Re: Official presentation template

[Vor DebConf visitors: I'm just replying into a thread that was started in Debian-devel list and which concerns more or less the LaTeX beamer BOF https://penta.debconf.org/~joerg/events/34.en.html ] On Sat, 23 Jun 2007, Sebastian Harl wrote: Afaik, there is no such thing. However, there has

Re: Proposed new release goal: Dependency/file list predictability

Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This should be fixed by rebuilding af. However, since we are moving > to a new menu structure, the menu file will need to be updated[1], so > the packages will need a new sourceful upload anyway. The footnote was missing, unfortunately: I'm really curi

Re: Proposed new release goal: Dependency/file list predictability

Matthew Johnson wrote: > Also, you should consider build systems which switch using the > alternatives system. Debian Java policy says that debian/rules must > specify the build system to use explicitly, but there are a number of > packages which don't. If you know of any such packages, please fil

Re: Bug#430140: ITP: hoard -- Fast, scalable, and efficient replacement memory allocator

Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Without having any knowledge of the specifics of hoard, the phrase > "faster and more efficient under many load patterns" does not eliminate > the possibility of "pathologically horrible behaviour under other load > patterns". Bubble sort works pretty

Re: Bug#430140: ITP: hoard -- Fast, scalable, and efficient replacement memory allocator

Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> What's the downsides? I'd guess that if it's GPLed and not in glibc, >> there's a catch somehow. glibc is not GPL'd. It's LGPL. > there're also the google perftools[1], which are suppsed to work very > well and we have libgoogle-perftools in Debian.

Re: Bug#430140: ITP: hoard -- Fast, scalable, and efficient replacement memory allocator

On 24-Jun-07, 17:46 (CDT), "Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 09:27:49AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Hoard is a replacement memory allocator that can be used instead of glibc > > malloc without recompiling binaries. It is faster and more efficient > > u

Re: Bug#430140: ITP: hoard -- Fast, scalable, and efficient replacement memory allocator

>> Hoard is a replacement memory allocator that can be used instead of glibc >> malloc without recompiling binaries. It is faster and more efficient >> under many load patterns than the default glibc malloc, and is particularly >> good for multithreaded programs running on multiple processors. >>

Re: Bug#430140: ITP: hoard -- Fast, scalable, and efficient replacement memory allocator

On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 09:27:49AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Hoard is a replacement memory allocator that can be used instead of glibc > malloc without recompiling binaries. It is faster and more efficient > under many load patterns than the default glibc malloc, and is particularly > good for

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Package

On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 05:51:29PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > As I understood it, the idea was more to keep information *comparable*, > which wouldn't be the case if someone "improved" the script by using a > faster minimizer, linking against an improved libfoo or whatever. You > simply cannot

Re: Nexuiz 2.3

Jiri Palecek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jonas Meurer wrote: > >> On 21/06/2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 01:39:41PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> wrote: >>> > Both packages have been uploaded at the same time, and I could not >>> > forsee that it has still not been bui

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Package

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le vendredi 22 juin 2007 à 14:20 -0400, Zachary Palmer a écrit : >> This software package has pretty much the best reason for >> being closed source that I've encountered; they want to prevent >> falsified results from damaging the research. > > This

Re: Proposed new release goal: Dependency/file list predictability

On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 09:23:16AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > However, with this setup, you only check that building packages in > non-clean environments doesn't significantly affect the package. It > would be interesting to check as well if the resulting package matches > what is in the archiv

Re: Bug#430206: ITP: iodine -- tool for tunneling IPv4 data through a DNS server

On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 15:35:07 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: (cc'ing the ITP bug to have this opinion documented there, too) > | How is iodine different from nstx? > - Works on !i386 > - Source code that does not make me cry and run away. > It's slightly less performant (in my experience), but I st

Re: Automated mails to maintainers of packages with serious problems

Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > Also nice would be links to the BTS. > > Well, links in text emails use a lot of space... The BTS uses this nice abbreviation which does not use too much space compared with the bug title that often is longer. Regards, Joey -- N

Re: making in stable or testing

LOL ... i don't know why, i understand that he wanted to develop some application for debian ... well .. i must not be in one of my days! Dom, 2007-06-24 às 18:02 +0200, Guus Sliepen escreveu: > On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 05:25:29PM +0100, Luis Matos wrote: > > > Dom, 2007-06-24 às 17:05 +0200, [EMA

Re: making in stable or testing

On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 05:25:29PM +0100, Luis Matos wrote: > Dom, 2007-06-24 às 17:05 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu: > > Hello devolpers, > > > > I want devolp packages for debian, must I make it in stable or testing? > > check your timetable ... do you want to develop your application to >

Re: making in stable or testing

Dom, 2007-06-24 às 17:05 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu: > Hello devolpers, > > I want devolp packages for debian, must I make it in stable or testing? check your timetable ... do you want to develop your application to start to use in th next two months or 2 years? the first one, develop in

making in stable or testing

Hello devolpers, I want devolp packages for debian, must I make it in stable or testing? Regards, polopolo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#430335: ITP: nsd3 -- authoritative name domain server

On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 12:35:25PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > Hi Pierre, > > On Saturday 23 June 2007 15:57, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > * Package name: nsd3 > > >NSD3 is an fast, authoritative only, high performance, simple > >and open source name server. > > Good that you want

Re: Nexuiz 2.3

Jonas Meurer wrote: > On 21/06/2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 01:39:41PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> wrote: >> > Both packages have been uploaded at the same time, and I could not >> > forsee that it has still not been built and uploaded on sparc on time. >> > I think to

Re: I don't understand Debian

[It's a general answer] I'm happy that you don't see me as a troll. I've already heard all these arguments that are _not_ arguments. For me the perfect distribution doesn't exist and never will (because of upstream). I have a simple dream : that Debian stable ships for instance linux 2.16 whi

Re: Bug#430335: ITP: nsd3 -- authoritative name domain server

Hi Pierre, On Saturday 23 June 2007 15:57, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > * Package name: nsd3 >NSD3 is an fast, authoritative only, high performance, simple >and open source name server. Good that you want to work on this. Did you coordinate this with the maintainer of the current nsd pa

Re: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?

On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 10:47:24AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > debian/rules build-arch || (test $? -eq 2 && debian/rules build) > > > > must work and exit with a status of 0. > > Which causes double builds in case something fails with error 2. How often does something fail with error