On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 09:29:30PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
I would like to start by highlighting one very important line from my
last email to you:
> > Do not contact me with regard to Debian bullshit.
And yet, you did. Fuck you. Do not contact me again. I shall consider
any further cont
I quit Debian development back in 2004. This was a moral decision, based
on the malfeasance of the project secretary over the "Editorial changes"
GR.
For some reason, Debian as a project failed to notice that I had quit,
even though my wi...@debian.org email address was deliberately forwarded
t
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:56:17PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> Same for apache 1.3 (including apache, apache-ssl, apache-perl); it too
> will soon disappear from sid and lenny. There are currently only a
> handful of apache 1.3 module packages in sid, against which bugs will
> be filed, but th
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 05:34:01PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Normally I wouldn't publish private email but I think in this case the
> > abusive nature warrants it.
It really doesn't. Wanker.
> It has been suggested that it would be better to include the context,
> to avoid any pot
reassign 388805 libapache-mod-auth-radius
retitle 388805 Please build apache 2 version
kthxbye
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 07:10:04PM +0200, Ond??ej Sur?? wrote:
> retitle 388805 RFP: please package mod_auth_xradius
> reassign 388805 wnpp
> severity 388805 wishlist
> thank you
>
> You have filled bug
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 09:06:19AM -0300, Humberto Massa wrote:
> And I believe that the Vancouver proposal, if implemented as intended up
> to now, will not only affect what Debian really *is*, but in some ways
> will *destroy* what Debian is.
Debian has already decided to destroy what it is by g
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:10:12PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Matthew Wilcox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050321 17:05]:
> > I'm not going to volunteer for them as I intend to leave Debian
> > shortly after sarge releases.
>
> Why do you intend to leave Debian?
The Vanco
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 04:08:19PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> Thanks. Maybe i should resign from my debian duties then since i am not
> wanted. Do you volunteer to take over my packages ? Please handle parted for
> which i am searching a co-maintainer since > 6 month, and take over the
> powerpc k
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:20:29PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Anyway, regarding kernels: I can imagine sometimes, especially with the
> > backlog we have currently, a swift processing of some kernel package
> > might be warranted and help Sarge. If there is such a case, it would
> > help if some
[ As suggested by Policy 10.1 [1], I am forwarding this issue to
debian-devel. Please maintain the cc list in followups. ]
Recent versions of manpages-dev include a new manpage queue.3. dqs has
been providing a manpage by this name for some time. Therefore there
is a file conflict when attem
badly.
http://people.debian.org/~willy/gcc-transition/
i think technically these are all worthy of an RC bug, but i don't want
to file them and you don't want to see them. if your name's on the list:
http://people.debian.org/~willy/gcc-transition/maint-packages-2.95
then figure out which of y
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:38:53PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> In Jeff's plan: All C++ packages will be uploaded via NMUs. The
> package maintainer can upload their packages afterwards if they have
> to make other corrections.
All of them? I sw someone do a count and there were around 1000 p
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 09:59:28AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > * Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
>
> why can't we have both installed, just like the libfoo6 and libfoo6g
> situation??
i explained this elsewhere...
Why don't we put the libs in a differen
I got sick of listening to people discuss the gcc 3.2 transition in an
uninformed manner. So I've whipped up a transition plan which will
hopefully get us from A to B without causing too much pain. Haha.
I'm entirely fallible and I don't pretend to understand all the issues
involved with doing t
Brent Fulgham put efuns up for adoption over a year ago. It's got 3
release critical bugs open against it. I considered adopting it, but
as I don't know CAML and don't like emacs, it would be a bad choice.
Please, could someone who knows CAML adopt this package and look it over?
Otherwise, let'
>From a security point of view, it might be considered worthwhile to install
system executables (particularly the suid ones) and then mark them immutable.
This does stop some common attacks from succeeding, and it might prevent some
stupid things accidentally done as root. My Debian 1.2.10 system
16 matches
Mail list logo
