Re: Why does Ubuntu have all the ideas? Debian official "update sub-release"

John Goerzen wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 05:09:54PM +0200, Joey Schulze wrote: > > ciol wrote: > > > The problem is that Debian doesn't speak a lot about nice features like > > > volatile and backports, for instance in the official web site, where it's > > > difficult to see the links. > > >

Re: Using the SSL snakeoil certificate

Milan P. Stanic wrote: > > For example: > > > > Dovecot uses . > > > > This is a symbolic link to if > > the above file or link does not exist during configuration of > > dovecot. > > > > That way, the admin can easily replace the symlink with a real > > certificate if they want per-ser

Re: Using the SSL snakeoil certificate

(please copy debian-devel, feel free to bounce my mail there after you've done so, for others to be able to comment as well). Klaus Ethgen wrote: > Am Do den 20. Jul 2006 um 11:24 schrieb Martin Schulze: > > > [one cert for all services] > > I believe that this is a good

Re: Using the SSL snakeoil certificate

Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote: > In bug #376146, Martin Pitt wrote: > > > In an effort to clean up the SSL certificate mess on Ubuntu servers, we > > recently converted all our supported Server packages to make use of > > the ssl-cert package instead of creating a package-specific > > self-signed SSL cert

Re: Transfer Maintainership From MIA Maintainer

Jason Self wrote: > The listed maintainers for the Webmin package > (http://packages.debian.org/stable/admin/webmin) and the associated > packages like webmin-core, Usermin, etc. are MIA. They are not fixing > bugs or responding anymore. The package has been removed from etch and sid, alias testin

Re: These new diffs are great, but...

Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 08:35:41PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > > Not really. pdiff's mainly reduce download size for low bandwidth > > connections. file:// is pretty high bandwidth, you won't notice the > > difference. > > I usually notice the difference -- the ot

Re: sending debian-private postings to gmail

Domenico Andreoli wrote: > it's nice to have your personal gobal & searchable mailing list > archive, where you can really find anything you have ever received. Even though it is nice, it's also problematic to scatter around private and hence sensitive (at least temporarily sensitive) information

Re: not running depmod at boot time

Marco d'Itri wrote: > So, does anybody mind if I remove depmod from the module-init-tools init > script? I guess it would be a time-saver to remove the depmod call. However, since one cannot run depmod properly without the respective kernel being installed, removing the depmod call will caus harm

Re: wiki.debian.org mailer b0rken

Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 03 May 2006, Ondrej Sury wrote: > > (added openldap2.2 + gnutls to SummerOfCode2006 page) > > > > Status of sending notification mails: > > [fr] PhilBat: (421, 'Too many concurrent SMTP connections; please try > > again later.') > > [en] PhilippKern, RaphaelHertzog

Re: Bug#353381: ITP: freebsd-manpages -- Manual pages for a GNU/kFreeBSD system

David Weinehall wrote: > > Upstream includes non-free manpages these days, so in reality, we have > > already forked. Further Debian-specific changes are needed to address > > bugs such as #295211 (upstream does not document our libc/kernel > > combination). > > What manpages in upstream are non-

Re: idea for project machines

Ganesan Rajagopal wrote: > > Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I was ranting about that on irc before, and was told that this is 1) > > considered to be a security risk and 2) not worth the effort. The > > additional concern I had was that an automatic solution would put less >

Re: For those who care about stable updates

[Sorry for the late response, I don't read -devel daily anymore.] martin f krafft wrote: > As someone who has served (and continues to serve) on several core > teams within Debian, would you be able to give us some insights into > how the situation may be improved? In theory the team needs to reo

Re: NEW queue backing up again -- ftpmasters, any explanation or comment?

Nico Golde wrote: > Hi, > * Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-13 19:19]: > > Nico Golde wrote: > > > > > Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done by > > > > > one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by

Re: NEW queue backing up again -- ftpmasters, any explanation or comment?

Nico Golde wrote: > > > Could be, but I believe I heard that most NEW processing is done by > > > one of the assistants while the mirror split is done by someone else. > > > I guess that one person got busy or demotivated. I suspect NEW > > > > Well, that person is currently on the CeBIT and mann

Re: NEW queue backing up again -- ftpmasters, any explanation or comment?

Nathanael Nerode wrote: > It looks approximately as though nothing has been examined since a month ago. > Although that doesn't explain the packages listed up top. DWN permanently lists new packages, have this always been false positives? Regards, Joey -- The only stupid question is th

Re: Debian Backup Server (was: Questions to the candidates)

Frank Küster wrote: > Moving this to -devel, it's off-topic for -vote; Cc to -admin. > > Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> At some place where it can be found even if you don't want to look up a > >> month-old announcement. What abo

Re: The Debian Backup Server

Joey Hess wrote: > Martin Schulze wrote: > > The services in the backup are: > > Are there any plans to add svn.debian.org / alioth to this set? No. Alioth will have its own backup facility. > (/me is glad he's still backing up his svn repos on his own..) Good.

Re: New packages.debian.org

Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Robert Lemmen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > really cool and thanks to schlund and partner, but the links to the > > changelogs and the copyright file at the bottom of each packages page > > don't work. probbaly just something really minor... > > Didn't such things us

Re: New packages.debian.org

Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote: > Am Montag, 6. März 2006 18:29 schrieb Martin Schulze: > > The Debian project happily announces the re-availability of the > > packages.debian.org service on a new machine. The system has been > > donated by Schlund + Parner where it is hos

Sending letters

Hi Henrique! The debian/changelog file is a file to document changes in the respective package and not an arbitrary file to collect letters to the stable release manager or anybody else. The latter should be reached via mail. Also, talking to the release manager before uploading a package, best

Security update modifies (inofficial) ABI and hidden API

We could use some advice and help with the GnuTLS / libasn1 update that would fix the vulnerabilities reported recently. The fix for libasn1 adds arguments to exported function. However, these functions are named _asn_* and should not be used outside of this library. Unfortunately GnuTLS is doin

Re: Bug#345091: ITP: checkgmail -- Alternative Gmail Notifier for Linux via Atom feeds

Sandro Tosi wrote: > > I looked at the homepage, and while this does appear useful, is it really > > nescessary to be packaged all by itself? > > > > Think about a collection package; I don't think debian should be overloaded > > with tons of single-program packages. > > I'm getting used to packag

Re: cvs loginfo configuration for alioth?

Junichi Uekawa wrote: > Hi, > > I'm looking for a 'loginfo' file configuration that works > for alioth. > I thought I have found a solution few days ago, but when > I came back, it no longer seems to work correctly: > > > CVSROOT/loginfo contains: > DEFAULT /usr/bin/cvs-mailcommit --mailto [EM

Re: [SECURITY] [DSA 881-1] New OpenSSL 0.9.6 packages fix cryptographic weakness

Turbo Fredriksson wrote: > > The following matrix explains which version in which distribution has > > this problem corrected. > > > > oldstable (woody) stable (sarge) unstable (sid) > > openssl 0.9.6c-2.woody.8 0.9.7e-3sarge1 0.9.8-3 > > openssl 094

Re: spam in wiki.debian.net

Stig Sandbeck Mathisen wrote: > > After having read this - wouldn't it be easier to report the user > > doing the spamming, and simply reverting all changes done by this > > user. > > There are a limited number of wiki which have this functionality. > Neither the current nor the new wiki have that

Re: Distro Development Talk

Jason Chu wrote: > (I'm not a member of the list, so please CC me on any responses you want me > to see) > > I'm a developer for a neighbour distro, Arch Linux, and I'm starting up a > site to discuss distro development issues. > > The goal is to have a site that describes solutions to common dis

Re: Bug#323227: new list: debian-planet to distribute planet.debian.org postings; archive to enable searching

Benj. Mako Hill wrote: > > > I'd like to have a debian-planet list that would receive blog > > postings from planet.debian.org. > > > > The main reason is that after postings expire on the planet website, > > it's very hard to find old postings if you cannot remember who wrote > > it. Think of "t

Re: Bug#323227: new list: debian-planet to distribute planet.debian.org postings; archive to enable searching

Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > | I'd like to have a debian-planet list that would receive blog postings > | from planet.debian.org. > | > | The main reason is that after postings expire on the planet website, > | it's very hard to find old postings if you cannot remember who wrote > | it. Think of "ther

Re: Documentation of alioth?

Raphaël Hertzog wrote: > I know Wichert is a bit disappointed because despite all the > money/sponsors we have, we're waiting for more than a year for a new > machine. The main problems appears to be DSA who must give an approval > that they're willing to admin the machine before we can decide to b

Re: resolution of licensing with httperf

Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > I have been corresponding with the developer and maintainer of httperf > [0], which I intend to adopt. The issue was that a libssl linking > exception was needed for the package. They are currently making > inquiries at HP as to how exaclty go about this from their end

Re: debian security archive/updates b0rken???

Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 12:31:23AM -0400, sean finney wrote: > > please excuse this blatant cross-posting, i wouldn't do it if i didn't > > think it were critical that i do so... > > > http://www.infodrom.org/~joey/log/?200506142140 > > > say it isn't so! > > It isn't so.

Re: New Nokia device is Debian-based?

Stephen Birch wrote: > On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 05:02 -0500, Christian Perrier wrote: > > Quoting David Weinehall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > > > Indeed. The Nokia OSSO (Open Source Software Operations) that work on > > > this product consists of several DD's (myself being one), plus at least > > > o

Re: Urgently need GPL compatible libsnmp5-dev replacement :-(

Christian Hammers wrote: > I could package the whole libsnmp source code into the Quagga file, and > simply compile it with --without-openssl and then link it statically > or something similar brute force and ugly. FWIW: Please don't. This would mean creating a security-support nightmare. Regar

Re: Ubuntu and its "appropriation" of Debian maintainers

Matt Zimmerman wrote: > Another option would be to leave the source package maintainer the same (to > retain proper credit, etc.), but override the binary package maintainer > during the build (to reflect that it is a different build, and also display > a more appropriate name in "apt-cache show" e

Re: Ubuntu and its "appropriation" of Debian maintainers

Matt Zimmerman wrote: > Every Debian derivative I have seen does this the same way. There is some > inaccuracy in either case, but I think this is the lesser of the evils: > > - Changing the maintainer field > - " is taking credit for my work!" > - Requires modification of every source packag

Re: Ubuntu and its "appropriation" of Debian maintainers

James Treacy wrote: > On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 11:40:19AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > I have to confess this is mainly because I maintain both > > packages.debian.org and packages.ubuntu.com and just copied the code. > > If anyone has suggestions how to improve the wording on the Ubuntu > >

Re: lintian & linda (was: Automatic testing of Debian packages)

Nico Golde wrote: > There is another thing that I don't understand often. Why > are there linda and lintian? > In my opinion this makes things difficulter. Both have to > coordinate themselves and keep their policy rules up to > date. Why are there Vi and Emacs? Why are there Perl and Python? Why

Re: Why do we still have this on the distribution?

Andrew Pollock wrote: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 04:16:18PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > > > > FWIW: This would mean to remove all of Mozilla and friends, since they > > don't receive any security support upstream, and neither the maintainer > > or the security te

Re: Why do we still have this on the distribution?

Andrew Pollock wrote: > > > - sarge is around the corner, and keeping it in means maintaining > > > it for possibly another 2-4 years! if it's *already* > > > no longer maintained upstream... > > > > This raises a valid point; maybe the maintainer can comment on this? Since > > we already rec

Re: Why do we still have this on the distribution?

Don Armstrong wrote: > > > This raises a valid point; maybe the maintainer can comment on > > > this? Since we already receive no security updates to php3 from > > > upstream, is it feasible security-wise to keep it in the > > > distribution for some years to come? > > > > I think the opinion of t

Re: Thoughts about changing Debian's release process

Andrew Pollock wrote: > On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 08:38:17PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > > Andreas Tille wrote: > > > >My point: We need the possibility to recreate the current Debian > > > >infrastructure for proposing changes to the current situation.

Re: Thoughts about changing Debian's release process

Andreas Tille wrote: > On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Torsten Landschoff wrote: > > >I was thinking of packages for important parts of the Debian > >infrastructure. > Sure. > > I absolutely agree with the approach to package infrastructure. Once this > is done use FAI. Feel free to start this effort. Debi

Re: Thoughts about changing Debian's release process

Andreas Tille wrote: > >My point: We need the possibility to recreate the current Debian > >infrastructure for proposing changes to the current situation. > Not only this, we need the possibility to setup an alternate machine quickly > in case of hardware problems. And we even have the solution in

Re: How to detect which user is connected to $DISPLAY

Michelle Konzack wrote: > Hello Martin, s/Martin/Joey/g > > FWIW: That's not always the case. Below is a real-world example > > from a woody system with XDM: > > > > koulutie!joey(pts/4):~> w > > 19:28:13 up 29 days, 8:52, 6 users, load average: 0.02, 0.04, 0.06 > > USER TTY FROM

Re: How to detect which user is connected to $DISPLAY

Michelle Konzack wrote: > I asume your are using TESTING or UNSTABLE... > Under STABLE I get only something like > > joss pts/0Mar 26 14:42 > joss pts/1Mar 26 14:42 > toto pts/2Mar 26 15:06 > > This is, why I have asked... > The test I must do, should work unde

Re: More DDTP problems

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > The questions below were posted at long time in the DDTP-Coors list, but > weren't replied :((( > > IMHO the ddts code needs a revision to correct bugs, I am wrong? This > revision is possible? I can help. It needs a thorough source code review before it can be react

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

Eduard Bloch wrote: > > Also, bear in mind that if we'd have done that, then we would still be > > where we are right now, but would not have the debian installer ready to > > release with sarge. > > Maybe. But AFAICS there are only few developers that have worked on > both, b-f and d-i. So how wo

Re: The sarge release disaster - some thoughts

Adrian Bunk wrote: > The milestone that included the start of the official security support > for sarge was only 6 days after the announcement, but is was missed by > more than 6 months. > > Whyever it was expected to get testing-security for sarge that quick, it > should have been obvious 6 da

Re: An alternative analysis of the etch architecture proposal

Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 05:50:23PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > [...] > > - issues with space on ftp.debian.org and on mirrors > > (especially hindering amd64) > > > > It might be a better point to start moving non-released architectures > > (GNU Hurd and sh) to a diff

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Martin Schulze wrote: > > not to mention the time spent by the DSA/buildd admins and the security > > Thanks for asking the security team how much work it is to support 11 > architectures. Err... Huh? I wasn't asked? Uh? > > However, to clarify this for the read

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Steve Langasek wrote: > First, the news for sarge. As mentioned in the last release team > update[1], deploying the testing-security queues has been held up > pending some infrastructure enhancements, without which > ftp-master.debian.org cannot handle the load of the added wanna-build > queues fo

Re: debian-devel-changes question/request

Marek Habersack wrote: > It's just a simple question/request. Would it be possible to include > custom headers in the messages sent to debian-devel-changes that would > contain the package name, version and distribution, like so: > > X-Debian-Package: foo > X-Debian-PackageVersion: 1.2.3-1 >

Re: Request for Help: apt 0.6

Florian Weimer wrote: > * Henrique de Moraes Holschuh: > > You still need to deal with key revocation and a new key being needed, > > anyway. Yearly changes will not make it more difficult, it will make sure > > those codepaths are tested (and used at least once an year). > I can understand that

Re: Request for Help: apt 0.6

martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.14.1851 +0100]: > > We need help by competent developers who work on apt 0.6 with the goal > > to get it supported properly and eventually enter sid and sarge. > > Thank you, Joey! &g

Request for Help: apt 0.6

Moin, We need help by competent developers who work on apt 0.6 with the goal to get it supported properly and eventually enter sid and sarge. There is a good chance the release will happen before the issues with apt 0.6 are resolved, so this may be a task that cannot address sarge in time but onl

Re: library packaging doc...

Osamu Aoki wrote: > On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 06:24:31PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote: > > Osamu Aoki wrote: > > Or see and follow the instructions summarised on > > http://master.debian.org/~joey/misc/webwml.html#ddp > > > > > PS: If you are in rush, I or javi sh

Re: Who could be able to help SW vendors to support Debian?

Christian Perrier wrote: > During the Solutions Linux expo in Paris, the DD's present at the > Debian booth have been approached by a representative from Trend Micro > Corp. who develops and sells security software (the most well known > being probably a virus scanning software and such similar sof

Re: german debian mirror with 700mb paris.avi file...

Florian Weimer wrote: > Would debian-admin or the security team like to act as a contact for > such problems (i.e. potential compromise of Debian infrastructure)? > Perhaps http://www.debian.org/security/ could be updated accordingly? Anything but a non-public list/forum/whatever would be fine and

Re: shell script sniplets in /usr/bin?

Adrian von Bidder wrote: > > You wouldn't need to change "every" script - you just need to move > > gettext.sh to /usr/share/gettext/scripts and create /usr/bin/gettext.sh > > with the content Sean suggested. > > Which buys us what? > > This new gettext.sh would still be a non-executable script s

Re: shell script sniplets in /usr/bin?

Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > All other packages have their script sniplets in /usr/share/, > e.g. devscripts, debhelper, debian-cd, ... You forget to notice one thing, these are debian specific. The gettext.sh script, however, is meant to be used by just ". gettext.sh" by random third party prog

Re: circular dependencies and dist-upgrades sarge->woody

Steve Langasek wrote: > > There is one case in which users can be bitten by this: when using apt-get > > dist-upgrade to sarge, so when documenting the woody-sarge upgrade, it > > should > > be at least mentioned that the user can run into this and should first > > upgrade apt to solve this proble

Re: library packaging doc...

Osamu Aoki wrote: > Please get it. Having DOC in CVS makes easier for proofreader to > correct things. For me, I initially got patches. But after a while, I > developed mutual trust with few people. They start fixing it with write > access sometimes later. But they always ask significant chang

Re: Is debhelper build-essential?

Lars Wirzenius wrote: > to, 2005-01-13 kello 13:35 +0200, Lars Wirzenius kirjoitti: > > I don't think debhelper fits into this category. On the other hand, > > build-essential (version 10.1) already depends on file, html2text, > > debconf-utils, and po-debconf, which I think are also not necessary

Re: New stable version after Sarge

Florian Weimer wrote: > > Re: Paul van der Vlis in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> You will understand that my most important point is security-support. > > > > ...which Debian provides for its stable distribution at any time, even > > if the last stable release was ages ago. > > Where is the security su

Re: New stable version after Sarge

Paul van der Vlis wrote: > >At least that's been the case including sarge. Hence, such > >a sentence would not mean anything. > > > >>I can understand something like "Debian releases when it's ready", but > >>many people have to work together. Maybe it's better to say: "a package > >>releases wh

Re: New stable version after Sarge

Paul van der Vlis wrote: > Hello, > > 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 release date for a Debian release is not set by a ca

Re: /var/log on Debian systems

martin f krafft wrote: > On all my Debian systems, /var/log seems like a big pile of dumps > without much consistency. Especially, while 0640:root:adm seems to > be a commonly accepted guideline, proggies like aptitude, > scrollkeeper, X, xdm, fontconfig, and many others basically just > dump their

Re: Bug#282742: Move daily find run later

Andreas Metzler wrote: > Anyway the solution seems to be overengineered for the problem at > hand. I have yet to decide whether > * I'll close the bugreport with "request denied" Please don't do that but tag it wontfix instead if you "won't fix" this bug report. Regards, Joey -- Open

Re: Duelling banjos or how a sane community goes crazy

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. > > I hope all you people are aware that you are causing a new duelling banjo > case and helping out Go

Re: Trouble to log in into s390 developer machines

Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > at http://db.debian.org/machines.cgi the hosts raptor and trex are listed > as s390 developer machines. I wanted to build the package phylip which has > to be builded manually because it is in non-free. > > $ ssh -i ~/.ssh/my_key [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ssh_exchange_i

Re: Documentation for upstream software authors

Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > I've just started http://wiki.debian.net/SoftwarePackaging, intended to > collect thoughts of packagers how upstream developers can make the life of > a packager easier. > > I'm sure all packagers have wondered about "brain-dead" upstream developers

Re: sarge security (was: Re: Release update: please upload to unstable; toolchain; buildds; ...)

Marc Haber wrote: > >Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > >> Will the start of official security support for sarge be announced widely, > >> to get as much testing as possible? (Like: general debian-announce, press > >> contacts, ...) > > > >No. Why should it? > > Because it was widely

Re: sarge security (was: Re: Release update: please upload to unstable; toolchain; buildds; ...)

Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > On Tuesday 09 November 2004 23.44, Colin Watson wrote: > > > N+0 days > > Official security support for sarge begins > > Will the start of official security support for sarge be announced widely, > to get as much testing as possible? (Like: gener

Re: debian-private list archives

Martin Godisch wrote: > Who can tell me, where the debian-private list archives can be found? > Looks like they moved somewhere... Did the mailing list footer change while we were not paying attention? Mine still says: Please respect the privacy of this mailing list. Archiv

Re: Why sysklog uses its own logrotate and not logrotate script

Graham Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 06:10:43PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > > Clemens Schwaighofer wrote: > > > I would like to know why sysklog package uses its own logrotation > > > scripts and not logrotate. > > > > Try to convert it to log

Re: Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update [Oct 24]

Michelle Konzack wrote: > The five missing files are not on ftp://security.debian.org/ > but the diff.gz and dsc are still there. > > >

Re: SourceForge.net PR-Web Upgrade Notice.

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > i'm forwarding this to debian devel for people's attention because > it would appear that debian has lost a quite large opportunity - > by not having selinux available. I thought Russell Coker put a lot of effort in having SELinux ready with Debian as well. M

Re: Why sysklog uses its own logrotate and not logrotate script

Clemens Schwaighofer wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to know why sysklog package uses its own logrotation > scripts and not logrotate. Try to convert it to logrotate and soon you will understand why it still uses savelog. > Because it uses its own scripts, its rather tricky to configure. Eg its >

Re: Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update [Oct 24]

Michelle Konzack wrote: > Hello Martin and *, > > Am 2004-10-24 11:24:26, schrieb Martin Schulze: > > Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update > > == > > > > An up-to-date version is at <

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Mike Hommey wrote: > On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 07:53:27AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > > Err... experimental ABI changes are for experimental. Confirmed ABI > > and API changes are for unstable (or whatever you want to call the > > development branch). We must not hide t

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > Is there really a developer out there that doesn't do even the most > rudimentary VC by keeping copies of all the source packages he has > uploaded/worked on ? FWIW: I've heard so... Regards, Joey -- MIME - broken solution for a broken design. -- R

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Mike Hommey wrote: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 12:14:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:23:48 +0900, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > > > And why not, instead of freezing unstable, make it build against > > > testing, when er try to freeze testing ? > > > >

Re: Drop testing

Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 12:56:36PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: > > It may sound a bit radical, but core points have been mentioned in the > > thread already. I suggest to do it in a more radical way: > > > > - unstable lockdown in the freeze > > - drop Testing and co

Re: Security updates for sarge?

Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le vendredi 22 octobre 2004 à 11:26 +0200, Martin Schulze a écrit : > > It still (as written on -project one or two weeks ago) lacks the > > infrastructure as in a working buildd network that processes the > > target ``testing-security'

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Jérôme Marant wrote: > It's too bad that interesting discussions take place in blogs rather > than in Debian mailing lists, especially for those who don't blog > but would like to participate. Logbooks are suited for a lot, but not for discussions. They're more suited for experiences, statements

Re: Security updates for sarge?

Jan Niehusmann wrote: > Question to the security team: What's holding back security support for > sarge? (This is not a complaint - I'm just curious) It still (as written on -project one or two weeks ago) lacks the infrastructure as in a working buildd network that processes the target ``testing-s

Re: about volatile.d.o/n

Andreas Barth wrote: > * Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 18:30]: > > The goal should be that I, as a user, can add volatile to my > > sources.list and periodically do an apt-get upgrade - without risking > > to suddenly have my web browser updated to a new major release where > > it sta

Re: RFD: Draft for a volatile.d.o policy

John Hasler wrote: > > This also might include working on a sort of security team for v.d.o (I > > think both jobs should actually be combined in v.d.o). > > v.d.o. should be supported by the Debian security team. I don't think it > is worth doing if it can't be. One way to help make sure Debian

Re: about volatile.d.o/n

Florian Weimer wrote: > >> Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually not applied to > >> stable because backports are not available for some reason? > > > > Are you speaking about mozilla? ;) > > Mozilla, GnuPG, and maybe even PHP 4, depending on sarge's lifetime. > Other complex pac

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Steve Langasek wrote: > > If I understood you correctly, you want me to remove these packages: > > > ttf-kochi-mincho > > ttf-kochi-mincho-naga10 > > ttf-xwatanabe-mincho > > watanabe-vfont > > ttf-xtt-wadalab-gothic (source ttf-xtt) > > ttf-xtt-watanabe-mincho (source ttf-xtt) > > > from the sta

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Kenshi Muto wrote: > At Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:59:24 +0100, > Martin Schulze wrote: > > Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 > > = > > > > An up-to-date version is at <http://master.debian.org/~joey/3.0r2/>. > > >

Re: Searching for mails in BTS by message-ID

Andreas Metzler wrote: > Hello, > Does anybody know a way to find a mail sent to the BTS with a specific > Message-ID? Neither google nor lists.d.o. nor gmane.org archive > debian-bugs-(rc|dist). See ~debian/lists/debian-bugs-dist/ on master. Regards, Joey -- If nothing changes, everyt

Re: On linux kernel packaging issue, assuming that user is never right

Mathieu Roy wrote: > Why do you always assume being facing idiots? I guess the answer would be experience... No, I'm only guessing, not knowing... > People knows all about placebo effect, but do you have any evidence > that there is nothing more than placebo effect? If you can't provide evidenc

Re: Version Updating Question

Mark Johnson wrote: > Hi All, > > I'm updating the docbook-simple package from V1.0cr2 to V1.0. Since > 1.0cr2 > 1.0, I'm not sure how to handle the situation. > > Policy & the Developers Reference imply that I upload V1.0 and file a > bug against ftp.debian.org to have V1.0CR2 removed from the >

Debian booth at COMDEX?

Moin! We have been offered to maintain a booth at COMDEX this November in Las Vegas (Nov 17th - 20th) and give a talk about Debian. Alex Perry thankfully agreed to deliver the talk but there are not enough people to staff a booth. Two people would be needed at least. COMDEX is provinding a tabl

Re: Accepted kaffe 1:1.1.1-1 (i386 source)

Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-08-31 10:24]: > > . Updated deprecation information on getipnodebyname(3) (closes > > Bug#183112, Bug#176709, Bug#157746, Bug#152780) > > You're missing a colon after "closes&quo

Re: overwriting files from modules packages

Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 12:18:26AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > > > also sprach Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.08.31.0013 +0200]: > > > If you want two different versions of documentation, they need to > > > be named differently. Alternatively, you can just sp

Re: Accepted kaffe 1:1.1.1-1 (i386 source)

Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > > If I report "segmentation fault in ls", I--as a user of ls, not a > > > developer--couldn't care less about why it was segfaulting or how the > > > bug was fixed; I only care that it's been fixed. If a developer wants > > > to spend their limited time researching how th

NEED HELP: Making woody LSB compliant

Moin! I've received several requests to update woody in order to make it compliant with the LSB (which version btw.?), including one from the DPL. Hence, it may be worth discussing the possibility. Below are several tasks where YOUR HELP is required. According to Anthony we need

Re: DebToo: Debian, Gentoo-style

Chris de Vidal wrote: > Volunteers needed! > http://debtoo.org I guess you haven't read Benchmarking Debian's Performance. Indranath Neogy tried to [35]discover what kind of gains the source based nature of Gentoo might give it over Debian and Mandrake. The tests included timing how long it took

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >