Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 01:15:44PM +0200, Thomas Weber wrote: > You are missing my point. We[1] got a reject for a documentation PDF > without source. So, we contacted upstream who checked the copyright with > the company in order to release the source for the documentation. And > yes, it's work, p

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Could you please elaborate here? The DFSG does not require us to have or > ship source code for non-program works, and if documentation is being > rejected on the basis of a *source* requirement (as distinct from a > licensing issue), then I think we ha

Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#503367: plink: file conflict with putty-tools

Le Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 08:40:59AM +0200, Sven Joachim a écrit : > Package: plink > Version: 1.03p1-1 > Severity: serious > > The /usr/bin/plink name is already taken: > > , > | # aptitude install plink > | [...] > | Selecting previously deselected package plink. > | (Reading database ... 134

Re: Inactive MIA team

On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 15:49, Mohammed Adnène Trojette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008, Paul Wise wrote: >> You must have misread the part of the email where it was mentioned >> that [EMAIL PROTECTED] is itself MIA and doesn't reply. > > MIA currently does reply but does not nec

Processed: reassign

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # appearantly nobody wants to discuss this so there is no need to > # keep it open against general > # also i think it's pretty obvious that this indeed should > # be fixed by changing the key-combo to Control+PrintScreen > reassign 501590 console-data

Bug Sprint started!

The Bug Sprint has just started! We have 27 players who registered to win cookies. The list of players and the bug they are affected is available at the usual place: http://wiki.debian.org/BugSprint Thanks for your contribution, and good luck in the game. -- .''`. : :' : W

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 01:47:15AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 01:15:44PM +0200, Thomas Weber wrote: > > You are missing my point. We[1] got a reject for a documentation PDF > > without source. So, we contacted upstream who checked the copyright with > > the company in or

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 22:22, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >It should not take us an indefinite time to release with > firmware blobs gone. I'll stake my reutation that the period involved > is not indefinite, and there is a upper boundary to it. > >Testing out th

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

On Sat, Oct 25 2008, Jeff Carr wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 22:22, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>It should not take us an indefinite time to release with >> firmware blobs gone. I'll stake my reutation that the period involved >> is not indefinite, and there is a up

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:21 PM, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Your argument boils down to: There is function that will never > be supported by free software. This is an incorrect assumption too, there are several pieces of free firmware already: Motorola DSP56001 (assem

Re: Problem with libtool relinking

[Ben Burton] > At the build stage, everything is fine. At the make install stage, > library A installs without problems into the DESTDIR, but then > libtool tries to relink library B against the older A in /usr/lib > (and fails because the older library is missing some new symbols). Yeah, same p

Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#503367: plink: file conflict with putty-tools

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since Plink is younger than Putty, I think that the burden of the > renaming is for us (the Debian Med packaging team). I plan to rename > /usr/bin/plink to /usr/bin/Plink, that would be a symbolic link to > /usr/lib/plin

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

Le Saturday 25 October 2008 10:56:56 Kalle Kivimaa, vous avez écrit : > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Could you please elaborate here?  The DFSG does not require us to have or > > ship source code for non-program works, and if documentation is being > > rejected on the basis of a *

Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#503367: plink: file conflict with putty-tools

Le Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 06:07:11PM +0300, Teodor a écrit : > IMO a simple "Conflicts: putty-tools" is enough. If they provide the > same functionality than an "alternative" is better than conflicting > with each other. Hello Tedor, thanks for the feedback, but this would be against our Policy, be

Re: Problem with libtool relinking

Hi, > > Does anyone know if there is a better solution than a > > build-conflicts? > > No, I use build-conflicts. If anyone does have better ideas, I want > to know too. (: I've had the same problem for vlc here [1] (real understanding of the situation starts around comment #44). It took me a

Bug#503395: ITP: libapache2-mod-spamhaus -- Apache module that use DNSBL to deny access to a known bad IP address

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * Package name: libapache2-mod-spamhaus Version : 0.5 Upstream Author : Luca Ercoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/m

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

On Sat, Oct 25 2008, Paul Wise wrote: > On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:21 PM, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Your argument boils down to: There is function that will never >> be supported by free software. > > This is an incorrect assumption too, there are several pieces of f

Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#503367: plink: file conflict with putty-tools

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 06:07:11PM +0300, Teodor a écrit : >> IMO a simple "Conflicts: putty-tools" is enough. If they provide the >> same functionality than an "alternative" is better than conflicting >> with each other.

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

On Sat, Oct 25 2008, Romain Beauxis wrote: > Le Saturday 25 October 2008 10:56:56 Kalle Kivimaa, vous avez écrit : >> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > Could you please elaborate here?  The DFSG does not require us to have or >> > ship source code for non-program works, and if docume

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

Hi, I take that back. postscript is a programming language, PDF might not be. Scratch what I said in my previous email. manoj -- The early bird gets the coffee left over from the night before. Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1024D/BF2442

Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations

"Jeff Carr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is hardware, for which to function, will always, for the > lifetime of the equipment, require a firmware blob to operate. This > will always be the case; there will never be a human readable version. > It will never be possible to compile it (with non

Re: RC bug for >10 packages

* Francis Tyers [Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:25:47 +0200]: > Yep, this is the case, it includes pre-compiled regular expressions and > these appear to be incompatible between versions of pcre. Ok. > [...snip...] > > > then set a Depend in the language packages to that > > > particular version of aperti

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Since the licence comming with the pdf was, up to what I read and > understand, compatible with DFSG, in particular right to reproduce, > distribute and *modify*, I completely fails to see the motivations > for such a decision. Let me quote the GR text:

Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#503367: plink: file conflict with putty-tools

Teodor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Le Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 06:07:11PM +0300, Teodor a écrit : >>> IMO a simple "Conflicts: putty-tools" is enough. If they provide the >>> same functionality than an "alternative" is bett

Re: RC bug for >10 packages

El vie, 24-10-2008 a las 00:06 +0200, Adeodato Simó escribió: > * Francis Tyers [Thu, 23 Oct 2008 22:47:20 +0200]: > > > Hi, > > Hello, Francis. > > > The bug is that the language packages require a specific version of > > libpcre to function. > > Could you explain a bit the technical backgroun

Re: RC bug for >10 packages

El sáb, 25-10-2008 a las 18:32 +0200, Adeodato Simó escribió: > * Francis Tyers [Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:25:47 +0200]: > > > Yep, this is the case, it includes pre-compiled regular expressions and > > these appear to be incompatible between versions of pcre. > > Ok. > > > [...snip...] > > > > > th

Re: RC bug for >10 packages

El sáb, 25-10-2008 a las 18:32 +0200, Adeodato Simó escribió: > * Francis Tyers [Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:25:47 +0200]: > > > Yep, this is the case, it includes pre-compiled regular expressions and > > these appear to be incompatible between versions of pcre. > > Ok. > > > [...snip...] > > > > > the

Re: RC bug for >10 packages

* Francis Tyers [Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:37:23 +0200]: Hi again, > Heh, actually there is an ambiguity there... I should have spotted it. > What I mean is: > Add the specific dependence in each language package to apertium and not > to libpcre3. The language packages already depend on apertium, but

Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#503367: plink: file conflict with putty-tools

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 7:40 PM, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No, if the functionality is different, it should be possible to install > and use both at the same time. Yes, this seems to be the rationale for this restriction in the policy. Thanks

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

Le Saturday 25 October 2008 18:36:33 Kalle Kivimaa, vous avez écrit : > Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Since the licence comming with the pdf was, up to what I read and > > understand, compatible with DFSG, in particular right to reproduce, > > distribute and *modify*, I completely

Re: RC bug for >10 packages

* Adeodato Simó [Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:57:55 +0200]: > Package: apertium > Provides: apertium-pcre-1 > And then, each time you detect a new incompatible version of pcre, you > make apertium Provide: apertium-pcre-2. This is of course fragile, so you may want to go for: Package: apertium

Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#503367: plink: file conflict with putty-tools

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Both programs are intended for command line, and could be used in > scripts. We may even find users who want to install both at the same > time. Very annoying… > > Since Plink is younger than Putty, I think that the burde

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Do you claim a PDF file is a binary file, or a program object ? Even > if PDF was a programming language, as proposed in another anwser, it > would fall into the script category, where the executed object is > also the source. I grant you that it is pos

Re: Bug#503367: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#503367: plink: file conflict with putty-tools

On Sat, 2008-10-25 at 20:18 +0300, Teodor wrote: > Since renaming seems to be the only solution, than IMO it is more > appropriate to rename 'plink' in putty-tools than in the plink > packages since this is exactly the source/binary package name. [...] > This has been done already in putty-tools fo

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 04:36:33PM +, Kalle Kivimaa wrote: > Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Since the licence comming with the pdf was, up to what I read and > > understand, compatible with DFSG, in particular right to reproduce, > > distribute and *modify*, I completely fails t

Re: Bug#503395: ITP: libapache2-mod-spamhaus -- Apache module that use DNSBL to deny access to a known bad IP address

On 2008-10-25, Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It take advantage of the Spamhaus Block List (SBL) and the Exploits > Block List (XBL) querying xbl-sbl.spamhaus.org Spamhaus's DNSBLs are > offered as a free public service for low-volume non-commercial use. the combined SBL/XBL zone i

Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#503367: plink: file conflict with putty-tools

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 08:18:23PM +0300, Teodor wrote: > On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Both programs are intended for command line, and could be used in > > scripts. We may even find users who want to install both at the same > > time. Very annoyin

Re: Bug#503395: ITP: libapache2-mod-spamhaus -- Apache module that use DNSBL to deny access to a known bad IP address

* Robert Edmonds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On 2008-10-25, Giuseppe Iuculano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It take advantage of the Spamhaus Block List (SBL) and the Exploits > > Block List (XBL) querying xbl-sbl.spamhaus.org Spamhaus's DNSBLs are > > offered as a free public service for low-volume no

Re: Bug#503395: ITP: libapache2-mod-spamhaus -- Apache module that use DNSBL to deny access to a known bad IP address

Ralf Hildebrandt ha scritto: > Or zen.spamhaus.org (which is actually a BIT more, but the recommended > list) Recommended for smtp service, not for web server. Giuseppe. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: RC bug for >10 packages

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 06:25:47PM +0200, Francis Tyers wrote: > We've come up with a better solution, which is to add dependencies to > the apertium package, and then make the apertium package depend on a > particular version of pcre3. It's safer this way, as I can't find out > anything about comp

can a kernel in main depend on firmware in non-free to work?

Hi again, I've been watching the discussion and the separation of firmware from kernel sources with a lot of interest, but today it dawned on me that, even if this project is completed, it wouldn't quite address the issue of compliance with Debian procedures and regulations. I understand main is

Re: Bug#503395: ITP: libapache2-mod-spamhaus -- Apache module that use DNSBL to deny access to a known bad IP address

On 2008-10-25, Ralf Hildebrandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Or zen.spamhaus.org (which is actually a BIT more, but the recommended > list) zen includes PBL, which certainly shouldn't be used for denying access to http service. i'm unsure why this program is named mod_spamhaus; it appears to be a

Re: can a kernel in main depend on firmware in non-free to work?

On Sat, 2008-10-25 at 18:28 -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Hi again, > > I've been watching the discussion and the separation of firmware from > kernel sources with a lot of interest, but today it dawned on me that, > even if this project is completed, it wouldn't quite address the issue > of com

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

["Followup-To:" header set to linux.debian.devel.] Thomas Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 05:06:29PM -0500, William Pitcock wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 09:03 +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > > > William Pitcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > Unfortunately, those who

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [NO CC, please] Trying hard. :-) > Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 14:59 -0500, William Pitcock wrote: > >> If we waited for a release to be 100% perfect, it will likely take > >> several more years. The good news is that the amou

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged 'lenny-ignore'?

Ben Hutchings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I just wrote this: > > http://womble.decadent.org.uk/blog/for-those-who-care-about-firmware.html Drat, just missed: Intel Corporation 82801DB PRO/100 VM (LOM) Ethernet Controller (rev 81) Thanks for the article. -- Any technology distinguishable