RE: FORTRAN implementation in Lenny

2010-02-22 Thread Fuentes, Adolfo
Hello Raju. is a link in "/etc/alternatives" to "/usr/bin/gfortran". When typing "gfortran -v" the options are: ]$ gfortran -v Using built-in specs. Target: i486-linux-gnu Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 4.3.2-1.1' --with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-4.3/READ

Re: Bug#571041: ITP: dreampie -- advanced Python shell

2010-02-22 Thread David Paleino
Luca Falavigna wrote: > Package: wnpp > Owner: Luca Falavigna > Severity: wishlist > X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org > > * Package name: dreampie > Version : 1.0 > Upstream Author : Noam Yorav-Raphael > * URL : http://dreampie.sourceforge.net > * License

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

2010-02-22 Thread Don Armstrong
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010, Guillem Jover wrote: > First, I'd like to change the dpkg Pre-Depends from lzma to xz-utils, [...] > Second, I'd like to switch from statically to dynamically linking > against zlib and libbz2, eventually liblzma too (affecting dpkg-deb) > and libselinux (affecting dpkg itsel

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

2010-02-22 Thread Robert Collins
On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 05:20 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > I don't think this would be worth it, as Marco has also said, if the > system is hosed but you can still get to the point of obtaining a > package to install you might as well just obtain the broken files. > Of course you might have it alre

Bug#571060: xz-utils: give xzdec and lzmadec their own package

2010-02-22 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Package: xz-utils Version: 4.999.9beta+20100212-1 Severity: wishlist Guillem Jover wrote: > Also what's > the point of shipping the xzdec and lzmadec tools in the main package? > It seems they would make sense as part of another package as tiny > decompressors-only, but no in addition to the main

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

2010-02-22 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Guillem Jover wrote: > Regarding xz-utils' size, I was just checking and it seems not all > programs are linking against liblzma, by passing --enable-dynamic to > both configure lines the package gets reduced to 396 KiB. Also by > not shipping xzdec and lzmadec the package gets down to 324 KiB. >

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

2010-02-22 Thread Guillem Jover
On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 00:15:10 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > First, I'd like to change the dpkg Pre-Depends from lzma to xz-utils, > the latter is a bit bigger in size (lzma 172 KiB; xz-utils 504 KiB, > 160 KiB in share/doc/ and liblzma2 304 KiB, 124 KiB in share/doc/) Regarding xz-utils' size, I

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

2010-02-22 Thread Guillem Jover
On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 10:07:45 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 12:15:10AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Second, I'd like to switch from statically to dynamically linking > > against zlib and libbz2, eventually liblzma too (affecting dpkg-deb) > > and libselinux (affecti

Re: Re: Google Summer of Code 2009: Debian's Shortlist

2010-02-22 Thread Filipus Klutiero
> On 2009-04-11, Filipus Klutiero wrote: > > Obey Arthur Liu wrote: > >> === And the details: === > > > > [...] > > These descriptions are very short. Assuming these are the abstracts, > > that's not the students' fault. The abstracts were shortened this year > > to 500 characters. I struggled to

Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread Raphael Geissert
#348864 ... -- Raphael Geissert -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201002221916.54574.atom...@gmail.com

Re: FORTRAN implementation in Lenny

2010-02-22 Thread Mark Allums
On 2/21/2010 10:28 PM, Mark Allums wrote: On 2/21/2010 4:44 PM, Fuentes, Adolfo wrote: ]$ gcc -O3 -lm -march=nocona -o nbody.x nbody.c ]$ time ./-o nbody.x 5000 Energy 0: -0.169075164 Energy 1: -0.169059907 Elapsed time: 1m 17.4s ]$ f95 -O3 -lm -march=nocona -o nbody.x nbody.f90 ]$ time ./n

Re: Bug#571041: ITP: dreampie -- advanced Python shell

2010-02-22 Thread Neil McGovern
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:48:11AM +0100, Luca Falavigna wrote: > Description : advanced Python shell > > This Python shell permits to work in a more productive way with Python > interpreter providing features not yet implemented in standard IDLE. > This short and long description need qui

Bug#571041: ITP: dreampie -- advanced Python shell

2010-02-22 Thread Luca Falavigna
Package: wnpp Owner: Luca Falavigna Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name: dreampie Version : 1.0 Upstream Author : Noam Yorav-Raphael * URL : http://dreampie.sourceforge.net * License : GPLv3 and others Programming La

Bug#570980: teasers

2010-02-22 Thread jidanni
Well just like many of the comments to 348864, I just hate the "teasers" in section 1 that only root can run. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87wry4vo

Bug#571031: ITP: ats-lang-anairiats -- The ATS language compiler Anairiats

2010-02-22 Thread Matthew Danish
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Matthew Danish * Package name: ats-lang-anairiats Version : 0.1.7 Upstream Author : Hongwei Xi * URL : http://www.ats-lang.org/ * License : GPL-3 and LGPL-2.1 Programming Lang: ATS, C Description : The ATS langua

Re: FORTRAN implementation in Lenny

2010-02-22 Thread kamaraju kusumanchi
>    ]$ f95 -O3 -lm -march=nocona -o nbody.x nbody.f90 >    ]$ time ./nbody.x 5000 >         Energy 0: -0.169075164 >         Energy 1: -0.169059907 >         Elapsed time: 2m 31.7s > AFAIK, the GNU fortran compiler goes with the name gfortran (not f95). Please give the output of "gfortran -v"

Re: Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread Russ Allbery
gregor herrmann writes: > On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:54:54 +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote: >> Many executables in .../sbin have their man pages in section 1 instead >> of section 8. >> Perhaps a piuparts like script could comb over the apt-file search >> results to target them. > Sounds more like

Re: User uucp to be member of group mail for `sendmail -f'?

2010-02-22 Thread Florian Weimer
* markus schnalke: > For exim, this seems to be solved by adjusting the exim configuration: > ``[...] you might use trusted_users and add uucp to it [...]'' [3]. > See also [4]. It appears that the system administrator has to do the > change in order to enable uucp to call `sendmail -f ...'. Debi

Processed (with 1 errors): Fix cloning of section 1 manpages bug to lintian

2010-02-22 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > # wrong bug was cloned > close 570994 Bug#570994: "please add a check against commands in /sbin using section 1 manpages" 'close' is deprecated; see http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#closing. Bug closed, send any further explanations to Osamu

Processed: Re: reportbug general bug filing recommendation (was Re: Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > clone 570991 -1 Bug#570991: tuxtype: Package with doc/AUTHORS and doc/ChangeLog and doc/TODO Bug 570991 cloned as bug 570994. > reassign -1 lintian Bug #570994 [tuxtype] tuxtype: Package with doc/AUTHORS and doc/ChangeLog and doc/TODO Bug reassi

Re: Bug#570980: reportbug general bug filing recommendation (was Re: Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread Adam D. Barratt
# Cc to -devel for information after the reassign merge 570980 348864 thanks Holger Levsen wrote, Monday, February 22, 2010 5:19 PM clone 570991 -1 reassign -1 lintian retitle -1 "please add a check against commands in /sbin using section 1 manpages" fwiw, there *was* such a lintian check, wh

Bug#570980: reportbug general bug filing recommendation (was Re: Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread Holger Levsen
clone 570991 -1 reassign -1 lintian retitle -1 "please add a check against commands in /sbin using section 1 manpages" severity -1 wishlist block 570991 by 476403 block 570991 by 512447 block 570991 by 512449 block 570991 by 512450 block 570991 by 512451 block 570991 by 512452 block 570991 by 5709

Bug#570980: reportbug general bug filing recommendation (was Re: Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread jidanni
I tried to find all bugs with "section 8" in their title via http://bugs.debian.org An error occurred. Error was: You have to choose something to select by I'll try this to at least find (most of) mine: $ w3m -cols -dump http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?submitter=jida...@jidan

Bug#570980: reportbug general bug filing recommendation (was Re: Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Sandro, please don't cc: me, I'm subscribed. On Montag, 22. Februar 2010, Sandro Tosi wrote: > > I'm tempted to close this bug or reassign to reportbug ;-) > Please don't. Neither? ;) > The one above is the description of 'general' we retrieve from > [1], that's the canonical place for defin

Re: correct/ideal way to obtain root from a shell script

2010-02-22 Thread Bill Allombert
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:45:20AM +, Jon Dowland wrote: > On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 08:37:57PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > Simply depends on the menu package which provide su-to-root > > We've determined that su-to-root in it's current state > doesn't handle the disabled-root case anyway,

Bug#570980: reportbug general bug filing recommendation (was Re: Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi jidanni, On Montag, 22. Februar 2010, jida...@jidanni.org wrote: > Then I got this great idea that instead of me just mentioning in to > packages that I've stumbled into, there could be a systematic combing of > all Debian. Can you point me to bugs about manpages in section 1 which belong in s

Bug#570980: reportbug general bug filing recommendation (was Re: Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 17:07, Holger Levsen wrote: >> P.S., I am sure I filed this bug in the right place, as reportbug says >> "general General problems (e.g., that many manpages are mode 755)". > > I'm tempted to close this bug or reassign to reportbug ;-) Please don't. > IME bugs against > t

Bug#570980: reportbug general bug filing recommendation (was Re: Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread jidanni
HL> Do you intend to file individual bugs? I'd appreciate this. Actually I've filed many individual bugs, some even just today. Then I got this great idea that instead of me just mentioning in to packages that I've stumbled into, there could be a systematic combing of all Debian. -- To UNSUBS

Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
On 22/02/10 15:54, jida...@jidanni.org wrote: > Many executables in .../sbin have their man pages in section 1 instead > of section 8. > > Perhaps a piuparts like script could comb over the apt-file search > results to target them. This could rather be a lintian check. Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRI

Re: Flag images - technical solution

2010-02-22 Thread Osamu Aoki
Hi, > On 17/02/2010 19:15, Mike Hommey wrote: > > On the other hand, one application will want 16x10 icons, another one > > 24x15, another one may have some effects applied on the flags to better > > fit the UI design, etc. > > > > So while applications amy be using flags already, are they really

Bug#570980: reportbug general bug filing recommendation (was Re: Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi jidanni, On Montag, 22. Februar 2010, jida...@jidanni.org wrote: > Many executables in .../sbin have their man pages in section 1 instead > of section 8. This is indeed a policy violation as it's covered by policy indirectly via FHS: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#USRSHAREMANMA

Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread gregor herrmann
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:54:54 +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote: > Many executables in .../sbin have their man pages in section 1 instead > of section 8. > Perhaps a piuparts like script could comb over the apt-file search > results to target them. Sounds more like a possible new test for lintian?

Bug#570980: man sbin man pages are in section 1 instead of section 8

2010-02-22 Thread jidanni
Package: general Severity: wishlist Many executables in .../sbin have their man pages in section 1 instead of section 8. Perhaps a piuparts like script could comb over the apt-file search results to target them. Not sure if a policy violation. Or if should be made part of policy. P.S., I am sur

Re: User uucp to be member of group mail for `sendmail -f'?

2010-02-22 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Feb 22, markus schnalke wrote: > However, I think the problem could be solved by making the user uucp a > member of group mail. From my limited POV, this solution represents > the logic behind: uucp wants to use special facilities of the MTA, > thus it needs to be in group mail. This does not

User uucp to be member of group mail for `sendmail -f'?

2010-02-22 Thread markus schnalke
I work on bug #409912 [0] in the MTA masqmail currently. [0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=409912 See also: [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=406395 [2] http://bugs.hylafax.org/show_bug.cgi?id=842 The point is that masqmail allows only root and the group mai

Bug#570932: ITP: xslthl -- XSLT syntax highlighting

2010-02-22 Thread Mathieu Malaterre
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Mathieu Malaterre * Package name: xslthl Version : 2.0.1 Upstream Author : Michal Molhanec, Jirka Kosek, Michiel Hendriks * URL : http://xslthl.sf.net * License : zlib/libpng License Programming Lang: Java Descriptio

Bug#570919: ITP: python-django-piston -- Piston is a Django mini-framework creating RESTful APIs.

2010-02-22 Thread Michael Ziegler
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Michael Ziegler * Package name: python-django-piston Version : 0.2.2 Upstream Author : Jesper Noehr * URL : http://bitbucket.org/jespern/django-piston/wiki/Home * License : BSD Programming Lang: Python Description