee88d64e57de406e43b 24908 interpreters optional goops_1.0.2-2.3_i386.deb 5d178401df19f58d684fdf83b747ce4c 50418 devel optional libgoops5-dev_1.0.2-2.3_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/Rqey2A7zWou1J68RAsenAJ4zHqXamGZgXB5Cjj2bAjY0u9jqNQCcCcAb AZ/TLTUzJ6yL6Z5ZXj9TLuo= =pF2O -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: goops-doc_1.0.2-2.3_all.deb to pool/main/g/guile-oops/goops-doc_1.0.2-2.3_all.deb goops_1.0.2-2.3_i386.deb to pool/main/g/guile-oops/goops_1.0.2-2.3_i386.deb guile-oops_1.0.2-2.3.dsc to pool/main/g/guile-oops/guile-oops_1.0.2-2.3.dsc guile-oops_1.0.2-2.3.tar.gz to pool/main/g/guile-oops/guile-oops_1.0.2-2.3.tar.gz libgoops5-dev_1.0.2-2.3_i386.deb to pool/main/g/guile-oops/libgoops5-dev_1.0.2-2.3_i386.deb libgoops5_1.0.2-2.3_i386.deb to pool/main/g/guile-oops/libgoops5_1.0.2-2.3_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted oops 1.5.22-2 (i386 source)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:18:11 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.22-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 165803 174811 Changes: oops (1.5.22-2) unstable; urgency=low . * Fixed build-depends (Closes: #174811) * Not to forget that this was the long awaited new upstream release, so: (Closes: #165803) Files: 2502d724dbbcbbee0db6a936bbd60f26 697 web optional oops_1.5.22-2.dsc 8013ab3c45d3b4adf3b89e385eaae66c 140909 web optional oops_1.5.22-2.diff.gz 9695e2337ec981201dedc5bd26f13bbd 353884 web optional oops_1.5.22-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+FC/8eBwlBDLsbz4RAqhpAJ44T5YWf/oE2fNU3wPsv1hhYBcfOQCcDmW0 ruiYz+o8eSotVMv3hugcfdA= =4Rui -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: oops_1.5.22-2.diff.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.22-2.diff.gz oops_1.5.22-2.dsc to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.22-2.dsc oops_1.5.22-2_i386.deb to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.22-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted oops 1.5.22-1 (i386 source)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 17:35:50 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.22-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 116029 165984 Changes: oops (1.5.22-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New package maintainer (Closes: #116029) * new upstream release * includes patch to 1.5.22f, (Closes: #165984) Files: b7c508d7539a31bb2976816790042379 556 web optional oops_1.5.22-1.dsc bd6f743fb4abc6cf08ae310b1927b211 449116 web optional oops_1.5.22.orig.tar.gz 6a76f274b7d75937bde85a8441e40aee 140783 web optional oops_1.5.22-1.diff.gz 8a47131b96249cc23b242073419a46fc 353816 web optional oops_1.5.22-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+EFM6eBwlBDLsbz4RAopvAKC8sBgVAemxTQTKt5iKvMbsvJxO5gCgwtxB 1VdVD9Yq0aGx1yi9t5BFkgk= =rvLD -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: oops_1.5.22-1.diff.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.22-1.diff.gz oops_1.5.22-1.dsc to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.22-1.dsc oops_1.5.22-1_i386.deb to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.22-1_i386.deb oops_1.5.22.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/o/oops/oops_1.5.22.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Uploaded oops 1.5.19.cvs.20010818-0.1 (m68k) to erlangen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 14:49:43 -0500 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: m68k Version: 1.5.19.cvs.20010818-0.1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/m68k Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Eric Gillespie [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Changes: oops (1.5.19.cvs.20010818-0.1) unstable; urgency=low . * NMU. * configure.in: AC_PREREQ(2.50) and remove non-existent -G option to ld. Use the shared pcre libraries instead of static, since pcre symbols are packed into dynamically loaded modules and therefore must be PIC. * Run autoconf to generate new configure script. * src/modules/Makefile.in: Add -DPIC -fPIC to CFLAGS. Files: 4948d16a358efcca8ba8c01e95800a0c 280886 web optional oops_1.5.19.cvs.20010818-0.1_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBO/KNt2547I3m3eHJAQG55wP/U2bB6nsbYjHk4WyDMNnv9qB6kNGkFYsK a9QKla84v8NwKrM9zgBZHls8aGl/LD43m7Flevw2U4FfMwJ2ERVc0uZzeNJpR0zd TPAVwnUnjsxQ/J3luUasvdbGBMncEF+uIA8CwBJgxiKMsJxXszTLfAFirddWSrlU IDr36/yTxpU= =sdeC -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.2-2.2 (m68k) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 14:06:29 -0600 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: m68k Version: 1.0.2-2.2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/m68k buildd2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Jeff Licquia [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: goops - Guile interpreter linked with GOOPS. libgoops5 - Shared libraries for goops. libgoops5-dev - Development headers and static libraries for goops. Closes: 104884 Changes: guile-oops (1.0.2-2.2) unstable; urgency=low . * NMU. * Updated config.sub and config.guess. Closes: #104884. Files: 02e03d3340fcaa58cb808bb006e1ee0c 73926 libs optional libgoops5_1.0.2-2.2_m68k.deb 99db22d6d70f21af2cdbb11610e1a113 25024 interpreters optional goops_1.0.2-2.2_m68k.deb ac781171e4d1e578fb09aa092107 49586 devel optional libgoops5-dev_1.0.2-2.2_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Rick Younie [EMAIL PROTECTED] iEYEARECAAYFAjvRCjMACgkQEycGpQPNsdKMWgCgn+FOauksQnesgNBd6vmdpKME EskAoJogHaGEL15irfZjvEBzdhI91H33 =bQfW -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.2-2.2 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 14:06:29 -0600 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: sparc Version: 1.0.2-2.2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/sparc Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Jeff Licquia [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: goops - Guile interpreter linked with GOOPS. libgoops5 - Shared libraries for goops. libgoops5-dev - Development headers and static libraries for goops. Closes: 104884 Changes: guile-oops (1.0.2-2.2) unstable; urgency=low . * NMU. * Updated config.sub and config.guess. Closes: #104884. Files: 792bcf0d583da42fe2431794bf179c5f 75988 libs optional libgoops5_1.0.2-2.2_sparc.deb e074c890324289a3feae17155f6baf29 25080 interpreters optional goops_1.0.2-2.2_sparc.deb 410862f1e7f0bc4064bd10a511489574 56728 devel optional libgoops5-dev_1.0.2-2.2_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 and Gnu Privacy Guard http://www.gnupg.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAjvOvrMACgkQgD/uEicUG7DldwCfXoxhSv5AcAH82fbBVJKUz4JD ZE0AoM0k5bjDfVhfScOx9mf1lR/HGQRc =nBPQ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.19.cvs.20010818 (m68k) to erlangen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 17:26:19 +0200
Source: oops
Binary: oops
Architecture: m68k
Version: 1.5.19.cvs.20010818
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian/m68k Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance
Closes: 97920 105042
Changes:
oops (1.5.19.cvs.20010818) unstable; urgency=low
.
* /etc/logrotate.d/oops `create 640 proxy proxy' to eliminate
log permission problems
* config file in doc/examples dir (closes: #97920)
debian/oops.examples
* config.{guess,sub} was so old and unportable to hppa
updated from autotools-dev (closes: #105042)
Files:
bcb1867f3661878d6f88e61e10889270 322118 web optional
oops_1.5.19.cvs.20010818_m68k.deb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBO4Ify2547I3m3eHJAQGqdQP8DHOep6K5qu0BFfO4LfAA5fT0aWR6d7yl
SuUoV3o2QJu8AdOP8f27OZ4DWFP6oPOc4YPl1FkJ3cVD14dyZ4eTgH0mjmRXgFZx
+xkvBr+DYKwJ8IMljPxXJUBvv2q12F08EP0pXCGFxu86tHac3PA82GsGbw/Ps6Dn
UzfxXcQkP1c=
=UbvM
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.19.cvs.20010818 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 17:26:19 +0200
Source: oops
Binary: oops
Architecture: sparc
Version: 1.5.19.cvs.20010818
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian/sparc Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance
Closes: 97920 105042
Changes:
oops (1.5.19.cvs.20010818) unstable; urgency=low
.
* /etc/logrotate.d/oops `create 640 proxy proxy' to eliminate
log permission problems
* config file in doc/examples dir (closes: #97920)
debian/oops.examples
* config.{guess,sub} was so old and unportable to hppa
updated from autotools-dev (closes: #105042)
Files:
04af8ca6d748227f8d6f24b60d0a1fab 344524 web optional
oops_1.5.19.cvs.20010818_sparc.deb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 and Gnu Privacy Guard
http://www.gnupg.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAjuA0eUACgkQgD/uEicUG7Ai9gCghgmJIOkuIkbv+VSsZCQOx7JJ
OfYAn2TjPL1MA7svMb3v9wIWQKCVjXNK
=tcbc
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.2-2.1 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 15:52:06 +0100 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: sparc Version: 1.0.2-2.1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian GNU/Linux SPARC/UltraSPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: goops - Guile interpreter linked with GOOPS. libgoops5 - Shared libraries for goops. libgoops5-dev - Development headers and static libraries for goops. Closes: 98295 Changes: guile-oops (1.0.2-2.1) unstable; urgency=low . * Non-maintainer upload. * Build-depend on debhelper and texinfo (closes: #98295). Files: d4ecbd1c20adf79e3c6bc8ca202b3387 75896 libs optional libgoops5_1.0.2-2.1_sparc.deb 04d78130ddd90b4a516c28684b2f4e55 24956 interpreters optional goops_1.0.2-2.1_sparc.deb 02dec69d6d2626ea6748eade8f13b8b1 56656 devel optional libgoops5-dev_1.0.2-2.1_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 and Gnu Privacy Guard http://www.gnupg.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAjtDPJcACgkQgD/uEicUG7AHpwCg0o3YKRjZnX6hko6CMc7Ud5gc L8UAmwYtsfkFYjYZVNFrq7eEdKFGsVjv =e3mE -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.18.cvs.20010515-1 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 09:22:04 +0200 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.18.cvs.20010515-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Changes: oops (1.5.18.cvs.20010515-1) unstable; urgency=low . * acces_log now htmlize path * accel.c: host from absolute uri have precedence over Host: * ssl works with parent * many bugfixes Files: c5f158156e7753f9623c17949b16b4fc 331950 web optional oops_1.5.18.cvs.20010515-1_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] iD8DBQE7AovTfNc/ZB4E7C0RAmEPAJ4sWo6mIMzL/MRTkGWHB8n+yRdYggCfYSZ2 GtHlPIsMdHHotxhamUflLWk= =opfe -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1 (m68k) to erlangen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 11:47:49 +0200 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: m68k Version: 1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 92252 Changes: oops (1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1) unstable; urgency=low . * libpcre3/2/1 (potato) backward compatibility * changelog duplication fix (closes: #92252), no lintian warning * many people asked me to use the standard http_port (now: 3128) and icp_port (now: 3130) in oops.cfg so it is recommended. Files: 6da8acfd83e70d9a7b6826642b406b0d 284786 web optional oops_1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBOts102547I3m3eHJAQGl5wP/bvBWFSql9UZX381yR4wD/oyWPaitobFM Pho43aKkGN2XZV7Wog+y0e37SuTKPEx0EUY481TE92L/VqVxmCFjy8HtJANKT1l3 EXPO3PQx+6xghToG9mex99f5WYAKvV9TlYces+P50VMH4qLV+W8RsllI2dJJ3QU8 1nqvuKM8ckg= =Ji13 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 11:47:49 +0200 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 92252 Changes: oops (1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1) unstable; urgency=low . * libpcre3/2/1 (potato) backward compatibility * changelog duplication fix (closes: #92252), no lintian warning * many people asked me to use the standard http_port (now: 3128) and icp_port (now: 3130) in oops.cfg so it is recommended. Files: e141ce25b180d5edc41be2f00db4be91 318718 web optional oops_1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] iD8DBQE60SnYfNc/ZB4E7C0RAvtuAKCFDc9r0lK1ai/DyzukBc2TnuBGywCeJPOj jnZNzl6BAzIWrSmGb3R6gDI= =WZl2 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.15.cvs.20010328-1 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 11:16:21 +0200 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.15.cvs.20010328-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Changes: oops (1.5.15.cvs.20010328-1) unstable; urgency=low . * upstream and debian changelog fix * The adfilter /usr/share/doc/oops/examples/adfilter . to not watch advertisements and counters * README.Debian mentions a security fix if you are using old oops.cfg Files: bdf85cd2487041216ae9171b28558e00 324874 web optional oops_1.5.15.cvs.20010328-1_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] iD8DBQE6w3M3fNc/ZB4E7C0RAr1IAKCjM3W6J/3Ht72QuVBSetwXM5AFdwCghZAI OV495ENULsyw5bKOEH4VpEg= =1hoT -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.7-3 (m68k) to erlangen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 00:47:01 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: m68k Version: 1.5.7-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/m68k Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 84220 Changes: oops (1.5.7-3) unstable; urgency=low . * bison, flex build dependency (closes: #84220) Files: 6ba09578cf1f3fb3e96fcea3e607e17c 234242 web optional oops_1.5.7-3_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBOrntKm547I3m3eHJAQGMuwP7Bnk2t9ttLPTpYnaUeoCjqawGSM4f+WvT 7r+JORawZwthCoZBEJq6J2wRAMpyT1aDyJl01ExX2QknyQFNTnT1xTY2EVLSQQyP DZjLcUk8I/atR+RI4h9+ijNH2mi8crzWy6vNQL/jbdpRVjE37VdavGPz5JH8QuC2 gKVmojf34nk= =SUDM -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.2-1 (m68k) to erlangen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 20:22:40 -0500 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: m68k Version: 1.0.2-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer: Debian/m68k Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Mikael Djurfeldt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: goops - Guile interpreter linked with GOOPS. libgoops5 - Shared libraries for goops. libgoops5-dev - Development headers and static libraries for goops. Changes: guile-oops (1.0.2-1) unstable; urgency=high . * New upstream version. Files: 34fed0caa26dd49719de716843c97a0d 73468 libs optional libgoops5_1.0.2-1_m68k.deb 64b58b9e1502bb1436fe490911e72269 24614 interpreters optional goops_1.0.2-1_m68k.deb 7beb3139e1cc6216d2a6f64dd6582a70 49168 devel optional libgoops5-dev_1.0.2-1_m68k.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.5 and Gnu Privacy Guard http://www.gnupg.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAjqt6j4ACgkQcS3JWD3FdvdmaQCdEZljpb3Vb4/EU1u1K4LyeqNc KJEAn3Opp4R2+IRxhJKmQuvG+7UwX2LX =z3KV -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.2-1 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 20:22:40 -0500 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: sparc Version: 1.0.2-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Mikael Djurfeldt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: goops - Guile interpreter linked with GOOPS. libgoops5 - Shared libraries for goops. libgoops5-dev - Development headers and static libraries for goops. Changes: guile-oops (1.0.2-1) unstable; urgency=high . * New upstream version. Files: 43d76497d17ecb34eea13f45f9d31c8b 75556 libs optional libgoops5_1.0.2-1_sparc.deb 8dfe697c7f0f6702f8f53ec5a40e40e0 27718 interpreters optional goops_1.0.2-1_sparc.deb 6148c5f9dda39387c3b83cf0a8a939bd 56354 devel optional libgoops5-dev_1.0.2-1_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] iD8DBQE6rZItfNc/ZB4E7C0RAlsTAJ4nerZKncGv93eRbHV/WmQoRuTPWgCfcHEF bWhdieGg4p4JE/2eli2HAX0= =2HCJ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.0-1 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 00:50:45 -0500 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: sparc Version: 1.0.0-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Mikael Djurfeldt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: goops - Guile interpreter linked with GOOPS. libgoops5 - Shared libraries for goops. libgoops5-dev - Development headers and static libraries for goops. Closes: 83809 87111 Changes: guile-oops (1.0.0-1) unstable; urgency=high . * New upstream version (closes: #87111, #83809). Files: e37cd16202e5f4393d2977acf660e492 75102 libs optional libgoops5_1.0.0-1_sparc.deb 34d9d911c6d35b1d857c05671fd21c65 27672 interpreters optional goops_1.0.0-1_sparc.deb bd18372223a4c9fa36eda6e0e84b36f3 57142 devel optional libgoops5-dev_1.0.0-1_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] iD8DBQE6qiTafNc/ZB4E7C0RAnyeAKC/ViWbXZGK9T59eMMAeJ9+NAWzGwCfSofq 2tWAOWRZr3uFKXFhYLBKBPg= =rnAy -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.7-3 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 00:47:01 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.7-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 84220 Changes: oops (1.5.7-3) unstable; urgency=low . * bison, flex build dependency (closes: #84220) Files: e7e6ba38516883639281e3ba72df224e 269506 web optional oops_1.5.7-3_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] iD8DBQE6mmr9fNc/ZB4E7C0RApecAJ90SIZep64iW/7gfBaNrBMOcf058ACgr5mj bK8OLfzpu1+7pjszXmZGCLY= =INxU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.7-2 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:03:13 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.7-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 83678 83930 Changes: oops (1.5.7-2) unstable; urgency=low . * german templates file for debconf (closes: #83930) * swedish translation of oops's debconf template file (closes: #83678) * hungarian debconf template * optional 'run' respawner ability in init.d script (see: RUNNING_TYPE) Files: 1f35d1d0c1856020cadb835edaad3ea4 259538 web optional oops_1.5.7-2_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] iD4DBQE6d4fgfNc/ZB4E7C0RAt9wAJ9FjaHN/hQ3dQAN383vRzk44vlvtgCTBwzH A+dKFQKxtaiGl9hiA8jFUg== =GMm0 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.7-1 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 14:27:42 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.7-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Closes: 83620 Changes: oops (1.5.7-1) unstable; urgency=low . * conffiles missed (closes: #83620) Files: 6520ac73ac5145224e240c352d85f834 258840 web optional oops_1.5.7-1_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] iD8DBQE6ctrFfNc/ZB4E7C0RAoWkAKCAb2knb9BIW29uMcvlj90fBg+rRwCfQAid kMohxqCEr06zs5frfO/pFyI= =sSbW -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.7 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 19:59:26 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.7 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Changes: oops (1.5.7) unstable; urgency=low . * logrotate.d conffiles cleanup (for the sake of grin) * new init.d script without silly oopsctl verobosity at start * new upstream source * fixed Age: header bug Files: 5d57344413589bbf91451ad273eb1867 258972 web optional oops_1.5.7_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] iD8DBQE6cdV6fNc/ZB4E7C0RAt4eAJ4pgO0ossWMoauojMmUTuqCCnaoSACgs8rR pOsaVrSwvONJhUvtso+YPv8= =H5qL -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Uploaded oops 1.5.6-1 (sparc) to ftp-master
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 01:03:35 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.6-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: oops - HTTP caching proxy server written for performance Changes: oops (1.5.6-1) unstable; urgency=low . * debhelper question to format the storages Files: 875fdc86761457a6dd0008543a5af4a8 257974 web optional oops_1.5.6-1_sparc.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] iD8DBQE6bzmofNc/ZB4E7C0RAv0SAJkB6CtGxihVnIPxRwfFwPZocxAZTACgtb6l elfoRUneFVhNPXaVVCmDov4= =sqV+ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Oops
Mistakenly sent to debian-devel. This is off topic. Merry Xmas to you all!! Cheers, -- Eray (exa) Ozkural Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/~erayo
GTK oops?
Dear overworked gtk maintainer... Did you deliberately upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused to me.. Jules /+---+-\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd| | Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| TW9 2TF *UK* | ++---+-+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \--/
Re: GTK oops?
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.. Jules /+---+-\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd| | Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| TW9 2TF *UK* | ++---+-+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \--/
Re: GTK oops?
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 /+---+-\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd| | Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| TW9 2TF *UK* | ++---+-+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \--/
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: GTK oops?
Jules == Jules Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jules Dear overworked gtk maintainer... Did you deliberately Jules upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused to Jules me.. It was deliberate, but it was a mistake. The GTK+ maintainers told me 1.1.14 was binary compatible with 1.1.13 (because GLib 1.1.14 is binary compatible with 1.1.13) but it was not. It's been fixed; libgtk1.1.13_1:1.1.13-1 is in the archives now, and libgtk1.1.14_1.1.14-1 is awaiting approval. Ben -- Brought to you by the letters I and O and the number 8. It is sad. *Campers* cannot *dance*. Not even a *party*. Debian GNU/Linux maintainer of Gimp and GTK+ -- http://www.debian.org/ I'm on FurryMUCK as Che, and EFNet/Open Projects IRC as Che_Fox.
Oops
Sorry for the last one. Should have gone to request. But I'm in a hurry. My boss decided to strip my remote login rights without telling me. Boy, am I glad I leave this company! Michael -- Dr. Michael Meskes, Project-Manager| topsystem Systemhaus GmbH [EMAIL PROTECTED]| Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 52146 Wuerselen Go SF49ers! Go Rhein Fire! | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44 Use Debian GNU/Linux! | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
oops
Sorry, I was having hassles with my local mail system broken reverse DNS here and accidentally resent an unstable upload announcement to debian-devel-announce instead of debian-devel-changes. :-( hamish -- Hamish Moffatt, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5 CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Bug#3320: Kernel oops - problem with APM BIOS?
Package: (bootdisk) Version: 1996_6_16 APM support is enabled in the 2.0 kernel on this bootdisk. Some green motherboards have problems with this, resulting in kernel oops every time during kernel startup (before mounting the root filesystem). Turning off power management in BIOS setup doesn't change anything - the buggy APM BIOS is still there. The machine has a 486DX2-66 green motherboard with Phoenix BIOS (more details on request). Another machine (with Award BIOS) works fine. The 1.2.13 kernel from 0.93R6 boots fine (because it has no APM support). The EIP value from the oops looks rather strange (2045:[d9c5]), but call trace suggests a problem with APM. The startup messages (may be inaccurate - they had to be written down manually): APM BIOS version 1.0 Flags 0x0b (Driver version 1.2) Entry f000:dbdf cseg16 f000 dseg 40 AC unknown, battery status unknown, battery life unknown Ramdisk ... hda: ST3660A, 520MB ... hdb: WDC AC280M, 81MB ... ... other messages ... FDC 0 is an 8272A. Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address c4ed current-tss.cr3 = 00101000, %cr3 = 00101000 *pde = 00102067 *pte = 0027 Oops: CPU: 0 EIP: 2045:[d9c5] EFLAGS: 00010012 eax: 0016 ebx:00173700 ecx: edx: esi: 0020b838 edi:0016 ebp:7e38 esp:7e30 ds: 2050 es: fs: gs: ss:0018 Process swapper (pid: 1, process nr: 1, stackpage=7000) Stack: [snipped, was too much to write down] Call Trace: 001731fe - apm_get_event 00110018 - wake_up_interruptible 00173700 - do_apm_timer 00173579 - get_event 00173645 - check_events 00173700 - do_apm_timer 00173774 - do_apm_timer 00110834 - timer_bh 00115ec7 - do_bottom_half 0010a40b - handle_bottom_half Aiee, killing interrupt handler This problem makes it impossible to install the system on that particular machine. I'd suggest to disable APM support in the default installation kernels - it's not very important to be green during installation, users who need APM can recompile the kernel later, and APM code causes some kernel bloat too (RAM is cheap now, but anyway - has anyone tried if it's still possible to install Debian on machines with only 4MB of RAM?). Ideally, it should be possible to enable/disable APM support using boot time parameters. Currently the only way to disable APM is to recompile the kernel, which may be difficult if you don't have a working system first... Marek
