On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 11:56:01 +0900, Junichi Uekawa
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You can check it out, but the last successful testsuite that I ran
>and committed to CVS is 4 Oct 2005; which is not months.
>
>http://cvs.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/pbuilder/testsuite/cdebootstrap/pbuilder-cre
On Sunday 09 October 2005 03:10, Henning Makholm wrote:
--cut--
> > The CVSup requires Modula-3 compilator to build, so also I'm
> > planning to package Ezm3 - An Easier Modula-3 Distribution, which is
> > designated to compile CVSup only.
>
> Best of luck with that. Torsten might still be interest
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 10:06:43PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Pierre THIERRY in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > - Oh, yes. My package is only compiled for i386. O:-)
> >
> > For the sake of my curiosity, aren't the packages in experimental taken
> > care of by the autobuilders?
>
> Not by the D
Hi,
> >
> >http://cvs.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/pbuilder/testsuite/cdebootstrap/pbuilder-create-etch.log?cvsroot=pbuilder
>
> I do not have a clue about pbuilder, but adduser's support of
> shadow-less systems was first broken in 3.64 by the fix for bug
> 298883.
Due to cdebootstrap b
Sorry for the delay..
For the record:
> > > > I got an issue though, but I think it is related to glibc itself:
> > > > after installing the built source packages, aptitude/apt-get
> > > > absolutely want to upgrade them with the binary versions:
> > > > : The following package
Stig Sandbeck Mathisen wrote:
> > After having read this - wouldn't it be easier to report the user
> > doing the spamming, and simply reverting all changes done by this
> > user.
>
> There are a limited number of wiki which have this functionality.
> Neither the current nor the new wiki have that
On Sat, 08 Oct 2005, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I have a better idea, then; how about if they just never have new major
> versions of libpng, ever again? The last two soname changes were in fact
> total bullshit, and judging by past events I can see them using symbol
Or, for something that has a mod
I've just been playing with udev version 0.070-3. It seems that it's start
script runs after /etc/init.d/mountvirtfs. This means that when it umount's
the /dev/pts and /dev/shm file systems it has to mount them again.
It seems that the best solution would be to have mountvirtfs split into two
On Oct 09, Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems that the best solution would be to have mountvirtfs split into two
> parts, one mounts /proc and /sys, the other mounts /dev/pts, /dev/shm (and
> anything else that might get added under /dev). This means that
> under /etc/rcS.d we
Hi,
First of all, sorry if you get this mail more than once.
I have just created the skeleton of what AMD64 certification page will
be [1].
Please, fill in the gaps.
[1] http://wiki.debian.org/amd64EtchReleaseRecertification
--
Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.
Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
[...]
I have just created the skeleton of what AMD64 certification page will
be [1].
Please, fill in the gaps.
[1] http://wiki.debian.org/amd64EtchReleaseRecertification
Having seen a request for this for (at least) two architectures, and
finding *many* simil
(Évidemment, ça s'applique aussi à Ubuntu ou aux autres distributions
qui utilisent dhclient aka dhcp-client)
Disclaimer: Ceux qui ne travaillent pas dans un des bureaux de BeezNest
ne savent probablement pas de quoi il s'agit, mais les autres
comprendront toute l'importance de ce mail.
J'ai un p
[..]
Sorry, wrong mailing-list.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Oct 09, Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It seems that the best solution would be to have mountvirtfs split into two
> > parts, one mounts /proc and /sys, the other mounts /dev/pts, /dev/shm (and
> > anything else that might get added unde
On Oct 09, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about /etc/modules processing? IMHO it really should be done *before*
> udev tries to coldplug, to give the local admin a well-known and very easy
> way to load some key modules in the order he wants them loaded.
>
> I just
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 06:53:28PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> But it's then very hard to see if this breaks anything. After all, the
> relevant change was made in netcfg in July of 2004. For an entire year,
> it was in every system installed, and nobody complained, although a few
> of us noticed it
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 05:24:12PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Hello all,
>
[...]
>
> There are two bugs against the OpenAFS package, one requesting prebuilt
> modules (Bug#224527) and one requesting that modules be automatically
> rebuilt when the kernel is upgraded (Bug#168852). I'm not sur
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 01:41:41PM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
[A whole bunch of stuff I severly trimmed because I like the sound
of my own voice. ^_^]
## apt-src install & build - NOT indentical
## Note: the build system has vanilla libc6, not the patched one
> $ debdiff ../dtach*.deb dtach_0.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Florian Ragwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libclass-rebless-perl
Version : 0.03
Upstream Author : Gaal Yahas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/~gaal/Class-Rebless/
* License : Perl (GPL/Artistic)
Frans Pop wrote:
> Do you mean that the security-flawed kernel patch would not have been
> needed?
Yes. For those interested, the full story is as follows.
gcc-3.3 contained inline functions in the C++ header atomicity.h -- included
by nearly every C++ program, and thus part of the binary inte
Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> A few weeks ago, libpng10-0 was removed from the archive. A
>> consequence of this was that all gnome-1 packages (and there are a
>> number still around) instantly became FTBFS.
>
> (s/FTBFS/uninstallab
Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Oh!, the irony.
>
> (http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/09/msg01242.html
>http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/09/msg01246.html)
Unlike Joey Hess, I did not say that people who wait for the bug
report are remiss or being bad people.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: xparam
Version : 1.22
Upstream Author : Ronnie Maor and Michael Brand
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://xparam.sourceforge.net/
* License : Revised GPL, LGPL compatibi
Quoting Junichi Uekawa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> shadow 1:4.0.12-1
>
> was the first version to introduce the change;
> and apparently it didn't enter testing until recently
> since it had a few bugs.
Yep, that one slightly broke adduser in environments without shadow
passwords.
Marc had to fix
24 matches
Mail list logo
