On May 12, Tom Lees wrote
On Wed, 7 May 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
Perhaps you can split dinstall into two scripts: One script that is run,
say once an hour, that just checks incoming for new uploads and posts the
.changes files in the appropriate lists. This script could check for
On May 12, Brian C. White wrote
The following message is a list of items to be completed for the upcoming
releases of Debian GNU/Linux. If something is missing, incorrect, or you want
to take responsibility for one or more items, please send email to:
Brian White [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
-
On May 13, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote
On Mon, 12 May 1997, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
no. bug should prompt the user with a list of conffiles before the
editor is called. then the user will select the config files to be
included, and leater in the editor he can edit them (like replaceing
On May 12, Jim Pick wrote
Excellent write-up, Klee. Thanks for doing it.
I second this; a lot of thought has obviously gone into this, and it
shows!
Since I've been attacking this topic lately, I'll try to post some (hopefully)
constructive criticisms. But, overall, I agree with what you
On May 11, joost witteveen wrote
I just downgraded my ldso from the one in unstable, to the one
in bo, and I appear to be left with a system that doesn't have
a dynamic linker!
This is because of a change from a hard link to a symlink in one of
the 1.9.x versions. I'm not sure that I
I have been trying for some time to solve Bug #8882 against the 'sp'
package, which says that in order to make it buildable under glibc,
I need to call libintl as well as libnls in order to accommodate glibc,
and to define LINUX_TYPES_H for glibc. I made those changes and could
no longer get the
Jim Pick wrote:
Vincent Renardias wrote:
A while ago there has been a thread about KDE and Qt's licence; some
people (can't remember who) told they were interested into re-writting a
GPL'd clone of Qt (possibly on the top on LessTif). What's the status on
this? I.e: has someone began
On May 13, joost witteveen wrote
On May 11, joost witteveen wrote
I just downgraded my ldso from the one in unstable, to the one
in bo, and I appear to be left with a system that doesn't have
a dynamic linker!
This is because of a change from a hard link to a symlink in one of
On May 13, David Engel wrote
This problem is not that simple. With the current dpkg, there is no
way to fix this even with a statically linked cp or ln. This is
because dpkg will remove ld-linux.so.1 before any postinst script gets
a chance to repair the damage.
How about putting something
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 13 May 1997, Susan G. Kleinmann wrote:
I have been trying for some time to solve Bug #8882 against the 'sp'
package, which says that in order to make it buildable under glibc,
I need to call libintl as well as libnls in order to accommodate glibc,
[
Please clarify - unpacking a Debian source package is different
than unpacking an upstream source package (which may require tar,
unzip, zoo, lha, jar, etc.). Right?
Andy Mortimer wrote:
Personally, I'd be inclined to disagree here, especially given [1.5]
below. If I've gone to all the
Jim Pick wrote:
Even if we wrote one, I doubt the KDE guys, especially Matthias Ettrich,
would
be willing to use it. Really an unfortunate situation, IMHO. :-(
Noel Maddy wrote:
Berate me for missing the obvious, but couldn't KDE just be compiled with
a QT clone for Debian? What am
On Tue, 13 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
If someone wants to contribute to an effort to clone a toolkit, they'd
probably be much better off contributing to the WINE project (Windows
emulator) or Jolt project (Java clone - kaffe, biss-awt, guavac, etc.).
What do you think about Lesstiff?
--
On Tue, 13 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
If someone wants to contribute to an effort to clone a toolkit, they'd
probably be much better off contributing to the WINE project (Windows
emulator) or Jolt project (Java clone - kaffe, biss-awt, guavac, etc.).
What do you think about Lesstiff?
On 12 May 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
say that if the source is well behaved (that is, it is a tar file
that unpacks into *some* directory other than ., compressed or
Kai You seem to think a tar that unpacks into . is a problem. I
Kai still fail to see why.
Kai Just unpack into a
On Tue, 13 May 1997, Susan G. Kleinmann wrote:
I have been trying for some time to solve Bug #8882 against the 'sp'
package, which says that in order to make it buildable under glibc,
I need to call libintl as well as libnls in order to accommodate glibc,
and to define LINUX_TYPES_H for
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 12.05.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Kai == Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Kai Well, yes. Scan the temp dir after unpacking. If it contains one
Kai directory and nothing else, that directory is the main package
Kai directory. If it contains
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Mortimer) wrote on 13.05.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On May 12, Jim Pick wrote
Excellent write-up, Klee. Thanks for doing it.
I second this; a lot of thought has obviously gone into this, and it
shows!
aol Me too! /aol
* [1.1] It must be possible to
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Joey Hess wrote:
Lars Wirzenius:
They might not understand enough about shell scripts (or Perl, or
whatever the script is written in) and whatever tools the script uses
to make an informed decision of whether the script is safe. With the
current scheme, they only
On 12 May 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
I think, from the volume of discussion on bugs-dist, that most
developers have signed up on that list (and I at least follow it
quite diligently). I would rather not clutter up debian-devel with
that traffic (if we send all reports to
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Joey Hess wrote:
Kai Henningsen:
Remember: no shell scripts in the source packages that are needed for
unpacking. It's just too dangerous.
I don't understand why this is more dangerous than debian/rules. Why?
You don't get to review it before it's run.
--
Tom
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Chris Walker wrote:
Further to the announcement from Ian Jackson about the creation of a
mailing list for closed bugs
There may be circumstances when I wish to know if a bug has been closed,
but am not the person who reported the bug (eg I want to know when the
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Ian Jackson wrote:
The good definition of powerpc processors is 'powerpc', not 'ppc'.
Was this issue settled ? This will be hard to change later, so it's
important to get it right quickly.
I believe it was.
--- archtable Thu Feb 27 21:53:23 1997
+++
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
You might want to unpack a source package for other reasons than
to build it -- e.g., I've sometimes searched for documentation. A
non-programmer might want to do this so that they can typeset the
documentation in LaTeX, instead of printing out the
It seems that this package hasn't evolved for quite a long time. As
there are many bug-reports, and as I worked out fixes for some of
them, I suppose its maintainer has no time for it, and I'm wishing to
maintain it.
If I get no response within a week, I'll take for granted that there's
no
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Ian Jackson wrote:
It would be useful if the kind of information sent to the debian-changes
mailing list were integrated into dpkg. For available updated packages, a
user
could use information about the number and Urgency: of each intervening
update.
Also
I am almost finished with my AP's, only having Biology tomorrow. During
my free time I have thaught up a way that may allow us to use Linuxconf,
and all of it's starting/stoping features w/o replacing init. The author
of linuxconf liked the idea so it looks like we might have an easier time
hi i,m just wondering if any of you companies can offer me any help
with my ansi c progrmming assignment.
Thanks
waseem
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Hi,
I was asking over Linux-ISP about doing cleanup after breakins and got
many use tripwire answers, and one which says that RPM has a verify
mode which checks for files which were changed since they were
installed. Can the dpkg maintainers consider adding such a feature
for Debian?
Chees,
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
The point I was trying to make was that having dependencies on
binary packages would be really, really nice.
This gets more complicated. To allow for cross-compiling or bootstrapping,
some packages need to be compilable using the Source from another
This is the message I got from the developer. If you have any comments
cc: me, as I have resubscribed to the lists yet.
Shaya
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 23:37:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jacques Gelinas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Shaya Potter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
How about where part of the upstream archive could go into the main
distribution, but part needs to go into non-free or non-US, even for the
sources?
That's a case where you _must_ repack the original archive.
MfG Kai
No. I'd just say upload the upstream sources to the non-US
Tom Lees wrote:
This gets more complicated. To allow for cross-compiling or bootstrapping,
some packages need to be compilable using the Source from another package,
so eg:-
SrcPackage: xmp
Depends: awe-drv | src.awe
I don't think it adds any complexity if upstream source packages,
Hi,
I was asking over Linux-ISP about doing cleanup after breakins and got
many use tripwire answers, and one which says that RPM has a verify
mode which checks for files which were changed since they were
installed. Can the dpkg maintainers consider adding such a feature
for Debian?
Hi,
[This is getting silly, I really have no objection to the proposal]
Kai == Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Kai [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 12.05.97 in
Kai [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Kai == Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Kai Well, yes. Scan the temp dir after
On May 13, Yann Dirson wrote
It seems that this package hasn't evolved for quite a long time. As
there are many bug-reports, and as I worked out fixes for some of
them, I suppose its maintainer has no time for it, and I'm wishing to
maintain it.
Have you tried to email the current
Hi,
Jim == Jim Pick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Might it be possible to, say, have a list of `supported formats' --
.tar.gz, .zip, others? -- and at least give the option of
downloading upstream sources which were originally in other formats
as a tarball? This is far from ideal, for any number
[ NOTE: I don't subscribe to debian-devel, and my question is geared
towards the developers, so please ensure that responses are CC:'d
back to me ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). Thanks. ]
G'Day,
I'm curious about how dpkg handles the Conflicts: line of packages
that are already installed on the
38 matches
Mail list logo
