Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just answer the questions.
Well there seem to be a lot of them. And a lot of them don't seem to have
default answers. Or in some cases any reasonable answer given my setup.
> It doesn't insist on "managing" your XF86Config-4 file now, it just in
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 09:42:42PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 21:25, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> > I think this should be clearly discussed.
>
> Just to prevent any confusion I'll just point out that
> the rant you quoted was authored by Eray Ozkural.
Thanks, you saved me from re
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 02:00:42PM -0800, Ivan Jelic wrote:
> is there any chance for gnome 2.4 to be included in sarge? maybe as
> option? which desktop enviroments are you planing to include in sarge?
Currently as far as I know Gnome 2.2, KDE 3.1.4 and XFCE 4.0 will be in
sarge. There were some
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 04:01:47AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 09:42:42PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> | Just to prevent any confusion I'll just point out that
> | the rant you quoted was authored by Eray Ozkural.
>
> Hmm. I've heard that name mentioned before on this m
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:21:39PM -0400, Gregory Stark wrote:
> I've always managed my own XF86Config, and the debian packages have for the
> most part stayed out of my way. How come now I can't upgrade without answering
> dozens of questions about my graphics card and monitor etc. I've been stuck
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:04:32PM -0500, Zed Pobre wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 03:40:18AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > The new version of libXrender moves from /usr/X11R6/lib to /usr/lib
> > which has already started to cause build failures... :\ I am not
> > certain if Branden plans to mo
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:48:48AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> It appears all of kde has it included as well. Does this happen to have
> anything to do with the rpath'ing issue that some of the XFree libs are
> causing as well? (iirc it was xrender)
Xrender is not an XFree86 library anymore.
htt
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 01:54:13PM +0200, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > The term "metapackage" is a gratuitous label, here. There is a real
> > binary package (as opposed to a virtual package) in the archive named
> > "gcc", which comes from the gcc-defaults source package; and
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 11:50:01AM +0200, Ron Rademaker wrote:
> I got the following situation:
> A server (debian stable) running a number of domains
> For each domain I've create a group, and everybody that has
> something to do with this domain is in that group
> I want everybody in
DEAR,你好！！
我司现有德国（BURKLE）PCB专业层压机组一台（一热一冷） 七成新，因生产转型，
现低价转让！
有意者请联系 013902945673 温生
is there any chance for gnome 2.4 to be included in sarge? maybe as
option? which desktop enviroments are you planing to include in sarge?
--
Ivan Jelic
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service
Well... After a little bit more research I found a good email about this
in debian mentors.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2003/debian-mentors-200307/msg00252.html
Maybe this thread is not needed anymore. Sorry.
[]'s
daniel
Em Qua, 2003-10-08 às 16:25, Daniel Ruoso escreveu:
> I think
Thomas Hood, 2003-10-08 22:00:17 +0200 :
> On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 21:25, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
>> I think this should be clearly discussed.
>
> Just to prevent any confusion I'll just point out that
> the rant you quoted was authored by Eray Ozkural.
I'll add that since I posted [1], [2] and [3], I
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 04:01:47 +0800
Cameron Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 09:42:42PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> | On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 21:25, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> | > I think this should be clearly discussed.
> |
> | Just to prevent any confusion I'll just point ou
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 10:13:53PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
> And if you want to discusse anyway then please do it on
> debian-projects og maybe rather debian-couriosa where it belongs. I
> has nothing to do with developing Debian (the distribution).
Why even waste debian bandwidth on it? Adv
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 21:09:31 +0200, Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hello Debian policy, Ancient policy [1] frowned upon running
> automated check of runtime behavior of packages in debian/rules to
> save time for the autobuilders, and say that such test should be run
> by maintainers m
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 04:01:47 +0800, Cameron Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 09:42:42PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
>> On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 21:25, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
>> > I think this should be clearly discussed.
>>
>> Just to prevent any confusion I'll just point out th
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 10:26:03 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > Santiago Vila wrote:
> >> Does anyone have a good estimation about the number of packages
> >> which currently do this? (That is, assume *blindly* that /usr/doc
> >> exists).
Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 21:25, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
>> I think this should be clearly discussed.
> Just to prevent any confusion I'll just point out that
> the rant you quoted was authored by Eray Ozkural.
And to immediately stop the any discussion:
-
He wanted to take over some of my packages and sent an email to
debian-kde, but not to my Debian address. By the time I had learned of
what he was doing, he had already created his own packages. He didn't
know how to work with other people.
If he was a developer, then he probably would have hijack
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 09:42:42PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> | On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 21:25, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> | > I think this should be clearly discussed.
> |
> | Just to prevent any confusion I'll just point out that
> | the rant you quoted was
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 12:50, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Colour me /clueless, but triggered by DWN, I tried
> teleport, without much avail:
Note that DWN simply picks up new packages; maintainers aren't asked
whether they want them advertised or not. An initial teleport package
has been in unstable
Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think this should be clearly discussed.
He calls named people village idiots and morons and acuses peoples of
'poor rhetoric'. I don't think that kind of stuff deserves to be
discussed anywhere.
And if you want to discusse anyway then please do it on
Thanks Ben, hadn't seen this thread.
-Thom
It's amazing how problem solving here is equated with "actively
waiting for problems to go away".
I wanted to improve Debian, but apparently there is no interest.
Herbert gets to pollute the kernel-source all he wants because
apparently noone gives a flying food.
I am thus closing the issue for m
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 09:42:42PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
| On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 21:25, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
| > I think this should be clearly discussed.
|
| Just to prevent any confusion I'll just point out that
| the rant you quoted was authored by Eray Ozkural.
Hmm. I've heard that name m
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 10:08:07 -0700
Ben Gertzfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alioth has been a terrific resource for me in this regard. Using it and
> dpatch, I'm easily able to co-maintain packages, maintain bugs, and keep
> releases in check with multiple developers.
>
> I'd highly recomme
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 21:25, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> I think this should be clearly discussed.
Just to prevent any confusion I'll just point out that
the rant you quoted was authored by Eray Ozkural.
--
Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I think this should be clearly discussed.
Original link at:
http://www.advogato.org/article/716.html
Debian and Democracy
Posted 7 Oct 2003 by exa (Master)
Two unrelated words. From experience.
Now, what is the problem with debian? It's because debian claims to be
democratic, but it isn't. It
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 10:26:03 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
>> Does anyone have a good estimation about the number of packages
>> which currently do this? (That is, assume *blindly* that /usr/doc
>> exists).
> Packages that
> a) don't use debconf ( < 5%)
> b) h
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 04:58:34PM +0200, Henning Moll wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 October 2003 13:27, Colin Watson wrote:
> > No, plain .so links are only needed for build-time linking, and
> > therefore live in development packages.
>
> Thank you for that information!
>
> But now i am in a bit of
> I got the following situation:
> A server (debian stable) running a number of domains
> For each domain I've create a group, and everybody that has
> something to do with this domain is in that group
> I want everybody in the group to be able to change the website of
> that domain, a
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
There are some developers who are clearly too busy to maintain their
packages properly, but yet cannot be considered inactive enough so
that their packages should be given away. I'd like to have a group of
people who are willing to help those developers out by co-maintainin
I've always managed my own XF86Config, and the debian packages have for the
most part stayed out of my way. How come now I can't upgrade without answering
dozens of questions about my graphics card and monitor etc. I've been stuck at
this version for a while since I always C-c the configuration an
* Joey Hess
| a) don't use debconf ( < 5%)
s/debconf/debhelper/, I presume?
--
Tollef Fog Heen,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' :
There are some developers who are clearly too busy to maintain their
packages properly, but yet cannot be considered inactive enough so
that their packages should be given away. I'd like to have a group of
people who are willing to help those developers out by co-maintaining
their packages for a w
Hi!
Am 2003-10-08 16:58 +0200 schrieb Henning Moll:
> But now i am in a bit of trouble: i packaged a woody backport of k3b.
> This programm tries to dlopen (=at runtime) 'libcdda_paranoia.so'. But
> that is only possible if package 'libcdparanoia0-dev' is installed.
> This would mean a dependen
Henning Moll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But now i am in a bit of trouble: i packaged a woody backport of k3b.
> This programm tries to dlopen (=at runtime) 'libcdda_paranoia.so'. But
> that is only possible if package 'libcdparanoia0-dev' is installed.
> This would mean a dependency to a dev
On Wednesday 08 October 2003 16:58, Henning Moll wrote:
> Is this a bug in k3b? Should k3b try to dlopen 'libcdda_paranoia.so.0'
> instead? Is there a standard for so-naming (which is respected by all/
> most Gnu/Linux distributions)?
Shared object files that are private to a project are usually n
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 04:58:34PM +0200, Henning Moll wrote:
> But now i am in a bit of trouble: i packaged a woody backport of k3b.
> This programm tries to dlopen (=at runtime) 'libcdda_paranoia.so'. But
> that is only possible if package 'libcdparanoia0-dev' is installed.
> This would mean a
Hello,
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 01:46:18PM -0500, Graham Wilson wrote:
> Not in Debian at least. XML catalog support is a work-in-progress at
> this point. Last time I checked, neither docbook-xsl or docbook-xml
> registered themselves using update-xmlcatalog.
>
> I've been meaning to write some p
On Wednesday 08 October 2003 13:27, Colin Watson wrote:
> No, plain .so links are only needed for build-time linking, and
> therefore live in development packages.
Thank you for that information!
But now i am in a bit of trouble: i packaged a woody backport of k3b.
This programm tries to dlopen
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 01:54:13PM +0200, Bj?rn Stenberg wrote:
> Does anyone have a policy-compliant version comparator in Perl that I
> can reuse?
There's one in debbugs CVS, module source, Debbugs/Versions/Dpkg.pm,
translated from dpkg's algorithm as of a couple of years ago. It doesn't
do "~"
Santiago Vila wrote:
> Does anyone have a good estimation about the number of packages which
> currently do this? (That is, assume *blindly* that /usr/doc exists).
Packages that
a) don't use debconf ( < 5%)
b) have not completed the transition yet (85 of 657 here)
c) happen to be written by Mano
John Belmonte wrote:
> All those points are well taken. I was trying to pull a fast one:
> surely no one would notice a few files added to base which total 1/3rd
> the size of bash itself. But I've been caught.
I hope you realize that the perl-base package is itself hardly larger
than bash.
-
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 01:54:13PM +0200, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> Does anyone have a policy-compliant version comparator in Perl that I can
> reuse? I'm slightly confused as to the exact meaning of 5.6.11. This means
> some version compares (such as xaw3dg's 1.5+E-1 vs 1.5-25) currently return
> w
On Wednesday 08 October 2003 09:04, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> 'chown -R ...' accidentally excuted in the wrong directory comes to
> my mind. Or filesystem corruption after a hard crash.
But then not only files from packages, but also user files are subject of
corruption. Using a tool like integrit
Steve Langasek wrote:
> The term "metapackage" is a gratuitous label, here. There is a real
> binary package (as opposed to a virtual package) in the archive named
> "gcc", which comes from the gcc-defaults source package; and its
> versions are handled just like those of any other packages.
Ah,
Does Debian have guidelines for minimal usefullnes or documentation of
a new package? Colour me /clueless, but triggered by DWN, I tried
teleport, without much avail:
13:16:04 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~
$ apt-cache search teleport gtk
teleport - moves GTK applications between displays
Wooh
Re: local Release [Marcos Dione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at
05:22:19PM -0300, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> *but*... now I set up atp.conf to have 'frankie' as the default
> release, but when I try to install galeon, it tries to get the unstable
> ones. if I try to get the frankie versi
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 01:13:45PM +0200, Henning Moll wrote:
> I wonder why there is a symbolic link
>
> /usr/lib/libcdda_paranoia.so -> libcdda_paranoia.so.0.9.8
>
> in package 'libcdparanoia0-dev'. Shouldn't that be in 'libcdparanoia0'?
No, plain .so links are only needed for build-time link
Hi!
I wonder why there is a symbolic link
/usr/lib/libcdda_paranoia.so -> libcdda_paranoia.so.0.9.8
in package 'libcdparanoia0-dev'. Shouldn't that be in 'libcdparanoia0'?
Regards
Henning
Hi Debian,
Kindly refer to the e-mail below:
Selloane
-Original Message-
From: Poppie Rakale
Sent: 08 October 2003 12:58 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Contact numbers
Hi John,
I got your details by surfing the net. We need to speak to someone at
your offices and wish that y
also sprach Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.10.08.1124 +0200]:
> > If it's a small security fix, then I am willing to work that into
> > grsecurity. But I won't port grsecurity to a new IP stack nor the
> > other way around.
> So, there will be no grsecurity for 2.6?
There will be, but not
Hello,
I got the following situation:
A server (debian stable) running a number of domains
For each domain I've create a group, and everybody that has
something to do with this domain is in that group
I want everybody in the group to be able to change the website of
that domain, and e
Your message dated Wed, 08 Oct 2003 11:36:21 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#213822: general: keymap be-latin1 doesn't allow typing \
or @ by using AltGr
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dea
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 09:57:42AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
| > That'd be /usr/share (lib is for arch-dependant data, see FHS)
|
| ... except that the Python policy seems to have bizarre rules about
| this. I assume this is because .pyc files are placed in the same
| directory as the correspondi
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.28.0510 +0200]:
> > For example, the grsecurity patch has had a history of conflicts
> > with various patches in the Debian kernel source. Most of those
> > patches that caused conflicts were in fact e
Virus detected in this email! One or more attachment(s) was infected. Below are the actions taken:The following attachment(s) was infected and has been cleaned and attached herein:Attachment name:Nil.
---The following attachment(s) was
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:19:58AM +, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 06:07:58PM -0400, Marco Paganini wrote:
> > Yes. "ask.py" is just the main executable. It imports all the other modules
> > (which have the .py extension and should be in /usr/lib/ask or something).
>
> That'd
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 06:37:31PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 06:07:58PM -0400, Marco Paganini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:57:42PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> >
> > > > That would not be a problem, as no other program impor
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 06:07:58PM -0400, Marco Paganini wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:57:42PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>
> > > That would not be a problem, as no other program imports ask.py...
> >
> > Are you confident that no other program will ever want to "import ask"?
>
> Yes.
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:24:37AM +1000, Kim Lester wrote:
>> There is no way to verify/correct the MODE, USER, GROUP, TYPE
>> of any files installed in a pkg.
>> If I am wrong please point out where, with an installed pkg
>> (and preferably without hav
成功需要学习、成功需要借鉴。
http://wisebook.yeah.net
免费的成功学电子书下载。
愿更多的人踏上成功之路。
---wise
免费注册，只要每月上网10分钟，你就可月赚500美金！
详情请见： http://kensou.web165.com/
不要再作那些私人的邮件点击赚钱了,你累不累呀?? 我这里有革命性的赚钱项目――
PlugUsIn4Cash，终身每月数万美金，600秒＝3美金。每月600秒时间，改变你的一生，
每月只需上网10分钟，就可以赚取过万元，已经有很多人成功了!
注册地址：http://185998.PlugUsIn4Cash.com/signup/
切记：免费注册,免费下载软件（这是必须的，否则注册无效，软件很小,不会对您的系统造
成任何伤害）!! （若看不懂英文请看最后
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 06:12:17AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> Actually the problem is somewhat lessened by the fact libtool generally
> doesn't put the .la path in dependency_libs and puts -lXrender instead.
>
> The *only* package I can see so far which has
> /usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.la
On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 21:32, Chris Cheney wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 02:58:25PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I think the problem with .la files may be solvable by updating
> > Build-Depends and -dev packages' dependencies to refer to libxrender-dev
> > (>= 0.8.3-1), and/or libraries th
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:03:19AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 01:46:08AM +0200, Nicolas Boullis wrote:
> > Moreover, that does not answer to my real question: is there a good
> > reason not to implement such an extended syntax for versionned
> > relationships.
>
68 matches
Mail list logo
