Re: [SUMMARY] About terminology for stable/testing/unstable and related issues
* Adam D. Barratt: On Tuesday, May 09, 2006 6:26 AM, Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Christian Perrier: Most concerns have been raised about my proposed use of branch for talking about stable/testing/unstable. Suite seems better...suited, indeed. Suite has already been used informally. For completeness, you should also mention section (main, contrib, non-free) Those are components in Debian's nomenclature. Sections are the next level down. Policy 2.2 calls them sections or categories (depending on whether you go with the headline or the main text). One place the term component is used is APT, but I don't think this is an authoritative reference (cf. the use of distribution). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [SUMMARY] About terminology for stable/testing/unstable and related issues
On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 09:54 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: * Adam D. Barratt: On Tuesday, May 09, 2006 6:26 AM, Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Suite has already been used informally. For completeness, you should also mention section (main, contrib, non-free) Those are components in Debian's nomenclature. Sections are the next level down. Policy 2.2 calls them sections or categories (depending on whether you go with the headline or the main text). One place the term component is used is APT, but I don't think this is an authoritative reference (cf. the use of distribution). dak calls them components, as ime do the ftp-masters (presumably because apt and dak do); likewise suites. Unofficial tools such as madison-lite and rmadison unsurprisingly also follow the convention. Policy 2.2 is a confusing use of sections imho, especially as 2.4 is also headed Sections and describes sections as I did previously, i.e. as a level below main, etc. Just to add to the fun, 2.4 also says: The `Section' field should be of the form: * _section_ if the package is in the _main_ category, * _segment/section_ if the package is in the _contrib_ or _non-free_ distribution areas. using three different terms for the same thing within one paragraph. Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
debian and UDEV
Hi, I am not a fan of UDEV, while I am a fan of debian. Its a shame that debian - in my experience - doesnt handle UDEV well. I have had problems with kernel version transitions as well as new installs. (High performance raid controllers from ICP-Vortex). I have contacted the hotplug people, only to be told that it isnt their job (even though they both created and apparently forced adoption of UDEV) to address these issues. Debian is my distro of choice but is probably the worse distro in terms of UDEV. (I had been using ubuntu and planning a deploy commercially to a number of servers currently using CentOS). ALL of the servers chosen to be reinstalled with a debian distro have high performance raid controllers and fail installs due to UDEV issues. (I hate that redhat handles this - Im not really a fan of redhat). I have been forced to abandon debian distros as a result. I'm not happy about that - I prefer debian - but find that it cannot be deployed and I have received zero interest from anyone from the hotplug group down to even acknowledge that this is a problem in general. So I am going to deploy FC bordeaux instead. I am only reporting this to let people know that this is an issue, sadly, that you might consider addressing. Thanks for a terrific distro otherwise though. Jim -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian and UDEV
On Sat, 13 May 2006 08:50:27 -0700 Jim Bodkikns (Dakotacom) wrote: I am not a fan of UDEV, [snip] I have contacted the hotplug people, [snip snip] I prefer debian - but [snip] am going to deploy FC bordeaux instead. I am only reporting this to let people know that this is an issue, Thanks for letting us know, and sorry that you had to go. To other users reading this and possibly getting inspired on ways to give feedback, please use our Bug Tracking System[1], and if dropping kind notes like the above when (sadly) giving up on us, please mention relevant bugreports about the issues. Our BTS is our backbone of solving problems - please use it! Regards, - Jonas P.S. Oh, and if you haven't left entirely, Jim, then I have concrete suggestions for solving your concrete problem. If interested, please drop a note either so some relevant bugreport or to debian-devel@lists.debian.org (this list is not appropriate for technical discussions) and cc me. -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm pgpq5iQ3Q3qli.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Suggestion
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Yann, The debian-project is a maillist focused on discussion about the Debian Project. For technical doubts and support questions you should use [EMAIL PROTECTED] You will also find support lists in other languages, just check http://lists.debian.org In order to help you in advance I add a couple of tips below. On 05/12/2006 05:18 PM, Yann Desponds wrote: Hello, I tried to install differents distibution of linux but without success... I always have a problem during installation with my graphic card. I saw that many people have the same problem with the xserver and this nv driver. If you can, use free (as in speech) drivers. :) Wouldn't be better to install the xserver with the default parameter vesa and then to install the good driver or modifie xserver? When you send your message do debian-user, try to add more informartion about which version of Debian are you running, which is the model of your graphic card, how you X is configured and other relevant information. Because I think the automatic detection of graphic card is not the good solution... Thanks for your reading You are welcome, good luck. Kind regards, - -- Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEZhasCjAO0JDlykYRAm9kAJ4qLJyC+d5/+HNa+YMRvo//BDz5dwCdFoch kuAp6vV9dHoUhvflQ6xxACg= =UGut -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian and UDEV
On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 08:50:27AM -0700, Jim Bodkikns (Dakotacom) wrote: ALL of the servers chosen to be reinstalled with a debian distro have high performance raid controllers and fail installs due to UDEV issues. (I hate that redhat handles this - Im not really a fan of redhat). I have been forced to abandon debian distros as a result. I'm not happy about that - I prefer debian - but find that it cannot be deployed and I have received zero interest from anyone from the hotplug group down to even acknowledge that this is a problem in general. So I am going to deploy FC bordeaux instead. I am only reporting this to let people know that this is an issue, sadly, that you might consider addressing. Thanks for a terrific distro otherwise though. I don't see it as a general issue either; if you have problems of this type, you should report them to the bug tracking system so that they can be fixed. Debian as an organization can't hope to test all of the hardware available in the market, so we rely on feedback from folks such as yourself to let us know when there is a problem. -- - mdz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
apt
Hello, I just received a mail from one friend of mine, he reported aptitude retrieves updated package list from servers (included in /etc/apt/sources.list) by diffs, i.e. does not download the whole list, but only modifications (like patches). Sorry if I cannot epxress clear. Please approve or reject this information. And don't you intend to make package upgrades by diffs (or deltas, but I do not know difference) like one could use on SuSe or Gentoo? Thank you -- Igor Bogomazov (Russia, St. Petersburg) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: apt
Igor Bogomazov wrote: I just received a mail from one friend of mine, he reported aptitude retrieves updated package list from servers (included in /etc/apt/sources.list) by diffs, i.e. does not download the whole list, but only modifications (like patches). Sorry if I cannot epxress clear. Your friend was right. A shiny new feature for all of us to enjoy. Please approve or reject this information. And don't you intend to make package upgrades by diffs (or deltas, but I do not know difference) like one could use on SuSe or Gentoo? Read [1] and please post similar questions to debian-user in the future. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/04/msg01093.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Am Sonntag, den 30.04.2006, 19:34 +0100 schrieb Steve McIntyre: I've heard it suggested by a variety of people that we should move the official irc.debian.org alias away from freenode to oftc. I can see that more and more of my own Debian IRC discussions are on oftc, to the extent that I'm (currently) not on any freenode channels at all. oftc support ssl connections (ircs.oftc.net:) so the secret nickserv and chanserv passwords wouldn't get sniffed via debconf6 wlan.:) -- Noèl Köthe noel debian.org Debian GNU/Linux, www.debian.org signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: irc.debian.org
On Saturday 13 May 2006 14:42, Noèl Köthe wrote: Am Sonntag, den 30.04.2006, 19:34 +0100 schrieb Steve McIntyre: I've heard it suggested by a variety of people that we should move the official irc.debian.org alias away from freenode to oftc. I can see that more and more of my own Debian IRC discussions are on oftc, to the extent that I'm (currently) not on any freenode channels at all. oftc support ssl connections (ircs.oftc.net:) so the secret nickserv and chanserv passwords wouldn't get sniffed via debconf6 wlan.:) Most Jabber servers support or require SSL connections and transparently provides what should have been basic functionality in IRC but ended up tacked on as nickserv and chanserv without having to deal with the insecurity and unreliability of most nickserv and chanserv implementations. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpyLqhya7798.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 14:58 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: Most Jabber servers... topic is -irc-.debian.org, iirc -- Yves-Alexis Perez -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Saturday 13 May 2006 15:12, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 14:58 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: Most Jabber servers... topic is -irc-.debian.org, iirc Why does it necessarily have to be IRC? Jabber fixes a lot of IRC's shortcomings, without bringing along all the political drama and baggage OFTC, Freenode, and every other IRC network in existence. Switching to another IRC network just sets things up to repeat and have this discussion again in another few years. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgp01VTEAG42n.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
Re: Paul Johnson 2006-05-14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Why does it necessarily have to be IRC? Jabber fixes a lot of IRC's shortcomings, without bringing along all the political drama and baggage OFTC, Freenode, and every other IRC network in existence. Switching to another IRC network just sets things up to repeat and have this discussion again in another few years. If you don't care about IRC, why don't you just let us choose the network we prefer? Christoph -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.df7cb.de/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Saturday 13 May 2006 16:03, Christoph Berg wrote: Re: Paul Johnson 2006-05-14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Why does it necessarily have to be IRC? Jabber fixes a lot of IRC's shortcomings, without bringing along all the political drama and baggage OFTC, Freenode, and every other IRC network in existence. Switching to another IRC network just sets things up to repeat and have this discussion again in another few years. If you don't care about IRC, why don't you just let us choose the network we prefer? Debian seeks the free choice, right? Jabber is free-er. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpiUSo4Ol6Zv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sat, 13 May 2006, Paul Johnson wrote: On Saturday 13 May 2006 15:12, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 14:58 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: Most Jabber servers... topic is -irc-.debian.org, iirc Why does it necessarily have to be IRC? Because it's irc.debian.org not jabber.debian.org nor yourfavoritechatprotocol.debian.org? Because people actually use IRC to discuss Debian related issues? Jabber fixes a lot of IRC's shortcomings, without bringing along all the political drama and baggage OFTC, Freenode, and every other IRC network in existence. Switching to another IRC network just sets things up to repeat and have this discussion again in another few years. So why not start up a jabber.debian.net if it doesn't already exist, and see who joins and holds dicsussions there? If you get enough participtation, and there's a reasonable open project to point jabber.debian.org to, I'd imagine it would be an easy case to make. Don Armstrong -- Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed. -- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p250 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu signature.asc Description: Digital signature
