* Arnd Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030705 17:14]:
> No, that's exactly the wrong way around. dpkg-libinfo (at least the
> current proposal) uses dpkg-architecture to find the target
> architecture and dpkg-architecture in turn calls gcc to get that.
> It makes sense this way, although dpkg-libinf
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 06 July 2003 11:27, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Koblinger Egmont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > >From time to time the question arises on different forums whether it is
> >
> > possible to efficiently use rsync with apt-get. Recent
On 6 Jul 2003, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Doogie is thinking about extending the Bittorrent protocol for use as
> apt-get method. I talked with him on irc about some design ideas and
> so far it looks realy good if he can get some mirrors to host it.
My plans are to require no additional software
On Sun, 6 Jul 2003 01:03:11 +1000, Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>ITP: google.com
Please do so and have it uploaded asap.
Greetings
Marc
--
-- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse
On Jul 05, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>* Before entering the Debian archive it would be nice if resolvconf
> were supported by all packages that currently futz with
> /etc/resolv.conf, including pump and bind.
If you mean that if should be mandatory to install this package on ever
On Sun, Jul 06, 2003 at 01:00:20AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> The simplest form would be:
>
> resolv.conf-register /etc/init.d/squid reload
Actually I think the simplest form would be to have /etc/resolvconf/notify.d
and run all scripts in there at the relevant times, with any necessary
ar
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 11:22:06PM +0200, Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 11:26:44AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > > Could the dh_undocumented programm allways fail with an error "Don't
> > > use me" as the next step? That way all new uploads will be f
Koblinger Egmont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> >From time to time the question arises on different forums whether it is
> possible to efficiently use rsync with apt-get. Recently there has been a
> thread here on debian-devel and it was also mentioned in Debian Weekly News
> June 24th, 20
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 11:56:41PM +0200, Koblinger Egmont wrote:
> order of files
>
> dpkg-deb puts the files in the .deb package in random order. I hate this
> misfeature since it's hard to eye-grep anything from ``dpkg -L'' or F3 in
> mc. We run ``dpkg-deb --build'' using the sortdir library ([
On Sat, 2003-07-05 at 17:22, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 04:35:09PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > So, I assume that with that you mean that we have "sacrificed one of our
> > core values" as well? My. All this sacrifice is making me hungry. :P
>
> Damn. That means some OTHER
On Sun, Jul 06, 2003 at 12:33:52AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> There are borderline cases, such as the GFDL or free works in
> >> non-editable formats (PS, PDF, in some cases even HTML), or licenses
> >> or other documents of perceived legal r
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [Please direct any XFree86-specific followup to debian-x.]
>
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 08:46:00AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > Yet another reasons for wanting to decouple installation and
> > configuration is if some hardware company (such as VA^H
"Artur R. Czechowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 11:26:44AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > > Could the dh_undocumented programm allways fail with an error "Don't
> > > use me" as the next step? That way all new uploads will be forced to
> > > car
Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Summary
> ~~~
> Resolvconf is a proposed standard framework for updating the
> system's information about currently available nameservers.
>
> Most importantly, it manages /etc/resolv.conf , but it does
> a bit more than that.
You should think of a
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 11:57:35PM +0200, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> > > E2tools is a simple set of GPL'ed utilities to read, write, and
> > > manipulate files in an ext2/ext3 filesystem.
> >
> > please excuse my ignorance - what would be the advantage of these
> > tools over the core file utilities w
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> There are borderline cases, such as the GFDL or free works in
>> non-editable formats (PS, PDF, in some cases even HTML), or licenses
>> or other documents of perceived legal relevance.
>
> I have argued on debian-legal that licenses as applied to sp
Hi,
I accidentally deleted all the messages in my debian-user folder
. However, I do remember enough of your original post to
(hopefully) enlighten you. I have also done the nasty cross-post
thing to -devel because I conclude with a thought on how to get the
package pool living up to its potenti
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 01:01:14AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Thanks to Matt Zimmerman and Joe Drew, apt-listchanges will now display
> NEWS.Debian entries for upgraded packages. They're displayed before the
> regular changelog entries, and Matt plans to later let it be configured
> to only display
Hi,
>From time to time the question arises on different forums whether it is
possible to efficiently use rsync with apt-get. Recently there has been a
thread here on debian-devel and it was also mentioned in Debian Weekly News
June 24th, 2003. However, I only saw different small parts of a huge an
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 05:22:33PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Mark Brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030705 16:05]:
> > On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 02:56:30PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
>
> > > OK, so basically you think ftpmaster people should spend review each ITP
> > > for
> > > such global rejection
Ralf Treinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > E2tools is a simple set of GPL'ed utilities to read, write, and
> > manipulate files in an ext2/ext3 filesystem.
>
> please excuse my ignorance - what would be the advantage of these
> tools over the core file utilities which use the VFS layer?
You do
[Please direct any XFree86-specific followup to debian-x.]
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 08:46:00AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Yet another reasons for wanting to decouple installation and
> configuration is if some hardware company (such as VA^H^H Emperor
> Linux) wishes to ship Debian pre-installed
Andreas Barth wrote:
> Marc is doing it the other way: He want an interface to reject a
> package before substantial work has been spent on it. So there
> shouldn't be this conflict any more, which would be a good thing.
Isn't this why ITPs are usually CCed to debian-devel?
Look what has been done
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 04:21:45PM +0200, Julien LEMOINE wrote:
> I will upload a stunnel4 package and a stunnel with Epoch tomorrow.
Excellent decision. :) Thank you.
--
G. Branden Robinson| The key to being a Southern
Debian GNU/Linux | Baptist:
Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 10:14:10AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
>
>>Debugging anti-virus software should be done by the maintainers thereof.
>>Why would a user need this?
> i used it many times, for example to find out which archives are checked and
> which not. In fact
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:16:07PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
> Fortunately, the situation you describe is unlikely to occur because few
> people are perverse enough to make their software free but their
> documentation very non-free.
/me falls into a fit of coughing
*COUGH*h
*COUGH*t
*COUGH*t
*C
Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> What's about dh_undocumented looking like:
> --
> #!/bin/bash
> if [ $FORCE_UNDOCUMENTED = 1 ]; then
> echo You are still using dh_undocumented which is obsoleted.
> echo Stop it.
> else
> echo You are using obsoleted dh_undocumented in your debian
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:53:56AM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
> Except for the title, the DFSG is very content-agnostic. It can be
> applied equally well to software, fiction, nonfiction, images, what have
> you.
I think that's a feature. Apparently, some people think it's a bug.
--
G. Brande
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 03:53:55AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 02:34:56PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> | The Debian Social Contract says "Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software".
> | If there are things "in Debian" that are "not free" or "not software",
> | then we
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 05:24:21PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-05
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: e2tools
> Version : 0.0.13
> Upstream Author : Keith Sheffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://home.e
Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Thomas Viehmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030705 09:35]:
>
>>Marc Haber wrote:
>>
Well that's the purpose of ITP-bugs against wnpp I think, because
they are CC'd to debian-devel for public review.
>>>Please show me a single ITP bug number where ftpmaster has said "this
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 02:03:11PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Debian really needs a separate policy for works which are not
> >> software.
> >
> > We could have a policy for non-software, but it should still exclude
> > non-free things. What y
On Saturday 05 July 2003 19:44, Bart Trojanowski wrote:
> On amd64, we currently have a biarch-gcc that builds 32bit binaries by
> default, and 64bit ones with a -m64 option. Coding debian/rules for this
> is pretty trivial but still requires some ugly architecture specific
> hacks in each debian/
Howdy,
The boost libraries have excellent documentation in HTML format.
Unfortunately, there is no "make install" equivalent to copy the files
into a nice place. Nor is it as simple as "cp -a docs ..." as the
files are intermixed with the source code. But there is a top-level
"index.htm" file,
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 04:35:09PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> So, I assume that with that you mean that we have "sacrificed one of our
> core values" as well? My. All this sacrifice is making me hungry. :P
Damn. That means some OTHER deity has been intercepting the products of
ritual slaughter o
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 11:26:44AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > Could the dh_undocumented programm allways fail with an error "Don't
> > use me" as the next step? That way all new uploads will be forced to
> > care.
> No. Breaking 400+ packages so our uses cannot build them
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 03:54:20PM -0500, Joshua Haberman wrote:
> * Branden Robinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 01:42:01PM -0500, Joshua Haberman wrote:
> > > I think non-free removal will seem more radical if it means that
> > > Debian will no longer distribute RFCs on
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:13:09PM -0500, Joshua Haberman wrote:
> And I am arguing that there is no reason not to endorse RFCs just as
> we endorse license texts. That last sentence is a personal judgement
> that I would guess many Debian developers would find agreement with.
I wouldn't.
The be
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 10:05:59AM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-07-04 00:03]:
> > Please stop saying rude things like "Please check " to the people
> > who are trying to explain the state of play to you, because they are
> > right: it has been like this fo
Am Samstag, 5. Juli 2003 21.51 schrieb Thomas Hood:
> Summary
> ~~~
> Resolvconf is a proposed standard framework for updating the
> system's information about currently available nameservers.
Cool, I really like this idea.
> the need to supply resolver information
> to DNS cache programs such
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 08:51:27PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 04:43:56PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > > Could the dh_undocumented programm allways fail with an error "Don't
> > > use me" as the next step? That way a
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 08:26:43PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> > OK, so basically you think ftpmaster people should spend review each ITP
> > for such global rejection reasons, then? You can't expect this to happen
> > in any remotely timely fashion, at least not with this many ftpmasters
> > a
Summary
~~~
Resolvconf is a proposed standard framework for updating the
system's information about currently available nameservers.
Most importantly, it manages /etc/resolv.conf , but it does
a bit more than that.
Background and rationale
During the long discussion
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 08:46:00AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 05:05:01PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > The point of decoupling installation and configuration is to let the admin
> > choose which of these scenarios happen, instead of the distribution or
> > the maintaine
Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 04:43:56PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > Could the dh_undocumented programm allways fail with an error "Don't
> > use me" as the next step? That way all new uploads will be forced to
> > care.
>
> this will still create fa
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 01:44:31PM -0400, Bart Trojanowski wrote:
> On amd64, we currently have a biarch-gcc that builds 32bit binaries by
> default, and 64bit ones with a -m64 option. Coding debian/rules for this
> is pretty trivial but still requires some ugly architecture specific
> hacks in ea
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-05
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: png2ico
Version : 20021208
Upstream Author : Matthias Benkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.winterdrache.de/freeware/png2ico/
* License : GPL
Description :
On Saturday 05 July 2003 09:26, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Jul 2003 03:01:14 +0200, Yven Johannes Leist
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I find that to be a very unfair accusation, since at least to my eyes
> > there was nothing especially unfriendly, unreasonable or otherwise
> > criticizable
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 01:44:31PM -0400, Bart Trojanowski wrote:
> I propose obtaining the gcc specific options from a dpkg-libinfo
> (introduced by Gerhard Tonn's lib64 patches) or dpkg-architecture.
> debian/rules can query for said options, and use them in order to build
> for a given host arch
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 04:43:56PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Could the dh_undocumented programm allways fail with an error "Don't
> use me" as the next step? That way all new uploads will be forced to
> care.
this will still create fail to build bugs for no good reason.
Greetings
Bernd
--
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 02:56:30PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> OK, so basically you think ftpmaster people should spend review each ITP for
> such global rejection reasons, then? You can't expect this to happen in any
> remotely timely fashion, at least not with this many ftpmasters and this
> many
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 10:14:10AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Debugging anti-virus software should be done by the maintainers thereof.
> Why would a user need this?
i used it many times, for example to find out which archives are checked and
which not. In fact I even already wrote bugs for AV
On amd64, we currently have a biarch-gcc that builds 32bit binaries by
default, and 64bit ones with a -m64 option. Coding debian/rules for this
is pretty trivial but still requires some ugly architecture specific
hacks in each debian/rules.
These hacks can be troublesome if the default compile ta
On 2003-07-05T11:36:31-0600 (Saturday), Shaun Jackman wrote:
> Also, I can't seem to upgrade or install the new packages. What have
> I done wrong here?
Blind shot:
$ apt-cache policy
$ man apt_preferences
And doesn't this question belong to users?
-towo
--
`But When I Am Off Duty I Will Gla
I'm using the following APT line
deb http://download.kde.org/stable/3.1.2/Debian stable main
When I update, the Release file is ignored by apt-get. Why is this?
Also, I can't seem to upgrade or install the new packages. What have
I done wrong here?
Thanks,
Shaun
# apt-get update
Hit h
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 05:22:33PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Nobody said that ftpmaster must see all problems from ITP. But - every
> problem that is seen at ITP time saves volunteer time for more usefull
> things.
That actually appeared to be exactly what Marc was asking for when he
started
Dear Sir,
* Martin Sobek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030705 17:57]:
> You place your page on address www.sobek-sobek.com unlawfully!
No we did not.
> Remove it immediately or you risk juridical prosecution.
Please take a closer look at this page, or at least read the first
paragraph:
"This is a pl
Le sam 05/07/2003 à 17:57, Martin Sobek a écrit :
> You place your page on address www.sobek-sobek.com unlawfully! Remove it
> immediately or you risk juridical prosecution.
>
> > Sobek-Sobek.com q analytic service q [EMAIL PROTECTED] q +420605921227
> > q Bryksova 27, 19800 Prague 9, CZ
Can you
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 01:02:13PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 10:14:10 +0200, Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >Marc Haber wrote:
> >> Because it makes debugging anti-virus software harder, and forces
> >> maintainers of anti-virus packages to have their own means
You place your page on address www.sobek-sobek.com unlawfully! Remove it
immediately or you risk juridical prosecution.
> Sobek-Sobek.com q analytic service q [EMAIL PROTECTED] q +420605921227
> q Bryksova 27, 19800 Prague 9, CZ
>
>
<>
> >Uh, this is not a problem with autoconf. It is a problem with upstream
> > calling AC_CHECK_COMPILERS (which checks for all compilers) and ignoring
> > the results thereof.
>
> ok. i'll have it sent upstream.
FYI, all upstream probably needs to do is update their admin/ directory with
a f
also sprach Sam Hocevar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.05.1718 +0200]:
>Uh, this is not a problem with autoconf. It is a problem with upstream
> calling AC_CHECK_COMPILERS (which checks for all compilers) and ignoring
> the results thereof.
ok. i'll have it sent upstream.
--
Please do not CC m
* Mark Brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030705 16:05]:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 02:56:30PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > OK, so basically you think ftpmaster people should spend review each ITP for
> > such global rejection reasons, then? You can't expect this to happen in any
> > remotely timely fashi
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-05
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: e2tools
Version : 0.0.13
Upstream Author : Keith Sheffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://home.earthlink.net/~k_sheff/sw/e2tools/index.html
* License : GPL
Descripti
Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> > > OTOH, maybe dh_undocumented should be removed from debhelper with prior
> > > notice? "This program does nothing and should no longer be used."
> >
> > As a rule I try to avoid causing less than
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003, martin f krafft wrote:
> ./configure: line 1: g++: command not found
> configure:21244: $? = 127
>
> This is, IMHO, a problem with autoconf, as it should really check
> for g++ first.
Uh, this is not a problem with autoconf. It is a problem with upstream
calling AC_CHEC
also sprach Ben Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.05.1629 +0200]:
> Hmm.. is it possible to post the section of config.log where the
> error occurs?
I had read this file upside down, inside out, from left to right and
right to left. I found nothing. This time I immediately spotted the
problem:
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 09:01:25AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 17:32:29 +0200, Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:51:49PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> >> In the past years, I have found it annoying that the eicar anti-virus
> >> testfile is not avai
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> > OTOH, maybe dh_undocumented should be removed from debhelper with prior
> > notice? "This program does nothing and should no longer be used."
>
> As a rule I try to avoid causing less than 469 FTBFS bugs with any given
> chang
> problem status: still unsolved.
Hmm.. is it possible to post the section of config.log where the error
occurs?
b.
also sprach Ben Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.05.1556 +0200]:
> ./configure --with-qt-dir=/usr/share/qt3
i had
--with-qt-includes=/usr/include/qt3
--with-qt-libraries=/usr/lib
in there, but I still get the same error if I replace that with
what you wrote above... i can also write /
> checking for Qt... configure: error: Qt (>= Qt 3.0.2) (library
> qt-mt) not found.
Try
./configure --with-qt-dir=/usr/share/qt3
and see if that helps. If it does then upstream is using a very old
admin/ directory which should probably be updated.
If the compilation then breaks becau
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 02:56:30PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> OK, so basically you think ftpmaster people should spend review each ITP for
> such global rejection reasons, then? You can't expect this to happen in any
> remotely timely fashion, at least not with this many ftpmasters and this
> man
Folks,
I am near explosion. I am trying to sponsor the kmymoney2 package
found at ftp://shakti.ath.cx/debian/kde3.1-sid/kmymoney2 , but
I cannot build it. I am not a KDE user, so that may be the root of
the problem.
Here is the error I see all the time:
checking for Qt... configure: error: Qt
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 02:10:12PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Stephen Stafford]
> > We have a commitment that everything in Debian main is Free. Since
> > the RFC license is NOT Free, it can't be in main. This does NOT
> > imply anything about the usefulness of RFCs, merely about their
* Sam Hocevar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030705 14:50]:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2003, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > is it usefull/ok to close old RFP/ITP-entrys? "old" means for me more
> > than year since the last mail for ITP, and 2 years for RFP. Of course
> > I would write mail first whether the package is sti
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 01:17:50PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> The discussion is only about global reasons, as "wrong license", "we
> don't need this package" or simmilar. This reasons could be discussed
> before making the package quite as easy as afterwards.
OK, so basically you think ftpmaste
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 02:10:12PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Stephen Stafford]
> > We have a commitment that everything in Debian main is Free. Since
> > the RFC license is NOT Free, it can't be in main. This does NOT
> > imply anything about the usefulness of RFCs, merely about their
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 05:05:01PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> The point of decoupling installation and configuration is to let the admin
> choose which of these scenarios happen, instead of the distribution or
> the maintainer. The first is appropriate if you're doing installs of many
> systems
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003, Andreas Barth wrote:
> is it usefull/ok to close old RFP/ITP-entrys? "old" means for me more
> than year since the last mail for ITP, and 2 years for RFP. Of course
> I would write mail first whether the package is still wanted
I do not think old RFPs should be closed, at
On Sat, 5 Jul 2003 14:05:55 +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>is it usefull/ok to close old RFP/ITP-entrys? "old" means for me more
>than year since the last mail for ITP, and 2 years for RFP. Of course
>I would write mail first whether the package is still wanted or if the
>packagin
Hi,
is it usefull/ok to close old RFP/ITP-entrys? "old" means for me more
than year since the last mail for ITP, and 2 years for RFP. Of course
I would write mail first whether the package is still wanted or if the
packaging is still in order, and only close if no answer for a month.
Comments?
C
[Stephen Stafford]
> We have a commitment that everything in Debian main is Free. Since
> the RFC license is NOT Free, it can't be in main. This does NOT
> imply anything about the usefulness of RFCs, merely about their
> Freedom.
There seem to be two ways of interpreting the social contract. O
* Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030705 12:05]:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 11:08:04AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030705 10:50]:
> > > On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:51:49PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> > > > Additionally, I would like to seriously propose establ
On Sat, 5 Jul 2003 10:43:35 +0100, Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>That's pointless, I think. If I were an ftpmaster I would not be willing
>to render an opinion on a package before I actually saw the package,
>especially if I were going to be held to that opinion later (and, if I
>wasn't,
On Sat, 5 Jul 2003 11:48:24 +0200, Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Is there a copy somewhere else?
Yes.
Greetings
Marc
--
-- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Karlsruhe
On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 10:14:10 +0200, Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Marc Haber wrote:
>> Because it makes debugging anti-virus software harder, and forces
>> maintainers of anti-virus packages to have their own means of
>> obtaining eicar.com for testing purposes
>Debugging anti-virus s
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-05
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: tkgamma
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Author : Pixel Fairy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://pixel.fairyden.net/tkgamma/
* License : GPL
Description : A simple color c
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 09:26:17AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> How would you react if somebody called work you did and that took a
> few hours "silly"? And Mr. Troup's appreciation of my work is
> appropriately named in the directory name the package sits in at the
> moment.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/org/
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 11:08:04AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030705 10:50]:
> > On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:51:49PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> > > Additionally, I would like to seriously propose establishing a
> > > pre-upload interface to ftpmaster so that a
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:36:30PM +0800, ZHAO Wei wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-07-03 at 14:47, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> > I remember vaguely that there used to be a licence problem with
> > Moscow ML. What is its exact licence now?
>
> Under the mosml/copyright directory, there are three license files:
>
* Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030705 10:50]:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:51:49PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> > Additionally, I would like to seriously propose establishing a
> > pre-upload interface to ftpmaster so that a developer could learn that
> > he is writing a package pending rejecti
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 02:30:47PM -0500, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 07:36:13PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Bullshit. It is common for RFCs to be revised over time, and
> > formulated into new documents. This license prohibits agencies other
> > than the IETF from revising
* Thomas Viehmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030705 09:35]:
> Marc Haber wrote:
> >>Well that's the purpose of ITP-bugs against wnpp I think, because
> >>they are CC'd to debian-devel for public review.
> > Please show me a single ITP bug number where ftpmaster has said "this
> > package will not go into
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 199197 libgnome2-common
Bug#199197: bsdgames debian X menu entries depend on gnome-terminal, not in
testing (Sarge)
Bug reassigned from package `general' to `libgnome2-common'.
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:51:49PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> It is my opinion that it would be a good idea to have that installer
> package in Debian. Heck, if I wouldn't have that opinion, I wouldn't
> have spent some of my time to build that package.
>
> Additionally, I would like to seriously
Marc Haber wrote:
> Because it makes debugging anti-virus software harder, and forces
> maintainers of anti-virus packages to have their own means of
> obtaining eicar.com for testing purposes
Debugging anti-virus software should be done by the maintainers thereof.
Why would a user need this?
> Sa
> How would you react if somebody called work you did and that took a
> few hours "silly"?
In the sweetest way possible, if all you lost was a few hours then I
don't see why you're (apparently) so very upset.
Many times I have seen contributions worth days or weeks of work
dismissed from softwar
On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 16:05:39 +0100, James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Given the current state of affairs, I am pretty sure that such a
>> package will be rejected by ftpmaster. They pretty sure reject almost
>> everything I upload.
>
>Since you didn't
Marc Haber wrote:
>>Well that's the purpose of ITP-bugs against wnpp I think, because
>>they are CC'd to debian-devel for public review.
> Please show me a single ITP bug number where ftpmaster has said "this
> package will not go into the archive, I will reject it on upload".
There's numerous ITPs
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
