On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Dec 2004, Dan Jacobson wrote:
>
> > Say, perhaps a "Date:" field could be added to Packages files.
> > I mean even dog food has the date stamped on it these days.
> > Even my crumby message has a Date: field.
> > Sure, as your eyes scan the MD
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.12.09.2053 +0100]:
> > Probably yes on dpkg-repack. Definately not for dpkg-www. Which
> > is a sucky name, btw.
>
> Agreed. However, if dpkg-repack goes into dpkg, why not provide
> a means to edit a D
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 00:27:38 +, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> agreed to set up the machine, host it for a while and give interested
> developers access. This box is not a general .debian.org
Is this by invitation only?
--
WC -Sx- Jones
http://insecuri
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 15:21 -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
>> Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 01:20:32PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> >> On Dec 09, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> Then we mig
Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually, I don't want a different set of criteria. As a user, I am
> concerned that Debian is in danger of having a thousand "CPU
> monitors"[1] all with RC bugs. A process for restricting addition of
> semi-duplicate packages might reduce workloads all r
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Though you could try the following set of criteria:
[I added these back in for the sake of clarity]
>>1. Are there already similar packages in Debian? NO - okay, add.
>>
>>2. Does it offer significant
Over the last few weeks, I have been in discussion with Intel about
getting an EM64T system for Debian. They agreed to give a system on
loan to us for 6 months (or possibly longer if we make good use of it)
and after some legal issues were clarified (thanks to Greg Pomerantz
of SPI), the machine i
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 15:21 -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 01:20:32PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> >> On Dec 09, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
>
> Then we might as well remove the whole kernel from main, since
On Friday 10 December 2004 04:23 pm, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:22:08PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > If you want to find alternatives for a virtual package, you can use 'd'
> > and 'r' to navigate the dependency lists. It's not as convenient as
> > dselect, but it wo
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 01:20:32PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> On Dec 09, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I have been thinking about the blob problem for a while. I propose to
>> > remove blobs from the driver, and store them as files in
Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, it is because the shortcuts are completely non-intuitive. I use
> aptitude for the good intuitive keymapping, not for its menu.
I see. You find them utterly unintuitive, and are not alone. I don't
claim they are really "intuitive" (for what it mea
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 01:20:32PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Dec 09, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The whole system has to be DFSG-free. Debian won't compromise on that.
> Which DFSG? The original one or the "clarified" one?
Give it up, Marco. Your little tantrums aren't cute.
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Say, perhaps a "Date:" field could be added to Packages files.
> I mean even dog food has the date stamped on it these days.
> Even my crumby message has a Date: field.
> Sure, as your eyes scan the MD5sum: field, the package's DNA is
> registered in your
Quer vender ou comprar produtos de informática ?
Venha participar do mais novo site de anúncios de classificados de produtos de
informática e telefonia celular da internet! Você pode colocar vários anúncios
sem limitação, colocar fotos do seus produtos, receber perguntas e respondê-las
pelo pró
* Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041210 22:18]:
> > Their main grief towards dselect is therefore formulated as "awkward,
> > non-intuitive user interface" as you wrote above.
>
> No, it is because the shortcuts are completely non-intuitive. I use
> aptitude for the good intuitive keymappin
Say, perhaps a "Date:" field could be added to Packages files.
I mean even dog food has the date stamped on it these days.
Even my crumby message has a Date: field.
Sure, as your eyes scan the MD5sum: field, the package's DNA is
registered in your brain. But us old fashioned types would still like
Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Though you could try the following set of criteria:
We could have all kinds of criteria. The ones you propose are not, in
fact, our criteria. Our criteria are something like:
1. Does the license meet the DFSG?
2. Is there a Debian maintainer willing to
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:22:08PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> If you want to find alternatives for a virtual package, you can use 'd' and
> 'r' to navigate the dependency lists. It's not as convenient as dselect, but
> it works.
Well actually you can enter the package you dont want to hav
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 12:03:03PM +0100, Florent Rougon wrote:
> I understand that this may be unpleasant to some people
It is not a problem for me that dseclt has no menu, it is a problem that the
keys are totally unintuitive, and some screens are really bothering.
aptitude has a nice usage "en
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 10:03:01PM +0100, Florent Rougon wrote:
> So, I guess some people simply don't like the *type* of control
> interface dselect offers, cause they want to see menus and widgets all
> around instead of having to learn that $keystroke will perform $action.
>
> Their main grief
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Pashley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On Dec 10, 2004 at 16:30, Will Newton praised the llamas by saying:
>> > I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing
>> > to ship as part of an operating system. I am an atheist an
Blunt Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do I consider this a problem? Not particularly. It is my problem, as
> much as anyone's. This is a sophisticated sysadmin tool, and I am only
> an occasional sysadmin, by no means sophisticated.
So, I guess some people simply don't like the *type* of con
David Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 12:03:03PM +0100, Florent Rougon wrote:
>> [1] I still use both versions and happen to often hit instead of
>> when I use sid's one, which doesn't have any bad
>> consequences (simply scrolls help). And the problem will d
David Pashley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Dec 10, 2004 at 16:30, Will Newton praised the llamas by saying:
> > I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing
> > to ship as part of an operating system. I am an atheist and a
> > liberal but the majority of people in the world
Will Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:24, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > > Which is a fine point of view if you are making a political point. But as
> > > far as I am aware we are trying to make an operating system.
> >
> > Sure. So we should not censor ourselves.
>
>
David Pashley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Dec 10, 2004 at 16:30, Will Newton praised the llamas by saying:
>> I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as
>> part of an operating system. I am an atheist and a liberal but the majority
>> of people in the world
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 04:38:10PM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> On Friday 10 December 2004 15.35, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > we don't exactly have a strong history of being able to pull off
> > timely releases
>
> Did Debian even try?
No, not since I've been around.
> I didn't follow the woo
Adrian von Bidder dijo [Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 04:38:10PM +0100]:
> > we don't exactly have a strong history of being able to pull off
> > timely releases
>
> Did Debian even try?
>
> I didn't follow the woody release too closely, being a Debian newbie at the
> time, so I don't know. But - this w
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:13:29 +0100, Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm just trying to understand
> people who bash dselect on the first occasion. If you don't like dselect
> and don't fall in one of the cases I have mentioned, then we have a
> problem. Simply preferring aptitude is *n
On Dec 10, 2004 at 16:30, Will Newton praised the llamas by saying:
> I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as
> part of an operating system. I am an atheist and a liberal but the majority
> of people in the world are not.
I don't think it is an acceptable thin
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 12:03:03PM +0100, Florent Rougon wrote:
> [1] I still use both versions and happen to often hit instead of
> when I use sid's one, which doesn't have any bad
> consequences (simply scrolls help). And the problem will disappear
> automatically when I don't have
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 04:04:22PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> As a practical matter, what if the Debian gcc team decide to release
> etch with gcc 3.3 because 3.4 break ABI on some platforms and gcc-4.x is
> not stable enough on all the platforms ? Will LCC follow ? If not, how
> are we going t
On Friday 10 Dec 2004 16:07, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Have you taken a look at what hot-babe actually looks like? I suspect
> you haven't. I don't think it will "offend" anyone.
I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as
part of an operating system. I am an athei
On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 13:59:10 -0500, Jim Gettys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That being said, certainly UNIX's disunity was a major aid to Microsoft.
> Repeating that history would not be good.
I must agree with Jim. From the stand-point that Debian is losing
developers to other Linux platforms an
yeah
Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 15:38 +, schreef Will Newton:
> On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:24, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > Which is a fine point of view if you are making a political point. But as
> > > far as I am aware we are trying to make an operating system.
> >
> > Sure. So we should not censor ourse
On Friday 10 December 2004 13.20, Frank KÃster wrote:
> Rene Mayrhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am still thinking about doing an "upgrade" package of freeswan
> > though, which depends on openswan and simply moves the configuration of
> > the old freeswan configuration to openswan. Any pref
Hi,
>
> * We should commit to strict release cylces of a base system others
>(and Debian itself) can build value upon.
>
> * We should proabably also commit to a set of core architectures which
>*need* to be bug-free on release, while the rest *should* be, but
>would not delay the
On Friday 10 December 2004 15.35, Steve Langasek wrote:
> we don't exactly have a strong history of being able to pull off
> timely releases
Did Debian even try?
I didn't follow the woody release too closely, being a Debian newbie at the
time, so I don't know. But - this was my impression - fro
On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:24, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Which is a fine point of view if you are making a political point. But as
> > far as I am aware we are trying to make an operating system.
>
> Sure. So we should not censor ourselves.
I don't see how that follows from what I said.
Here's a
Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 15:22 +, schreef Will Newton:
> On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:13, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > It is. if we want people in Arabia to be able to possess Debian
> > > disks.
> >
> > The solution to censorious regimes is not to say, "
Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 11:43:22AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
I find this extremely annoying.
Please calm down.
Why? There's _no_ excuse not to mail the BTS before NMUing.
You're free to discuss with lamont how to handle such
cases in the future (and communicating him your
On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:13, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It is. if we want people in Arabia to be able to possess Debian
> > disks.
>
> The solution to censorious regimes is not to say, "well, ok, we'll
> censor ourselves so you don't even have to bother
Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> A note to Thomas: You can already try building GnuCash 1.8.9 (1.8.10
> >> will have the patch applied, as it is already in CVS, both in HEAD a
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is. if we want people in Arabia to be able to possess Debian
> disks.
The solution to censorious regimes is not to say, "well, ok, we'll
censor ourselves so you don't even have to bother".
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 02:45:17PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 01:49:33PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> > > I'm sorry the NMU annoyed you but I welcome it. There is nothing worse
> > > than a package that kills buildds, esspecially such a common one.
> > I agree. But still
Hello Debian developers,
It seems to me than one of the main value of Debian is in the quality of
its core distribution. One of the reason of the quality is that it
is not developed for itself but as a platform for the 10^4+ packages
and the 10+ architectures in Debian. For example the compiler m
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 12:50:13PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> *** The interested parties of the LCC should pick Debian as a base and
> Debian should make this possible. ***
> Rather than everybody just throwing all their stuff in together and
> mixing it up.
> Of course, this would also mean
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One could argue about sending the NMU-patch/interdiff to the BTS, but I
> personally do not see much point in it, since (hi Omnic!) you can just
> get it from the archive and sync it yourself. It still makes sense for
> packages where you suspect the main
Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 12:50 +0100, schreef Michael Banck:
> *** The interested parties of the LCC should pick Debian as a base and
> Debian should make this possible. ***
>
> Rather than everybody just throwing all their stuff in together and
> mixing it up.
>
> Of course, this would also mean fo
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 06:31 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 23:15 -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > John Goerzen dijo [Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 09:40:51PM -0600]:
> > > > I think that tying core Debian packages to the Red Hat boat anchor is a
> > > > horrible, horrible idea.
> > >
> > >
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 12:50 +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 12:40:29PM -0500, Ian Murdock wrote:
> > Let me first say unequivocally that the LCC is very interested in
> > getting Debian involved. The question has always been: How do we do
> > that?
>
> I think there is one o
Martin Zobel-Helas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Hi Frank,
>
>> Please calm down. Sure, it isn't usual to upload such a quick NMU, but
>> (as Goswin already pointed out) such a bug that makes a package
>> uninstallable that is a common build-depends can really hurt the
>> autobuilders. You're fre
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 01:49:33PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> > I'm sorry the NMU annoyed you but I welcome it. There is nothing worse
> > than a package that kills buildds, esspecially such a common one.
>
> I agree. But still LaMont should have expressed his intent to do so, and
> send the pat
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 21:35 -0800, Philip Miller wrote:
> Greg Folkert wrote:
> > Many reasons people come to Debian... Distributed Binaries is not one of
> > them.
>
> If you think this isn't a reason to use Debian, I, as a long-time user, will
> tell you that
> you're dead wrong. I use Debian
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> You have not posted anything to this bug,
>>> neither a patch nor an intent to NMU. And you won't stop me from
>>> uploading these packages this morning.
Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 13:49 +0100, schreef Frank KÃster:
> I must admit that I didn't know that failed *removals* of
> build-dependencies would cause the buildd to fail. Nobody cared to
> indicate that to us.
It can happen. It doesn't happen always, but sometimes it does. In
extreme cases, a buildd
Hi Frank,
> Please calm down. Sure, it isn't usual to upload such a quick NMU, but
> (as Goswin already pointed out) such a bug that makes a package
> uninstallable that is a common build-depends can really hurt the
> autobuilders. You're free to discuss with lamont how to handle such
> cases in t
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> You have not posted anything to this bug,
>> neither a patch nor an intent to NMU. And you won't stop me from
>> uploading these packages this morning.
>>
>> I find this extremely annoying.
>>
[...]
> I
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 11:43:22AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Since then, I was testing the packages with the fixes that we had
> prepared in the last days. You have not posted anything to this bug,
> neither a patch nor an intent to NMU. And you won't stop me from
> uploading these packages this
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 22:48 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thursday 09 December 2004 14:06, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You're coming very late to the "conversation". A District
> > Attorney angling for higher office or someone in the Morality
> > Police (think Saudi Arabia) or a
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 23:15 -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> John Goerzen dijo [Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 09:40:51PM -0600]:
> > > I think that tying core Debian packages to the Red Hat boat anchor is a
> > > horrible, horrible idea.
> >
> > I tend to agree with sentiments like this, but didn't Bruce mentio
On Dec 09, Ian Murdock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Let me first say unequivocally that the LCC is very interested in
> > > getting Debian involved. The question has always been: How do we do
> > > that?
> > As usual: by sending patches.
> So, the flow can only be unidirectional?
No, intereste
On Dec 09, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The whole system has to be DFSG-free. Debian won't compromise on that.
Which DFSG? The original one or the "clarified" one?
> I have been thinking about the blob problem for a while. I propose to
> remove blobs from the driver, and store them
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 21:40 -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 07:08:48PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > I think that tying core Debian packages to the Red Hat boat anchor is a
> > horrible, horrible idea.
>
> I tend to agree with
Rene Mayrhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am still thinking about doing an "upgrade" package of freeswan though,
> which
> depends on openswan and simply moves the configuration of the old freeswan
> configuration to openswan. Any preferences towards such a package?
I don't see any reasons
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 12:40:29PM -0500, Ian Murdock wrote:
> Let me first say unequivocally that the LCC is very interested in
> getting Debian involved. The question has always been: How do we do
> that?
I think there is one obvious answer to this question: 'Learn from
history'.
1. Unix and U
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Debian Bug Tracking System) wrote:
>
>> Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>>
>>> tag 284800 + fixed
>> Bug#284800: tetex-base: Can't be removed: rmdir:
>> `/usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/pxr/': No such file or directory
>> There
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> As for distributing the blobs itself they can be relicensed under
>> BSD license or similar (if their aren't already) that doesn't have
>> such a problem with a char data[] = { 0x17, ... } source file,
On Thursday 09 December 2004 14:06, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're coming very late to the "conversation". A District
> Attorney angling for higher office or someone in the Morality
> Police (think Saudi Arabia) or a petty member of the CCP might not
> care about "there will be co
Hi all,
[Please CC me in replies, I am currently not subscribed to -devel. This is
also cross-posted to debian-user because it might affect users that are not
subscribed to -devel.]
I have thought for quite some time about this issue and have now come to a
decision. Sorry that it's rather late
Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Completely and utterly wrong in my case. I'm exactly the sort of person
> that you apparently think should like dselect, but I think aptitude is
> _far_ superior, for both experts and newbies. The competition isn't even
> close.
Did I mention aptitude in
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: paje.app
Version : 1.0.0cvs20041022
Upstream Author : Benhur Stein
* URL (old) : http://www-id.imag.fr/Logiciels/paje/pajedist.html
* URL (new) : http://forge.objectweb.org/projects/paje/
* License (old) : GPL
* License
Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Er, these are shortcuts. *shrug*
>
> Uh, so there is a non-shortcut method of operating?
I awaited this comment, but didn't know which other word to use. No, I
don't claim there is a non-shortcut method. I would say that dselects'
control interface co
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Debian Bug Tracking System) wrote:
> Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
>> tag 284800 + fixed
> Bug#284800: tetex-base: Can't be removed: rmdir:
> `/usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/pxr/': No such file or directory
> There were no tags set.
> Tags added: fixed
Was this re
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: fprobe-ng
Version : 1.0.6
Upstream Author : Slava Astashonok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : fprobe.sourceforge.ne
* License : GPL
Description : Export captured traffic to remote NetFlow Collector
A well-main
On Friday 10 December 2004 06.15, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> John Goerzen dijo [Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 09:40:51PM -0600]:
> > we could participate in this organization even if we didn't take
> > their packages? That is, perhaps we could influence the direction to
> > a more useful one?
> Then we would b
also sprach Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.12.09.2053 +0100]:
> Probably yes on dpkg-repack. Definately not for dpkg-www. Which
> is a sucky name, btw.
Agreed. However, if dpkg-repack goes into dpkg, why not provide
a means to edit a DEB file (without having to install it) too?
--
Please
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> A note to Thomas: You can already try building GnuCash 1.8.9 (1.8.10
>> will have the patch applied, as it is already in CVS, both in HEAD and
>> the 1.8 branch) when you apply the attached patch.
Hi,
* Thomas Womack [Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:18:29PM +]:
> The program
[...]
> segfaults in the mpz_urandomb() function
> with a back-trace
> #0 0x4003d051 in __gmpn_copyi () from /usr/lib/libgmp.so.3
> #1 0x40023012 in __gmp_randinit_lc_2exp () from /usr/lib/libgmp.so.3
> #2 0x4002310d in
80 matches
Mail list logo
