ITP: 1-mb-random-data -- one megabyte of pseudo-random data

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: 1-mb-random-data Version : 1 Upstream Author : entropy * URL : /dev/urandom * License : ? (may violate various licenses at random, though probably won't) Description : one megabyte of

Re: ITP: 1-mb-random-data -- one megabyte of pseudo-random data

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Joey Hess wrote: > I intend to dd if=/dev/urandom of=debian/tmp/usr/lib/1-mb-random-data Will this be available via CVS? ;) Mike

Re: Bug#219942: ITP: zope-textindexng2 -- Fulltext index for Zope

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Joe Drew wrote: > > > This is the new fulltext index for Zope and is the most feature-complete > > solution for fulltext indexing under Zope. > > > > Supported Formats: HTML, PDF, Postscript, WinWord, PowerPoint, OpenOffice > > Again, s/fulltext/full text/g. > > What does t

Re: status of Progeny projects

Hi Ian: I have been long time user of linux and I find the greatest weakness to be the ability to easily install applications which seems to be the intent of this group. I would like to make a suggestion with respect to handling of dependancies. Most software installs fail as a result of missi

gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Package: gimp1.2 Version: 1.2.3-2.4 Severity: normal Hi, Installed the gimp, I got a message suggesting me to install gimp1.2-nonfree I find non-appropriate for a package in main to advertise for non-free packages in non-free, which is theoretically not part of Debian -- a package part of Debia

Re: Removal of LaTeX2HTML from main

Ralf Treinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : > On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 04:06:02PM +0100, Roland Stigge wrote: > >> working on the legal issues for LaTeX2HTML [1], at debian-legal [2], we >> concluded that LaTeX2HTML will have to be removed from main because it > [...] >> With /usr/bin/latex2html

Re: ITP: 1-mb-random-data -- one megabyte of pseudo-random data

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 01:08:55 -0500, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Package: wnpp >Severity: wishlist > >* Package name: 1-mb-random-data > Version : 1 > Upstream Author : entropy >* URL : /dev/urandom >* License : ? (may violate various licenses at random, t

Re: possible compromise for ITP: linux?

Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Problems of this approach, off the top of my head: > > a. Having a binary package of the same name that is produced by > different source packages on different architectures may or may not > drive the archive maintainence scripts nuts. On the other han

Re: Bug#220261: RFP: tnimage -- scientific image analysis software

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Don Armstrong wrote: > Odd. I was looking for a package that does exactly this on monday. > > I'm going to evaluate it and see if it does what I hope it does, and > then prepare it for packaging in debian... assuming it fullfills the > nich that I need filled. Just keep me inf

Re: status of Progeny projects

On Tuesday, Nov 11, 2003, at 23:39 America/Denver, Peter Zoeller wrote: Most software installs fail as a result of missing libraries. I would like to see a central repository for all libraries, old, new and development. A repository that when a library dependancy needs to be satisfied, the ins

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

reopen 220363 thanks Anthony Towns a tapoté : > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:00:44AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: >> Package: gimp1.2 >> Version: 1.2.3-2.4 >> Severity: normal >> >> Installed the gimp, I got a message suggesting me to install >> gimp1.2-nonfree > > If you don't want to install it,

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

* Mathieu Roy | Installed the gimp, I got a message suggesting me to install | gimp1.2-nonfree Suggests are ok, Recommends and Depends are not ok. If you disagree with this, please discuss it on -policy, it's not a technical discussion. -- Tollef Fog Heen

Re: Removal of LaTeX2HTML from main

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:15:19AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > Can someone provide a link to a clear explanation about latex2html > being non-free? Read the latest DWN

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : > * Mathieu Roy > > | Installed the gimp, I got a message suggesting me to install > | gimp1.2-nonfree > > Suggests are ok, Recommends and Depends are not ok. > > If you disagree with this, please discuss it on -policy, it's not a > technical discuss

Re: Removal of LaTeX2HTML from main

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Isaac Clerencia) a tapoté : > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:15:19AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: >> Can someone provide a link to a clear explanation about latex2html >> being non-free? > > Read the latest DWN You mean the DWN from yesterday which has not already been translated? Ok

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:27:35AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > * Mathieu Roy > > | Installed the gimp, I got a message suggesting me to install > | gimp1.2-nonfree > > Suggests are ok, Recommends and Depends are not ok. > > If you disagree with this, please discuss it on -policy, it's not a

Re: Removal of LaTeX2HTML from main

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:56:44AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > > Read the latest DWN > > You mean the DWN from yesterday which has not already been translated? > Ok, thanks. > > In case someone else is wondering, the explanation is finally there: >

Re: Kernel 2.4.22-k7-1: initrd cannot mount proc from cramfs image

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 >> If you're using busybox then try regenerating the initrd image with >> BUSYBOX=no. > I did not generate the image, i'm using a stock kernel-image-2.4.22-1-k7 > package, no trace of busybox in the initrd image, and it's not even installed > on this

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 10:53, Mathieu Roy wrote: > > Suggests are ok, Recommends and Depends are not ok. > > > > If you disagree with this, please discuss it on -policy, it's not a > > technical discussion. > > 1) Do you have a pointer that give that information in the debian policy? http://www.d

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Mathieu Roy wrote: > 1) Do you have a pointer that give that information in the debian > policy? Policy 2.2.1: Every package in main and non-US/main must comply with the DFSG (Debian Free Software Guidelines). In addition, the packages in main * must not require a

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Fabian Fagerholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : > On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 10:53, Mathieu Roy wrote: >> > Suggests are ok, Recommends and Depends are not ok. >> > >> > If you disagree with this, please discuss it on -policy, it's not a >> > technical discussion. >> >> 1) Do you have a pointer that g

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Pierre Machard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:27:35AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: >> * Mathieu Roy >> >> | Installed the gimp, I got a message suggesting me to install >> | gimp1.2-nonfree >> >> Suggests are ok, Recommends and Depends are not ok. >> >> If you dis

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 11:27, Mathieu Roy wrote: > > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-main > > > > "...the packages in main > > > > * must not require a package outside of main for compilation or > > execution (thus, the package must not declare a "Depends", >

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : > >> 2) Why the gimp cannot any longer save gif files without installing >> non-free software? > > The software itself is free, but the algorithm necessary to save GIF > files (LZW) is patent encumbered in certain parts of the planet, and > the patent i

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Mathieu Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : >> * Mathieu Roy >> | Installed the gimp, I got a message suggesting me to install >> | gimp1.2-nonfree >> Suggests are ok, Recommends and Depends are not ok. >> If you disagree with this, please discuss it

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Fabian Fagerholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > * must not require a package outside of main for compilation or >> > execution (thus, the package must not declare a "Depends", >> > "Recommends", or "Build-Depends" relationship on a non-main >> > package), ..." >> >

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Mathieu Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If not, why incitating people to get non-free stuff while you just can > provide a Gimp that can save GIF without LZW? If it isnt already there - write a patch for it if you want that. -- bye Joerg A.D. 1492: Christopher Columbus arrives in what he beli

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Le mer 12/11/2003 à 10:31, Mathieu Roy a écrit : > If you have anything on topic to do, you are welcome to reply to this > mail. The whole thread is off-topic on this list. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `'[EMAIL PRO

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Mathieu Roy wrote: > If not, why incitating people to get non-free stuff while you just > can provide a Gimp that can save GIF without LZW? Because no such non-LZW plugin exists for the GIMP. [And since people may wonder why they can't save GIFs, it is appropriate for the pack

Re: ITP: 1-mb-random-data -- one megabyte of pseudo-random data

Scripsit Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Description : one megabyte of pseudo-random data > I intend to dd if=3D/dev/urandom of=3Ddebian/tmp/usr/lib/1-mb-random-data Please, please, no! /dev/urandom does not reliably deliver pseudo-random data. There is a chance that fresh entropy will arr

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:25:23AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > reopen 220363 > thanks Please do not abuse the BTS. If you want to discuss it, feel free to do so, but this is not a bug in the gimp package. > Are you kidding? > Do you really think that I'm the only person to find UNACCEPTABLE that

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 10:54:29AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > > > It is also possible to create GIFs using a patent-free run > length encoding but this doesn't achieve the compression that > one normally expects in a GIF. > >

Re: Bug#219942: ITP: zope-textindexng2 -- Fulltext index for Zope

On Mi, 2003-11-12 at 07:44, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Joe Drew wrote: > > > This is the new fulltext index for Zope and is the most feature-complete > > > solution for fulltext indexing under Zope. > > > > > > Supported Formats: HTML, PDF, Postscript, WinWord, PowerPoint, OpenO

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Anthony Towns a tapoté : > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:25:23AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: >> reopen 220363 >> thanks > > Please do not abuse the BTS. If you want to discuss it, feel free to do > so, but this is not a bug in the gimp package. If you consider that not being a bug, please never claim

Re: ITP: 1-mb-random-data -- one megabyte of pseudo-random data

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 11:17:57AM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote: | Please, please, no! /dev/urandom does not reliably deliver | pseudo-random data. There is a chance that fresh entropy will arrive | in the middle of the computation and mess up with the pseudoness. No, I already covered that in

Closing. (Was: Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel)

On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 02:37:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > > * Package name: linux > Version : 2.4.22 > Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and others, see: > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/CRED

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Nov/12, Mathieu Roy wrote: > > As you're not a member of the Debian project, you don't get any say > > in what's to be accepted or not > Apparently you forget about a specific part of the Social Contract. > (Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software...) Note that "Users" goes befo

Version Updating Question

Hi! It will not be necessary to name it 1.0really, but as many others do: 1.0final... What about that one? Rolly

Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: linux-experimental Version : 2.4.22 Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and others, see: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/CREDITS * URL : http://www.kernel.org/ * License

Re: radiusd-freeradius history and future

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 03:37:29PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote: > On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:11, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > > That would need a reimplementation of some (all?) of the servers. Wouldn't > > it? Old ones (cistron, livingston) call getpwnam()|getspnam() to retrieve > > the user

Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 04:02:14PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 02:47:14PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > However, > > for the matter of finding out wether there will be much people in that > > userbase, there's the Popularity Contest. > > Some people just never learn.

Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 03:48:26PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 11:40:11PM +1100, Jamie Wilkinson wrote: > > There are already several forks of the Linux kernel in Debian anyway. > > Robert wishes to attempt to unify them, does that not grant him use of the > > name 'linu

Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 05:14:02PM +0100, Eike Sauer wrote: > Robert Millan schrieb: > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 02:17:10PM +0100, Eike Sauer wrote: > >> Robert Millan schrieb: > >> > I don't see why. I have a bunch of resources to find a solution for > >> > this trivial bug. > [...] > > I didn't w

Re: ITP: 1-mb-random-data -- one megabyte of pseudo-random data

[ CCing debian-hurd ] Hi Joey, On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 01:08:55AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > > * Package name: 1-mb-random-data > Version : 1 > Upstream Author : entropy > * URL : /dev/urandom > * License : ? (may violate v

Re: radiusd-freeradius history and future

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 02:07:27AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 02:02:49PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 11:52:00AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > The packages at will be sponsored into > >

Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 03:29:04PM +, Colin Watson wrote: > > Either satisfies the first part of my question, but at least your second > option doesn't satisfy the second part of my question. I'll repeat: > > "without leaving old System.map junk around for eternity" > > When would you clea

Re: Closing. (Was: Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel)

On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 00:23, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 22:31, Robert Millan wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 02:37:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > > Package: wnpp > > > Severity: wishlist > > > > > > * Package name: linux > > > Version : 2.4.22 > > > Ups

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:36:27PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and others, see: He no longer works for transmeta. Should be changed? J -- Jesus Climent info:www.pumuki.org Unix SysAdm|Linux User #66350

Re: Security liabilities (Re: radiusd-freeradius history and future)

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 07:44:01PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:18:38AM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 04:30:50PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > > CAN-2001-1376 and CAN-2001-1377 made the rounds last Spring, with > > > advisories > > > from Re

Re: status of Progeny projects

Peter Zoeller schrieb: > I have been long time user of linux and I find the greatest weakness to > be the ability to easily install applications which seems to be the > intent of this group. I allways found it less easy to - go to mozilla website - find the appropriate binary - download it - r

Re: Closing. (Was: Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel)

On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 22:31, Robert Millan wrote: > On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 02:37:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > Package: wnpp > > Severity: wishlist > > > > * Package name: linux > > Version : 2.4.22 > > Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and others, see: >

Re: radiusd-freeradius history and future

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Hampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Cistron begat FreeRADIUS. FreeRADIUS is certainly actively maintained >upstream. xtRADIUS is also begat of Cistron. I'd assumed that Cistron >is dead upstream too, and xtRADIUS active. Cistron radius is not dead. It's just i

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 02:31:17PM +0100, Jesus Climent wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:36:27PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and others, see: > > He no longer works for transmeta. Should be changed? [EMAIL PROTECTED] is ok now. -- Fr

Re: POSIX capabilities patch

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 07:11:47PM -0700, Hans Fugal wrote: > In order to get realtime capabilities, jackd can be run with a suid > wrapper (jackstart), instead of being run as root, if the following > patch is applied to the kernel: > It has implication for libcap* packages too, doesn't it? -

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 02:31:17PM +0100, Jesus Climent wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:36:27PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and others, see: > > He no longer works for transmeta. Should be changed? s/transmeta.com/osdl.org/ > > J >

Re: POSIX capabilities patch

* Daniel Jacobowitz [Tue, 11 Nov 2003 at 22:18 -0500] > I would want considerably more information on the security implications > of allowing CAP_SETPCAP than either of those documents provides, if I > were you. > > The POSIX capability code is notoriously subtle and prone to anger. Which is why

Re: POSIX capabilities patch

* Francesco P. Lovergine [Wed, 12 Nov 2003 at 14:48 +0100] > It has implication for libcap* packages too, doesn't it? I would assume so. -- Hans Fugal | De gustibus non disputandum est. http://hans.fugal.net/ | Debian, vim, mutt, ruby, text, gpg http://gdmxml.fugal.net/ |

Re: Common SSL CA Certificate Directory

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 08:17:38PM -0600, Jerry Haltom wrote: > Does Debian by Policy have a standard directory to store Certificate > Authority certificates? I've run into the need to incorporate a > certificate into a number of services on my system: web browsers, email > clients, email servers,

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

* Mathieu Roy wrote: > Fabian Fagerholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : [...] >> Note, no mention of "Suggests". > > No mention is not necessarily approval. It may be just something > forgot. That's why Tollef suggests to discuss this on -policy. -- - nobse

Re: Bug#220363: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Nov 11, 2003, at 11:00 PM, Mathieu Roy wrote: Installed the gimp, I got a message suggesting me to install gimp1.2-nonfree Discussion aside, this is a nonissue, since the gimp1.2-nonfree package is gone in unstable. I would very much like to close this bug. Does this solve this issue to you

Re: POSIX capabilities patch

* Francesco P. Lovergine [Wed, 12 Nov 2003 at 14:48 +0100] > It has implication for libcap* packages too, doesn't it? From libcap2's README.Debian: This library should be used in conjunction with the kernel patches from http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/libs/security/linux-privs/kernel-2

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Nov 12, 2003, at 1:27 AM, Mathieu Roy wrote: So you confirm what I thought (yes, I checked this page before): - the support for GIF creation inside the main gimp package, in main, has been removed in favor of a package in non-free, that provide the same functionality (plus patented

Re: Bug#220363: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Ben Gertzfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : > On Nov 11, 2003, at 11:00 PM, Mathieu Roy wrote: > >> Installed the gimp, I got a message suggesting me to install >> gimp1.2-nonfree > > Discussion aside, this is a nonissue, since the gimp1.2-nonfree > package is gone in unstable. > > I would very

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Ben Gertzfield schrieb: > As I mentioned in a response to the bug report, this is mostly a > nonissue, since the LZW patent has expired in the US and I've merged > the -nonfree package back into the main package in the unstable Debian > distribution. As far as I know(*), the patent is still valid

Re: Bug#220289: general: make a new section: gis, for Geographic Information System packages

Hi, > > Debian needs a new Packages section, named gis, or perhaps geography or > > cartography, to prevent the mapping related packages from being > > scattered in sections graphics and science, and misc, etc.? as at present. > I'd consider this section much too special. > Why not sort out which

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Nov 12, 2003, at 7:38 AM, Eike Sauer wrote: As far as I know(*), the patent is still valid in Europe and Japan until mid 2004. Shouldn't this matter for an international project? This is true, I believe. Whether or not the main GIMP source (distributed in main) is even allowed in Europe and Ja

Re: Bug#219959: ITP: mozilla-locale-eu -- Mozilla Basque Language Package

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 04:59:45PM -0500, Joe Drew wrote: > The mozilla-locale* packages need some uniformity to their short (and > maybe long, I haven't looked) descriptions. > > ("Mozilla $LANG Language Package", "Mozilla $LANG language add-on", > "Mozilla $LANG language/region pack" are all exa

Re: Bug#219942: ITP: zope-textindexng2 -- Fulltext index for Zope

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Igor Stroh wrote: > How about mentioning ZCatalog in some way? Any suggestions to enhance my latest version: This is the new full text index for Zope objects and is the most feature-complete solution for full text indexing under Zope. . TextIndexNG will live happily as p

Re: radiusd-freeradius history and future

On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 12:19:02AM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 02:07:27AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña > wrote: > > > Maybe I'm mistaken, but the rpm spec file seems to use a 'radiusd' user > > whileas the Debian rules package does not. I would be more confident

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Eike Sauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : > Ben Gertzfield schrieb: >> As I mentioned in a response to the bug report, this is mostly a >> nonissue, since the LZW patent has expired in the US and I've merged >> the -nonfree package back into the main package in the unstable Debian >> distribution.

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:41:10PM +0100, Roberto Suarez Soto wrote: > > Sure, keep lowering the quality of Debian in matter of freedom, > > there's no matter discussing that. > I don't see how making more packages available to our users is > "lowering the quality of Debian in matter of fre

Re: radiusd-freeradius history and future

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 03:36:40PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote: > On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:47, Matt Zimmerman wrote: [...] > unix_chkpwd is a reasonable solution to this. >>> One possible solution to this is to have a special GID for >>> non-root programs which are allowed to check passwords. I woul

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

> * Package name: linux-experimental I really don't care either way, but would you consider using kernel-linux-whatever instead? Just for consistency's sake. As someone else said, eventually there will be a kernel-freebsd or kernel-netbsd, and having an uniform scheme to call these thin

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:10:02PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > Apparently you forget about a specific part of the Social Contract. > (Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software...) I have a creepy feeling that you are not wearing a user hat but rather a hat of an organisation with a specific a

Re: radiusd-freeradius history and future

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:23:09PM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > > It does adduser freerad shadow on first installation, but not after that > > (on the advice of Steve Langasek) to allow the local authentication code > > to work, and to give the admin the freedom to disable this fo

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:27:10 +0100, Mathieu Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Fabian Fagerholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : >> On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 10:53, Mathieu Roy wrote: >>> > Suggests are ok, Recommends and Depends are not ok. >>> > >>> > If you disagree with this, please discuss it on -pol

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:25:23AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > Do you really think that I'm the only person to find UNACCEPTABLE that > a package in mail suggests packages in non-free, which ARE NOT PART OF > DEBIAN? Packages are free to suggest whatever the maintainer wishes; I wouldn't even con

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 11:26:26AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > > * Package name: linux-experimental > > I really don't care either way, but would you consider using > kernel-linux-whatever instead? Just for consistency's sake. As > someone else said, eventually there will be a ke

Re: Security liabilities (Re: radiusd-freeradius history and future)

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 07:44:01PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > This is exactly the kind of situation I don't want going forward...there is > so much neglected software in Debian that bugs like these sometimes go > unnoticed, or even if they are noticed, the maintainer doesn't care enough > abou

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Mathieu Roy schrieb: > As far I know, there are still no patent for software in Europe, > whatever an European institution know to fail to comply to European > rules may do. Neither GIF nor LZW is software, though. The patent is about the LZW compression algorithm. Ciao, Eike

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 11:26:26AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > > * Package name: linux-experimental > > I really don't care either way, but would you consider using > kernel-linux-whatever instead? I considered it, but it's redundant and unnecessary. I'll stick with the name choose

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

Ben Gertzfield schrieb: > good question. How do we deal with this situation for other source > projects that contain things like encryption that are outlawed in > countries X, Y, and Z but OK in the US? Establish non-non-US? ;o) Ciao, Eike

Re: Bug#220289: general: make a new section: gis, for Geographic Information System packages

Hi! Simon Richter schrieb: > How about "science/geography"? Establishing subsections? Or as a section name? Either way, we should use "science/math", "science/pysics", "science/biology", "science/whatever..." as well then. I think geography&co neatly fits into the current science section. Ciao,

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 07:37:58PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: > 4) Patch apt-listchanges so that id doesn't mail about suggestions >on packages that are not available. apt-listchanges neither knows nor cares about suggests or recommends. -- - mdz

Re: radiusd-freeradius history and future

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:35:53AM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 03:23:24PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:00:40AM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > > > PostgreSQL requires license changes, and I've not had much luck buiding > > > impetus for this, no

Re: Bug#215103: ITP: gmasqdialer -- gtk/gnome client for masqdialer server

On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 21:04, Joe Drew wrote: > > Description : gtk/gnome client for masqdialer server > How about "client for masqdialer"? The problem with calling it just that is there are many more clients for masqdialer than just this one, like the qt/kde client, the cli client, the java

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

Robert Millan wrote: >There's no consistency in that, since FreeBSD and NetBSD are not kernels. Robert, your (frankly autistic) worldview worries me. What do you believe would be in a freebsd-kernel or netbsd-kernel package? What do you believe would be in a linux-kernel package? When someone say

Re: ftpmaster accepts packages that have been rejected a few days ago

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 11:29:07AM +, Daniel Silverstone wrote: > We have procedures in place to handle all this, perhaps it's time you > learnt to use those, instead of whining about things which aren't even > the case. No way, man. We simply have to have people repeat the same fodder on debi

Re: Closing. (Was: Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel)

On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 12:23:44AM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > I > for one _would_ appreciate having a debian-standard linux package. kernel-source-*, kernel-image-*, kernel-headers-* -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `'

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Mathieu Roy wrote: > 2) Do you have any valid proof of what you claim? Please, avoid being >a liar, this is a very bad attitude. Keep your personal feeling >out of this mailing-list, I do not give a toss about it and I think >that noone else does. A liar? You hav

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Mathieu Roy wrote: > I think this is a serious bug: the functionality of the free version > has been lowered to promote patent emcumbered package. Patented software isn't really non-free. Search the list archives.

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 01:28:20PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:25:23AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > > > Do you really think that I'm the only person to find UNACCEPTABLE that > > a package in mail suggests packages in non-free, which ARE NOT PART OF > > DEBIAN? > > Pa

sarge release

I apologise if this is covered elsewhere, I am currently totally swamped and can't afford too much time for Debian. I am going to be away from my machine(s) starting 22 Nov until the middle of December. I currently have 1 RC bug and several other bugs against my packages. If sarge's release will h

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

Hi Robert, On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 07:23:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 11:26:26AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > > > * Package name: linux-experimental > > > > I really don't care either way, but would you consider using > > kernel-linux-whatever instead?

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 07:24:52PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Robert Millan wrote: > > >There's no consistency in that, since FreeBSD and NetBSD are not kernels. > > Robert, your (frankly autistic) worldview worries me. What do you > believe would be in a freebsd-kernel or netbsd-kernel pack

Re: POSIX capabilities patch

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 07:35:05AM -0700, Hans Fugal wrote: > So yes, it is broken on purpose (because the real solution is not in > place). No, it doesn't make capabilities useless, it just makes it > impossible to use CAP_SETPCAP. And if i enable SETPCAP for init, will init drop that capability?

Bug#220468: RFA: sourceforge -- Integrated development project framework

Package: wnpp Severity: normal I would like to deprecate sourceforge in favour of gforge. I believe gforge is ready to enter sarge (and it should have done so long ago were it not for problems in quite a lot of software depended upon). Gforge is an evolution of the free code that is sourceforge,

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 10:34:32PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > Did you consider ease of finding alternative packages through the normal > UI like dselect and aptitude? I, for one, appreciate similar things to > exist next to each other. Well no (I use apt-get), but I think I can assume that (I

Re: Bug#220401: ITP: linux-experimental -- Linux 2.4 kernel [EXPERIMENTAL PACKAGE]

Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 11:26:26AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: >> > * Package name: linux-experimental >> >> I really don't care either way, but would you consider using >> kernel-linux-whatever instead? Just for consistency's sake. As >>

Re: sarge release

On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 21:26, martin f krafft wrote: > I am going to be away from my machine(s) starting 22 Nov until the > middle of December. I currently have 1 RC bug and several other bugs > against my packages. If sarge's release will happen in 2003, I will > bite the bullet and fix these bugs

  1   2   >