Re: problems with debian-security machine ?

Previously jason andrade wrote: > perhaps this isn't exactly the right forum but i'm not sure who > looks after pandora aka the machine which makes non-US and security > available via rsync. That is satie, not pandora > it's been spitting out "10 users connected full" rsync messages > for a coupl

Re: jigo gone missing

Previously Richard Atterer wrote: > There's a backup of the files at > . My uni's > sysadmins are usually pretty quick - if it isn't fixed soon, I'll make > www/jigdo-cd/ point to the backup. Would it make sense to move these to some debian.

jigo gone missing

http://www.debian.org/CD/jigdo-cd/ tells me to download jigdo from http://home.in.tum.de/~atterer/jigdo/, but tje jigdo-lite download links on that page all point to non-existing files. Can someone please fix that? Wichert. -- _

Re: debian-cd and security mirror

Previously Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Yes. I asked Anne Bezemer (who patched debian-cd to support that) to > document it but he never did it. > > export SECURITY=/mirror/security.debian.org What does debian-cd use the security mirror for? You might want to know that the structure for security.debi

Re: Bug#149491: dpkg depends hard on working F_SETLK fcntl

Since I don't know the answer to this one I'll cc debian-boot and debian-cd in the hope somewhere there can answer this. Wichert. Previously Paul Stoeber wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 06:43:57PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > > Are you running rpc.statd on the clie

Re: What kernel stuff on CD1? Was Still no TeX in CD#1

Previously Philip Hands wrote: > The good news is that TeX is in, the bad news is that packages such as > xdm, xfs & xterm are out. This seems bad, but I suppose since gdm & kdm > are on there, and one can survive without xfs, and gnome-terminal is in, > we could actually live without those, but

Re: Still no TeX in CD#1

Previously Christian T. Steigies wrote: > "These days"? Do you think everybody is using w**d, or is there something > else you can use for writing papers, books, letters, faxes, creating posters? For scientific documents *TeX is still pretty much the only real solution, but with scientific commun

Re: Still no TeX in CD#1

Previously Santiago Vila wrote: > I believed there was a consensus that the most popular packages would > be on CD #1. Thanks for replying but my question remains unanswered. So prove to us that TeX is popular. These days that would surprise me very much. Wichert. --

Re: web pages

Previously Josip Rodin wrote: > Eh? cdimage.d.o will be redirecting to that when it's all polished up > (shouldn't be too long now). Most of the images on the header seem to be missing.. Wichert. -- _ [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Redesign of cdimage website

Previously Richard Atterer wrote: > over the last days, I've finished the work on the new cdimage website, > the result can be viewed at . > Comments welcome! I really like the content, but I'ld rather see it having the same look as the rest of the debian.org

Re: Redesign of cdimage website

Previously Richard Atterer wrote: > How do people like it? Does it stand any chance of eventually > replacing ? I already like it a lot more then the current maze. Wichert. -- _ [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#113794: Woody new install, problems with tasksel

Previously Raphael Hertzog wrote: > What do other people think about that ? Ditch it. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~

Re: JBoss the J2EE application server

Previously Tobias Frech wrote: > Would it be possible for me to customize the debian distribution in a way, > that after downloading a install disk or burning a install CD they only need > to go through the installation process and end up with a ready-to-run > application server machine ? Defi

Re: How do I create a Packages file?

Previously Justin F. Knotzke wrote: > I have done all except create the so called "Packages" file. How do > I do that? dpkg-scanpackages or apt-ftparchive. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently tal

Re: question regarding 2.4 kernal release for Debian...

Previously Ross wrote: > When will debian release a stable version of the 2.4 kernel ? Not before 2.4 itself becomes stable. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian 1.3

Previously Stephen Kasirye wrote: > I am looking for Debian 1.3 release. I am looking for a Debian CD or > preferably the Debian 1.3 official CD image. > Any help will be greatly appreciated. As far as I know we don't have those CD images online anymore. The complete archive is still available at

Re: official 2.2_rev3 CDs available

Previously Attila Nagy wrote: > BTW, wouldn't be wiser to figure out a layout which is compatible with the > "rsync way" of mirroring? Not really, rsyncing individual files can't notice packages that moved from one CD image to another. Wichert. -- ___

Re: 2.2rev3 CDs (was Re: Stable Release plan)

Previously Nate Duehr wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:37:33PM +0200, Bernd Hentig wrote: > > AFAIK, the only kernels worth having in either binary or source > > are (in release order) 2.0.36, 2.0.17, 2.0.19, 2.4.2. > > You don't like *any* of the 2.2 series? Considering he said `in release

Re: "pool"- and "dists"-structure of the current Debian packages mirror

Previously Otto Wyss wrote: > Note: While this thread might be interesting for both mailing list, > please discuss it only in debian-dpkg. Also do a CC to > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" since I'm not subscribed to either list. This really does not impact dpkg at all so please do not discuss this on debian

Re: Rsync and incremental updates on top of Original CDs

Previously J.A. Bezemer wrote: > Ah, indeed! I appear to have a manpage for it, but it isn't mentioned in the > glibc documentation where I searched initially. But why did they call it > _f_truncate when in fact it does _not_ use a FILE* stream?! The kernel knows not about FILE*. Compare it with

Re: your mail

Previously Zbigniew Bojko wrote: > Please send me the address of Debian CD-ROM seller in Poland. > The address on your Web Page is not actual. Which address exactly is invalid, and on what page? Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is

Re: using GRUB

Previously Adam Di Carlo wrote: > Uh, well, you mean hda to hdc? Plus SCSI drives, etc etc. Oh, ick. > There must be a better way. grub uses a different naming scheme for drives: so (hd1) means the whole first IDE disk (ie /dev/hda). Wichert. --

Re: improved boot.bat

Slight change in the script: Previously [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > @echo off echo Flush any write-cached disk blocks before we leave DOS. echo If your system does not use smartdrv an error message will appear; echo you can safely ignore that. > smartdrv /c > Wichert. -- __

Re: md5sum for FreeBSD

Previously Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim wrote: > May I know where to get md5sum for a FreeBSD system; > or its source code? There is source for md5sum in the dpkg sourcetree. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignor

Re: Package pools, testing, 2.2r2

Previously Anthony Towns wrote: > All who're interested: katie (ie, the new dinstall, ie package pools) > will be rolled out when James has enough time to cope with any unforseen > problems. Hopefully in the next week or two. "testing" will be rolled out > shortly afterwards, in all probability.

Re: Good news on RSYNC issues

Previously [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > That brings up a dos window with whatever magical fix done. The `magical' fix is simply that command.com will allocate more space for the environment. The default is 256 bytes iirc. Wichert. -- ___

Re: BTS virtual package

Previously J.A. Bezemer wrote: > On > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?archive=yes&pkg=cd-images Try cd-image instead of cd-images. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \

Re: [Patch] for new Package format

Previously Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 01:05:17PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > >On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 07:05:18PM +0200, Michael Schlueter wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> as discribed in the BTS the Package format has changes a bit (Filename is now > >> FileName). Here is the Patch

Re: Suggestions for 2.2 r1

Previously Bernd Hentig wrote: > We already have 'non-US', so this could disappear then since > only the "us"-Version of the first Debian CD would not have > crypto support, non-US is not just crypto, it also has patented stuff. Wichert. -- __

Re: 2.2.17 early access testing version (i386)

Previously Adam Di Carlo wrote: > i386 build of the CVS boot-floppies as of yesterday is available at > http://auric.debian.org/~aph/bf/2.2.17/>. Please note that the 2.2.17 kernel is basically ready as well, Alan Cox is just waiting for Linus to make it official. We should get that in 2.2.r1 as

Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication]

Previously Brooks R. Robinson wrote: > Just couldn't help but add my $0.02! For the M$ server products (NT and > 2000), the initial release is always Service Pack 1. That is not true. A service pack is a collection of hotfixes and other (sometimes major) changes. For example the first serv

Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication]

Previously Philip Hands wrote: > Shouldn't that be 2.2 r1? The first revision will be 2.2r1, but we'll do a second revision as well at some point. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience

Re: TC3 CD#1 images are different sizes on ftp.d.o and cdimage.d.o

Previously Philip Hands wrote: > The reason for this split is that ftp.d.o is a lot quicker than > cdimage.d.o so can produce a full range of CDs in the time it takes > cdimage to start producing the first, so these images filled a need > while people were waiting for cdimage.d.o to do it's thing.

TC3 CD images for LWCE

Can someone please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as soon as i386 and source CD images for TC3 are finished? Bradley kindly agreed to produce TC3 CDs for us so we can hand them out at LinuxWorld, but he needs the images quickly seens LinuxWorld isn't very far away.. Also please tell him wher

Re: Updated forcd1

Previously J.A. Bezemer wrote: > forcd1: When we discussed kernel-source not long ago, Raphael said that anyone > could commit such little changes. When I saw it hadn't been done yet, I did > it myself. Forcing new application on CD 1 is not a `little thing'. And if you do that for applications l