> Old debian source packages (subsurface-1.2-1 and libdivecomputer-0.1.0),
> could also be of some value.
>
> I'm really looking forward to see latest subsurface/libdivecomputer in
> debian, as soon as it can be done. It'll most probably be unstable, but
This thread is interesting. I faced abou
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 4:12 AM, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
> Is it just me or this thread about propietary stuff should not be happening
> here?
http://www.debian.org/social_contract
> It may be just me, yes.
It definitely isn't just you.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/P
On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Holger Levsen wrote:
> signed commits, so you can identify unwanted bits and clean up in the very
> care case that's actually needed?
Indeed. Secure git workflows are possible, although it is a relatively new
development. Signed commits and pull requests are a very big part
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 495 (new: 1)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 143 (new: 0)
Total number of packages request
On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Robert Wolfe wrote:
>
> Um, forgot about me already, hmm? :)
But, of course not. Do you want to be Cc:ed?
> And yes, libdivecomputer-3.0.1 in .DEB format
That should probably be:
subsurface-3.0.1 and
libdivecomputer-0.3.0
I presume. Can you make the sourc
Robert Wolfe writes:
> Um, forgot about me already, hmm? :) And yes, libdivecomputer-3.0.1
> in .DEB format is also available on my site if anyone wants to try
> that (in RPM format, too).
Not at all. The problem with your approach to creating a package was
that you are using the tool that is q
Dmitrijs Ledkovs writes:
>
> I have only one dive of a whole 8m deep, but I am ubuntu & debian
> developer and can upload this package to debian/ubuntu and a ppa.
>
> Is there any packaging done so far? Point me to it, if not just file
> Debian RFP and CC me on it.
There are old packages for Subs
On 28 February 2013 20:03, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn
wrote:
> Please Cc:, not subscribed to the debian-devel@lists.debian.org list.
>
> Hi there! Linus Torvalds is highly involved in this project :)
>
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
>>
>> The problem is that our target audience are dive
Hi,
signed commits, so you can identify unwanted bits and clean up in the very
care case that's actually needed?
cheer,s
Holger
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: htt
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 04:01:34PM +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:45:35AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > Has anybody had experience controlling access to git repositories, for
> > > example, to give users access but prevent some of the following
> > > dangerous o
On Feb 28, 2013, at 12:03 PM, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:
>> And for those I try to make their lives easier.
>
> Of course. Where do you get all that energy from? I'm impressed.
> Really.
Actually, I just decided to give up. This is an utter waste of my time.
Whatever. Someone who cares m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 28/02/13 20:20, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Daniel Pocock (2013-02-28 19:20:09)
>> On 28/02/13 13:15, Simon McVittie wrote:
>>> On 28/02/13 09:39, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Has anybody had experience controlling access to git
repositori
Please Cc:, not subscribed to the debian-devel@lists.debian.org list.
Hi there! Linus Torvalds is highly involved in this project :)
On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
>
> The problem is that our target audience are divers, not hackers.
Agreed.
> Someone who can build from those sources
On Thu 28 Feb 2013 14:46:28 Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez escribió:
> On 28/02/13 15:54, Mikko Rasa wrote:
> > We considered the possibility of updating the DDK to version 1.9, but in
> > the end decided to stay with 1.7. An update of the DDK would involve an
> > unknown amount of work in making the
Quoting Daniel Pocock (2013-02-28 19:20:09)
> On 28/02/13 13:15, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > On 28/02/13 09:39, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> >> Has anybody had experience controlling access to git repositories,
> >> for example, to give users access but prevent some of the following
> >> dangerous operat
On 28/02/13 13:15, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On 28/02/13 09:39, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> Has anybody had experience controlling access to git repositories, for
>> example, to give users access but prevent some of the following
>> dangerous operations?
>
> If you look at it from the appropriate angle
On 28/02/13 15:54, Mikko Rasa wrote:
>
> We considered the possibility of updating the DDK to version 1.9, but in
> the end decided to stay with 1.7. An update of the DDK would involve an
> unknown amount of work in making the driver work with it, and that was
> deemed undesirable by the customer
On Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:51:33 +0100, Arno Töll wrote:
> On 28.02.2013 11:07, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:39:26AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> >> Has anybody had experience controlling access to git repositories, for
> >> example, to give users access but prevent some o
Nice work, Wookey! If experience cross-building for armhf is any guide,
all you need for NSS is a host build of shlibsign; see
https://github.com/mkedwards/crosstool-ng/blob/master/patches/nss/3.12.10/0001-Modify-shlibsign-wrapper-for-cross-compilation.patch.
There's also scriptage in that repo f
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 16:21:05 +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
>
> > reassign 701883 xserver-xorg
> Bug #701883 [general] general: error in the load driver displaylink_drv.so in
> configuration for two displays with Xinerama
> Bug rea
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 701883 xserver-xorg
Bug #701883 [general] general: error in the load driver displaylink_drv.so in
configuration for two displays with Xinerama
Bug reassigned from package 'general' to 'xserver-xorg'.
Ignoring request to alter found versi
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Rémi Duraffort"
* Package name: proot
Version : 2.3.1
Upstream Author : Cédric Vincent
* URL : http://proot.me
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : chroot, mount --bind, and binfmt_misc without
pr
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Thijs Kinkhorst
* Package name: libapache2-mod-auth-mellon
Version : 0.6.0
Upstream Author : Feide RND, Uninett
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/modmellon/
* License : GPLv3
Programming Lang: C
Description : A SAM
On 25.02.2013 17:06, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
On 25/02/13 15:09, Mikko Rasa wrote:
On 21.02.2013 19:42, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
On 21/12/12 14:23, Mikko Rasa wrote:
Hi Debian developers,
I'm working as a consultant on a project to develop drivers for the
PowerVR graphics pr
Package: debian-maintainers
This is my annual ping.
CC'd to debian-devel@, as d-m pseudo-package has lots of stalled
"annual ping" reports. Are we have need in such kind of bureaucracy?
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Package: general
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
*** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
* What led up to the situation?
* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
ineffective)?
* What was the outcome of this action?
* What outc
Hello.
On 28 February 2013 12:51, Arno Töll wrote:
> Having that said the risk is real and it may be time to reconsider some
> choices including the use of Alioth itself for those who do not believe
> in openness. Chances are #700630 is going to rescue us all on that.
> Maybe we could set-up our
On 28/02/13 09:39, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> Has anybody had experience controlling access to git repositories, for
> example, to give users access but prevent some of the following
> dangerous operations?
Do you consider this to be a strong security measure against malicious
changes, or a weak safet
Hi,
On 28.02.2013 11:07, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:39:26AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> Has anybody had experience controlling access to git repositories, for
>> example, to give users access but prevent some of the following
>> dangerous operations?
>
> Related to
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:39:26AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> Has anybody had experience controlling access to git repositories, for
> example, to give users access but prevent some of the following
> dangerous operations?
Related to this, there is also the risk that a user will ssh on alioth
a
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:45:35AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > Has anybody had experience controlling access to git repositories, for
> > example, to give users access but prevent some of the following
> > dangerous operations?
> >
> > - prevent users pushing with the `--force' option
> > (fr
On 28 February 2013 09:39, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>
> There was recently some discussion in pkg-javascript about how to give
> more people access to the VCS (e.g. keeping the git repositories
> logically organised under the pkg-javascript tree, but making write
> access available to all DDs + alio
]] Daniel Pocock
> Has anybody had experience controlling access to git repositories, for
> example, to give users access but prevent some of the following
> dangerous operations?
>
> - prevent users pushing with the `--force' option
> (from the man page for git-push: "This can cause the remote r
There was recently some discussion in pkg-javascript about how to give
more people access to the VCS (e.g. keeping the git repositories
logically organised under the pkg-javascript tree, but making write
access available to all DDs + alioth guest users and not just those in
the pkg-javascript UNI
34 matches
Mail list logo
