On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Jonathan Hseu wrote:
Last I asked on #debian-devel, source-only uploads aren't allowed (as in, you
can't just upload the orig.tar and the diff. With auto-builders in place, is
there any reason why?
They are allowed. See pine.
There are reasons why source-only uploads
On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 03:25:57PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 01:52:25PM +0100, Noel Koethe wrote:
As a debian developer, I like an easier way to find and keep up with
all the nice reports out there keeeping track of me. I think it would
help myslef and
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 03:26:10AM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Jonathan Hseu wrote:
- Wouldn't the binaries be more trusted if they came from auto-builders
anyways?
So that way a maintainer can't just stick something in there that's not in
the
source code.
I would
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 01:59:33AM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote:
there are 2 ways for a package maintainer to deal with l10n-ed Debconf
templates: either put all translations in a single file, or separate each
language in its own template file.
The former has a severe drawback, because when
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 09:59:04AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
Conversely, I would sometimes like to be able to get my arch-specific
and arch-independant packages built by the build daemons in order to
detect build time errors that don't show up on my own system (missing
build deps, for
On Mon, 31 Dez 2001, Michael Bramer wrote:
Hello,
The point is to collect all informations about reports in a place that
is well known, easy to know for new developers (i.e. readable in the
developers reference) and kept up to date.
yesterday I add a new status pages on request of a
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 11:23:19AM +0100, Noel Koethe wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dez 2001, Michael Bramer wrote:
The point is to collect all informations about reports in a place that
is well known, easy to know for new developers (i.e. readable in the
developers reference) and kept up to date.
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 02:05:05AM -0800, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
a clean chroot will solve that one for you. besides, the buildd's may
still have an un-listed build dependency, from a previous build.
It would still be nice to have the external check.
--
You grabbed my hand and we fell
Hi,
I would like to have some information about harden ?
Where can i find how to use and configure it ?
Thnx
+==+
| Why Reboot ?? |
| Use Debian GNu/Linux |
| www.debianworld.org|
+==+
On Mon, 31 Dec 2001 02:23:55 +0100
Marc == Marc L de Bruin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marc
Marc So, to be more precise: debconf asks the user for that location, and
Marc puts it in the debconf-database at myapp/thelocation. Now, when
Marc installing mydata.deb, it should read the
* Michael Bramer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20011231 10:35]:
yesterday I add a new status pages on request of a maintainer:
http://ddtp.debian.org/pdesc/maintainer/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your packages file is outdated. This page lists me as the maintainer
for a package of which I'm no longer
How does it work? Broad overview: does it install a root filesystem and
simply do a huge cp /mnt/cdrom/package /wherever then configure, or what?
Thx :)
--
Penguin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Girls are for pleasure; boys are for ecstasy.
In Sat, 29 Dec 2001 14:14:15 +0100 Josselin cum veritate scripsit :
I don't think all these packages should be swept out. Unmaintained
packages that don't have bunches of bugs shouldn't be a problem, for
example.
No, it's a serious problem.
Unmaintained, unused, and untested packages are
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 12:08:30PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
* Michael Bramer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20011231 10:35]:
yesterday I add a new status pages on request of a maintainer:
http://ddtp.debian.org/pdesc/maintainer/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your packages file is outdated. This page lists
On Sun, Dec 30, 2001 at 11:09:50PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Sun, 2001-12-30 at 17:02, Julian Gilbey wrote:
This package is correct as is, and the warning is harmless; the line
of code involved is:
return (c0||c255)? unexpected_char: icode[c];
where c is a char expected to be
Joey Hess wrote:
Jeff, unless I'm mistaken you've taken over maintainence of the debian
packaging of quakeforge and you have fairly current packaging in the
quakeforge-current tree in their cvs. I remember that when knghtbrd
decided to remove quakeforge packages from debian, it was because
On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 03:53:19PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 01:11:15PM +0100, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote:
print Dumper($virtula1);
[...]
which is pretty much the structure you wanted.
other comments:
i still think you should use a field separator
At (time_t)1009793105 John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 09:59:04AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
Conversely, I would sometimes like to be able to get my arch-specific
and arch-independant packages built by the build daemons in order to
detect build time errors that don't
On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 11:16:03AM -0600, Colin Watson wrote:
On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 03:02:29PM +0100, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote:
my %virtual1 = {};
[...]
$virtual1-{$user[0]}-{$fields[$_]} = $user[$_];
[...]
When running the script using this module, I get this error:
In Mon, 31 Dec 2001 09:59:04 + Mark cum veritate scripsit :
Conversely, I would sometimes like to be able to get my arch-specific
and arch-independant packages built by the build daemons in order to
detect build time errors that don't show up on my own system (missing
build deps, for
Hi Junichi!
You wrote:
Unmaintained, unused, and untested packages are in Debian.
If no one uses these packages, bugs won't be filed.
No bugs filed is not a status of well-being.
But OTOH no bugs is neither an indication that the package is not being
used.
--
Kind regards,
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 08:19:24PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
Are we trying to force users to use binary packages that even the
maintainer of the package has not tried to install/run ?
We do all the time. I expect the majority of the packages on the
machine I'm typing this on have not been
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 07:02:43AM -0500, Jeff Teunissen wrote:
Jeff, unless I'm mistaken you've taken over maintainence of the debian
packaging of quakeforge and you have fairly current packaging in the
quakeforge-current tree in their cvs. I remember that when knghtbrd
decided to remove
At 1:53 am, Tuesday, January 1 2002, Penguin mumbled:
How does it work? Broad overview: does it install a root filesystem and
simply do a huge cp /mnt/cdrom/package /wherever then configure, or what?
As I understand it, when you partition a drive, it mounts the too-be root
partition as
* Steve Kowalik
| It then un'tar's the base tarball into /target, makes Linux bootable if you
| said it could, and then reboots.
There is no base tarball for woody; it then runs debootstraps which
unpacks the .debs.
--
Tollef Fog Heen
Unix _IS_ user friendly... It's just selective about who
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 10:20:14PM +1100, Penguin wrote:
| How does it work? Broad overview: does it install a root filesystem and
| simply do a huge cp /mnt/cdrom/package /wherever then configure, or what?
It depends on what you tell it to do. It does all the basic setup of
a system (partition
David Z Maze wrote:
Marc L de Bruin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
MLdB What I am trying to build are a couple of packages (let's call one of
MLdB these mydata.deb) containing just ordinary files, related to a
MLdB specific application. All these packages Depend on a generic
MLdB configuration package.
Joseph Carter wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 07:02:43AM -0500, Jeff Teunissen wrote:
Jeff, unless I'm mistaken you've taken over maintainence of the
debian packaging of quakeforge and you have fairly current packaging
in the quakeforge-current tree in their cvs. I remember that when
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 02:34:56PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 08:19:24PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
Are we trying to force users to use binary packages that even the
maintainer of the package has not tried to install/run ?
We do all the time. I expect the majority
On Mon, 2001-12-31 at 05:40, Julian Gilbey wrote:
I believe that the author (Knuth) presumably thought c should only be
between 0 and 127, probably not even that far, and we're using c as an
array index, where we've only allocated 256 chars for this array.
Right. Then it should be
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 01:33:37PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to always explicitly
declare all char variables as signed or unsigned; otherwise, you're just
asking for latent bugs.
IMHO, this is a peculiar statement. The type 'char' is best
On 30 Dec 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Please take a look at #99208 in the BTS, and give me some advice.
The complaint is that there are a bunch of files in xpuzzles that
needed to be marked conffiles, but were not. Then, when that was
fixed, the result was that a whole bunch of files
Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If only the location but not the contents of the files changed from
potato to woody, you can use the prerm to copy/move the files to the
new location before dpkg realizes they didn't previously exist.
If both the location and the contents changed you
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 01:33:37PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Mon, 2001-12-31 at 05:40, Julian Gilbey wrote:
I believe that the author (Knuth) presumably thought c should only be
between 0 and 127, probably not even that far, and we're using c as an
array index, where we've only
I demand that Colin Walters may or may not have written...
[snip]
No, the C standard guarantees that a char is exactly a single byte; i.e.
sizeof(char) == 1.
Yes, but who's to say that a byte is 8 bits wide? :-)
--
| Darren Salt | linux (or ds) at | nr. Ashington,
| Linux PC, Risc PC |
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 01:33:37PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Mon, 2001-12-31 at 05:40, Julian Gilbey wrote:
I believe that the author (Knuth) presumably thought c should only be
between 0 and 127, probably not even that far, and we're using c as an
array index, where we've only
On 31 Dec 2001, Colin Walters wrote:
and there's a small possibility that char could be some weird wide
character thing,
No, the C standard guarantees that a char is exactly a single byte; i.e.
sizeof(char) == 1.
I think he meant wider than one would think-character. A char didn't
Hi all,
I'm hopping that someone has some experience with audio CD recording and
can help me a bit. I can record data CDs without any problems but if I
try the audio option I get the following output
mira:/tmp# cdrecord -dev=0,0 -dummy -audio -pad t.iso
Cdrecord 1.10 (i686-pc-linux-gnu)
On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 01:33:26PM -0600, Kevin Corry wrote:
On Friday 28 December 2001 23:48, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
I have been using LVM for some time, and I am eager to start working
with EVMS. Once I have working packages, I will be migrating some of my
LVM volumes to EVMS using them,
I'm in a strange situation, something (the last program I installed was fligh
gear) caused my /var/lib/dpkg/status file to be deleted. Meaning
apt/dpkg/dselect is unable to determin what packages are installed. I managed to
manually write in the details of debconf and dpkg so that packages would
On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Hereward Cooper wrote:
I'm in a strange situation, something (the last program I installed was fligh
gear) caused my /var/lib/dpkg/status file to be deleted. Meaning
apt/dpkg/dselect is unable to determin what packages are installed. I managed
to
manually write in the
On 31-Dec-01, 16:30 (CST), Peter Finderup Lund [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31 Dec 2001, Colin Walters wrote:
No, the C standard guarantees that a char is exactly a single byte; i.e.
sizeof(char) == 1.
I think he meant wider than one would think-character. A char didn't
originally have
On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 01:33:26PM -0600, Kevin Corry wrote:
On Friday 28 December 2001 23:48, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
I have already grabbed the latest release and started work on evms
packages for Debian, though I haven't touched them for over a week since
I have been away. I should have
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 01:33:37PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
It can't be larger than 255 (precisely because it is limited to a single
byte).
The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to always explicitly
declare all char variables as signed or unsigned; otherwise, you're just
Le Sun, Dec 30, 2001 at 08:51:20PM -0600, Colin Watson écrivait:
On Sun, Dec 30, 2001 at 06:43:57PM +0100, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
I don't agree. In a perfect world, yes, we would have all available
software packaged for debian and all packages maintained. But that's
just not reality. It's not
Hi,
Le Sun, Dec 30, 2001 at 06:50:16PM +0100, Bas Zoetekouw écrivait:
It's quite easy to say that you can find dozens of such packages. Please
be specific, and post the name of those packages/maintainers (take it to
-private, if you want) but I honestly don't believe that there are many
badly
Hi,
I hereby restart my long-forgotten, yet ancient, tradition of posting
ridiculous mails to this newsgroup. Why ? I believe in the allmighty power of
self-organisation :P And have to work till 11pm 31/12/01 until 07am today
01/01/2002. I'm not looking to cause flame-wars, rants or what so
At 2:08 pm, Tuesday, January 1 2002, Tollef Fog Heen mumbled:
| It then un'tar's the base tarball into /target, makes Linux bootable if you
| said it could, and then reboots.
There is no base tarball for woody; it then runs debootstraps which
unpacks the .debs.
Okay, I should add that it
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 11:51:44AM -0500, Jeff Teunissen wrote:
The stuff outside I have done. Back in March or so I designed a nice,
complex, and complete system for handling gamedata. It would work as
long as an engine using it had fs_* Cvars and config files. Unless of
course you did
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 05:09:06PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
Unmaintained, unused, and untested packages are in Debian.
If no one uses these packages, bugs won't be filed.
If no one uses the package, the bugs are not a problem! :-)
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL
On Sat, 29 Dec 2001, Erik Steffl wrote:
[...]
there is also a number of other libraries (for GUI), I don't think you
have to use ms libs, you can use e.g. wxwindows, qt etc..., also, if the
application doesn't have complicated gui the porting might be fairly
easy... (it also depends on how
Feliz año a todos los locos desarrolladores que como yo pones su granitos de
arena en esa hermosa locura que es el Proyecto Debian,
Un abrazo
--
Javier Viñuales Gutiérrez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GnuPG public key:'finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
101 - 152 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
