On 2007-09-27 16:39 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I don't think there is any requirement to have any upstream contact
> > information whatsoever in order to be able to distribute a package.
>
> This seems to be the point of disagreement. I think this
On 2007-09-24 13:17 -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 24-Sep-07, 04:30 (CDT), Andre Majorel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 2007-09-24 18:21 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> > > Andre Majorel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > On 2007-09
On 2007-09-24 18:21 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Andre Majorel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On 2007-09-23 17:22 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > The package should include in the copyright file the correct email
> > > address for whatever contact informat
On 2007-09-23 17:22 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, Andre Majorel wrote:
> > On 2007-09-20 23:10 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> >
> > > I would not be against a policy requirement that email addresses
> > > in package metadata should be the lite
On 2007-09-20 23:10 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> I would not be against a policy requirement that email addresses
> in package metadata should be the literal address without
> munging.
I would not be against a policy requirement that packagers *ask*
third parties before publishing their email addre
On 2007-08-28 12:22 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I don't have any time to work on this, but it occurred to me
> reading this that it might be useful for QA purposes to have a
> version of debuild that *unsanitizes* the environment to test
> robustness. An evil-debuild that sets every problematic
On 2007-08-29 10:58 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Tue August 28 2007 3:11:20 pm Eduard Bloch wrote:
>
> > Oh, come on. People who put $TAPE into the default environment
> > may also link /dev/null to /dev/hda (or /dev/sda) and complain
> > to the coretutils maintainer because ln isn't unable to
Would it be OK for an ISV to insert a user-defined field
(X-Yoyodyne-Peanuts) in their binary Debian packages ? Name
collisions aside, no chance of causing problems with dpkg, apt and
friends ?
Thanks in advance.
--
André Majorel http://www.teaser.fr/~amajorel/>
Do not use this account for regul
First use of email address: 2004-10-06 18:56 (UTC)
First spam received at email address: 2004-10-09 17:12 (UTC)
If you've been wondering how long it takes for an email address to
propagate from the Debian list archives to spammers, here's one
data point: less than 71 hours.
--
André Ma
On 2004-10-06 16:09 +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Andre Majorel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Is the Installed-Size field supposed to be computed for a specific
> > block size, or can I just go with a usual block size like 4k ?
>
> Do not try to compute
Is the Installed-Size field supposed to be computed for a specific
block size, or can I just go with a usual block size like 4k ?
--
André Majorel http://www.teaser.fr/~amajorel/>
Do not use this account for regular correspondance.
See the URL above for contact information.
At 00:57 1999.10.04 +0100, you wrote:
>Andre Majorel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How can they put limitations on your piece off work, I do not understand, do
>they have a patent on wad files (I do not think so).
I don't think so either but they act like they had. IIRC, the
At 13:17 1999.10.03 -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
>On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 12:41:51PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
>> It looks like the doom source is now under the GPL.
>> (http://www.doomworld.com/). This clears up the previous licencing problems
>> that were keeping it out of debian. It will still be f
13 matches
Mail list logo
