La NewsLetter d'AALWAY Software
AALWAY, TOUT LE LOGICIEL POUR LA COMMUNAUTE DU NET LA LETTRE D'INFO du 21 novembre 2001 http://www.aalway.net/index_assur201101.php Bonjour, * 30% de remise sur tous nos logiciels jusqu'au 31/12/2001 * Nouvelle version d'AspiMail, notre logiciel de capture d'adresses Email * Nouvelle version de Boomerang, notre logiciel d'envoi de masse ASPIMAIL : Nouvelle version d'AspiMail, notre logiciel phare de capture d'adresses Email. La capacite d'aspiration est portee maintenant à pres de 120.000 adresses en 24H pour les connexions les plus rapides. http://www.aalway.net/index_assur201101.php BOOMERANG : Nouvelle version de Boomerang, notre logiciel d'envoi de masse est maintenant entierement multitache, il expédie jusqu'a 99 messages en meme temps. La capacite d'envoi est portee maintenant a pres de 2.500.000 messages en 24H pour les connexions les plus rapides. http://www.aalway.net/index_assur201101.php ASPIWEB: Notre logiciel de capture de sites Internet reste un best-seller, distribue en shareware par la plupart des journaux informatiques. http://www.aalway.net/index_assur201101.php Nous vous rappelons que tous nos logiciels sont telechargeables gratuitement pour une version d'essai. Par ailleurs n'hesitez pas a nous faire des remarques, nous sortons en moyenne une nouvelle version de chaque logiciel trimestriellement en tenant compte de vos avis. Cordialement. L'équipe AALWAY. Pour vous desabonner a cette offre, vous pouvez cliquer sur le lien ci-dessous: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] en écrivant remove dans le sujet.
Re: EURO SUPPORT DOCUMENT
Hello all!! I was away for a time, so sorry for the delay. We have Euro in Kde but not in all the applications in Kde, here you are (applications that we have checked): Not suported: -Netscape, konsole Not fully supported: -Konqueror: the euro works fine in the bos where you put th web addres, but inside forms the Euro doesn't work, very strange. In other apps, it seems to work fine, kword, kmail, etc.. I have followed the document of Javier Sanguino and all the threats in this list, and I think that this should be enough to get the euro fully supported. Thans to Javier Sanguino an all the list. Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: I wrote this due to a mail from javi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) in the debain-user-spanish list. He did not write that the problem was solved (I gather after talking in debian-user-spanish he sent his problems to debian-kde). I will fix this, of course :) Javi Hello, In the previous web page (section 5.2.7) it says 5.2.7 KDE FIXME: Text needed It seems that KDE 2 euro support is not yet working properly. More info at http://users.pandora.be/sim/euro/112/ . and that is NOT correct. KDE supports the euro and it works fine in all aplications as has already been discussed several times in this list. And, as Hasso Tepper has just said it was already supported in Potato, something I did not know at all...:-) up to now: -- CAPON http://capon.sourceforge.net C.B HOLOGRAMAS http://webs.demasiado.com/hologramas LInuxeros LOcos http://lilo.sourceforge.net Llave publica http://www.terra.es/personal5/heraclit0/heraclit0.gpg Usuario de Linux registrado Nª 224358 en http://counter.li.org Tfno curro: 915866123
Re: EURO SUPPORT DOCUMENT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 21 November 2001 11:15, javi wrote: I have followed the document of Javier Sanguino and all the threats in this list, I hope you weren't too scared by all the threats on this list ;-) [It's thread not threat.] - -- - -M - --- Magnus von Koeller [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Georg-Westermann-Allee 76 / 38104 Braunschweig / Germany Phone: +49-(0)531/2094886 Mobile: +49-(0)179/4562940 lp1 on fire (One of the more obfuscated kernel messages) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7+4oJUIvM6e6BgFARAudoAKC+zT2gK4lB622bjL06vMJqnN0WoQCdGu5r gZWILRfpDVWmz0QPxPkhujU= =xQ9e -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: hanging in konqueror - libqt broken
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 21 November 2001 06:11, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 05:22:32PM +0100, Franz Keferboeck wrote: On Monday 19 November 2001 09:23, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Moreover, the euro support works again with this downgrad ! It works, but downgrading is not a solution! Can anybody tell _why_ we're facing that problem? (ok. it's qt. but __why__?). I had to downgrade as well, now i can't do a proper upgrade anymore cause of unmet dependencies. Has there been an error with building the qt-packages, or are they a priory not capable with this KDE-code??? I'm willing to help on building a solution, but first someone has to find the root of the problem (and this does in NO way address Ivan, I really appreceate his work; he does more than we can all expect of anyone...THANX!). I didn't build debs yet, but i'm about to learn... Because QT doesn't know how to keep from breaking things when they release a bug fix version. :) I have downgraded the Debian version to 2.3.1. 2.3.2 is just way too buggy and being this close to freeze/release/etc I'm not going to futz with it. 2.3.1 works quite well and if a 2.3.3 version get's released and actually works we'll consider it if it's in time. This is the best solution I could have thought of (though I didn't think of it;-) I downgraded as well at MY box and neither as user nor as programmer i considered any advantages of 2.3.2, just that one disadvantage... Thanx for the respond and again thanx for the work you and the other debian-kde-developers do for us! Your KDE-packages ARE the BEST KDE-packages I've ever seen (and I've seen a lot) and these are one reason for using Debian: KDE as it is, matched for the OS... (but of course there are a holy lot of reasons... they're almost uncountable;-) CU Franz Ivan - -- Wenn auch die Sicherheit vor den Menschen bis zu einem gewissen Grade eintritt durch eine bestimmte Macht, Störungen zu beseitigen, und durch Reichtum, so entspringt doch die reinste Sicherheit aus der Ruhe und dem Rückzug aus der Masse. (Epikur) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7+5DZeSeJPuOA2l4RAvGWAKCHyLuQrrGtL+NmOxkYYev6H4ElVQCdH/wO aww4N0h2QmbKVBH5Nx87wzA= =gPHK -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Why are there no task packages for KDE?
I already posted something like this several days ago. Why are there no task-kde packages in KDE 2.2.1?. I think that KDE would increase its visibility in Debian if there are task packages since they will automatically appear (I guess) in tasksel and newbies will be presented a choice for the desktop Now tasksel for Woody shows 4 entries for Gnome packages and 3 for Helix Gnome packages and none for KDE. Pablo de Vicente
Re: Why are there no task packages for KDE?
Now tasksel for Woody shows 4 entries for Gnome packages and 3 for Helix Gnome packages and none for KDE. run dselect update before you run tasksel... there are four KDE tasks: [ ] The K Desktop Environment [ ] The K Desktop Environment (development files) [ ] The K Desktop Environment (extras) [ ] The K Desktop Environment (Games and Toys) randolph -- Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.TauSq.org/
Re: Problem Adding A Printer To KDE
El Lun 19 Nov 2001 18:07, Robert Tilley escribió: I am adding my wife's HP DeskJet 672C printer with the Printing Manager from KDE 2.2.1. I can see the printer on the network attached to my wife's shared drive. When I add it I then desire to test the added printer, and so I click Test. A dialog pops up saying The access to the requested resource on the CUPS server running on localhost (port 631) requires a password. The username field field contains my logged in username. When I enter my login password it dialog comes back with the same response, so that's not right. How do I specify (or check on) the password to my CUPS server? Thank you! I think that you need to enter root and its password, or run the CUPS Control Center from root. In the latter case it will not ask you ant password. Pablo de Vicente
Fwd: KMail and Debian packages
See my next mail on more thoughts about this. -- Forwarded Message -- Subject: KMail and Debian packages Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 18:04:19 +0100 From: Michael Häckel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Ivan, We (the KMail team) receive here daily about two bug reports from people that use KMail 1.2 which came with KDE 2.1 on KDE 2.2 and that doesn't work properly. Of course in theory that should work, but in reality there are some problems. I have heard, that there exists a policy, that packages have to remain 10 days in unstable, until they can go to testing. Therefore this results in people using KMail 1.2 on KDE 2.2. If it is really not possible to change that, wouldn't it then be better to leave the whole KDE release in unstable until all packages are ready for testing? At least the current policy spreads bad light on the KMail developers although it is not KMail that is broken, but this policy. Regards, Michael Häckel ___ kmail Developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail --- -- -M --- Magnus von Koeller [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Georg-Westermann-Allee 76 / 38104 Braunschweig / Germany Phone: +49-(0)531/2094886 Mobile: +49-(0)179/4562940 lp1 on fire (One of the more obfuscated kernel messages)
Re: KMail and Debian packages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 21 November 2001 18:04, Michael Häckel wrote: If it is really not possible to change that, wouldn't it then be better to leave the whole KDE release in unstable until all packages are ready for testing? Wouldn't making all KDE packages depend on kdelibs=2.2.1 and kdebase=2.2.1 be enough? New packages would be held back then until these other packages went through. Actually, right now the problem is that KMail hasn't gotten through to testing yet but if the current KMail package depended on kdelibs=2.1.2 and kdebase=2.1.2 then these upgrades would be held back, too, right? - -- - -M - --- Magnus von Koeller [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Georg-Westermann-Allee 76 / 38104 Braunschweig / Germany Phone: +49-(0)531/2094886 Mobile: +49-(0)179/4562940 lp1 on fire (One of the more obfuscated kernel messages) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7+/RsUIvM6e6BgFARAmEYAKDecUTTmfEZZGKN8nOU8+lLkXid1ACg5hk3 BBno7Y33j/JE3VkeP2rZ/VY= =MGBX -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: KMail and Debian packages
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 07:37:30PM +0100, Magnus von Koeller wrote: On Wednesday 21 November 2001 18:04, Michael Häckel wrote: If it is really not possible to change that, wouldn't it then be better to leave the whole KDE release in unstable until all packages are ready for testing? Wouldn't making all KDE packages depend on kdelibs=2.2.1 and kdebase=2.2.1 be enough? New packages would be held back then until these other packages went through. HELL NO! that would mean that if I make a minor fix (say a typo fix in the description or something that is Debian specific but with no code change) that every single app would need to be rebuilt and uploaded. Actually, right now the problem is that KMail hasn't gotten through to testing yet but if the current KMail package depended on kdelibs=2.1.2 and kdebase=2.1.2 then these upgrades would be held back, too, right? How about this everyone... if you want something stable..use stable and don't use testing. I am not going to put in hacks to make things work for testing. That's just not the right way to go about things. Ivan -- Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD
Re: Why are there no task packages for KDE?
El Mié 21 Nov 2001 17:16, Randolph Chung escribió: Now tasksel for Woody shows 4 entries for Gnome packages and 3 for Helix Gnome packages and none for KDE. run dselect update before you run tasksel... there are four KDE tasks: [ ] The K Desktop Environment [ ] The K Desktop Environment (development files) [ ] The K Desktop Environment (extras) [ ] The K Desktop Environment (Games and Toys) randolph uups, I did not know there were 4 tasks for KDE. Sorry for the error. Indeed I am puzzled. I never use dselect, only apt-get update and last time I updated (woody+sid) was last week. I looked at /var/lib/dpkg/available and then there were no tasks for KDE. Anyhow thanks very much :-). Pablo de Vicente
Re: hanging in konqueror - libqt broken
Thus spake Franz Keferboeck ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): This is the best solution I could have thought of (though I didn't think of it;-) I downgraded as well at MY box and neither as user nor as programmer i considered any advantages of 2.3.2, just that one disadvantage... Thanx for the respond and again thanx for the work you and the other debian-kde-developers do for us! Your KDE-packages ARE the BEST KDE-packages I've ever seen (and I've seen a lot) and these are one reason for using Debian: KDE as it is, matched for the OS... (but of course there are a holy lot of reasons... they're almost uncountable;-) Hear hear! Nice decision, and great results. Thanks to all who contributed thoughts and ideas to fixing this. -- Justin R. Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP/GnuPG Key ID 0xC9C40C31 (preferred) pgp18h3rj6Ifx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Fwd: KMail and Debian packages
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 07:37:28PM +0100, Magnus von Koeller wrote: See my next mail on more thoughts about this. -- Forwarded Message -- Subject: KMail and Debian packages Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 18:04:19 +0100 From: Michael Häckel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Ivan, We (the KMail team) receive here daily about two bug reports from people that use KMail 1.2 which came with KDE 2.1 on KDE 2.2 and that doesn't work properly. Of course in theory that should work, but in reality there are some problems. I have heard, that there exists a policy, that packages have to remain 10 days in unstable, until they can go to testing. Therefore this results in people using KMail 1.2 on KDE 2.2. If it is really not possible to change that, wouldn't it then be better to leave the whole KDE release in unstable until all packages are ready for testing? At least the current policy spreads bad light on the KMail developers although it is not KMail that is broken, but this policy. testing is testing and that's that. If people want something that is stable and functional they should use stable or unstable. I support those 2 distributions. testing is not meant to be functional at all. It is meant as a staging ground for our next release. By putting in hacks to make sure things do work in testing would only lead to other problems and the possiblity of KDE never making it to a stable release of Debian. Ivan -- Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD
testing means testing
I agree w/ this philosophy otherwise I would not be here. However, I might point out for those of you who would like a stable kde, there is: http://kde.debian.net/ Which has the stable kde for potato. I would suggest that not everyone should rush there if they can help it. I think potato for servers, woody for home. The point I'm making is that complaints to for stuff that Ivan can't fix are only going to slow him down, and slow down the real fixes, as he has stated. Thanks for the great packages. Fred
Re: testing means testing
On Wednesday 21 November 2001 20:05, Fred K Ollinger wrote: I agree w/ this philosophy otherwise I would not be here. However, I might point out for those of you who would like a stable kde, there is: http://kde.debian.net/ Which has the stable kde for potato. I would suggest that not everyone should rush there if they can help it. I think potato for servers, woody for home. Great, but then please communicate that to all Debian users. The point I'm making is that complaints to for stuff that Ivan can't fix are only going to slow him down, and slow down the real fixes, as he has stated. And the complaints we recive about things we can't fix, only slow us down. Regards, Michael Häckel
Re: Fwd: KMail and Debian packages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 21 November 2001 19:50, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: testing is not meant to be functional at all. It is meant as a staging ground for our next release. quote testing -- leading edge, maybe buggy, but working /quote src=http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2000/debian-devel-28/msg00906.html; this is the announcement of testing, basically It _IS_ supposed to work. - -- - -M - --- Magnus von Koeller [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Georg-Westermann-Allee 76 / 38104 Braunschweig / Germany Phone: +49-(0)531/2094886 Mobile: +49-(0)179/4562940 lp1 on fire (One of the more obfuscated kernel messages) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7/AXfUIvM6e6BgFARAmfHAJ9SWQ27UXgQ6liwgpoqCPZw3mCVMwCgkiTb g+GFnSzjxiBWrO6VJTDoQbE= =6P5Y -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: KMail and Debian packages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 21 November 2001 19:43, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: HELL NO! Whew ... First of all, why don't you cool down a little? It's not that I want to hurt you or even say that you did something wrong. I just want to talk about ways of making this work better. that would mean that if I make a minor fix (say a typo fix in the description or something that is Debian specific but with no code change) that every single app would need to be rebuilt and uploaded. Okay. I get it. But wouldn't it be possible to, say, let KMail depend on only a major KDE release (2.2.1, for example) and not on a single Debian sub-release of it (-x)? Actually, right now the problem is that KMail hasn't gotten through to testing yet but if the current KMail package depended on kdelibs=2.1.2 and kdebase=2.1.2 then these upgrades would be held back, too, right? How about this everyone... if you want something stable..use stable and don't use testing. Well, you know as well as everybody else that potato (stable) is quite outdated now. And for a desktop machine that's not really mission critical testing is _the_ perfect choice of all distributions because you can always be close to the cutting edge while still having a considerably stable (which means basically usable) system and not having to compile everything yourself. The real problem here, though, is not that users complain about their system being a little unstable but that the developers of KMail are being bug-spammed. So there _is_ a problem that deserves fixing (IMHO) so maybe we should talk about it. I am not going to put in hacks to make things work for testing. That's just not the right way to go about things. I don't really get why this would be such a dirty hack. P.S.: I'm quite new to Debian so maybe I don't have a clue. P.P.S.: I _REALLY_ appreciate your work, especially as a new Debian user. This distribution rocks and since I'm using KDE quite a lot you are an important part of it. - -- - -M - --- Magnus von Koeller [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Georg-Westermann-Allee 76 / 38104 Braunschweig / Germany Phone: +49-(0)531/2094886 Mobile: +49-(0)179/4562940 lp1 on fire (One of the more obfuscated kernel messages) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7/AXrUIvM6e6BgFARAulvAJ9BnRoFpIFIfVQBs+0Uh5Tc1q0sAQCgv3wI KimNoQIN4Ah7GFOJiY8KoMU= =VvkN -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Fwd: KMail and Debian packages
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 08:51:57PM +0100, Magnus von Koeller wrote: On Wednesday 21 November 2001 19:50, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: testing is not meant to be functional at all. It is meant as a staging ground for our next release. quote testing -- leading edge, maybe buggy, but working /quote src=http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2000/debian-devel-28/msg00906.html; this is the announcement of testing, basically It _IS_ supposed to work. and it also says maybe buggy Ivan -- Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD
Re: KMail and Debian packages
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 08:52:09PM +0100, Magnus von Koeller wrote: On Wednesday 21 November 2001 19:43, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: HELL NO! Whew ... First of all, why don't you cool down a little? It's not that I want to hurt you or even say that you did something wrong. I just want to talk about ways of making this work better. I'm not upset or irate or anything. Just stressing how much of a no-no that is. that would mean that if I make a minor fix (say a typo fix in the description or something that is Debian specific but with no code change) that every single app would need to be rebuilt and uploaded. Okay. I get it. But wouldn't it be possible to, say, let KMail depend on only a major KDE release (2.2.1, for example) and not on a single Debian sub-release of it (-x)? we could add dependencies until the cows come home... ie... depends on = version x but not version y and less then version z... but the question is...what good would it do us now? The next version of KDE is 3 and the package names are different so putting in hacks (which is all they are) won't do a bit of good. Actually, right now the problem is that KMail hasn't gotten through to testing yet but if the current KMail package depended on kdelibs=2.1.2 and kdebase=2.1.2 then these upgrades would be held back, too, right? How about this everyone... if you want something stable..use stable and don't use testing. Well, you know as well as everybody else that potato (stable) is quite outdated now. And for a desktop machine that's not really mission critical testing is _the_ perfect choice of all distributions because you can always be close to the cutting edge while still having a considerably stable (which means basically usable) system and not having to compile everything yourself. The real problem here, though, is not that users complain about their system being a little unstable but that the developers of KMail are being bug-spammed. So there _is_ a problem that deserves fixing (IMHO) so maybe we should talk about it. what I don't understand is that testing breaks majorly quite often...so you would think that users would get use to this. I am not going to put in hacks to make things work for testing. That's just not the right way to go about things. I don't really get why this would be such a dirty hack. P.S.: I'm quite new to Debian so maybe I don't have a clue. P.P.S.: I _REALLY_ appreciate your work, especially as a new Debian user. This distribution rocks and since I'm using KDE quite a lot you are an important part of it. it's a hack because it only takes care of a specific situation which only exists for a short period of time and is only a result of the diversity of the Debian distribution. The only reason kmail (and the rest of the kdenetwork packages) didn't go into testing when kdelibs did was because of the mips architecture which is having problems building it right now. it's a bad hack because putting too many specific deps on packages will cause things like this: kdelibs won't go into testing because the packages in testing depend on a specific version of kdelibs and if kdelibs goes in they will no longer be installable. Ok..no biggy if and only if every single package that depends on kdelibs is built on all archs, have been in unstable for 2 weeks, *AND* do not have any RC bugs against them. ^^^ that is a bitch to have happen espcially since developers have to constantly fight off RC bugs that are only with packages in testing, work on getting packages to build on all archs, and have to work at upstream's pace. Upstream developers have a tendancy not to want to deal with *old* releases. Getting KDE folks to back port fixes to the 2.2 branch is getting harder and harder. They are busy working on the next release and like all of us don't have time to mess with stuff they no longer use. Now..above and beyond that it also ties my hands as the package of kdelibs... I cannot make uploads as often as it affects not just a couple packages but several dozen packages. all of this just to make sure that testing doesn't have a few weeks where if a user upgrades they'll have a broken package becuase of mixed libs. Ivan -- Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD
Re: testing means testing
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 08:25:07PM +0100, Michael Häckel wrote: On Wednesday 21 November 2001 20:05, Fred K Ollinger wrote: I agree w/ this philosophy otherwise I would not be here. However, I might point out for those of you who would like a stable kde, there is: http://kde.debian.net/ Which has the stable kde for potato. I would suggest that not everyone should rush there if they can help it. I think potato for servers, woody for home. Great, but then please communicate that to all Debian users. umm..this has been communicated quite often over the past couple years on both debian mailing lists and kde mailing lists as well as KDE release announcements. it has not been a secret. The point I'm making is that complaints to for stuff that Ivan can't fix are only going to slow him down, and slow down the real fixes, as he has stated. And the complaints we recive about things we can't fix, only slow us down. this is not a unknown problem and is not specific to KDE. It is specific to testing and happens quite often. Ivan -- Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD
Re: KMail and Debian packages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Okay. I get it. Thanks for the explanation. - -- - -M - --- Magnus von Koeller [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Georg-Westermann-Allee 76 / 38104 Braunschweig / Germany Phone: +49-(0)531/2094886 Mobile: +49-(0)179/4562940 lp1 on fire (One of the more obfuscated kernel messages) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7/Ar4UIvM6e6BgFARAiXHAJ92o0zmJB9Rejnvs4XeMBFb0c1DigCeOkvR QzRQcVnQdR62oaoPZ0vudEs= =jFjq -END PGP SIGNATURE-
what happened to keystone?
I'm curious as to what happened to the keystone package (the vnc stuff for kde). its in testing but not in unstable anymore. -pete -- (peter.royal|osi)@pobox.com - http://pobox.com/~osi - uin#153025 your brain on life - http://fotap.org - incubating They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Ben Franklin, ~1784 pgpwHR5FsjmLq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: what happened to keystone?
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 03:16:19PM -0500, kiss the sun and walk on air wrote: I'm curious as to what happened to the keystone package (the vnc stuff for kde). its in testing but not in unstable anymore. -pete upstream dropped it -- Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD
Re: KMail and Debian packages
Forgive my newbieness, but it seems you are saying that unstable is actually more stable than testing. Since I am primarily a user who wants a good compromise between stability and currency (in this case, I want KDE 2.2.x), I should actually be running unstable rather than testing? Help out a reasonably experienced, but very much not developer here? Am I thinking wrongly in assuming that testing is preferable to unstable? I had assumed that since packages take 10 days or whatever to make their way into testing, then testing would be more stable, because broken updates are fixed before the 10 days are up. Also, I just wanted to clarify the naming scheme. At the moment, I believe that stable=potato, testing=woody, and unstable=sid. Is this correct? Thank you all, Jim Ivan E. Moore II Spoke Thusly: testing is testing and that's that. If people want something that is stable and functional they should use stable or unstable. I support those 2 distributions. testing is not meant to be functional at all. It is meant as a staging ground for our next release. By putting in hacks to make sure things do work in testing would only lead to other problems and the possiblity of KDE never making it to a stable release of Debian.
Re: what happened to keystone?
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 01:18:03PM -0700, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 03:16:19PM -0500, kiss the sun and walk on air wrote: I'm curious as to what happened to the keystone package (the vnc stuff for kde). its in testing but not in unstable anymore. upstream dropped it damn. seemed useful. oh well. -pete -- (peter.royal|osi)@pobox.com - http://pobox.com/~osi - uin#153025 your brain on life - http://fotap.org - incubating They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Ben Franklin, ~1784 pgpY0CnoJXTa3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KMail and Debian packages
Further, at http://www.debian.org/releases/woody/ , it says the following: the testing distribution should be more stable than unstable, but you should be cautious nevertheless. Now I'm really confused . . . ? Thank you all. James Lindenschmidt Spoke Thusly: Forgive my newbieness, but it seems you are saying that unstable is actually more stable than testing. Since I am primarily a user who wants a good compromise between stability and currency (in this case, I want KDE 2.2.x), I should actually be running unstable rather than testing? Help out a reasonably experienced, but very much not developer here? Am I thinking wrongly in assuming that testing is preferable to unstable? I had assumed that since packages take 10 days or whatever to make their way into testing, then testing would be more stable, because broken updates are fixed before the 10 days are up. Also, I just wanted to clarify the naming scheme. At the moment, I believe that stable=potato, testing=woody, and unstable=sid. Is this correct? Thank you all, Jim Ivan E. Moore II Spoke Thusly: testing is testing and that's that. If people want something that is stable and functional they should use stable or unstable. I support those 2 distributions. testing is not meant to be functional at all. It is meant as a staging ground for our next release. By putting in hacks to make sure things do work in testing would only lead to other problems and the possiblity of KDE never making it to a stable release of Debian. -- ???`,??,`,??,`,??,? James Lindenschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ???`,??,`,??,`,??,?
Re: KMail and Debian packages
On Wednesday 21 November 2001 21:08, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: but the question is...what good would it do us now? The next version of KDE is 3 and the package names are different so putting in hacks (which is all they are) won't do a bit of good. Maybe also the package names for KDE 2.1 and KDE 2.2 should have been different? From the point of view of KDE there is also no problem to have both versions installed. The only difference is, for KDE 2.1/2.2 it is tried to be compatible, for KDE 3.0 compatibility is definitely broken. From the users perspective the step should not be bigger. Just KMail 1.2 will not even start with kdelibs-3.0 instead of working with some problems like with kdelibs-2.2. what I don't understand is that testing breaks majorly quite often...so you would think that users would get use to this. That might also partly a KDE problem. KDE applications have a menu item that allows to submit bug reports. Therefore people see this first and try to use it to get support how to get the application running. Also the problem is, it is not easily understandable to the average user, why just compiling the code can cause a broken application. Regards, Michael Häckel
Re: KMail and Debian packages
I would have to say that overall for the time that testing has been in place unstable has been more stable in my opinion. Usually when unstable breaks it's fixed within 24-48 hours...when testing breaks it usually stays broken for quite some time depending on what is broken. Testing has the potential to be very stable however it depends on how closely one follows it. If you delay your upgrades and monitor the mailing lists and whatnot you could potentially have a very stable testing install. I do that exact same thing for unstable. I delay my upgrades by at least 24 hours on most of my machines until I find out if there is any big problems (like libc croaking which has happened)... Ivan On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 03:24:09PM -0500, James Lindenschmidt wrote: Forgive my newbieness, but it seems you are saying that unstable is actually more stable than testing. Since I am primarily a user who wants a good compromise between stability and currency (in this case, I want KDE 2.2.x), I should actually be running unstable rather than testing? Help out a reasonably experienced, but very much not developer here? Am I thinking wrongly in assuming that testing is preferable to unstable? I had assumed that since packages take 10 days or whatever to make their way into testing, then testing would be more stable, because broken updates are fixed before the 10 days are up. Also, I just wanted to clarify the naming scheme. At the moment, I believe that stable=potato, testing=woody, and unstable=sid. Is this correct? Thank you all, Jim Ivan E. Moore II Spoke Thusly: testing is testing and that's that. If people want something that is stable and functional they should use stable or unstable. I support those 2 distributions. testing is not meant to be functional at all. It is meant as a staging ground for our next release. By putting in hacks to make sure things do work in testing would only lead to other problems and the possiblity of KDE never making it to a stable release of Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---end quoted text--- -- Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD
Fwd: Bug#35197: attaching a file that is in other partition crashes
Hi,
Yet another one :-(
At least anyone voluntearing to answer all these.
Regards,
Michael Häckel
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Bug#35197: attaching a file that is in other partition crashes
Date: 21 Nov 2001 20:11:17 -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: kmail
Version: 1.2 (using KDE 2.2.1 )
Severity: normal
Installed from:compiled sources
Compiler: gcc version 2.95.3 20010315 (release)
OS:Linux (i686) release 2.4.14
OS/Compiler notes:
LOADED PLUGINS
none i guess...
/LOADED PLUGINS
BACKTRACE BACKTRACE BACKTRACE BACKTRACE BACKTRACE
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...[New Thread 1024 (LWP 440)]
0x411a4689 in __wait4 () from /lib/libc.so.6
#0 0x411a4689 in __wait4 () from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 0x4120da58 in __DTOR_END__ () from /lib/libc.so.6
#2 0x409cb8b5 in KCrash::defaultCrashHandler () at eval.c:88
#3 0x413cceb4 in pthread_sighandler (signo=11, ctx={gs = 0, __gsh = 0,
fs = 0, __fsh = 0, es = 43, __esh = 0, ds = 43, __dsh = 49168,
edi = 3221220724, esi = 3221220472, ebp = 3221220428, esp = 3221220428,
ebx = 3221220472, edx = 3221220472, ecx = 137489480, eax = 59,
trapno = 14, err = 6, eip = 1086003993, cs = 35, __csh = 0,
eflags = 66054, esp_at_signal = 3221220428, ss = 43, __ssh = 0,
fpstate = 0xbfffe9d0, oldmask = 2147483648, cr2 = 59}) at signals.c:97
#4 signal handler called
#5 0x40bb1b19 in QString::QString () from /usr/lib/libqt.so.2
#6 0x80d66fd in KDialog::marginHint () at eval.c:88
#7 0x80af0f9 in KDialog::marginHint () at eval.c:88
#8 0x4065a66f in KIO::Job::result () at eval.c:88
#9 0x4063f06c in KIO::Job::emitResult () at eval.c:88
#10 0x406402e2 in KIO::SimpleJob::slotFinished () at eval.c:88
#11 0x40642a29 in KIO::TransferJob::slotFinished () at eval.c:88
#12 0x40c588ba in QObject::activate_signal () from /usr/lib/libqt.so.2
#13 0x4062ef35 in KIO::SlaveInterface::finished () at eval.c:88
#14 0x406294dc in KIO::SlaveInterface::dispatch () at eval.c:88
#15 0x40629220 in KIO::SlaveInterface::dispatch () at eval.c:88
#16 0x40627838 in KIO::Slave::gotInput () at eval.c:88
#17 0x40c58b7e in QObject::activate_signal () from /usr/lib/libqt.so.2
#18 0x40caa0b8 in QSocketNotifier::activated () from /usr/lib/libqt.so.2
#19 0x40c8b07c in QSocketNotifier::event () from /usr/lib/libqt.so.2
#20 0x40c088a6 in QApplication::notify () from /usr/lib/libqt.so.2
#21 0x409327b4 in KApplication::notify () at eval.c:88
#22 0x40bd685a in qt_set_socket_handler () from /usr/lib/libqt.so.2
#23 0x40bd6f9b in QApplication::processNextEvent () from /usr/lib/libqt.so.2
#24 0x40c0a5f4 in QApplication::enter_loop () from /usr/lib/libqt.so.2
#25 0x40bd68c7 in QApplication::exec () from /usr/lib/libqt.so.2
#26 0x813dadd in KDialog::marginHint () at eval.c:88
#27 0x4111f2eb in __libc_start_main (
main=0x813d710 KDialog::marginHint(void)+874268, argc=7,
ubp_av=0xb8e4, init=0x8061c5c _init, fini=0x8162fa4 _fini,
rtld_fini=0x4000c130 _dl_fini, stack_end=0xb8dc)
at ../sysdeps/generic/libc-start.c:129
/BACKTRACE BACKTRACE BACKTRACE BACKTRACE BACKTRACE
How to Reproduce
Write a message and then click the attach button and add some file that is in
/mnt/windows for example...
/How to Reproduce
Expected Behaviour
It should crash imediatly...
/Expected Behaviour
(Submitted via bugs.kde.org)
(Called from KBugReport dialog)
___
kmail Developers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail
---
Re: KMail and Debian packages
Ivan E. Moore II wrote: I would have to say that overall for the time that testing has been in place unstable has been more stable in my opinion. Usually when unstable breaks it's fixed within 24-48 hours...when testing breaks it usually stays broken for quite some time depending on what is broken. There's the rub. Unstable gets fixed faster, since it's constantly in flux. But testing is indeed more _stable_ -- working things stay working longer and broken things stay broken longer. The question might be: Which breaks more often? By that metric, I suspect that unstable is more, well, unstable, even though its breaks might get fixed faster. M.
RE:khelp not working right
I am running testing w/ the kde2.2.1 packages out of testing except for kmail from unstable. All seems well except khelp will only view Unix man/info pages not kde application help. The error is as follows: Could not start process Unable to create io-slave klauncher said unknown protocol 'help' Anyone else have this? I was running 2.1 without problems so... TIA!! -john
Re: KMail and Debian packages
I would have to say that overall for the time that testing has been in place unstable has been more stable in my opinion. Usually when unstable breaks I don't know. I ran unstable once. It killed my whole system. There was a fix, but only for developers, it was too hard for a humble desktop users like myself. I thought that unstable means that packages are just made and thrown in there, letting darwinian forces sort things out. I could be wrong here. I'm thinking that a lot of these problems will go away after woody is released. It's going to be the first official stable ver to have kde. I'm thinking that many people who want a stable desktop w/ kde on there will stick to woody for a while. I'm still using potato at home (on internet connection) and I'm finding that it works just fine for just about everything. Kind hearted people even made potato kde iso's and someone put out packages for 2.4. I'm trying not to cry here, but god I love debian. Fred
konq in ftp mode
Greetings: How do I set konq to send my user/pass? It logs in anonymously just fine, but I need my own directory, not the anonymous /pub directory on a server. tia -- Jaye Inabnit\ARS ke6sls\/A GNU-Debian linux user\/ http://www.qsl.net/ke6sls If it's stupid, but works, it ain't stupid. I SHOUT JUST FOR FUN. Free software, in a free world, for a free spirit. Please Support freedom!
Re: KMail and Debian packages
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 03:24:09PM -0500, James Lindenschmidt wrote: Forgive my newbieness, but it seems you are saying that unstable is actually more stable than testing. Since I am primarily a user who wants a good [snip] I run stable on my edge servers, no X, no problems. For my workstations (home and work) and my laptop, I run unstable. I've generally found that packages in unstable are either (A) Fine, or (B) so borked (dependencies or whatever) that they don't even run. Turns out, the times I've run testing, it's the little tweaks that are made to adjust this and that in the approach to a stable Woody, that breaks my system more often and worse than the sometimes BIG changes that happen in unstable. I'm thinking Lorentz Attractor, here. heh .brian -- Brian Bilbrey The ships hung in the sky in [EMAIL PROTECTED] much the same way that bricks don't. www.orbdesigns.comDoug Adams, H2G
Re: Fwd: KMail and Debian packages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On Wednesday 21 November 2001 11:56 am, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 08:51:57PM +0100, Magnus von Koeller wrote: On Wednesday 21 November 2001 19:50, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: testing is not meant to be functional at all. It is meant as a staging ground for our next release. quote testing -- leading edge, maybe buggy, but working /quote src=http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2000/debian-devel-28/msg00 906.html this is the announcement of testing, basically It _IS_ supposed to work. and it also says maybe buggy Ivan This thread (threat?) is long enough, but I'm STILL gonna add to it!! (Hey Ivan!) I've been a Debianite now since HAM (any of you remember THAT release) and have stayed in the STABLE arena (on my current box) until this last year. There were a great number of 'enhancements' and new software that was released that I wanted to run. But it was only packaged for UNSTABLE. I was bummed, but didn't upgrade until one day, I fubar'd and used the wrong /etc/apt/sources.list by accident. I lost the use of my machine ONCE during all this time I've been on UNSTABLE. ONCE!! While the other machines I've got running TESTING have been down NUMEROUS times. Yeah, it's damn confusing. Here's what I have always used as my definitions when people ask me which one to use. STABLE =no bugs, no bitches, older but reliable packages, good running machine. TESTING = some bugs, a few bitches, newer (fairly reliable( packages, a fairly stable box UNSTABLE = more bugs then a rotting tree, a squatload of bitches, bleeding edge (brand new) packages, if yer lucky your box may boot after an upgrade. But, for some reason, we've (the debian community) seen a bit of a reversal in the TESTING/UNSTABLE during this work around. I'm NOT bitching!! Just stating what I've observered. I usually keep a couple boxes running, with different releases on them. (server = woody, firewall = potatio, my box = unstable) and this is just to track and use and watch how the distro is growing. (I'm a tad proud of my Debian group!!) And again, this is NOT the usual way I see the distro. Usually 'my box' is a troublesome issue. I'm running UNSTABLE on it (I like the bleeding edge stuff) and so I'm used to it causing me fits all the time. Though on this run-thru, it's been my TESTING machines that have bit me where I sit! :--) I know this isn't common. I accept it. But the new folks that have written in, and wondered aloud about it, well, from an older hand in Debian...This IS uncommon!. Usually the ranking (bugs, fix time, etc) runs 1,2,3. Why it's 1, 3, 2 right now, well, I'm willing to bet it's one of the older, smaller gods just having some fun. So, as Ivan and crew have said (time and again), if you want stabilty, run STABLE. If you want to play and work WITH us on the development, come on up to TESTING/UNSTABLE. If you want to run the devel stuff, MY advice is UNSTABLE, for the reasons I've mentioned above. Happy Thanksgiving to the Americans on the list, and Good coding to the rest of you all! Regards, Griz - -- __ OutCast Computer Consultants of Central Oregon http://outcast-consultants.redmond.or.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] (541) 504-1388 Toll Free (866) 562-7160 Via IRC at; 205.227.115.251:6667:#OutCasts Via ICQ: UIN 138930 Failure is not an option...it's bundled with Microsoft -anonymous- Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please! Software is like sex. They're both better when they're free!! - Linus Torvalds As a computing professional, I believe it would be unethical for me to advise, recommend, or support the use (save possibly for personal amusement) of any product that is or depends on any Microsoft product.
