On Thu, Jun 25, 1998 at 10:29:43AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> Brandon Mitchell has come up with a better scheme than my "numbering"
> alternative. Consider the following:
>
> 2.0.8pre1 2.0.8-0pre1
> 2.0.8pre2 2.0.8-0pre2
> 2.0.8 2.0.8-1
>
> This has several advantages over my
On Wed, Jun 24, 1998 at 09:48:36PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> > Dale> Epochs are not, were never, intended to be used for this
> > Dale> purpose. They are only for dealing with upstream renumbering
> > Dale> that would cause conflicts.
> >
> > I thought this was all about the upstream rel
On Mon, Jun 15, 1998 at 09:38:16AM +0200, I mangled and reordered what
Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> you may flame me, but you have to write the flame with joe.
You asked for it...
~$ echo $EDITOR
joe
~$
[if not emacs or vi or ae,]
> what then ?
> joe.
How dare you come up with such a logical
On Sun, Jun 14, 1998 at 12:59:49AM -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> : My personal opinion is that Apt is *already* the way to go.
>
> Absolutely. 100% of the people I've suggested apt to (which is now almost
> everyone in my circle of Debian friends) has
On Tue, Jun 09, 1998 at 02:05:45AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
On the subject of ircII, thanks David, your effort is GREATLY appreciated.
> > > RedHat for one doesn't care for this, so I think it's one of the
> > > examples of what Debian is doing for Free Software with its
> > > clear and visi
On Mon, Jun 08, 1998 at 01:22:26PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> We must decouple our development tracks much more. I propose that we
> resolve never again to plan a release with is not fully backward
> compatible with the current stable version.
Agreed! Those of us who have been talking about pos
On Sun, Jun 07, 1998 at 03:43:13PM -0700, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> I'd like to see a Zip disk install set. What should go on it?
[..]
> pine
This can't be on the base disk because it's non-free. If you want, you can
make a zip disk with anything you want on it, make it bootable even... Or,
On Wed, Jun 03, 1998 at 12:59:50PM -0500, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
> > No, because democracy is inefficient in our case.
>
> I would go a step further and say democracy is always inefficient, in
> fact it is "inefficiant by design"
Indeed, there is a reason why in the US a republic was formed by
On Wed, Jun 03, 1998 at 07:43:22AM +0300, Shaya Potter wrote:
> > Shaya> Also, linuxconf shouldn't be used to configure a user's
> > Shaya> personal information, such as .bashrc, .pinerc, those should
> > Shaya> be left to either the program itself like in pine, or to a
> > Shaya> package like the
On Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 12:32:53PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Jules> The solution is to switch to a better designed mailer (exim
> Jules> springs to mind) with easier to manage configuration.
>
> This seems to imply that linuxconfig should drop support for
> sendmail (which still is
On Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 12:46:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Shaya> Also, linuxconf shouldn't be used to configure a user's
> Shaya> personal information, such as .bashrc, .pinerc, those should
> Shaya> be left to either the program itself like in pine, or to a
> Shaya> package like the
On Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 03:59:22PM +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
> > yes, that's a perfect solution.for those who choose to use exim. it
> > does absolutely nothing at all for those who prefer to use sendmail.
>
> True. But I was answering the suggestion (chopped, unfortunately, which
> was fooli
On Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 11:14:45AM +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
> > The solution of course is to extend the m4 stuff to support all the things
> > linuxconf does, but that's not so easy. Also, note that slackware didn't at
> > last look have m4 sendmailconfig. Another example of where slackware is
>
On Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 05:24:10PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > if a program edits it too, it should do it in a way which does
> > > not interfere at all with that human's right to put whatever s/he
> > > desires in the file. if it can not guarantee that 100% then it
> > > should not edit the
On Mon, May 04, 1998 at 11:28:20AM -0400, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
> I have been working on the xfstt package to take it over. Until a few
> days ago there was only one bug of "Wishlist" priority filed against
> it which is now ready to close as soon as I am able to upload
> files (ie am finished r
On Mon, May 04, 1998 at 01:52:25AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > I expect that everyone who has sent email to debian-devel this
> > weekend will have been unsubscribed.
>
> [Er... probably not everyone: the "too many bounces" mechanism
> probably won't knock off people who posted just a few times.
On Sun, May 03, 1998 at 11:40:45PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We are probably wasting everyone's time now by not looking to see just what
> fetchmail/procmail interface actually is...
>
> As I understand it, the fetchmail/procmail interface is a kludge.
No, actually it's a pipe.. =>
On Sun, May 03, 1998 at 11:45:24PM +0400, Amos Shapira wrote:
> |Sendmail configuration is tough but it is also the best documented MTA
> |bar none! The O'Reliey book alone on sendmail is 2 1/5" thick. Probably
> |close to everything that has ever been done with mail has been done with
> |sendma
On Sun, May 03, 1998 at 07:10:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Rev> How did you get sendmail to cooperate with dialup?
>
> What do you mean by cooperate? I send mail using sendmail
> whenever I want to. On up-up, I do a sendmail -q. I download messages
> using fetchmail. As to my send
On Sun, May 03, 1998 at 07:38:57PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Rev> The script didn't deal with the fact that I didn't have a static
> Rev> IP/name.
>
> Hmm. I don't quite understand that -- I think I just had my
> machine set up as 127.0.0.2 or something (I could also have used
> 192
On Sun, May 03, 1998 at 10:41:10AM +0200, Hugo Haas wrote:
> > > root: The person who gets root's mail (also daemons', etc).
> > > This userid (on the mailhub) get all mail sent to
> > > local adressees with userids less than 10. In other
> > > words, she gets mail
On Sun, May 03, 1998 at 12:54:20AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I think I'm confused too thought that is not such an unusual state latesly...
> Fetchmail IS POP (or IMAP and somthing else but definately NOT smtp) for
> __getting__ the mail. It IS also smtp for handing the mail to the machine
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 08:34:28PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> > I haven't looked at it. It's only 15k! That would be a really good
> > choice if it actually does the job. :-)
>
> One large problem with ssmtp is that it has no queueing. If you try to send
> mail offline, it gets lost.
Does ssmtp
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 08:39:25PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> > slrnpull should probably be seperated from slrn simply because there's
> > nothing in it that REQUIRES slrn other than that it puts things in
> > /var/spool/slrnpull (can be changed) and if you don't LIKE slrn you can
> > still have slr
On Sun, May 03, 1998 at 11:27:29AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > smail is NASTY to configure over dialup links. And getting worse it seems.
> > I couldn't do it. sendmail is clearly not suited for the task.
> ^^^
>
> why?
>
> sen
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 09:49:31PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You can configure fetchmail to run through procmail.
>
> Er, the fetchmail FAQ implies that if you use -mda procmail you can lose
> mail to resource exhaustion.
You lose .forward and alia
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 07:42:08PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Rev> smail is NASTY to configure over dialup links. And getting worse
> Rev> it seems. I couldn't do it. sendmail is clearly not suited for
> Rev> the task.
>
> Just don't tell that to my machine.
>
> manoj
> wh
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 07:33:03PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > one word: fetchmail.
>
> fetchmail doesn't do local mail delivery, but relies on an smtp server.
> ssmtp is not an smtp server.
one more word: procmail
[from man page]
-m, --mDa
(Keyword: mda) You can force
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 09:10:08PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Rev. Joseph Carter writes:
> > I think most Rockwell chipsets can do that. Part of a 4-5 line report of
> > the connection info. Quite verbose actually.
>
> But somewhere in there they always say &#
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 08:24:50PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Test $DISPLAY, it's the Right Way to test for X.
>
> But not the right way to test for xterm.
If $DISPLAY is set you're either in an xterm, rxvt, or kvt. As far as ae
would care, these are one and the same.
pgpBM27t6J25C.pgp
Desc
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 12:13:35PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > BTW has anyone else run across a modem that reports 'CARRIER' instead of
> > 'CONNECT'?
>
> My very first modem did that. But we are talking 1988 (whoa! it's been
> long) here and that was an El Cheapo 2400
I think most Rock
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 11:42:39PM +0200, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> >There doesn't seem to be a "reliable" method for determining whether or
> >not you are in an xterm. Any method so far suggested has "natural"
> >configuration situations that break the method.
>
> When you start an xterm, TER
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 06:52:47PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > > root: The person who gets root's mail (also daemons', etc).
> > > This userid (on the mailhub) get all mail sent to
> > > local adressees with userids less than 10. In other
> > > words, she gets mai
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 08:24:30PM +0100, Mark Baker wrote:
> > > You DON'T need a news server. slrn is a good thing here!
> >
> > Any newsreader, for that matter -- rtin, for example.
>
> No, that's useless on dialup links, which I understand is a large part of
> the market Jim wants to aim for
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 08:22:31PM +0100, Mark Baker wrote:
> > have you looked at ssmtp? i just took a quick look at the source, and
> > it seems that it's *extremely* simple -- sounds like a good one for a
> > send-only MTA.
>
> But this is aimed at dialup users! You don't want a send-only MTA,
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 03:22:18PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> This might work for some people -- people with constant net connections
> or who don't mind waiting for demand-dialed ppp every time they want
> to send a message.
Yeah, the lack of a queue bothered me, but at the same time most MUA's
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 11:43:22AM -0700, Jim Pick wrote:
> > have you looked at ssmtp? i just took a quick look at the source, and
> > it seems that it's *extremely* simple -- sounds like a good one for a
> > send-only MTA.
>
> I haven't looked at it. It's only 15k! That would be a really good
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 11:36:28AM -0700, John Labovitz wrote:
> > The whole exim package is about 500k, which only takes 5 minutes or so
> > to download via modem - so I'd probably stick with that (unless
> > something better comes along). MTA choices are easy, because there is
> > very little us
On Sun, May 03, 1998 at 01:37:28AM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > You need MTA. You just do. But you don't need a complex MTA. If you
> > consider sendmail the standard to judge by, most everything is smaller,
> > simpler, or better for personal systems. My personal choice for an MTA is
> > q
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 10:11:48AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > You need MTA. You just do. But you don't need a complex MTA. If you
> > consider sendmail the standard to judge by, most everything is smaller,
> > simpler, or better for personal systems. My personal choice for an MTA is
> > qmai
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 09:12:41AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Yeah, that's right, an editor that opens /dev/mem.
>
> If you do an objdump (-Slx) on the binary, you'll see that it's trying
> to treat the screen as a region of memory.
This program is starting to scare me. It disables console sw
On Sat, May 02, 1998 at 12:15:32PM +0100, Mark Baker wrote:
> > - targetted towards desktop use only, no server apps, just a few games
> >
> > - minimal size - optimized for installation via 28.8k modem via FTP,
> >which will be the primary distribution mechanism (not CD).
>
> These don't s
On Fri, May 01, 1998 at 09:08:12AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've seen the term mentioned here many times, I've looked in the docs but
> can't find the meaning (so it must be slang). What is a tarball?
A .tar.gz file =>
> On the thread of .deb vs .rpm From Maximum RPM I see that rpm
On Fri, May 01, 1998 at 04:12:59PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
Hi back! =>
> This, I like.
Me too. It makes sense.
pgpokv7P7zBx2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, May 01, 1998 at 08:43:20PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> the qmail-src package works very nicely (i tried it out on a 'spare'
> machine recently - qmail's quite nice...if it wasn't for the license
> and attitude problems i'd be quite tempted to switch to it) and the
> build-qmail script cou
On Fri, May 01, 1998 at 11:33:55AM -0400, Daniel Martin at cush wrote:
> I think someone already proposed this idea, and it was immediately
> ignored, so I'm going to suggest it again:
I didn't ignore it.
> What about a pine-installer package?
>
> This would be similar to the netscape3 and nets
On Fri, May 01, 1998 at 12:32:26PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > The postinst for the .deb will compile the source, install the .deb, and
> > clean up after itself if you so desire for a -src package...
>
> Well, I don't plan to do that. I think it would be too much for a -src
> package.
>
> I
On Fri, May 01, 1998 at 04:19:42PM +1000, John Boggon wrote:
> Can someone tell me why a new distribution has to be started up just
> because the current one isn't newbie friendly or easy to install ?
There isn't really.
> Why not concentrate on an installation system or front end for dpkg / AP
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 06:47:02PM -0700, Joel Klecker wrote:
> A week or so ago I sent a report[1] regarding the latest upstream version
> of the shadow password utils, in that report I detailed which bugs were
> fixed, and I offered to do a non-maintainer release.
>
> I have yet to receive any r
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 11:32:18PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > That said, I can't see anyone using a MCA card as his primary
> > interface.
>
> I can see this, or serial console, being used for a server.
Or an old 386 that you use as a router...
> Also, don't forget the sorts of interfaces b
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 06:55:43PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > You think nobody is going to try and snatch it then?
>
> Er.. how do you snatch an expired patent?
Reregistration?
pgpDXJWQhU0vz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 10:08:59AM -0700, David Welton wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 01:05:19PM -0400, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
>
> > That might not put it in contrib isn't there a "Free" version
> > of DOS that someoen other than Micro$loth made? i fsomething like
> > that works with DOS
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 09:57:11AM -0700, David Welton wrote:
> > > dpkg -s dosemu says:
> >
> > > Package: dosemu
> > > Status: install ok installed
> > > Priority: extra
> > > Section: contrib
> > > Installed-Size: 1799
> > > Maintainer: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Version: 0.66.7-10
>
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 05:09:18PM -0300, Igor Grobman wrote:
> Here is an idea. Why don't we make an installer package for these
> source-only packages. It would work the same way as netscape installer,
> except it would compile the binary as well as retrieve the source tarball
> from the net (o
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 02:16:12PM -0400, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
> hmm would it satisfy things to make a binary dist of the original files
> and of the debainized files...and litterally have it unpack the "real"
> pine and then run patch on it with a diff made agains t the debianized
> binaries?
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 01:57:28PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> I agree with Ian. The .deb file format is expressly for the distribution
> of configured executables (binaries for short). Using this format for
> source distribution is simply asking for trouble.
>
> Maybe we need a tarball that cont
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 05:19:00PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Ian, why do you still think that qmail-src should not exist?
> Are you the only one?
>
> [ I intent to package pine-src ].
I use qmail-src and I would use pine-src. You are right that at least in
hamm this is the best way to do it.
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 11:32:00AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > For what it's worth, GIF support is doable with free software, just not
> > compressed gifs. [gif supports a variety of compression mechanisms,
> > including "none".]
>
> The patent expires in August.
You think nobody is going to t
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 10:44:21AM -0400, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
[Debian for the clueless users]
> > If there are a group of people interested in doing this still, I am very
> > much interested in seeing this done and contributing what I can to the
> > project.
>
> I find this idea interesting
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 04:35:24PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> [1] The KDE team produces a lot of them like kppp, kisdn, kheise etc.
> I don't believe that these is the answer as long as Qt is non-free
> but it's a way in the right direction.
My personal hesitation with Qt has been over
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 10:06:00AM -0400, Steve Dunham wrote:
> > It might be smart to fork rpm (call it something else) and re-do the
> > header fields to be more sensible, then use APT to provide understanding
>
> This would be bad. Especially since RPM is a cross platform standard:
> people ar
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 02:33:54AM -0500, Ean Schuessler wrote:
[..]
> Bruce could have followed the great Freeware tradition of building
> concensus by putting togethor a team of Debianites dedicated to
> creating a newbie-friendly wrapper for the technically excellent
> Debian distribution.
[..]
On Wed, Apr 29, 1998 at 08:05:00PM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> I've been giving serious thought for a while to forming a new Linux
> distribution. My reason is to fulfill some goals that currently are
> not addressed by Debian or the commercial distributions.
Certainly no distribution can meet th
On Wed, Apr 29, 1998 at 10:14:18PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Why is xfs in xbase at all? It's not required to use X. I would suggest
> > just pulling it out to its own package.
>
> I eventually plan to do this. See the X Strike Force page.
> http://master.debian.org/~branden/xsf.html
You know, I think I would not mind seeing someone respond to these spams
with something that might get the point across that we don't want their
garbage.
I really think the lists should reject mail from those not subscribed.
pgpCNszjWPc1S.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 01:49:06AM +0200, Remco Blaakmeer wrote:
> If it is a patch to xfs that uses the freetype libs, I'd think it could be
> incorporated into the xfs that is in the xbase package, but I wouldn't
> care if it was implemented as a separate font server. Could you contact
> Branden
On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 07:00:48PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > What if the person does not want to use dselect? Many people (not me)
> > prefer
> > to download packages themselves, and dpkg -i them. Now that ftp is
> > removed,
> > they would either have to download netstd using somethi
On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 05:36:03PM +0200, Yann Dirson wrote:
> > The long-term plan is:
> >
> > 1) ship an empty /etc/X11/window-managers with xbase
> > 2) mark it as a conffile
> > 3) separate twm into its own package
> > 4) write /usr/sbin/register-window-manager
>
> I don't think shippin
On Sat, Apr 25, 1998 at 06:11:25PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> If you're running a hamm (Debian 2.0, frozen) you might like to look at
> cruft (cruft_0.9.4_i386.deb, still sitting in Incoming; try
> ftp1.us.debian.org:/pub/debian/Incoming
> or your favourite Incoming mirror) which does s
On Fri, Apr 24, 1998 at 10:21:04PM +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
> I don't see any version of ncftp 2 in frozen?
>
> Someone said it was GPL (and hence free) now? And someone else said it had
> gone into hamm/main, but I don't seem to have it in my packages file...
It's there. In main, I believe sec
On Sat, Apr 25, 1998 at 04:27:20AM +1000, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> > 3 was yanked from hamm (hardly usable) and 2 was put in main. I think it
> > uses an epoch, which should make it install even though versionwise it's
> > older.
>
> Hm.. I'm the ncftp maintainer and the version in hamm/non-free
On Fri, Apr 24, 1998 at 02:22:39PM +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
> >>On the contrary. This is an excellent point you made. ncftp
> >> is now under GPL!! Yay! libreadline not being under LGPL worked!
> >> Hurrah!
> >
> > Um, 2.x is GPL. 3.x is not, afaik.
>
> Certainly the version of 3 in hamm
On Thu, Apr 23, 1998 at 05:04:19PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Rev> It does that, but sometimes that is not always a good thing.
> Rev> Take for example the libreadline library. It is GPL, not LGPL.
> Rev> In order to link this library which is somewhat standard (IMO at
> Rev> least) your sof
On Thu, Apr 23, 1998 at 12:06:33AM -0400, James A.Treacy wrote:
> > If you ask RMS, MANY licenses are not "free enough", including BSD,
> > Artistic, and others. DFSG is not free enough for him, yet you can do
> > more with one of the other licenses. Interesting how that works out.
> >
> > RMS i
> >>Anyway, could you explain to me how this advertising clause is so
> harmful?
> >
> > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html.
>
> Ok, this helps. I am still at a loss why we mention BSD as one of the "free"
> licenses in DFSG, and have no mention of this problem there. I'll try to
On Wed, Apr 22, 1998 at 06:27:03PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure that a program must be either entirely GPLed,
> > or contain no GPLed parts.
>
> More precisely, the non-gpled parts must not have terms which prevent
> compliance with the gpled parts.
Uhh, the GPL does not state
On Sun, Apr 19, 1998 at 10:10:00AM -0700, Robert Woodcock wrote:
> [...]
> >> Yes, what that does is check your /dcc commands to see if they have
> >> /etc or /passwd in them, and if they do, print a message "Send request
> >> rejected".
> >
> > Ick, no. If an admin is not running shadow passwds,
On Sun, Apr 19, 1998 at 06:39:25PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > There's nothing wrong with your mail, my mutt just doesn't recognize
> > > it as pgp signed. I have adjusted my preprocessor.
> >
> > /usr/doc/mutt-i/pgp-Notes.txt.gz has more info on how to fix this with
> > procmail.
>
> Ha
On Sun, Apr 19, 1998 at 03:29:18PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
>
> There's nothing wrong with your mail, my mutt just doesn't recognize
> it as pgp signed. I have adjusted my preprocessor.
/usr/doc/mutt-i/pgp-Notes.txt.gz has more info on how to fix this with
procmail.
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGN
On Sat, Apr 18, 1998 at 07:29:19PM -0700, Robert Woodcock wrote:
> I'd like to see this patch become the default:
>
> --- ircii-4.4/source/dcc.c~ Thu Dec 25 17:36:09 1997
> +++ ircii-4.4/source/dcc.cSat Apr 18 19:22:43 1998
[patch body removed]
>
> Yes, what that does is check your /dcc com
On Tue, Apr 14, 1998 at 08:19:29PM -0700, boobileedoo wrote:
> please get someone to spam [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and [EMAIL PROTECTED] plus get some one to spam
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] thanx
Why? Isn't spamming supposed to be wrong? What makes it wrong for people
to spam is if it's not wrong for us to
On Tue, Apr 14, 1998 at 10:28:34AM -0400, Alex Yukhimets wrote:
> > Find the IP Masq HOWTO and make use of same. It'll save you LOTS of pain.
>
> Hi.
Hi back =>
> The thing is that I had a prefectly working IPmasq setup, with rules
> changed in ip-up and ip-down.
hmm, now there's an idea.
On Tue, Apr 14, 1998 at 07:27:03AM -0400, Alex Yukhimets wrote:
> Well, script is sure nice, but when I installed the whole distribution from
> scratch yesterday, it was some pain: I requested ipmasq package to be
> installed (among other 800 or so things :) and when it asked me how to
> configure
On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 12:56:49PM +0200, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > A question which comes to my curious mind... is there a way a program
> > running as root can ask the kernel things like "do you support modules and
> > module versioning?" or is the above script which hung my machine without
>
On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 12:23:41AM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
> > Please do not use force unless you understand what you are
> > doing, and also understand that others may not be able to help
> > recover a hosed system.
>
> Agreed, and thank you for the information. I now understand how th
On Sun, Apr 12, 1998 at 11:38:18PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
>
> Also, I now see what you ment by your "ticking time-bomb" comment. If you
> change the symlinks, user programs are no longer in sync with glibc. This
> can, as Linus pointed out in your quoted text, cause "interesting"
> failures
On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 12:28:15AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> Congratulations! You have just introduced a subtle bug on your
> system. It may work, and possibly never cause a problem, but
> there is a bomb ticking away, waiting to explode ;-)
Which bug is that? If it's really tha
On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 01:44:22AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> One presumes that will stop very soon now. Both GTK+ and the GIMP are
> very, very close to a 1.0 release. For the GTK+, one can assume that the
> library interface will be stable for a while.
>
> Like I said, this is probably
On Sat, Apr 11, 1998 at 09:10:21PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From a logical point of view, I think project/experimental is the best
> > choice. Why don't we include selected directories from there on the official
> > CD (I think of gettext (ouch, do
89 matches
Mail list logo
