Re: Need server

On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 11:01:43AM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote: > Is there any apt-able server out there that is accessible with a better > bandwidth than ftp.debian.org (currently 468 bytes/sec) but still is > up-to-date? There are almost two hundred public Debian mirrors, use them. http

Re: PGP/GPG transition + db.debian.org

Hi Pawel! On Thu, 04 Jan 2001, Pawel Wiecek wrote: > How long does it take usually for a (GPG) key sent to keyring.debian.org > to show up in official keyring (and maintainers database)? > I'm waiting for my new GPG key to show up for quite a few weeks and it seems a > bit excessive to me :^) Ne

Re: dpkg-statoverride vs. suidmanager

Previously Joey Hess wrote: > Wichert Akkerman wrote: > > This still leaves us with two problems: > > 1. there is no 100% correct way to decide if something is an override > >or not > > They're flagged local or so arn't they? Either `local' or 'user' in my suid.conf, but it could be anything

ITP: Rhythm Composer TK-707 (And suggestions for sound in debian)

Yes, I've been in a packaging mood lately :) I'd like to have Tk707 packaged. Tk707 is a software clone of the Roland TR-707 rhythm composer, a drum machine. It is written in C and Tk and it uses the alsa sequencer. I am using it together with the latest alsa modules and lib (compiled from source

PGP/GPG transition + db.debian.org

How long does it take usually for a (GPG) key sent to keyring.debian.org to show up in official keyring (and maintainers database)? I'm waiting for my new GPG key to show up for quite a few weeks and it seems a bit excessive to me :^) BTW -- our web interface to developers database (http://db.debi

Re: [Fwd: Bug#63511 acknowledged by developer(Bug#63511: fixed in glibc 2.2-7)]

Russell Coker wrote: > > This is already being done for some packages. Check the maintainer address > on the gcc package for an example. > > The thing that determines this is whether there are multiple people who are > skillful and willing to work. > > If you want to be the second developer for

Re: [Fwd: Bug#63511 acknowledged by developer(Bug#63511: fixed in glibc 2.2-7)]

Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > > Oh, and just to chime in on this little bit, I did not start maintaining > > glibc until Aug 31, 2000 (my first changelog entry). So no, I have not > > been sitting on this for 7 months. Get your facts straight. > > And just to chime in, I appreciate the huge effort an

Re: libapache-asp-perl - perl Apache::ASP - Active Server Pages for Apache with mod_perl.

On 22 Dec 2000, Stephen Zander wrote: > Piotr> ITO: libapache-asp-perl > Piotr> ITO: libapache-filter-perl > Piotr> ITO: libapache-ssi-perl > Piotr> ITO: libcgi-pm-perl > Piotr> ITO: libdbd-csv-perl > Piotr> ITO: libhtml-clean-perl > Piotr> ITO: libhtml-simpleparse-perl

ITP: yardradius

I gonna package yardradius, see http://yardradius.sourceforge.net. I'm the upstream author. $Id: README,v 1.4 2001/01/02 09:41:19 kiavik Exp $ Yet Another Radius Daemon (YARD RADIUS) README File This program is a RADIUS RFC compliant daemon which is

Re: Bug#81180: ITP: aterm -- an x terminal emulator

>> Chris Gray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Description: [4 ysabell:~] grep-available -s Package,Maintainer -P aterm Package: aterm-ml Maintainer: Jordi Mallach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Package: aterm Maintainer: Jordi Mallach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Please close

Re: [Fwd: Bug#63511 acknowledged by developer(Bug#63511: fixed in glibc 2.2-7)]

On Thursday 04 January 2001 20:50, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote: > Russell Coker wrote: > > I'm sure that Ben will welcome your contributions towards maintaining the > > libc6 package. All you have to do is read the list of bugs, solve some, > > and send in patches. > > I'm not trying to bash Ben. He

ITP: lovecalc

Hello I'd like to package lovecalc (http://www.lovecalculator.com/). Because of kinda unclean licence I'm not quite sure if it'll go into main or non-free (this depends on whether I convince the author to write a more precise one, I guess). Pawel -- (___) | Pawel Wiecek --

Re: [Fwd: Bug#63511 acknowledged by developer(Bug#63511: fixed in glibc 2.2-7)]

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 10:20:11AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: > > I've just reported what I had thought, some many many months ago, > > to be a problem. Of course, the maintainer has not done anything > > about this report for 7 months, and then he closes it like that. > > Not good. > > Oh, and ju

What happened to libnss1-compat?

I have a commercial binary that needs this library. Yes, I can find it in potato, but not in unstable. Is there a new package providing libnss1-compat? Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael@Fam-Meskes.De Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!

Re: Unclean licences

"Pawel Wiecek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >These programs are freeware, which means that they may be distributed >freely. Nope, we should explicitly have the rights to distribute and modify the program.

Need server

Is there any apt-able server out there that is accessible with a better bandwidth than ftp.debian.org (currently 468 bytes/sec) but still is up-to-date? ftp.debian.org has been very flaky for me for weeks. And neither ftp.de.debian.org nor source.rfc822.org are up-to-date. I guess they have the ve

Re: our broken man package

Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On the other hand, we might want to copy the OpenBSD version instead > of maintaining our own man. But I leave that to whoever maintains the > packages. We have alternatives on almost everything but dpkg and man. If someone thinks it's worth the effort

ITP: crack

Hello. I'd like to package CRACK, the well know password security checker. It has a nice licence, derived from Artistic and is no doubt a useful tool for an administrator. Pawel -- (___) | Pawel Wiecek <+48603240006> http://www.coven.vmh.net/ | < o o > | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GP

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:34:26AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > You prove my point. Resorting to invective is the last refuge > of the incompetent. This is your second demonstration of incompetence > in a public forum in 24 hours; and I suspect your drop in the > estimation of the rea

Re: [Fwd: Bug#63511 acknowledged by developer(Bug#63511: fixed in glibc 2.2-7)]

Russell Coker wrote: > > I'm sure that Ben will welcome your contributions towards maintaining the > libc6 package. All you have to do is read the list of bugs, solve some, and > send in patches. I'm not trying to bash Ben. He did a wonderful work in resolving many bugs and generally keeping up-

Unclean licences

Hello One of the programs I'd like to package has somewhat unclean licence. The readme file says only: COPYRIGHT: This program is FREEWARE! which I don't suppose is enough for us. The webpage is a bit more descriptive and says: These programs are freeware, which means that they may be distr

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

>>"Ethan" == Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ethan> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:48:46AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> That just demonstrates you have no idea what you are talking about. Ethan> oh please. someone already pointed out to me that older Ethan> versions of Gnus ignored

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 11:06:18PM -0800, Erik Hollensbe wrote: > apt-get and it's kin need more simple getopt-style flags that allow > overriding of certain things, mainly conflicts. Also, an option to > actually view what's being upgraded before you download 250 packages that > are only going to

Re: Problem with start-stop-daemon and pidfile

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 02:10:19AM +0100, Goswin Brederlow wrote: > touch /var/run/debian-mirror.pid > chown mirror.nogroup /var/run/debian-mirror.pid > > touch /var/log/debian-mirror.log > chown mirror.nogroup /var/log/debian-mirror.log Please don't do this. nogroup should not be the group of

Re: Anybody seen Loic Prylli lately?

On 01-01-04 Chuan-kai Lin wrote: > Does anyone know where Loic has been lately (i.e., for the past two years > or so)? AFAIK his last package upload was in November 1998, and the mail > I sent him about whether he needs help with mailx has generated no reply. > Since mailx is important, if the mai

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: PLEASE DON'T CC ME. I'M ON THE LIST > FYI 28 (aka RFC 1855) is the standard. Strictly speaking it's is only a standard if it is on the Standard Track and RFC1855 isn't. It is only an informational RFC. PLEASE DON'T CC ME. I'M ON THE LIST

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:48:46AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > That just demonstrates you have no idea what you are talking about. oh please. someone already pointed out to me that older versions of Gnus ignored M-F-To but the current one does not. go fuck off. -- Ethan Benson http

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Craig Sanders wrote: > On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:11:50PM -0700, John Galt wrote: > > On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Craig Sanders wrote: > > > Mail-Followup-To is the correct header to use. > > > > Mail-Followup-To isn't even a registered header! The closest thing to a > > registry tha

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

>>"Ethan" == Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ethan> pine is a lost cause anyway. i was thinking of GNUs which Ethan> seems to be the other big offender of ignorage of M-F-To. (i Ethan> am not sure if it respects Mail-Copies-To: never i just Ethan> started adding that.) That

Re: DEBIAN IS LOOSING PACKAGES AND NOBODY CARES!!!

On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 01:09:07PM +, Oliver Elphick wrote: >Peter Palfrader wrote: > >> There is a further weird package disappearance in unstable: all mgetty > >> packages (execept mgetty-doc) are gone! [...] > >> Hey, these are important packages. >

Re: our broken man package

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:53:37PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: > Ethan Benson wrote: > > the problem with this is you end up with the catman files owned by > > whatever user reads whatever man page. personally as a sysadmin i > > don't want users gaining write permission to files in any more places >

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:23:23PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote: > btw is it Mail-Copies-To: never or Mail-Copies-To: nobody ? i have > seen both which is correct? (assuming any MUA actually pays any > attention to this header anyway) 'nobody' is correct. 'never' is deprecated but still observed b

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:15:23PM +0100, Sven Burgener wrote: > On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:23:55PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: > > the new 'testing' distribution (sid) should be even better - nearly > > all the benefits of 'unstable' but tested to at least install properly > > without error. > >

Re: our broken man package

Ethan Benson wrote: > the problem with this is you end up with the catman files owned by > whatever user reads whatever man page. personally as a sysadmin i > don't want users gaining write permission to files in any more places > under /var then there already is (ahem texmf). i am not certain if

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:11:50PM -0700, John Galt wrote: > On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Craig Sanders wrote: > > Mail-Followup-To is the correct header to use. > > Mail-Followup-To isn't even a registered header! The closest thing to a > registry that RFC822 implies is in the hands of SRI International

Re: need headers for target architecture: asm/unistd.h

On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 12:39:58PM +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > * Andreas Schuldei ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [001229 23:24]: > > I try to build a crosscompiler i386->arm (but also other archs). At one > > point headerfiles for the target architecture are needed. Where could I find > > headerfiles f

Re: need headers for target architecture: asm/unistd.h

On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 11:24:26PM +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > I try to build a crosscompiler i386->arm (but also other archs). At one > point headerfiles for the target architecture are needed. Where could I find > headerfiles for other archs? Are there development packages for this purpose

Re: Rambling apt-get ideas

On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 11:11:01PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Why not look at this from a different perspective? I don't know if it may be > useful or not for upgrading machines, but the multicast server would be a > very nice thing for mass installations. I still disagree. Multicast is t

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:07:27PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote: > in that case there would be something funny going on, here is my > theory: > > you post to list, you M-F-To: is set to only the list > > someone (Mr-Broken) with broken mailer uses reply-to-all which CCs you > anyway ignoring M-F-To.

Re: our broken man package

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 03:23:03PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: > I'm concerned with some breakage in the man program. Here is an example: > [snip examples] > > This is because man runs via a wrapper that makes it run as user man > (and makes root's pager run as user man too for some reason). > > Rel

Re: ITP: aterm -- an x terminal emulator

On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:27:13AM -0500, Chris Gray wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > > Description: Someone please close this bug once it gets a number from the BTS. Package: aterm Priority: optional Section: x11 Installed-Size: 308 Maintainer: Jor

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

> "Ethan" == Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ethan> pine is a lost cause anyway. i was thinking of GNUs which Ethan> seems to be the other big offender of ignorage of M-F-To. Ethan> (i am not sure if it respects Mail-Copies-To: never i just Ethan> started adding that.

ITP: aterm -- an x terminal emulator

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Description: aterm is based upon rxvt v.2.4.8 with add ons of Alfredo Kojima's NeXT-ish scrollbars. Fast transparency functionality, background lightening/darkening or/and

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:23:23PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:18:40AM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote: > > > if this is the case the solution is fixing broken mailers, many of > > > them are Free software so why have patches to support M-F-To not been > > > made? > > > > I'd

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:18:40AM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote: > > if this is the case the solution is fixing broken mailers, many of > > them are Free software so why have patches to support M-F-To not been > > made? > > I'd like to see someone convince that M-F-To fix Pine. But I doubt you'll >

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:07:27PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote: > > have been added to Mail-Followup-To by other Mutt users, and I don't use > > the > > lists command at all. > > in that case there would be something funny going on, here is my > theory: > > you post to list, you M-F-To: is set to

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Craig Sanders wrote: > On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:53:04PM -0700, John Galt wrote: > > > > In fact, the only thing the RFC says to do is to honor Reply-To: > > > > headers, > > > > which I might note you didn't include in your message. > > > > > > Why should I, when it would b

Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)

On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 12:41:24AM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote: > > as for including other's in the Mail-Followup-To mutt only does this > > if those users had used `lists' instead of `subscribe' indicating they > > WANT to be CCed. > > There must be a bug in it somewhere, then, because I often se

<    1   2