On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 09:22:12AM +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> > 3. Software packages from Apt cannot declare dependencies against
> > language-specific packages, for the same reasons highlighted in
> > #1.
> Irrelevant argument in our case, as outlined earlier in the
> discussion.
On Sat, Jan 01, 2011 at 05:11:17PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> For both libgpg-error-dev and libgcrypt11-dev you moved the .so
> symlink ,the *.a and *.la libtool files to /lib too.
>
> My original patch [1] for libcryptsetup (#604936) handled this
> diffently. It only moved the *.so.* files to
Hi Kamaraju,
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:33:09AM -0500, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=354032
>
> asking for the latest version (0.8.0) of gerris which has been
> available since Oct 17, 2005. I have not received any reply to this
> bug report e
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 05:30:52PM -0400, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> I tried building from SVN:
>
> [...]
> mkdir -p debian/stamp/ && touch debian/stamp/target-gl-debian-debug
> dh_testdir
> chmod +x debian/shadowtree
> rm -f -rf build/gl-debian-debug-i386
> debian/shadowtree build/gl-debian-
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 02:58:19PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Right. My solution for that was to split them into a separate
> mesa-utils source package, with a slightly hacked Makefile. They
> build just fine independently.
Ah, you mean the utils! The demos are shipped in a separate tarb
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 12:07:46PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Sorry, I've really just not had any time recently, and there are some
> things I wanted to clean up before I fired off to you (e.g. the
> Build-Dep on glut, which introduced horrible Build-Deps and other
> hilarity which meant tha
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 10:35:55PM -0400, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > Is this an attempt to smooth the transition from the xorg
> > > packages to the mesa ones and in the course of the X
> > > modularisation to get completely rid of the GL/GLU code in xorg
> > > (and the libgl*-xorg package
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 03:20:10AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> x-window-system-core in Ubuntu Breezy now depends on
> libgl1-mesa-dri/libgl1-mesa/libglu1-mesa while as in unstable it is
> xlibmesa-dri/xlibmesa-gl/liblu1-xorg.
If that's right, that's broken, too.
It should at most recommen
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 02:41:05AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> It seems that mesa (6.3.2) as well as xorg (6.8.2) both provide a
> GL/GLU implemetation.
If you look at:
http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_contents.pl?word=libGL.so.1&searchmode=searchfiles&case=sensitive&version=unst
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:13:08AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> +for pid in $pids ; do
> +wait $pid
> +done
Isn't just:
wait
enough?
--
Marcelo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject o
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 02:42:18PM +1000, Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:
> But we've know about it for a week. That's plenty of time to register
> a source-forge project, knock up a coming-soon webpage, install a
> piece of webforum software and a blog, and maybe a wiki, produce a
> list of things
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libdrm
Version : 1.0.2
Upstream Author : DRI Developers
* URL : http://people.freedesktop.org/~ajax/libdrm/
* License : BSD-like
Description
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 08:51:31PM +, Joerg Sommer wrote:
> I reported my wish #281892 to have a file in examples executable to
> make it possible to create a symlink on it that is placed in the
> PATH. Or that is to say I would like to have the file
> bogominitrain.pl in examples executab
On Sun, Aug 07, 2005 at 04:37:51PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > If someone knows of a way to get graphviz to produce something
> > _readable_ please let me know.
>
> I managed to produce a readable (still huge) graph by cheating and
> omitting dependencies on qt-x11-free and kdelibs,
On Sun, Aug 07, 2005 at 01:41:06PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > http://people.debian.org/~mmagallo/gcc-transition/
>
> Are you going to keep it up to date? Is it generated using a
> cronjob, or do you update it manually?
After having fixed some glitches, yes, it is in a cronjob n
On Sun, Aug 07, 2005 at 10:59:51AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 06-Aug-05, 17:42 (CDT), "Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That said, what exactly is the problem kernel-image-x.y.z
> > providing a kernel image for *bsd or hurd or
On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 06:48:49PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 August 2005 18:15, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > Thanks for the pointer, Adam, and a giant "Feh!" to the genius who came
> > up with that idea.
>
> Did you even think of asking for the rationale behind the name change?
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 11:22:19AM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
> > libtagcoll0, Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Already asked for removal, now supserseded by libtagcoll1-{dev,pic}.
I added this to the exclusion list.
Marcelo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 10:34:14AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> thanks for the list. Do you want updates?
Sure. Exclusions mostly. Whatever needs to be excluded from the list
because it doesn't need to be/won't be transitioned.
--
Marcelo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 11:04:30PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> The attached list has been generated with an up to date Packages
> file for the following architectures: alpha arm hppa hurd-i386 i386
> ia64 m68k mips mipsel powerpc s390 sh sparc.
The list and script can be
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 07:45:39PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> After some fiddling with AptPkg, my first cut at generating a list
> of packages ready to be transitioned is attached.
After getting fed up with AptPkg I rewrote the script in the attached
form. If you feed the
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 08:39:26PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> A small parser that looks for extern "C", the "{" right after it and
> the matching "}" should make things much easier.
The attached script should work in most cases.
--
Marc
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 02:51:14PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Yeah, this is another lib with a C++ implementation that only exports
> a C ABI in its headers. (other telltale signs to look for besides
> '::', btw are 'use', 'class', 'operator'; but that may obviously give
> false positives
OTECTED]> libranlip libranlip1
Juergen Salk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>dcmtk dcmtk
Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ladspa-sdk ladspa-sdk
Keita Maehara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> dvd+rw-toolsdvd+rw-tools
Klaus Reimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> strutilsx
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 03:24:50PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Oh, ugh. I think the XSF was essentially following Ubuntu's lead
> here; no one realized, or thought to check, that the C++ bits weren't
> exported as part of the ABI.
Ah... that was my guess...
> David, do you want me to pu
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 03:09:18AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Also, for those who aren't aware, the new xorg packages now in
> unstable are also implicated in the C++ transition, because libGLU is
> implemented in C++.
Keyword: implemented.
All of GLU's interfaces are C, not C++, so "tr
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 04:43:06PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Out of those, they are all either available for php4 as well (php3-*)
> or depend on either php3 or php4.
Just to make the point more explicit:
$ grep-available -n -s Package -F Depends php3 -a ! -F Depends php4 | sort -u
php3-cg
Hi fellows,
while grepping thru the Vancouver thread, I was trying to understand
why Sparc isn't in the "likely first class citizens for etch" list.
My impression was that Sparc is one of the "healthy" ports. Looking at
http://buildd.debian.org/ I noticed that, say:
http://buildd.debian.or
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 03:17:51AM +0100, Wouter van Heyst wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 06:03:04PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > * it's not ftp-master's business to judge on _technical_ merits of
> >the pacakge (bad packaging practices, missing depe
Hi,
pardon me for the delay, I really have better things to do that getting
involved all day long in discussions with purposely obtuse people.
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 01:30:22PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> >On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 11:21:02AM +1000
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 12:40:02AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > It works and is available from dak.ganneff.de. And the packages
> > > is used on several archives now. Its just not out of NEW atm.
>
> > So, let's *guess* ...
>
> > * -release decided to stop processing NEW ... we
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 01:14:09AM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> (Aha: the strip tool mentioned is in elfutils, which is non-free.
> Blah.)
objcopy(1):
--only-keep-debug
Strip a file, removing any sections that would be stripped by
--strip-debug and leaving the debugging s
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 11:21:02AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 08:39:10PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > * it's not ftp-master's business to judge on _technical_ merits of the
> > pacakge (bad packaging practices, missing dependencies, ignores
> > /chapter and v
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 08:39:10PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> It works and is available from dak.ganneff.de. And the packages is
> used on several archives now. Its just not out of NEW atm.
So, let's *guess* ...
* ftp-master surely knows about the license on that one, so it's not a
"
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 06:28:58PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> As a DD, you can ls /org/ftp.debian.org/queue/new on merkel, daily
> synced. Beware, there are 2826 files in there atm, so ls via grep or
> something.
And while we are on the subject, what's with NEW not being processed?
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 04:12:16PM +0100, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> Anyway, your mail also says that if someone send you config for
> dupload then you are going to include it in some README. Is this
> README available somewhere?
Something along the lines of the following in ~/.duploa
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 12:20:25PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > I haven't read the document in question in a rather long time, so
> > I can't actually object (on some sort of serious basis, I mean),
> > but I would nevertheless request that the document be handed to
> > the -english ma
On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 07:37:18PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> IIRC there were some people who objected to some of the contents of
> the document. But even for those it is probably better to have a
> Debian package - if it's important, the discussion will take place in
> bug reports, instead
On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 01:20:56PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > > > > Ugh... that pushes the burden of maitaining support for new
> > > > > architectures to the package.
> > >
> > > Yeah - I think it's trade off - whether we support library
> > > optimization package or we don't get
On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 09:43:18AM +0100, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> I agree with you, but dont forget that this micro benchmark does not
> really measure the overall effect on the system (i.e. to other
> programs, to the number of meta data updates, cach useage) and it
> does not take into acco
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 05:52:04PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > > > Yes, and if ev67 is instruction upper compatible with ev56 (I
> > > > guess so), I think it's acceptable to add a symlink "ln -sf
> > > > lib/ev67/libfoo.so lib/ev56/libfoo.so".
> > >
> > > Ugh... that pushes the burden o
On Sat, Jan 15, 2005 at 10:14:15PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > occurs when you have for example an ev56 library in lib/ev56, and a
> > ev67 CPU. Then the loader looks in lib/ev67 and then falls back to
> > lib. Since glibc is very carefully undocumented in this area [1], I
> > didn't want
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 11:27:28AM +0100, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> Sensible options are ev56 and ev67; ev5 is not particularly useful,
> since it has the same instruction set as the baseline ev4, only
> different scheduling. -mieee is default anyway on Debian's gcc.
If you have the time, hardw
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 03:52:58PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> Note that MMX will be removed from the next glibc 2.3.4 upload. It
> will provide only SSE2 (and CMOV, debian-specific for only VIA C3
> processor).
Well, there's hand-crafted MMX code, so it's runtime checked. I guess
that w
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:46:00PM -0500, William Ballard wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 08:22:47PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > We don't have to go from X.0 to (X+1).0 in 6 months. It's
> > perfectly ok to go from X.0 to X.1.
>
> .1 Releases
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:50:04AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Yes, I don't think the release team has any intention of working
> itself ragged to get a second release out 6 months after sarge. I
> also don't think there's any consensus among developers (or users)
> that we *want* to relea
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 11:25:29PM +, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> We've spent most of the past year thinking a release might be just
> round the corner. We can only cry wolf so many times before the world
> stops believing us and finds an option that actually works.
You ought to hear the j
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 03:34:20PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time
> > it takes for a new stable version.
> >
> > What about saying something like: the next stable release comes in
> > the beginning of 2006?
>
> The relea
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:35:37PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> It shouldn't be forgotten that the biggest blocker after these things
> is probably a general failure to actually care all that much. How
> many people are actually behaving as if a release is just around the
> corner? How can
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 03:41:41PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> ...which Debian provides for its stable distribution at any time,
> even if the last stable release was ages ago. How does a fixed
> release date help there?
Besides Florian's point, you have to consider that Debian needs peopl
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 01:27:21AM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> Some Alpha systems (I forgot which) came with only the inferior
> AlphaBIOS installed in flash. Later, an SRM version for this system
> was released, and installing this is generally considered a good
> thing. These firmwares r
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 10:20:09AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> > The other problem with aptitude is touted as a design feature: it
> > tends to be all-or-nothing. Either you use it always or you don't
> > (automatic removal thingie). This becomes a problem when multiple
> > persons use d
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 11:52:05AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Completely and utterly wrong in my case. I'm exactly the sort of
> person that you apparently think should like dselect, but I think
> aptitude is _far_ superior, for both experts and newbies. The
> competition isn't even close.
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 08:12:50AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I failed in ending this thread when I posted
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/12/msg00016.html
>
> instead I caused two trolls making even more noise.
Without having read your post, I'm pretty confident th
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 11:31:09AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Your project registration for Alioth has been denied.
>
> Project Full Name: Window Maker Debian Package
> Project Unix Name: wmaker
>
> Reasons for negative decision:
>
> If you decide to use an alioth project to com
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 04:53:29PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> > * bash reads and writes a number of files in ~/ (.bash_profile,
> > .bashrc, .bash_history)
> > * there are several directories related to GNOME (at least ~/.gnome2
> > and ~/.gnome2_private)
> > * vim h
On Sat, Oct 30, 2004 at 01:41:23PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> Why not simply make it search for ~/GNUstep, and when that isn't
> found, ~/.GNUstep or something like that - would retain full
> compatibility.
With Debian, yes. With the rest of the world, no. You have to take
into accou
On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 01:54:54PM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
wrote:
> IIRC the problem is that rsync is quite CPU-heavy on the servers, so
> while the mirrors have the (network) resources to feed downloads to
> 100s of users, they don't have the (CPU) resources for a few dozen
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 5)==
>
> User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the
> user's home directory in a file that starts with the '.' character (a
> "dot file"). If an application needs to create more than one dot file
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:37:21AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Okay, it's a month old, but there hasn't been any since.
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/09/msg5.html
> > "We are also still missing official autobuilders for
> > testing-proposed-updates on alpha
On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 05:15:30PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> There's more to a package name than just being a key to tools. It is
> the name by which one remembers the software, even when he or she
> doesn't really know it; it is the name one uses when asking a friend
> (or Dr. Google) abou
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:46:07PM +1100, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
> Actually, Linux has been ported to all of the CPUs and systems I had
> in mind; in fact, ported by the vendor since there's demand for Linux.
> The 1 GHz dual-cores I mentioned are one from Broadcom (wh
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 12:53:39AM +1100, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
> [ Responding to this since I've been BCCed. ]
Oh, nice. If hadn't been Bcc'ed you wouldn't respond? That's
reasuring, since you seem to be one of the few persons who's got some
information on the sub
> But there is one thing to mention: development seems to be stalled
> for some time now, I can't complain about bugs though.
Take a look at kahakai: http://kahakai.sf.net/
--
Marcelo
> * Package name: linux-experimental
I really don't care either way, but would you consider using
kernel-linux-whatever instead? Just for consistency's sake. As
someone else said, eventually there will be a kernel-freebsd or
kernel-netbsd, and having an uniform scheme to call these thin
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 03:10:14PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> The question was: How do you provide 2.4.x for architecture blah and
> 2.4.y for architecture foo, which are two versions of the same
> "upstream branch".
just to give you a better idea of what we are talking about here, these
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 12:21:32PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> or who pretend the dessign of my package is broken in a way that I
> can't solve such trivial bugs.
Look, you see whatever you want to see, but you are still missing the
forest for the trees. When I mentioned System.map this wa
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Since you like playing word games... what else do you get when you
> > do apt-get source kernel-image-2.4.22-1-k7 if not
> > kernel-image-2.4.22-1-k7's source package?
> >
> > Do you want the Linux Kernel sources with all
> How do the current kernel packages guarantee this?
>
> Why would Robert's package need to behave any differently?
The current kernel packages don't make the old stuff just dissappear,
so it's less of an issue in that case. In fact, the only "bad"
situation with the current kernel package
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 02:40:11PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> The packaging method is the whole point. And indeed, some people like
> the ability to do standard things like "apt-get source foo" and get
> foo's sources.
Since you like playing word games... what else do you get when you do
On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 11:28:50PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > 3. You seem to have a problem with the kernel-source-* packges,
> > which I honestly don't follow.
>
> Do you understand what standarisation means?
Is that your problem? Having source distributed in binary packages?
> > > It's not "cosmetic". The point is it has a completely different
> > > packaging style and philosophy. I want to package the Linux kernel in
> > > the same way the rest of Debian is packaged, that's all.
> >
> > Until now you have failed to provide a reason for that, other than
> >
> It's not "cosmetic". The point is it has a completely different
> packaging style and philosophy. I want to package the Linux kernel in
> the same way the rest of Debian is packaged, that's all.
Until now you have failed to provide a reason for that, other than
cosmetic reasons.
Please _d
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 02:37:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> * Package name: linux
> Version : 2.4.22
> Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and others, see:
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/CREDITS
> * URL : http://w
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 11:31:30AM +0100, Sebastian Henschel wrote:
> in short: i want your blessing. :)
Go, go, go!
Just package the thing as wmacpi and be happy.
--
Marcelo
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 03:22:10AM -0600, Chris Cheney wrote:
> Intel
> -
> i845 10 Sept 2001
> i875 14 Apr 2003
> i865 21 May 2003
The last two don't have AGP support before 2.4.23-preX (not sure if X
is 1 or not), and the on-board network cards which many of the the
motherboards b
On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 05:55:22PM +0200, Tom Cato Amundsen wrote:
> How can I find all packages that build-depends on a package? In my
> case, I'm looking for packages that build-depends on docbook-xml and
> docbook-xsl.
Please excuse the somewhat terse answer of our fellow Goswin...
You
> Me too. The actual problem seems to have been causing by a behavior of
> ldconfig that we almost never see because we tend to ship library
> packages with lib$SONAME.so.$SOVERSION symbolic links already in the
> package payload.
I don't want to nitpick, but the SONAME is what you are calli
> > a. Whack upstream with a cluebat.
>
> Euh, I think you messed up. Marco *is* upstream.
That doesn't preclude whackig upstream with a cluebat :-) Here, he can
use mine.
--
Marcelo
> What's more of a problem here is that libtool actually links
> dependency libraries of dependencies ... it's something I've been
> working on for a while.
That's a bug, not a feature. From libtool's perspective at least.
You have to keep in mind that libtool is designed to work around
ex
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 01:33:01AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> Does anyone happen to know why .la files hardcode the paths to .la
> files that they depend on?
Anal-retentiveness wrt using the exact same library originaly used.
> This is about to bite Debian hard with some of the XFree86 lib
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 08:26:44PM -0400, Marco Paganini wrote:
> I'm packaging a Python program called "ask" for distribution.
> Currently, the main executable is called "ask.py".
a. Whack upstream with a cluebat.
b. Repeat a.
c. What happens when the program gets reimplemented in another
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200, Robert Lemmen wrote:
> please do! dselect (whil ebeing verty simple and functional) has the
> most counter-intuitive user interface i have seen. the day i
> discovered aptitude and got rid of dselect meant a big step forward
> for my persoanl debian ex
Hi Luca,
sorry about the Cc, but eye-balling -devel didn't reveal much activity
from you, so I'm not sure if you track the list. M-F-T is set to d-d.
> I propose to restructure the vim package so that it builds fewer vim
> variants.
>
> I propose to have only the following:
> vim (aka
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 10:12:27PM +0200, JG wrote:
> In gnome2 there is also something called "gnome-settings-dameon". I
> don't know exactly what it is used for, but at least the "theme"
> preferences use it. (i.e. without gnome-settings-daemon running, all
> applications are in the default
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 12:19:36PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> How much space do those 500 odd packages take up?
I really have no intention to peg the database up with a query like
that. Here:
$ zcat testing{,-proposed-updates}/main/binary-alpha/Packages.gz |
grep-dctrl -n -s Pa
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 12:56:19PM -0700, Joshua Kwan wrote:
> > [alpha]7283
> > [i386] 7889
>
> I'd not include non-free in the batch because many non-free on i386 are
> i386 only, i.e. binary driver installers.
Ah, well spotted, but still there's some significant difference:
[EM
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 04:27:57PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> And people allways say that 64 Bit archs need much bigger executables.
>
> Somehow alpha saves 328MB compared to i386 and a suggested 30-50% size
> increase on binaries would mean a lot of packages are not available on
>
On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 06:57:38PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> > [NEW] 3dwm (#206870), orphaned 5 days ago
> > Description: libzorn development files
> > Reverse Depends: 3dwm-pickclient 3dwm-texclient 3dwm-csgclient
> > libcelsius-dev libpolhem-dev libgarbo-dev libnobel-dev
On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 12:18:50PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Pray to god that testing and unstable stop diverging so much? :)
FYI, this is the size of all the binaries belonging to the given
architecture, in the specifies suites:
architecture | any| unstable| u+t| u+t+s
On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 03:05:00PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> But sometimes there are fundamental disagreements about how something
> should be packaged and then it must be possible for two competing
> packages to exist in Debian
Says who?
Debian is not just a collection of packages, it's
Hi Steve,
thanks for the work. A couple of questions for clarity's sake (as
sysadmin, not packager)
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:37:59PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> - Per-package /etc/pam.d/ configuration files should not include
> explicit 'password' blocks. Instead, services should us
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 04:32:03PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> I don't see why it would be idiotic to fork the package.
> If you can package this application better than the
> current maintainer then go ahead and do so.
Forking packages outside of Debian might or might not achieve the goals
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 12:21:52PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> In the next few weeks, I will replace my GPG key with a new one.
> Since I suspect that the time it takes for a key to be exchanged in
> the key ring needs to be measured in weeks or months[1], I would like
> to submit the new key a
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 11:34:05AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > If you have an admin who has properly setup DNS, DHCP, etc zeroconf
> > has little practical use.
>
> Maybe not zeroconf, but somewhat-less-than-100%-manually-conf is good.
>
> Consider printers, for instance. The home u
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 05:07:11PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> According to the Debian Constitution, he only has mastery over the
> keyring because he's a "Delegate" appointed by the DPL.
Yeah, like that's ever mattered. I can't actually remember someone
saying "for this period of time
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:54:43PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:41:37PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > the person who's in charge of the keyring has to be as paranoid as
> > James. The other person in the project that comes to mind
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:04:33PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Himself, for example? He already does work on that front, he's
> certainly a trusted developer judging by the vote results (and
> there's no such record for any other officers, mind you), and in fact
> he said he helped James add s
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 09:44:17AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> The last time I tried to use CUPS, I found it to be so user friendly
> that I couldn't get it to do anything useful. Very pretty, less
> functional; and the documentation was entirely inadequate.
>
> On the other hand, whi
On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 01:32:39PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Of course the date hasn't been decided yet, but I guess it will be
> around the same time like the last two: in july, with no conflict
> with other important events.
July in Vienna! More power to you!
--
Marcelo
1 - 100 of 275 matches
Mail list logo
