-Original Message-
From: Tom Lees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>alpha 2 is released at http://www.lpsg.demon.co.uk/gdselect/
I was trying to compile it, had a little problem with some includes on glib,
which I overcame, but it seg faulted (or something like that, said glib
caught it) in the ini
David Engel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 1998 at 12:27:17PM -0700, Alex Romosan wrote:
> > can somebody who know more about tcl (maybe even the tcl maintainer)
> > take a look at this? i appreciate any help. thank you.
>
> I (the Tcl maintainer) don't have time to do this right n
Contrib and Non-free packages can't have release critical bugs --
they're not even an official part of debian.
--
Raul
Paul Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ever since hamm, expect has been giving me serious trouble. It won't
> run cleanly when started from cron. This means that a lot of my
> expects scripts are broken. I use expect extensively for system
> maintanance and accounting (make sure servers run, upl
> > On a related note, do we want to continue using names from pixar movies
> > now that Bruce is gone?
Justin Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i see no reason not to. they are nice names, the only problem is that we
> may be running out of good ones (i admit, rc was a stretch)
Is this suppos
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is from the linux kernel mailing list. I find it pretty completly sums
> op my thoughts on all the new constitution and voting and policy voting
> stuff that we've been setting up. I haven't been vocal about this, but I
> think we've been moving in the wr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Emacs should not be part of the 'basics' (I say this as an emacs user).
I think we should have a priority between "Standard" and "Optional",
perhaps named "Recommended". These are packages which would be
"Standard", but for size. Tex and a lot of X
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now that sounds like a better idea if it would work, but just like
> the "touching idea", you'd have to make sure that all the relevant
> programs actually keep the file open, and don't just open it when they
> need it.
I think we can safely say that a pro
Gregory S. Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It might not be legal for someone to give him PGP or explain how
> crypto works even while he's in the US.
No, the regulations prohibit export. If he's in the US, that's not
export.
As you mention, even if it was a problem, it would be a problem for
So, is there any consensus on how to upload source packages for ports?
I have some things like strace that I would like to upload for arm,
but the source is fairly different... Hrmm... pondering.. maybe I can
get around it.. hrmmm
Thanks,
--
David Welton http://www.efn.o
Darren Stalder wrote:
> I suspect that it's in the best interest of the freeze to revert to Perl
Thanks.
> 5.004. I'm currently uploading the 5.004.04-6 release to master's
> Incoming. I'll file a bug on ftp.debian.org that the 5.005 release
> should be deleted and the 5.004 release installed.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
I suspect that it's in the best interest of the freeze to revert to Perl
5.004. I'm currently uploading the 5.004.04-6 release to master's
Incoming. I'll file a bug on ftp.debian.org that the 5.005 release
should be deleted and the 5.004 release installed.
I'
John Lapeyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, at least part of their rationale for the new scheme is to
> allow multiple versions of perl, a feature that debian is not
> interested in.
Threaded perl and non-threaded perl are binary-incompatible at the
extension level, meaning most compiled e
On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> > 2) Are we really going to freeze slink in 7 days?
>
> I dont think we should freeze until we have a broken libc in slink...
^
Hmpf... I meant while :)
--
Madarasz Ger
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Santiago Vila wrote:
> 2) Are we really going to freeze slink in 7 days?
I dont think we should freeze until we have a broken libc in slink...
--
Madarasz Gergely [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's practically impossible to look at a penguin and
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Michael Stone wrote:
mstone>What I'm trying to say is "why doesn't perl look in /usr/lib/perl5
mstone>anymore?" Was this just a gratuitous change, or was there a reason for
mstone>breaking things? I can understand the change if there are modules that
mstone>work in 5.004 but not
On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Richard Braakman wrote:
dark>That "only" is a large source of packaging bugs. In fact, the (IMO)
dark>most annoying upgrade problem in hamm was a pathname problem: two
dark>packages had moved to a different directory at the last minute, and
dark>the auto upgrade script hadn't
101 - 117 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
