also sprach Daniel Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.25.0324 +0100]:
> I have written a script that I think would be useful in Debian. It
> seems excessive to make a package for for it, but a quick google for
> 'debian scripts' didn't turn up any convenient websites or
> repositories, so I th
Hi all,
In agreement with the current maintainer, Jonathan Oxer, I will take
over maintainership of lcdproc. As per his wishes, he will continue to
be co-maintainer (uploader) for the time being.
This is mostly to let ftpmasters know that he has indeed agreed to
these terms so that the up
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 07:54:15 +0200
Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I both cases, the circular dependency would be useful to avoid
> installing the common data without the software. Consequently, when
> you apt-get remove the software, you don't get an orphan data package.
You can then ap
Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Consequently, when you apt-get remove the software, you don't get an
> orphan data package.
... though perhaps aptitude's method of doing this is cleaner
(automatically removing unneeded packages).
-Miles
--
.Numeric stability is probably not all that im
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 04:39:24AM +0200, David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 06:32:54PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Steve Greenland wrote:
> > > This really seems like something that while they may, very occasionally,
> > > be required, are mostly unnecessary and
Hi David,
David Watson wrote:
> * Package name: pybridge-common
are you planning to ship three different *source* packages?
If so, why?
(ITPs are filed per source package, but on a first glance, a single
source package with multiple binaries should be more appropriate.)
Kind regards
T.
--
T
David Weinehall wrote:
> Well, if foo depends on foo-data, and foo-data depends on foo, I find
> it really hard to see the point of splitting the two into distinctive
> packages...
Because libfoo7 bumps sonames and foo-data will have files in the same
location.
Kind regards
T.
--
Thomas Viehmann
David Weinehall wrote:
> Well, if foo depends on foo-data, and foo-data depends on foo, I find
> it really hard to see the point of splitting the two into distinctive
> packages...
There are lots of valid reasons to do it; tasksel and tasksel-data split
to make it easier for derivatives to replace
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 11:42:39AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Well, if foo depends on foo-data, and foo-data depends on foo, I find
> > it really hard to see the point of splitting the two into distinctive
> > packages...
>
> It could be useful if f
David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, if foo depends on foo-data, and foo-data depends on foo, I find
> it really hard to see the point of splitting the two into distinctive
> packages...
It could be useful if foo-data is very large, but changes rarely,
whereas foo is small, but chan
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 06:32:54PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Steve Greenland wrote:
> > This really seems like something that while they may, very occasionally,
> > be required, are mostly unnecessary and often misused.
>
> Rather, I'd characterise it as a feature that is necessary for any
> gener
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have written a script that I think would be useful in Debian. It
seems excessive to make a package for for it, but a quick google for
'debian scripts' didn't turn up any convenient websites or
repositories, so I thought I'd ask here where would be a
Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday 25 July 2006 01:42, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> Which packages actually use it, and why?
>> What can it do that "echo $VALUE > /sys$DEVPATH/attribute" and similar
>> commands cannot do?
>>
>> What is the point of having an abstraction layer for a publ
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 01:42, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Which packages actually use it, and why?
> What can it do that "echo $VALUE > /sys$DEVPATH/attribute" and similar
> commands cannot do?
>
> What is the point of having an abstraction layer for a published and
> already widely used API?
>
> I ob
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: David Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: pybridge-server
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : Michael Banks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://pybridge.sourceforge.net
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Python
Des
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Miriam Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: vbindiff
Version : 3.0 beta 1
Upstream Author : Christopher J. Madsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://home.comcast.net/~chris-madsen/vbindiff/
* License : GPL
Programmi
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 10:58:09PM +0200, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> bincmp allows to quickly compare two binary files printing the offset and
> the bytes where the files differ. It should run on just about anything and
> it might even support large files (> 4GB) if your system does LFS properly.
Doe
Steve Greenland wrote:
> This really seems like something that while they may, very occasionally,
> be required, are mostly unnecessary and often misused.
Rather, I'd characterise it as a feature that is necessary for any
general-purpose depencency-based system to be complete[1], which is
totally
also sprach Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.24.2253 +0100]:
> Well, what is the reason to conflict on itself? It makes sense for
> conflict on provides for virtual packages, but on the real package?
An upgrade is the same as removing the old and installing the new
package, so other than
Steve Greenland wrote:
> Sure, it allows some one to install foo-data without the program that
> uses it? So what? It's unlikely to happen by accident, and annoying to
> those doing it intentionally. (Just like those foo-docs that depend on
> foo, although they are mostly fixed, now.)
I don't buy
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: David Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: pybridge-common
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : Michael Banks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://pybridge.sourceforge.net
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Python
Des
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: David Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: pybridge
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : Michael Banks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://pybridge.sourceforge.net
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Python
Descriptio
* martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060724 23:28]:
> also sprach Fabio Tranchitella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.24.2204 +0100]:
> > I've noticed that some packages conflict or depend on themself. As far
> > as I know, this makes no sense and the dependency (of conflict) should
> > be removed,
On 24-Jul-06, 11:15 (CDT), Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You persist in using the word `fix'. But that's not correct. There
> is NOTHING WRONG with circular dependencies per se.
>
> Of course particular instances of circular dependencies might be
> problematic. I would try to avoid
also sprach Fabio Tranchitella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.24.2204 +0100]:
> I've noticed that some packages conflict or depend on themself. As far
> as I know, this makes no sense and the dependency (of conflict) should
> be removed, but I prefer to ask here before filing useless bug reports.
On Monday 24 July 2006 23:00, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> The "webwml" repository is available via pserver (cf
> /org/cvs.debian.org/cvs-pserver.conf) so I don't see a reason to
> provide the same service to other CVS repositories.
>
> Or were you thinking about something else?
No. I misread your ori
Hi,
> I've noticed that some packages conflict or depend on themself. As far
> as I know, this makes no sense and the dependency (of conflict) should
> be removed, but I prefer to ask here before filing useless bug reports.
>
> This is a list of the packages:
> [...]
> unison:
> Conflicts on
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Miriam Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: bincmp
Version : 1.6
Upstream Author : Guralp Systems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.guralp.net/software/tools/bincmp/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Descri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/24/2006 06:00 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
>>On Monday 24 July 2006 22:28, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>>> And since the web interface [1] also doesn't provide any nice way to
>>> download the content of the repos
Hello,
I've noticed that some packages conflict or depend on themself. As far
as I know, this makes no sense and the dependency (of conflict) should
be removed, but I prefer to ask here before filing useless bug reports.
This is a list of the packages:
avr-libc:
Conflicts on avr-libc ( )
ct
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Monday 24 July 2006 22:28, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > And since the web interface [1] also doesn't provide any nice way to
> > download the content of the repository I just hacked a little script
> > that I've put in my crontab on gluck: it checkouts (in r
On Monday 24 July 2006 22:28, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> And since the web interface [1] also doesn't provide any nice way to
> download the content of the repository I just hacked a little script
> that I've put in my crontab on gluck: it checkouts (in read-only mode)
> the various repositories and
Hello,
the debian-admin CVS repository is not accessible via pserver. After some
discussion with Joey, it looks like it's a choice of DSA rather than a
mistake (security concern with pserver implementation probably). And since
the web interface [1] also doesn't provide any nice way to download the
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 12:00:56PM +0100, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 08:14:48PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > For starters, we'd need a *lot* of hardware to be able to do all these
> > builds. Many of them will fail, because there *will* be people who will
> > neglect to te
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Benjamin Mesing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: vos
Version : 0.23.0
Upstream Author : Peter Amstutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://interreality.org/
* License : mostly LGPL, some GPL
Programming Lang: C++
Des
- Original Message -
From:
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 3:37 PM
Subject: Message could not be delivered
Deze e-mail is door E-mail Virus Scan van Het Net gecontroleerd op
virussen. Zie voor meer informatie: http://www.hetnet.nl/evs/
Een aan u verstuurd e-mai
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Kenny Duffus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libewf
Version : 20060708-1
Upstream Author : Joachim Metz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : https://www.uitwisselplatform.nl/projects/libewf/
* License : BSD
Description :
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Kenny Duffus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: afflib
Version : 1.6.28
Upstream Author : Simson L. Garfinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.afflib.org/
* License : BSD
Description : Tools to use AFF segment
Loïc Minier writes ("Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 5"):
> I fail to see how the circular depends between tasksel and tasksel-data
> would cause any bug though. I agree it's best to fix circular deps in
> general, but it's not necessarily required each time.
You persist in usi
Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 5"):
> I see you have not fully followed through on reading policy
> here: [quote]
Quite.
> Clearly, dpkg authors have read all of policy, including the
> caveats about circular dependencies.
This is
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 12:43:16PM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Milan P. Stanic wrote:
> > But then you must change all symlinks to that new real certificate.
>
> That's why on my systems all the service names symlink to
> thishost.{pem,key} and that is itself a symlink to
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Christian Hammers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: scatterchat
Version : 1.0.1
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.scatterchat.com/
* License : GPL
Description : gaim clone with encryption and a
> -Original Message-
> From: Loïc Minier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, 24 July 2006 2:32 a.m.
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies, stage 5
>
> On Sun, Jul 23, 2006, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le dimanche 23 juillet 2006 à 0
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 08:14:48PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> For starters, we'd need a *lot* of hardware to be able to do all these
> builds. Many of them will fail, because there *will* be people who will
> neglect to test their builds, and they will hog the machine so that
> other people (w
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The later is not so clear to me -- the distinction is blurred
> a bit, but I tend to agree than not. How does one feel about a LaTeX
> package that sets up a default output style, and the user prefers a
> different one? If there is a way to
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Milan P. Stanic wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 23, 2006 at 08:37:50PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Milan P. Stanic wrote:
> > > Sorry if I misunderstand something, but is it okay to call it snakeoil
> > > if it is real certificate? I like to say that the symbolic links for
> > > per
On Sun, Jul 23, 2006 at 08:37:50PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Milan P. Stanic wrote:
> > Sorry if I misunderstand something, but is it okay to call it snakeoil
> > if it is real certificate? I like to say that the symbolic links for
> > per-service certificate shouldn't point to something calle
47 matches
Mail list logo
