* Frédéric Bothamy [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-04-18 15:47] :
[...]
J'ai validé les modifications dans le CVS Debian hier soir et la
traduction sera présente dans le prochain paquet Debian
developers-reference-fr 3.3.2. Elle sera également disponible sur le
site Debian à l'adresse suivante :
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 08:43:45PM -0400, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
Imlib is more-or-less dormant upstream. However, in late August, I
was under the impression that upstream imlib was going to release a
new version (with new SONAME) that would be linked with libpng3. In
I forgot to comment on
trying to fix my desktop setting on my computer
Is it just me, or would this fix the problem simply:
1) If a postinst generates a configuration file with debconf, it
must place the md5sum of the generated configuration file in
/var
2) A package should try and parse the current configuration file
back into debconf
Package: binutils
On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 19:14, Joey Hess wrote:
Enough already.
Folks, if you don't stop abusing debconf with useless notes that belong
in README.Debian and config file overwriting, I will stop maintaining
it.
Amen. For example, we really need to kill that kernel link
Hi
Chinput can use any of libpng2 or libpng3, it just need a rebuild.
--
Yu Guanghui ygh at dlut.edu.cn
Network Center
Dalian University of Technology, China
Steve M. Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hello,
I'd like to solicit opinions about what to do with
imlib-linked-against-libpng3.
Dear all,
StarDict-2.0.0-pre2 has been packaged and uploaded to Debian's
incoming. StarDict 2 is a GNOME-based international dictionary,
currently with English-Chinese/Chinese-English data included.
It is a major rewrite by HU Zheng (http://stardict.cosoft.org.cn/)
based on the an earlier
On 19 Apr 2003 00:07:54 -0400,
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Is it just me, or would this fix the problem simply:
1) If a postinst generates a configuration file with debconf, it
must place the md5sum of the generated configuration file in
/var
2) A package
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 10:22:45 +1000, Brian May wrote:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 09:33:01PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: amavisd-new
Version: 20021227p2-5
Severity: grave
Grave would seem to be a bit of an overkill? amavisd-new still works OK
for the majority of users...
Hi,
[ obDebianDevel: just in case this has become popular beleif or
something like that ]
from menu's 2.1.7-3 changelog:
* debiandoc-sgml 1.1.75 has reached testing so remove the versionned
Build-Depends.
what gave you the idea that because debiandoc-sgml 1.1.75 is now in
testing,
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 07:14:19PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Enough already.
Folks, if you don't stop abusing debconf with useless notes that belong
in README.Debian and config file overwriting, I will stop maintaining
it.
Stop slapping incorrect uses of debconf in everywhere. Feel free to
To debian-devel: Because it is a long time, we have been discussing this
bug here, and the thread is broken, I remark, we are talking about
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200302/msg00349.html.
Please, let's return to the problem and let's try to solve it.
On Fri, Apr 11,
On Sat, 19 Apr 2003 12:07:11 +0200,
Marcel Kolaja [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To debian-devel: Because it is a long time, we have been discussing this
bug here, and the thread is broken, I remark, we are talking about
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200302/msg00349.html.
At 7:22 pm, Saturday, April 19 2003, Denis Barbier mumbled:
I do not understand exactly what is good and bad use of debconf.
For instance all questions asked by the debconf package have good default
values, so there is no reason to prompt user, a configuration file is
enough. So what am I
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 06:11:16AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 08:11:52PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
I CCed you the bugreport where i explain everything, but the packages are :
libpgsql-ocaml
ocamlsdl
These are the source packages.
You missed:
ocaml-core |
Enough already.
Folks, if you don't stop abusing debconf with useless notes that belong
in README.Debian and config file overwriting, I will stop maintaining
it.
Stop slapping incorrect uses of debconf in everywhere. Feel free to run
any package using debconf by me before you upload it, or take
Personally I use the ask-about-overwrite question in debconf because the
last time this thread came up the only sensible solution was put forward in
the attached email. Now, I'm all for a better solution when it is determined
what that is, *but* I'm not for a witch hunt based on what was seen to
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 10:44:52AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
Hi,
[ obDebianDevel: just in case this has become popular beleif or
something like that ]
from menu's 2.1.7-3 changelog:
* debiandoc-sgml 1.1.75 has reached testing so remove the versionned
Build-Depends.
I am interested in coordinating a new sub-project called Debian-Lex,
which would be Debian for Lawyers, akin to the Debian-Med, Debian-Jr and
DebianEdu projects. Hopefully, these sub-projects will evolve into
Bdale's idea of flavours (flavors, but I'm Australian) of Debian.
I am a lawyer and
Denis Barbier wrote:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 07:14:19PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Enough already.
Folks, if you don't stop abusing debconf with useless notes that belong
in README.Debian and config file overwriting, I will stop maintaining
it.
Stop slapping incorrect uses of
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 02:08:27PM +0100, Matt Ryan wrote:
Joey Hess wrote:
Enough already.
Folks, if you don't stop abusing debconf with useless notes that belong
in README.Debian and config file overwriting, I will stop maintaining
it.
Stop slapping incorrect uses of debconf in
At Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:24:17 +0200,
Markus Amersdorfer wrote:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2003 13:06:07 +0900
GOTO Masanori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- /var/lib/dpkg/info/libc6.postinst checks for $1 ==
configure
(which is the case when updating, isn't it?). If true it
afterwards checks if
Steve Kowalik wrote:
Well, not all use of debconf is bad. For example, libnet-perl is a terrible
misuse of debconf, *but* it can be remedied by dropping the priority of the
questions from medium to low.
At least libnet-perl is actually asking questions and preserving some
(though not all) user
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 03:43:56PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 10:44:52AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
[ obDebianDevel: just in case this has become popular beleif or
something like that ]
from menu's 2.1.7-3 changelog:
* debiandoc-sgml 1.1.75
On 19 Apr 2003, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
I am interested in coordinating a new sub-project called Debian-Lex,
Could you please explain the naming lex for non English speakers?
In general I really like your idea because I think those internal
projects are an important way to fit the needs of our
On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 12:05:49AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
So everytime we have to restart all binaries which use a library
involving security-problem. In additionm this problem affects not
only debian packages, but user-built binaries.
Well, this is why it is most often described in the
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 03:46:32PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
snip
Or maybe realize that Joey might perhaps know what he's talking about
with regard to debconf ... you could go find the text of his talk at the
last Debian Conference if you like.
/snip
Could you (or someone else) give me a
Arthur de Jong wrote:
Ok, could you review my cvsd package for me for correct debconf usage and
tell me what you do and don't like?
Thanks for taking advantage of that offer. (So far you're the only one.)
I am ccing this to -devel just because.
All of the debconf questions are pretty well
Please explain your reasons for removing the credits and attributions
from the reiserfs utilities in violation of our copyright.
You'll note that ReiserFS anticipated the GNU GPL V3 by including
clauses that forbid removal of credits in its license, and for a long
time I have been telling
One more thing that I didn't notice until purging the package. In the
purge question, you refer to selecting yes and answering no. Don't
do that, some debconf frontends do not use yes or no; the user might be
staring at a check box when they see that text. Just ask the question,
something like
On 18-Apr-03, 10:28 (CDT), Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the package maintainers are correctly using the debconf priorities,
and the admin has chosen a debconf priority that accurately reflects
their preferences, why do you care? By definition, any prompts at
priority medium or
On Sat, 19 Apr 2003 14:07:04 +0100,
Matt Ryan [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Personally I use the ask-about-overwrite question in debconf
because the last time this thread came up the only sensible
solution was put forward in the attached email. Now, I'm all for a
better solution when it is
On 19-Apr-03, 06:47 (CDT), Steve Kowalik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 7:22 pm, Saturday, April 19 2003, Denis Barbier mumbled:
I do not understand exactly what is good and bad use of debconf.
For instance all questions asked by the debconf package have good default
values, so there is no
Andre Luis Lopes wrote:
Could you (or someone else) give me a hint on where one could find
Joey's talk ? I've already tried googling for it and looking at [1] but
couldn't find it.
Hmm, I don't have it online that I know of, it was mostly extemporaneous
anyway. (Here, I've linked the slides
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 05:57:42PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
On 19 Apr 2003, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
I am interested in coordinating a new sub-project called Debian-Lex,
Could you please explain the naming lex for non English speakers?
s/English/Latin/
cheers,
Michael
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 05:57:42PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
I am interested in coordinating a new sub-project called Debian-Lex,
Could you please explain the naming lex for non English speakers?
It's latin, not english. :-) It means law.
--
Christian Surchi, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL
On Sat Apr 19, 11:18am -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 19-Apr-03, 06:47 (CDT), Steve Kowalik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 7:22 pm, Saturday, April 19 2003, Denis Barbier mumbled:
I do not understand exactly what is good and bad use of debconf.
For instance all questions asked by the
On Saturday 19 April 2003 17:23, Christian Surchi wrote:
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 05:57:42PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
I am interested in coordinating a new sub-project called Debian-Lex,
Could you please explain the naming lex for non English speakers?
It's latin, not english. :-) It
Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
GOTO Masanori wrote:
So everytime we have to restart all binaries which use a library
involving security-problem. In additionm this problem affects not
only debian packages, but user-built binaries.
Well, this is why it is most often described in the security
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-04-19
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libapache-mod-auth-radius
Version : 1.5.7
Upstream Author : Alan DeKok [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : ftp://ftp.freeradius.org/pub/radius/
* License : Apache Software License
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 08:07:03PM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote:
Please explain your reasons for removing the credits and attributions
from the reiserfs utilities in violation of our copyright.
You'll note that ReiserFS anticipated the GNU GPL V3 by including
clauses that forbid removal of
* David Goodenough ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030419 19:20]:
[debian-lex]
In England there is a move to remove all the Latin and obscure language
from the Law, so I would suggest that the project should be called
Debian-law not Debian-lex.
lex is the better word, as it is not only known in
On Sat, 19 Apr 2003 20:07:03 +0400
Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You'll note that ReiserFS anticipated the GNU GPL V3 by including
clauses that forbid removal of credits in its license, and for a long
time I have been telling Stallman that he needs to get V3 of the GPL
out the door.
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 12:36:04PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Andre Luis Lopes wrote:
Could you (or someone else) give me a hint on where one could find
Joey's talk ? I've already tried googling for it and looking at [1] but
couldn't find it.
Hmm, I don't have it online that I know of, it
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 06:23:13PM +0200, Christian Surchi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 05:57:42PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
I am interested in coordinating a new sub-project called Debian-Lex,
Could you please explain the naming lex for non English
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 11:11:59AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 18-Apr-03, 10:28 (CDT), Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the package maintainers are correctly using the debconf priorities,
and the admin has chosen a debconf priority that accurately reflects
their preferences,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi
First I have to say, that I even did not realize, that the credits had
been removed.
I think Hans has a good point. The inclusion of credits is something
that should be respected. Free software does not mean that you can do
what you want with a
Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You'll note that ReiserFS anticipated the GNU GPL V3 by including
clauses that forbid removal of credits in its license, and for a long
time I have been telling Stallman that he needs to get V3 of the GPL
out the door.
Oh, I think it's natural to assume
Marcel Weber wrote:
I think Hans has a good point. The inclusion of credits is something
that should be respected. Free software does not mean that you can do
what you want with a piece of code, but that you're allowed to use,
modify and redistribute it freely, respecting it's license.
IMHO
a)
In England there is a move to remove all the Latin and obscure language
from the Law, so I would suggest that the project should be called
Debian-law not Debian-lex.
lex is the better word, as it is not only known in English, but also
in most other (roman) Languages for law.
The first
I'd hardly call it plagiarism. Your copyright is, by will of our own
policy and to abide by authors wishes, distributed with the tools in
/usr/share/doc/pkg/copyright.
Ah.. I guess Hans is referring to the author list in README?
The package maintainer probably looked at COPYING (contains GPL,
whats up with you? havent talked to you in awhile, same thing here pretty much.
I am updating some info on the website and need your help. Can you hook me up
with some info about your local skateshop and or skatepark? We are still adding
skateparks to the list so if yours isnt in there let
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 10:10:54PM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
Why not simply make a imlib1p that conflicts with old imlib1 and rebuild
the remaining 11 sources that still use imlib1 with old libpng2? There
are fewer that would cause trouble in that batch, afaict only: chameleon,
ebview,
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 02:07:04PM +0100, Matt Ryan wrote:
Personally I use the ask-about-overwrite question in debconf because the
last time this thread came up the only sensible solution was put forward
in the attached email. Now, I'm all for a better solution when it is
determined what
Marcel Weber wrote:
Hans, I hope that the removal of these credits was a mistake and that
they're going to be included in future releases of testing. ReiserFS is
a really fine piece of software and anyone who helped with it's
development should have the right to be credited if he or she wants
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 07:24:55PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* David Goodenough ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030419 19:20]:
[debian-lex]
In England there is a move to remove all the Latin and obscure language
from the Law, so I would suggest that the project should be called
Debian-law not
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 12:36:04PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Andre Luis Lopes wrote:
Could you (or someone else) give me a hint on where one could find
Joey's talk ? I've already tried googling for it and looking at [1] but
couldn't find it.
Hmm, I don't have it online that I know of, it
Or maybe realize that Joey might perhaps know what he's talking about
with regard to debconf ... you could go find the text of his talk at the
last Debian Conference if you like.
I realise he has an opinion on how things should be done. Depending on your
own viewpoint this may be more
Now I hope you stop with your trolling and consider speaking
respectfully to us. I am pretty sure that if you emailed the maintainer
of the package and pointed out the facts to him, he would revert the
change.
Dude,
You really need to calm down. Twice now recently you have opened your
Secondly, this isnot a witch hunt. What is being done is that
a policy violation in older practice is being pointed
out. Alternatives are being discussed; a witch hunt would have
involved mass RC bug filings.
The TEX discussion is definitely in witchunt territory. Maintainers (on the
* Jarno Elonen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030419 21:05]:
lex is the better word, as it is not only known in English, but also
in most other (roman) Languages for law.
The first things lex brings in my mind are lexicon and parser generators
like 'flex'.
Well, that's for you as an computer
* Sami Haahtinen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
lex is the better word, as it is not only known in English, but also
in most other (roman) Languages for law.
Oh right, in finland there is a site finlex.fi, which is ofcouse
obviously a site that contains the finnish law. This is the first time
i've
Hello Martin and Robert,
can you please inform the list and me about the current status of the
mICQ code audit you two wanted to do? It's been a while and I didn't
hear anything further from you since then.
However, since it is my principle to finish the things I've started,
i'm writing this
* Matt Zimmerman
There was a more recent discussion about the same idea. A summary of the
goals:
- Don't try to parse every program's configuration file format
- Notice that a non-conffile, autogenerated configuration file has been
modified by the user, and don't lose their
On Sat, 2003-04-19 at 02:42, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Or, simply generate the file using debconf or whatever, and
call ucf directly; then ucf handles storing the md5sum and comparing
it for you seamlessly.
/me uses staying up too late as an excuse for that one...
signature.asc
all that was removed was *code* that gets compiled. If the maintainer
cannot arbitrarily change any code he wants, then it is not clear that
the program is DFSG-free.
Amen. Making part of the code immutable is not what I call free
software. What if I want to use parts of the code and I
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 08:24:21PM +0100, Matt Ryan wrote:
Now I hope you stop with your trolling and consider speaking
respectfully to us. I am pretty sure that if you emailed the maintainer
of the package and pointed out the facts to him, he would revert the
change.
Dude,
You
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You'll note that ReiserFS anticipated the GNU GPL V3 by including
clauses that forbid removal of credits in its license, and for a long
time I have been telling Stallman that he needs to get V3 of the GPL
On Sat, 2003-04-19 at 15:41, Tore Anderson wrote:
cat _eof /usr/share/fnord/managed-conffiles/fnord.cf
/var
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 11:13:59PM +0200, Anders Widman wrote:
all that was removed was *code* that gets compiled. If the maintainer
cannot arbitrarily change any code he wants, then it is not clear that
the program is DFSG-free.
Amen. Making part of the code immutable is not what I
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 08:17:16PM +0100, Matt Ryan wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
Or maybe realize that Joey might perhaps know what he's talking about
with regard to debconf ... you could go find the text of his talk at the
last Debian Conference if you like.
I realise he has an opinion on
all that was removed was *code* that gets compiled. If the maintainer
cannot arbitrarily change any code he wants, then it is not clear that
the program is DFSG-free.
Amen. Making part of the code immutable is not what I call free
software. What if I want to use parts of the code and I
On Sat, 2003-04-19 at 15:17, Matt Ryan wrote:
Or maybe realize that Joey might perhaps know what he's talking about
with regard to debconf ... you could go find the text of his talk at the
last Debian Conference if you like.
I realise he has an opinion on how things should be done.
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 08:17:16PM +0100, Matt Ryan wrote:
Or maybe realize that Joey might perhaps know what he's talking about
with regard to debconf ... you could go find the text of his talk at the
last Debian Conference if you like.
I realise he has an opinion on how things should be
#include hallo.h
* Ben Collins [Sat, Apr 19 2003, 05:09:58PM]:
Wow.. what an reaction :). Hans's original message was that the
credits were not included with the distributed files, nothing else.
Or am I completely mistaken?
Sorry, I had read into some other peoples comments
retitle 188800 ITA: gap4 -- computer algebra system
retitle 188803 ITA: gap4-doc-dvi -- DVI-Docu files for GAP4
retitle 188801 ITA: gap4-doc-html -- HTML-Documentation for GAP4
retitle 188798 ITA: gap4-doc-ps -- Postscript files for GAP4
retitle 188802 ITA: gap4-gdat -- Group data libraries for
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 09:41:58PM +0200, Tore Anderson wrote:
Hey, you just described how how ucf can be used.
I am aware of ucf. I described some things that ucf does, and some things
that it does not.
Lo and behold! We've just achieved your goals, using tools already in
the
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 09:40:07PM +0300, Jarno Elonen wrote:
Additionally, it might be a good idea to provide a shoreter list of authors
in
addition to the detailed one for easier copying to 'standard copyright files'
like 'copying' in Debian.
GNU folks generally use a Credits file
On Apr 19, 2003 16:55 -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
all that was removed was *code* that gets compiled. If the maintainer
cannot arbitrarily change any code he wants, then it is not clear that
the program is DFSG-free.
Amen. Making part of the code immutable is not what I call free
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 11:54:36PM +0200, Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
#include hallo.h
I cannot see what exactly he was talking about. The only serios thing
that has been removed in the Debian package is his spam (for
SuSEMP3.com) from the mkreiserfs executable code.
I
Hello,
I really don't know how to express what I want to say :) It has come
to my mind a few days ago when the Vera fonts were released to public.
My problem was: everybody was acting like mad, screaming at last,
some good fonts for linux!, whereas, as far as I remember, these
fonts lacks many
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 11:13:59PM +0200, Anders Widman wrote:
Wow.. what an reaction :). Hans's original message was that the
credits were not included with the distributed files, nothing else.
Or am I completely mistaken?
Who knows. The original message was an non-specific rant.
Mike
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 04:25:57PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Apr 19, 2003 16:55 -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
all that was removed was *code* that gets compiled. If the maintainer
cannot arbitrarily change any code he wants, then it is not clear that
the program is DFSG-free.
* Matt Zimmerman
Did you read my sample configuration scenario (xserver-xfree86),
or the threads that I referenced? They explain in more detail.
I did, and I can't see why ucf can't be done for this purpose,
too;
As I said, I am suggesting we mimick the conffile mechanism. conffiles
On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 01:05:18AM +0200, Tore Anderson wrote:
As far as I know, ucf is created exactly for this purpose; to mimic
dpkg's conffile handing. I assume you want to know if the configuration
file is unmodified prior to asking all the debconf questions, and making
use of
Op za 19-04-2003, om 22:51 schreef Lukas Geyer:
the issue seems to be the fix of #152547. If we are not allowed to
remove a screenful of advertising from the output of a program, then
this unduly restricts the freedom to distribute modified versions.
Uhm.
From the GPL, section 2:
c) If
On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 12:26:04AM +0200, Nikolai Prokoschenko wrote:
Thank you for your time, and you want to tell me I'm paranoid, don't
bother, it is not worth your time :) Better tell me what I might have
missed in the observing the subject.
A point. What *is* yours?
--
.''`. **
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 04:25:57PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
I'm sure all the FSF/Debian folks would be thrilled if someone changed the
code in [x]emacs to not output anything about the GPL at startup, or if vim
didn't include any info about helping Ugandan orphans.
I'm not saying that
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 08:34:06PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
binutils was changed around July 15 2002. Unfortunately the binutils
Changelog does not mention the change, nor does it say which releases
of binutils were issued around that time. Does upgrading to modutils
= 2.4.17 fix your
Andre Luis Lopes wrote:
Hmm, future plans really seems to be quite interesting. Is there a
mailing list dedicated to discussing debconf ideas and implementation I
could subscribe to ?
I saw that there's a link to an ancient Config mailing list at
kitenet, but it seems not to be active
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 03:14:34PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
- Provide 3-way merge functionality to incorporate changes without losing
modifications in the common case (I hear this is coming for conffiles as
well)
Great!
Actually what I would like (and is similar in ways to the above)
#include hallo.h
* Andrew Suffield [Sun, Apr 20 2003, 12:29:49AM]:
On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 12:26:04AM +0200, Nikolai Prokoschenko wrote:
Thank you for your time, and you want to tell me I'm paranoid, don't
bother, it is not worth your time :) Better tell me what I might have
missed in the
On Sun, 20 Apr 2003 09:54:53 +1000,
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
modutils = 2.4.17 is not available for woody. You
have two options: 2.4.15 for stable or 2.4.21 for unstable.
This means you would have to recompile 2.4.21.
Recompiling is easy, I have a version at
On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 01:24:09AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Op za 19-04-2003, om 22:51 schreef Lukas Geyer:
the issue seems to be the fix of #152547. If we are not allowed to
remove a screenful of advertising from the output of a program, then
this unduly restricts the freedom to
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 08:51:51PM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
Share an initscript between them, if that's possible?
No, that would cause more problems trying to rename
the existing amavisd-new conffile.
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 09:06:58AM +0200, Ernst Kloppenburg wrote:
yes. So maybe one of
* Matt Zimmerman
As was explained in detail, in order to do anything useful with that
information, it is necessary to be able to show the user the proposed
changes to the configuration file. It is completely unhelpful to say:
You have modified this configuration file, and it has also
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 03:50:23PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
I've read the changelog and the bug report closed by that earlier
change, and removing the version still makes no sense. If earlier
versions of debiandoc-sgml produce incorrect output, as reported, then
the versioned build-dep
On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 02:20:00AM +0200, Tore Anderson wrote:
* Matt Zimmerman
As was explained in detail, in order to do anything useful with that
information, it is necessary to be able to show the user the proposed
changes to the configuration file. It is completely unhelpful to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Sonntag, 20.04.03, um 01:06 Uhr (Europe/Zurich) schrieb Chris Cheney:
First of all emacs is pure bloat so who cares what it does... Vim has
one line about Ugandan orphans at startup, until now I didn't even
notice it was there. If had been pages of
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 08:07:03PM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote:
Please explain your reasons for removing the credits and attributions
from the reiserfs utilities in violation of our copyright.
It appears that, in all likelihood, the credits were inadvertently omitted,
and not intentionally
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
