[Going on with the mass-CC]
El día 04 jun 2003, Andreas Tille escribía:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Ben Armstrong wrote:
>
> > To elaborate: I considered building all junior-* packages from a single
> > source, but instead opted to build them individually from a minimal package
> > template. This a
Tom Badran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The latest libfreetype6 (as of this morning) seems to slight degrade font
> rendering for me (this is an LCD screen with sub pixel hinting). For instance
<...>
Please do a Bug report about this.
TIA,
Otavio
--
O T A V I OS A L V A D O R
--
The latest libfreetype6 (as of this morning) seems to slight degrade font
rendering for me (this is an LCD screen with sub pixel hinting). For instance
the @ symbol under the Arial font looks slightly smudged, and there is a hint
of blue on the bottom left suggesting the sub pixel hinting is sli
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2003 08:24:38 +0200, Marcelo E Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> My point is that given the way the question is written, its
>> priority and default answer seem to counter its purpose.
[...]
>Given that were the defaults set diffe
On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> To elaborate: I considered building all junior-* packages from a single
> source, but instead opted to build them individually from a minimal package
> template. This allows me to de-couple the release cycle for each meta
> package from each other. You
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 02:12:55AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Given that were the defaults set differently this would be a
> serious bug, perhaps that says something about the purpose.
Come again?
Marcelo
On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 05:10:24PM +1200, Corrin Lakeland wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 13:59, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> > If we put the Packages file under some sort of version control [...]
> You could use cvsup rather than cvs to reduce load further. But ideally
> you'd just use rsync and make the
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 21:07:00 +1000, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> OK. Let me ask you this question: what if the maintainer uploads a
>> new upstream release which happens to fix bug #xxx, and then sends a
>> message by hand to [EMAIL PROT
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 21:07:00 +1000, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> OK. Let me ask you this question: what if the maintainer uploads a
>> new upstream release which happens to fix bug #xxx, and then sends a
>> message by hand to [EMAIL PROT
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 05:05:04PM +1000, Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Martin Schulze wrote:
> >Flaming with Jamie Zawinski.
>
> Slow news day, Joey?
I found it highly entertaining.
Michael
--
marcus: You *are* a dangerous person to distract. I've seen
some
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030604 08:20]:
> On Sun, 1 Jun 2003 21:50:45 +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > You should really accept the decision of a package maintainer.
> Why so, if they are not doing the right thing?
In real life there a three categories:
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 07:42:05 +1000, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 09:07:00PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
>>>
OK. Let me ask you this question: what if the maintainer
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 03:24:39AM +0200, Alexander Neumann wrote:
> While digging around in the calendar-files at infodrom.org I
> suddenly realized that Debian will have it's 10th birthday at
> August, 16th (according to the calendar.infodrom.debian file at
> http://www.infodrom.org/projects/cale
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 12:04:03AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> Having a single "debconf" was a good idea when it was first started
> in Bordeaux. Since then things have changed, there is more apparent
> demand for conferences and more reluctance to travel.
It appears that I not be in the major
Jason Pepas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> dh_make does a good job of providing reasonable defaults, with one
> exception I have encountered.
[...]
> finally, I propose an addition be made to the new maintainer's guide
> to point out that
[...]
> again, I am new to all this, so constructive cr
On Wed, 4 Jun 2003 08:24:38 +0200, Marcelo E Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 01:01:18AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> It is an either or situation -- give us your configuration files,
>> or forever lose out on any configuration change the maintainers do,
>> even t
On Wed, 04 Jun 2003 00:34:43 -0500, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> This is not dotting i'sand crossing t's. this is information
> that is inherent to a changelog; and writing poer changelogs must
> be encouraged.
*Sigh*. s/poer/proper/
manoj
--
"Oh what wo
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-06-05
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: kwifimanager
Version : 1.0.2
Upstream Author : Stefan Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://kwifimanager.sourceforge.net
* License : GPL
Description : the wirele
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 12:34:43AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > I read that entry as "the new upstream version fixes the problem
> > reported in #193497", and looking at the BTS that is exactly its
> > meaning.
>
> I thinik a good changelog should not require one to go off to
This one time, at band camp, Martin Schulze wrote:
>Flaming with Jamie Zawinski.
Slow news day, Joey?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.debian.org/~jaq
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 01:01:18AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> It is an either or situation -- give us your configuration
> files, or forever lose out on any configuration change the
> maintainers do, even though that shall break your packages.
Sure, I wasn't claiming it's perfec
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:18:03 +0200, Marcelo E Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> So the gist of that text is: "debian packages can manage the
> configuration file by themselves, it's a good idea if they do and
> there's a chance something will break unless you really really know
> what you a
On Sun, 01 Jun 2003 19:13:29 +1000, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Adrian Bridgett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Changes: tkdiff (1:3.08-4) unstable; urgency=low .
>>> * lintian fixes
>>
>> Issues that lintian reports are, in most cases,
On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 22:29:56 +1000, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 09:07:00PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
>>> what if the maintainer uploads a new upstream release which
>>> happens to fix bug #xxx, and then sends a message by
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003 21:50:45 +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> You should really accept the decision of a package maintainer.
Why so, if they are not doing the right thing?
> However, it really might be better to put a longer statement into
> changelog. _But_ it's certainl
On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 07:42:05 +1000, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 09:07:00PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
>>
>>> OK. Let me ask you this question: what if the maintainer uploads
>>> a new upstream release which happens to
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:29:24 +0200, Marcelo E Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Is this a new sport in #d-d or something like that?
Asking for proper changelogs is a sport I can warm up to.
> I read that entry as "the new upstream version fixes the problem
> reported in #193497", a
On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 07:39:38 +1000, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> So what? The *Debian* changelog is for Debian changes only. It's
> not there for listing upstream changes, copyright information, or
> who your favourite TV personality is.
A change that closes a bug is a signifi
On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 21:07:00 +1000, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> OK. Let me ask you this question: what if the maintainer uploads a
> new upstream release which happens to fix bug #xxx, and then sends a
> message by hand to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message "This
> bug is fixed in ups
On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 03:01:26PM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> As far as I can tell /etc/menu, /usr/lib/menu, and /usr/share/menu will go
> away once we start using the desktop entry spec and /usr/share/applications
> directory. Anything natively supporting the desktop spec won't have any
> reas
On Tue, 27 May 2003 11:04:07 +0200, Arnd Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> The order in which the patches are applied should in general not be
> significant. If it is, it should be stated in the patch
> description. I assumed that the 'Depends' tag is semantically more a
> 'Pre-Depends', right
31 matches
Mail list logo
