> How about: /usr/bin/latex is a program - my_neat_little_phdthesis.tex is
> a file?
Actually, /usr/bin/latex is an interpreter.
my_neat_little_phdthesis.tex *is* program code, even though the vast
proportion of the content will be literal text for output. See Andrew
Greene's BASiX (BASIC interp
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:20:28PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> Also consider that pulling gcc from main would fracture the project; it
> would become literally impossible to build a completely free OS, given
> that the whole ball of wax would depend on a non-free compiler.
Why do we need to pull
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:08:53PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:26:48PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > So the FDL is a free license because it's inconvenient for it to be not?
> > No, they're saying that a vast majority of programs which are widely
> > considered fre
This is probably the same "missing build-depends for makeinfo" that
id-utils was having trouble with...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I don't see any harm in making up jigdo files for DVDs --- I don't see
Ooh, yes, please - I'd love to be able to make bootable dvds to pass
around here [MIT area.]
> Of course, if loads of people with DVD writers mail me, I'm likely to be
metoo :)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECT
Anthony Towns writes:
> ilisp
>
> These packages will get a brief chance to be reconsidered in the
> next few days, but don't bet too heavily on them making it. From
> this point on, packages that are still in testing that have serious,
> grave or critical bugs that get removed probably won'
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 22:49, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:20:28PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> >
> > So, we change either the status quo, or the DFSG, or issue
> > clarifications on why the status quo (with GFDL-licensed components)
> > doesn't violate the DFSG.
>
> Where "cl
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 22:40, Joseph Carter wrote:
>
> This should have been dealt with sooner. But the past three times the FDL
> has been discussed on this list, no concensus was reached. The only thing
> we can be certain of is that there are enough problems with it to prevent
> any consensus.
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:20:28PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> Given that gcc, binutils, and KDE are in main, it would seem that the
> status quo and the DFSG are in conflict, or the status quo and someone's
> interpretation of the DFSG are in conflict at least.
>
> Also consider that pulling gcc
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:26:48PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > We should also move binutils and gcc to non-free because the manpages
> > > are under the GNU FDL.
> >
> > So the FDL is a free license because it's inconvenient for it to be not?
>
> No, they're saying that a vast majority of p
> "Martin" == Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Martin> getpwnam.passwd = x as it is written in /etc/passwd.
Martin> getspwnam.passwd = encrypted password.
Perl doesn't supoprt getspnam(). It used to do a getspnam under the
covers in the getpwnam call in 5.00404 (I wrote the
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 08:50:43PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > > > The GNU FDL violates the DFSG ?
> > > >
> > > > In case this is true, nearly all KDE packages have to be moved to
> > > > non-free as they use the GNU FDL for the documentation. For example :
> > > > open KHelpcenter and click
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 22:08, David Starner wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:26:48PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > So the FDL is a free license because it's inconvenient for it to be not?
> >
> > No, they're saying that a vast majority of programs which are widely
> > considered free by our
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:26:48PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > So the FDL is a free license because it's inconvenient for it to be not?
>
> No, they're saying that a vast majority of programs which are widely
> considered free by our community are using this license. Thus, the onus
> is on yo
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 08:39:12PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 20:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Whatcha mean "becoming"? Lispers have been blurring the line between
> > data and code for the last half-century.
>
> Speaking as a budding LISPer (working my way through "On
On 7 Apr 2002, Robert Tiberius Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 11:16, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > What amazes me is that nobody is able or willing to provide any figures.
> > So I guess no provider of an rsync server is interested in this subject
> > and therefore it can't be a big problem.
Btw,
On 7 Apr 2002, Robert Tiberius Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 11:16, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > What amazes me is that nobody is able or willing to provide any figures.
> > So I guess no provider of an rsync server is interested in this subject
> > and therefore it can't be a big problem.
>
> He
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 09:11:27PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 13:16, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > > A large mirror in Australia does provide an rsync server to access debian
> > > packages. When redhat 7.0 came out so many people tried to rsync it at the
> > > same time, the machine
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 20:28, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:04:12PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > The GNU FDL violates the DFSG ?
> > >
> > > In case this is true, nearly all KDE packages have to be moved to
> > > non-free as they use the GNU FDL for the documentation. For
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 13:16, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > A large mirror in Australia does provide an rsync server to access debian
> > packages. When redhat 7.0 came out so many people tried to rsync it at the
> > same time, the machine promptly fell over.
> >
> What amazes me is that nobody is able or
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 19:28, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:04:12PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > The GNU FDL violates the DFSG ?
> > >
> > > In case this is true, nearly all KDE packages have to be moved to
> > > non-free as they use the GNU FDL for the documentation. For
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 20:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Whatcha mean "becoming"? Lispers have been blurring the line between
> data and code for the last half-century.
Speaking as a budding LISPer (working my way through "On Lisp" while my
classes ruin my brain with Java), I'm well aware of this.
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 12:12:47PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 06:14, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> > people, i just want to remember you that DFSG stands for debian free
> > SOFTWARE guidelines. documentation is *not* software
>
> Unfortunately this is becoming less true.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 07:30:48PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> It's also probably worth pointing out, as you seem to see yourself as
> "the Dutch RMS", that the Free Software Foundation also accepts
> donations from proprietary software companies:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/thankgnus/2002supporters
update_output.txt says:
trying: postgresql
skipped: postgresql (134+2)
got: 46+0: a-46
* alpha: courier-authpostgresql, dbf2pg, ddt-server, gda-postgres,
gphotocoll, gtksql, guile-pg, libapache-mod-auth-pgsql, libch,
libch-dev, libdbd-pg-perl, libgql0-driver-pg,
libgtran
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:22:51AM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 05:15:16PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> > In fact, XML and HTML (and I would imagine therefore CSS and XSLT) are
> > explicitly listed as transparent formats. I'm not going to argue that.
> > The problems, alt
> BTW, why this problem manifest itself only on hppa? Is the c++ compiler
> somewhat different or is only a chain of #ifdef and/or configure
> switches that behaves differently on that arch?
In woody, hppa is the only architecture that is using gcc-3.0 compilers.
The other architectures are all us
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 09:34:45PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> I thought that it hasn't been finally resolved if the GNU FDL meets
> the DFSG or not. However, there seemed to be consensus on documents
> released under the GFDL with large sections marked invariant are
> probably not DFSG-complia
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:36:28PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> 3. I placed my book under this license with the express understanding
> that it was considered free. Now I'm hearing noise that this is a
> non-free license. While I disagree, that is often irrelevant.
>
> 4. If we still
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:04:12PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > The GNU FDL violates the DFSG ?
> >
> > In case this is true, nearly all KDE packages have to be moved to
> > non-free as they use the GNU FDL for the documentation. For example :
> > open KHelpcenter and click on "Introduction
Sending this bug report to debian-devel so that hopefully the maintainer
of this package will see it.
Please rename your package.
- Forwarded message from Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bdale Garbee)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Bug#141688: FTBFS: config.su
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:59:37PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Package: xbase
> Version: 2.0.0-1
> Severity: normal
>
> xbase |2.0.0-1 | unstable | source
> xbase | 3.3.6-11potato32 |stable | all
>
> This seems pretty broken to me ... it's a source package, so the lowe
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 09:29:27PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > IMO, an FDL-licensed document with invariant sections is non-free. As a
> > user of Debian, I'd like to know that they're not installed on my system
> > if I'm only using packages from main.
>
> The FDL is not DFSG-compliant, but
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 03:00:37PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > > There are an ever growing number of packages that make use of the GNU Free
> > > Documentation License. Isn't it about time to put a copy of this license
> > > into the common reference area?
> > >
> > > Who should I talk to about
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:05:07PM +0200, Uwe Hermann wrote:
> Chris Cheney indends to adopt the package, yes, but he only mailed
> to [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead of properly renaming the bug to ITA.
I have this sneaking suspicion that we need a tool more appropriate than
the BTS to handle the WNPP
Jérôme Marant wrote:
> I guess that the package will have to predepend on python, right?
> So, unlike the current debconf usage, a debconf dependency is no
> longer sufficient.
No, pre-depending on python will not ensure that your package's
config script has python available at preconfgiu
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 05:15:16PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 14:29, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > It's possible to draw a line. The GNU FDL clearly describes what a
> > "Transparant copy" is for example.
>
> Whether or not it describes what a transparent copy is is irrelevant
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:45:39AM -0700, Randolph Chung wrote:
> it needs some c++ work. For one thing it references internal libstdc++
> symbols (__STL_BEGIN_NAMESPACE, etc). Instead you should use "namespace std;",
> etc.
In fact I noticed the problem and I already forwarder it to the upstream
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 07:35:57PM -0400, jpstewart wrote:
> if [ ! $EUID == 0 ]; then
> echo "Sorry, this script must run with root privileges."
> if
Oops. I forget to add the `exit 69' or whatever error code.
--
Jean-Paul Stewart
pgpnpQJPMuk43.pgp
Description: PGP sig
There is something that has always bothered me about the scripts in
`/etc/init.d'. Every once in a while I attempt to execute one of these
scripts while logged in as a non-root user. For example, I might type
`/etc/init.d/foobar restart' while having the privileges of user `jps'
(uid=1000). Normall
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 08:16:28PM +0200, Otto Wyss wrote:
> What amazes me is that nobody is able or willing to provide any
> figures. So I guess no provider of an rsync server is interested in
> this subject and therefore it can't be a big problem.
It is a problem on cdimage.d.o, which is also f
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 05:15:16PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> In fact, XML and HTML (and I would imagine therefore CSS and XSLT) are
> explicitly listed as transparent formats. I'm not going to argue that.
> The problems, although they're transparent, they're programs as well
> as documents.
Bl
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 01:53:07PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> IMHO the non-free section should be removed.
Well, go for it. In the meantime, stop antagonizing people who do nice
things for us.
--
Richard Braakman
"I sense a disturbance in the force"
"As though millions of voices cried out,
Il lun, 2002-04-08 alle 00:15, Joe Wreschnig ha scritto:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 14:29, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > Unfortunately this is becoming less true. CSS contains statements for
> > > content generation and counting variables. Is this a program? I'm not
> > > sure, but it's definitely not j
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:24:34PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> * gs-common's license issues need to be resolved
Just to keep people from wasting their time to fix this: My local
gs-common edition has the following changes:
* debian/control: Add dependency on gsfonts. Rationale: gs is
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 04:34:36PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 11:56:59AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
>
> > The DFSG is an excellent place to start, but trying to apply it to things
> > which *are not software* is silly, and results in the sort of sillyness
> > which we're
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Michael Piefel wrote:
> You, Jason, did not add full i18n support to APT, and were not willing
> to accept my patches for woody. This is OK, as APT is a very central
> package and has been in different shades of freeze for quite some time.
Bzzt, I accepted the parts of your p
For those interested in the status of the GNU Free
Documentation License issue: Please read the interesting thread
"The old DFSG-lemma again" on debian-legal from Nov. 2001.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/debian-legal-200111/msg6.html
In the thread, Branden Robinson expressed concer
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 11:16, Otto Wyss wrote:
> What amazes me is that nobody is able or willing to provide any figures.
> So I guess no provider of an rsync server is interested in this subject
> and therefore it can't be a big problem.
Here are some experiments, and a mathematical analysis of d
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 16:08, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> documentation != document. XSLT is cleary a program and s stylesheet
> should go under a code license. but a manual about programming in XSLT
> is definitely documentation and should be treated in a different way.
What about inline stylesh
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 11:14:08PM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> Il dom, 2002-04-07 alle 21:34, Martin Schulze ha scritto:
> > Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > > The GNU FDL violates the DFSG ?
> >
> > I thought that it hasn't been finally resolved if the GNU FDL meets
> > the DFSG or not. Howeve
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 14:29, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > Unfortunately this is becoming less true. CSS contains statements for
> > content generation and counting variables. Is this a program? I'm not
> > sure, but it's definitely not just a document anymore. XSLT can be
> > included as "documentatio
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 16:08, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On 7 Apr 2002, Thomas Hood wrote:
> > powermgmt-base_1.3_m68k.deb was built on "kullervo".
> > Is it fscked up to?
>
> Not sure. Roman Hodek is kullervo's buildd admin; you'll have to ask him
> (or wait for his reaction ;-)
Well, powermgmt-b
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 11:56:59AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 12:12:47PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> > On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 06:14, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> > > people, i just want to remember you that DFSG stands for debian free
> > > SOFTWARE guidelines. documentati
Il dom, 2002-04-07 alle 21:34, Martin Schulze ha scritto:
> Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > Le Dimanche 7 Avril 2002 09:57, Ben Pfaff a écrit :
> > > Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Package: gnu-standards
> > > > Version: 2002.01.12-1
> > > > Severity: serious
> > > > Justification: Pol
>>"Josip" == Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Josip> You seem be able to blatantly maliciously misinterpret what I said.
I was presenting the flip side of the coin, yes. Malice was
not the intent.
manoj
--
"All over the place, from the popular culture to the propagand
>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> >>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> There are an ever growing number of packages that make use of
Dale> the GNU Free Documentation License. Isn't it about time to p
Il dom, 2002-04-07 alle 19:12, Joe Wreschnig ha scritto:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 06:14, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> > people, i just want to remember you that DFSG stands for debian free
> > SOFTWARE guidelines. documentation is *not* software
>
> Unfortunately this is becoming less true. CSS co
On Sat 06 Apr 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
> Over the past few weeks most of the following packages have been removed
> from the upcoming release due to bugs and such [0].
[...]
> dnrd logtrend-consolidation pptp-linux
Could someone give a pointer where I can found out why pptp
>
> So if I wanna link an programm with the gcc-3.0 version, -lfoo-gcc3 has
> to be used and for gcc-2.9x, -lfoo.
>
> Are there any better ideas?
>
unfortunately not, the ABI is different between the two.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 15:30, Martin Schulze wrote:
> However, I still cannot find a request for help with setting up a
> registration site/form on this list, neither including nor excluding
> specs, searching from November 2001 until now.
You were looking in the wrong spot. Check Message-Id:
<[EMA
On 7 Apr 2002, Thomas Hood wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Ditto powermgmt-base_1.3_m68k.deb :
> >http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?&pkg=powermgmt-base&ver=1.3&arch=m68k&file=log
>
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > If you look very closely, you'll find that these both
> > have been built by 'arrakis', a box of
Le dim 07/04/2002 à 20:50, Joey Hess a écrit :
> > Isn't it a bit heavy to make debconf depend on python ?
>
> Um, I can include a language binding in debconf w/o making it depend on
> that language.
But that won't solve the problem ; if a package using the python module
is preconfigured when th
Joe Drew wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 04:54, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > To the best of my knowledge, no. But I didn't have time to learn how and
> > > do it, and Lindows.com decided that they wanted to pay one of their
> > > engineers to do it. It's quite simple: nobody else did it, so I took
>
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Le Dimanche 7 Avril 2002 09:57, Ben Pfaff a écrit :
> > Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Package: gnu-standards
> > > Version: 2002.01.12-1
> > > Severity: serious
> > > Justification: Policy 2.1.2
> > >
> > > The GNU standards are licensed under two seperate
Thank you for taking care of sane.
Christophe
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 04:13:18PM +0200, Julien BLACHE wrote:
> christophe =?iso-8859-15?Q?barb=E9?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi *,
>
> > The sane problem is apparently solved and gphoto2 2.0final-3 is build on
> > arm.
>
> Not exactly. I up
King "Leo (Martin Oberzalek)" writes:
> Hello,
>
> it's not possible linking a C++ library compiled with g++-2.9x to a C++
> application compiled with g++-3.0.
>
> We all no the reasons...
>
> My question is how I should handle this, on debian distributions that
> are based on gcc-2.9x?
use onl
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> > Aside from this problem, I wouldn't mind including the module in debconf
>> > after woody is released. It looks nice.
>>
>> Isn't it a bit heavy to make debconf depend on python ?
>
> Um, I can include a language binding in debc
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 12:12:47PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 06:14, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> > people, i just want to remember you that DFSG stands for debian free
> > SOFTWARE guidelines. documentation is *not* software
>
> Unfortunately this is becoming less true.
Will Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sunday 07 Apr 2002 3:20 pm, David Starner wrote:
>
> > Why? Considering how close to the release we are, and how easy it is,
> > why not do it now? It certainly won't interfer with the maintainer
> > closing them.
>
> OK, done. I just don't want to st
Laurence J. Lane writes:
> iptables 1.2.6a-3 is being held back because it's out of date
> on m68k.
>
>http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/update_excuses.html.gz#iptables
>
> iptables_1.2.6a-3_m68k was built, according to the buildd log,
> but package does not appear to have been uploaded.
>
Wilmer van der Gaast wrote:
> Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Sun, 7 Apr 2002 10:54:06 +0200:
> > You may not aware of the discussion we had last year, when VMware
> > offered to donate five (or another amount, not sure anymore) licenses
> > of their vmware product to Debian in order to help us develop
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 05:57:43PM -0500, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > There are an ever growing number of packages that make use of the GNU Free
> > Documentation License. Isn't it about time to put a copy of this license
> > into the common reference area?
>
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Aside from this problem, I wouldn't mind including the module in debconf
> > after woody is released. It looks nice.
>
> Isn't it a bit heavy to make debconf depend on python ?
Um, I can include a language binding in debconf w/o making it depend on
that language.
--
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Dale> There are an ever growing number of packages that make use of
> Dale> the GNU Free Documentation License. Isn't it about time to put
> Dale> a copy of this license into the common refer
On Apr 07, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Isn't it a bit heavy to make debconf depend on python ?
Why would debconf have to depend on python? You stick the module in
and only bytecompile if python is installed.
(This is the same silly attitude that has lead to a lot of unnecessary
-elisp packages.)
> A large mirror in Australia does provide an rsync server to access debian
> packages. When redhat 7.0 came out so many people tried to rsync it at the
> same time, the machine promptly fell over.
>
What amazes me is that nobody is able or willing to provide any figures.
So I guess no provider o
Hello,
it's not possible linking a C++ library compiled with g++-2.9x to a C++
application compiled with g++-3.0.
We all no the reasons...
My question is how I should handle this, on debian distributions that
are based on gcc-2.9x?
I have a C++ library. And I wan't to create debs for g++.2.9x a
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Package gtkmathview (version: 0.3.0-4) hasn't been rebuilt on hppa since
> Wed 13 March and on m68k since Wed 27 March, could someone please
> trigger the rebuilt of it on these archs?
On m68k it's waiting on gmetadom. It's easier to see what's
going on at bruno.fmepn
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 12:12:47PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 06:14, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> > people, i just want to remember you that DFSG stands for debian free
> > SOFTWARE guidelines. documentation is *not* software
>
> Unfortunately this is becoming less true.
In reference to a message from Stefano Zacchiroli, dated Apr 07:
> I noticed that another package of mine, which is needed to build
> gtkmathview, wasn't successfully rebuilt on hppa, namely package
> "gmetadom".
it needs some c++ work. For one thing it references internal libstdc++
symbols (__STL
Le dim 07/04/2002 à 17:54, Joey Hess a écrit :
> What's worse, you can really only safley use essential and base packages
> in debconf config scripts. You can of course depend on python and use
> this python module in your postinst, after dependencies are met, but
> depednencies (and even pre-depe
On Sunday 07 Apr 2002 3:20 pm, David Starner wrote:
> Why? Considering how close to the release we are, and how easy it is,
> why not do it now? It certainly won't interfer with the maintainer
> closing them.
OK, done. I just don't want to step on anyone's toes.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EM
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 06:14, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> people, i just want to remember you that DFSG stands for debian free
> SOFTWARE guidelines. documentation is *not* software
Unfortunately this is becoming less true. CSS contains statements for
content generation and counting variables. Is
I wrote:
> Ditto powermgmt-base_1.3_m68k.deb :
>http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?&pkg=powermgmt-base&ver=1.3&arch=m68k&file=log
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> If you look very closely, you'll find that these both
> have been built by 'arrakis', a box of which I am the
> buildd admin. This was a result
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 09:08, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> BTW, on arm the package has been successfull rebuilt on April 2 and
> April 6, but the package is still reported as out of date on arm in
> update_excuses.html, anybody knows the reason?
Dunno, just some or other random delay. It's showing
Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Being tired of the shell, and not knowing perl enough, I have written a
> > little python module for debconf.
> >
> > I haven't tested it thouroughly, but it seems to work fine. Of course, I
> > intend to use it, but if people
"Carl B. Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I did read the BTS and saw the bug listed there which is why I didn't
> report it again. At the time I didn't see any mention of a patch but I
> may have overlooked something.
Probably. There are patch tags and the bug is in the "pending uplo
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Being tired of the shell, and not knowing perl enough, I have written a
> little python module for debconf.
>
> I haven't tested it thouroughly, but it seems to work fine. Of course, I
> intend to use it, but if people are interested, it can be found
* J?r?me Marant ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> "Carl B. Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I've had the following problem while trying to do a dist-upgrade this
> > morning:
> ...
> > ideas on a fix?
>
> Please read the BTS. I've already sent a patch and the maintainer will
> upload
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> El día 07 Apr 2002, Mark Purcell escribía:
> >
> > According to
> > http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=openh323gk&ver=2.0b4-1&arch=m68k&stamp=1017326211&file=log&as=raw
> >
> > openh323gk-2
Am 6.04.02 um 21:52:03 schrieb Jason Gunthorpe:
> Because it is a bad idea?
As Steve pointed out, good or bad idea is not really a good reason for
delaying packages, at least it has not been so far. Furthermore I don't
think it is a bad idea, for the following reason:
You, Jason, did not add ful
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 04:54, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > To the best of my knowledge, no. But I didn't have time to learn how and
> > do it, and Lindows.com decided that they wanted to pay one of their
> > engineers to do it. It's quite simple: nobody else did it, so I took
> > Lindows.com up on thei
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 03:04:43PM +0100, Will Newton wrote:
> On Sunday 07 Apr 2002 2:44 pm, Josip Rodin wrote:
>
> > Since you're not a maintainer, you shouldn't close them. However, you can
> > tag them "fixed", by sending 'tag fixed' commands to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> OK, if Craig hasn't
> IIRC galeon is not moved to woody just because it depends on mozilla
> which has an RC bug. Since mozilla is not removed but will be fixed
> before the release (at least that's how I understood Anthony's mail) I
> wonder if galeon then can make it back in. Or did you just removev
> galeon 1.0.3 a
christophe =?iso-8859-15?Q?barb=E9?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi *,
> The sane problem is apparently solved and gphoto2 2.0final-3 is build on
> arm.
Not exactly. I uploaded another NMU, now sane-backends should build on
SPARC (and hopefully HPPA but it's not critical). It will be installed
to
On 07 Apr 2002 Mark Purcell wrote:
> According to
>
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=openh323gk&ver=2.0b4-1&arch=m68k&stamp=1017326211&file=log&as=raw
> openh323gk-2.0.b4-1 was built for m68k on 28 Mar, however this
> package doesn't seem to of been uploaded to the archives which
> is why
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:24:40AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I'm wondering why the hell "gmetadom" isn't mention as out of data on
> hppa in update_excuses which reports only:
It's only out of date if it was previously built for an architecture.
AFAICT from madison it has never been buil
On Sunday 07 Apr 2002 2:44 pm, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Since you're not a maintainer, you shouldn't close them. However, you can
> tag them "fixed", by sending 'tag fixed' commands to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OK, if Craig hasn't done it by the end of today I will do that.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email t
iptables 1.2.6a-3 is being held back because it's out of date
on m68k.
http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/update_excuses.html.gz#iptables
iptables_1.2.6a-3_m68k was built, according to the buildd log,
but package does not appear to have been uploaded.
Who can look into this problem?
--
T
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
