Re: Anybody else having problems w/ DNSSEC and ftp.debian.org?

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 04:11:01PM +0100, Heiko Schlittermann wrote a message of 65 lines which said: > > Expired signature ket in the cache, may be? It ends at > > 2010-12-14T09:48Z, which was several hours ago. > > Sure? I'd say the signature expires 20110111094829 and was created > 2010121

Re: Anybody else having problems w/ DNSSEC and ftp.debian.org?

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 02:43:38PM +0100, Heiko Schlittermann wrote a message of 134 lines which said: > With checking disabled: > # dig www.debian.org +cd +dnssec @192.168.0.1 ... > www.debian.org. 132 IN RRSIG A 5 3 300 > 20110111094829 20101214094829 38208 www.debi

Re: Anybody else having problems w/ DNSSEC and ftp.debian.org?

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 02:18:44PM +0100, Heiko Schlittermann wrote a message of 46 lines which said: > Using a current lenny with bind9 I can't validate (www|ftp).debian.org > anymore. Works for me (BIND on a lenny using dlv.isc.org). Note the ad bit: % dig +dnssec A www.debian.org ; <<>

Re: Default value of net.ipv6.bindv6only should revert to 0

On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 08:20:37AM +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote a message of 63 lines which said: > I've no strong opinion about the default value for > net.ipv6.bindv6only. However, I think that any application that > breaks if the default value is 0 or 1 is broken and a bug must be > filled

Re: Default value of net.ipv6.bindv6only should revert to 0

On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 09:04:18PM +0900, Kazuo Oishi wrote a message of 48 lines which said: > Anyone, could you teach me why net.ipv6.bindv6only need to be set > to 1 globally, and why other good programs need to be changed? > I think it should revert. I do not claim to have a final opinion

Re: Explications needed...

On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 11:36:45AM +, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote a message of 43 lines which said: > > An arm buildd maintainer not reading [EMAIL PROTECTED] is simply not > > doing his job as buildd maintainer. > > Please show where reading everything on [EMAIL PROTECTED] is > given

Re: [OT] Looking for a program which generates binary formats decoders from a high-level description

On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 11:06:26AM -0500, Aaron M. Ucko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote a message of 0 lines which said: > BitPim's protogen.py seems similar to what you're looking for; It seems so, thanks, but it is hard to say because the file in http://www.bitpim.org/pyxr/c/projects/bitpim/src/p

[OT] Looking for a program which generates binary formats decoders from a high-level description

I know, it is off-topic, but this is Xmas so everyone loves everyone and helps them :-) And there are many programmers here and I do not see where to ask otherwise. I'm looking for a program which would allow to: * someone describes a binary format (MPEG, PNG, tcpdump's trace, an OSPF packet, wha

Conary is a distributed software management system for Linux distributions

Interesting. apt already provides some of the features of Conary but not all and Conary or a Conary-like system may help Debian-based distributions or local customizations. Conary is a package management system, based on concepts similar to those of the distributed Version Control Systems like dar

Re: Removing non-free documentation from main

On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 02:36:11AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote a message of 168 lines which said: >Known non-free documentation licenses are: > - GFDL (at least up the current version 1.2) > - CC licenses (at least up to the current version 2.5) > - OPL an

Re: debian.org e-mail address and SPF/SRS

On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:15:19AM +0100, Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote a message of 47 lines which said: > If you know easy way to avoid this problem exists, please let me > know. I remail my email from debian.org machines, I do not forward it. So, I do not have the problem (I have oth

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 11:54:09AM -0500, Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote a message of 126 lines which said: > Debian either needs a trademark license from the NetBSD Foundation > for use of the "NetBSD" mark, or it does not. Legally speaking, you're right. Now, on more practical gr

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:40:47AM +0100, Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote a message of 24 lines which said: > I am happy to take it. Several people already stepped in (which, IMHO, replies to the "Do we need dupload?" question). See the bug report. Josip Rodin was the first one, even

Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

Package: wnpp Version: N/A; reported 2002-04-08 Severity: normal Sorry, folks, but it is clear I have not enough time to work seriously on a package like dupload, which is important and should be handled with care. I leave it to someone more active. There are many bugs reported but most are mino

[FLAME WARNING] Linux Standards Base and Debian

The last version of the LSB says: Currently the LSB does not officially specify a package format; however, the recommended package format is RPM (Version 3) with some restrictions listed below. RPM is the defacto standard on Linux [sic]

Re: Debian LDAP Schema

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 01:23:35PM +0200, Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote a message of 81 lines which said: > How about the following as a start: Thanks! > Is this the right list for such things? Is there a more appropriate list? There is apparently no debian-ldap (it might be usef

Re: ITP: mboxgrep -- Grep through mailboxes

On Monday 8 January 2001, at 9 h 5, the keyboard of Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I intend to package mboxgrep, a utility which greps mailboxes. BTW, we already have sgrep, which is fine for that purpose.

Re: Potato packages

On Friday 5 January 2001, at 11 h 21, the keyboard of Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do we have a repository of packages to support such people? http://www.internatif.org/bortzmeyer/debian/apt-sources/

Re: RSA Released Into The Public Domain

On Wednesday 6 September 2000, at 9 h 38, the keyboard of Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So some stuff can get moved from non-US/main into main proper? It's now free in the USA (it already was in the rest of the world) but it is still not-exportable (which was because of US offi

Re: Entering in the Official Debian's distribution

On Wednesday 29 March 2000, at 13 h 59, the keyboard of [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > How can a programmer have the right of putting his own program on the > Official Debian's Distribution ? #ifdef I_WANT_TO_BE_A_DEBIAN_MAINTAINER_MYSELF Debian lesson #1

Re: Paradise

On Tuesday 28 March 2000, at 15 h 53, the keyboard of Jeffrey Watts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The Paradise Netrek developers would like to work with Debian to get > Paradise included in Debian GNU/Linux. Thanks for your interest in Debian and welcome here. First, you should tell what your li

Re: Do we have a package of W3C's www-lib library?

On Friday 10 March 2000, at 15 h 4, the keyboard of Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do my eyes deceive me or are we really without a package of "Libwww - the W3C > Protocol Library", <http://www.w3.org/Library/>. One Debian developer made an unoffic

Re: ITP: transformiix

[Please Cc: debian-sgml for SGML/XML-related stuff.] On Tuesday 21 March 2000, at 22 h 42, the keyboard of =?iso-8859-1?Q?Nicol=E1s_Lichtmaier?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Transformiix is a XSLT processor written in C++. > > License: MPL. Good, there is not one entirely free XSLT processo

Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!

On Tuesday 14 March 2000, at 12 h 38, the keyboard of Paul Seelig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Depends on the functions one needs. But i'd like to generalize a bit: > the included *apps* are far too old. Stuff like teTeX, Since the teTeX in slink works fine and the one is potato is broken (a b

Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!

On Sunday 12 March 2000, at 20 h 59, the keyboard of =?iso-8859-1?Q?Nicol=E1s_Lichtmaier?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We are all using potato, but we are shipping slink, keep that in mind. This is *wrong* as is wrong the claim that "slink is useless". The vast majority of the machines I mana

Do we have a package of W3C's www-lib library?

Do my eyes deceive me or are we really without a package of "Libwww - the W3C Protocol Library", . Its licence seem 100 % free and it compiles fine on Debian/potato. Any package which I missed? Under what name? www-lib? libwww?

Re: Package giveaway, will sponsor if necessary.

On Wednesday 6 October 1999, at 11 h 29, the keyboard of Drake Diedrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >gtkglarea - I'm still using this, but if someone wants to lighten my load >it could go with gtkglareamm. I maintain xt, which uses it. And another GtkGl library, which is no lo

Re: when one have a package to test...

On Monday 4 October 1999, at 21 h 8, the keyboard of Carlos Barros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have a package to test for security, license, and debian rules. > How to upload? Did you read the documentations and specially "Debian Developer's Referen

Re: Unstable release

On Monday 4 October 1999, at 20 h 44, the keyboard of =?iso-8859-1?Q?Staffan_H=E4m=E4l=E4?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm just curious about how other people succeed in installing the > potato release. As explained, almost nobody "installed" potato. They installed slink (may be only the base

Re: Debian membership (with a twist)

On Sunday 3 October 1999, at 4 h 46, the keyboard of Yves Arrouye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I know this has been a topic recently, but I really wonder how long it > takes to get a membership. Is it something that can be estimated at > least? No. In the mean time, you can: - ask for a sponsor

Re: First beta version of the Debian SGML/XML HOWTO

On Friday 1 October 1999, at 4 h 14, the keyboard of David Coe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > looks nice, thanks for doing this; one immediate question: > nsgmls is not (any longer?) in potato. Should it be? It is: ishtar:~> cat /etc/debian_version potato ishtar:~> dpkg --search /usr/bin/nsgml

First beta version of the Debian SGML/XML HOWTO

Since it seems a lot of people have trouble with SGML, since there is very few documentation about a language which is supposed to ease the job of documenting, since FAQ are... frequent on this topic, I just wrote the Debian SGML/XML HOWTO. The emphasis is on practical information: how to typ

Re: Is XEmacs nonfree?

There are two things: - copyright (who owns it?) - licence (what can I do with it?) Debian is only concerned with the second point. On Thursday 30 September 1999, at 0 h 54, the keyboard of David Coe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But in another sense it is not GNU software, because we can't

Re: Metapackages (was Re: Debian Weekly News - September 14th, 1999)

On Thursday 16 September 1999, at 2 h 3, the keyboard of Laurent Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > very nice, but how will uninstallation be handled ? Will you be able > to uninstall all the packages of a metapackage in one step ? Certainly not: - a package can be a member of several meta-p

"Open Science", free software in Science

An interesting, although very preliminary (very few links or texts, at this time), attempt to emphasize the need for free software in Science. Good news for those who manage sets of scientific packages for Debian. http://www.openscience.org/ -- http://www.debian.org/~bortz/

Intent to package: [Biology] BioPerl

BioPerl is a nice set of Perl modules (not scripts, BioPerl is useful for developers only) to deal with various biological problems. Debian developers will be pleased to learn that BioPerl is a cooperative and anarchistic effort. I subscribed to the debian-perl mailing

Two sets of packages for slink and potato. How to version?

[Please Cc: me when replying, I have difficulties reading debian-devel at this time - but I'll try.] I want to setup an apt-compatible directory of my Biology packages , so that users can use apt to install them, without waiting the relea

Intent to package: Puzzle ([Biology] Reconstruction of phylogenetic trees)

[Please Cc: my personal address, I'm far from my normal mail and have difficulties reading Debian lists.] [Cc: to debian-legal because there is a small legal problem. Advices about it should go to debian-legal, not debian-devel.] I intent to package the Puzzle program, which is a biology prog

jdk1.1 grave bug (Was: List of bugs that *must* be fixed before releasing Slink

On Monday 1 February 1999, at 10 h 54, the keyboard of [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale E. Martin) wrote: > java was not found in /usr/lib/jdk1.1/bin/../bin/i686/green_threads/java ... > The binary is somehow actually missing, and I've not done anything weird as > far as I know. The other folks who are

Re: List of bugs that *must* be fixed before releasing Slink

On Sunday 31 January 1999, at 0 h 48, the keyboard of Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > boot-floppies 32269 partion harddisk fails if WIN95_EXTENDED present > > [0] (Enrique Zanardi ) > > The report log is a little unclear. It looks like there is a version of cfdisk > that work

Re: Debian Security Issues

On Saturday 30 January 1999, at 23 h 31, the keyboard of Larry Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The professor asked me to find out : > "What is distinctive about Debian Linux development that affects > its assurance? " As a recent Debian developer (Sep. 1998), let me give my opinion:

Re: Installation Profiles [was: Re: Reality check!]

On Saturday 30 January 1999, at 16 h 41, the keyboard of Paul Seelig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Okay, let's be serious again: unfortunately this actually means that > some of the most obvious installation profiles of slink stay to be > unnecessarily bloated. Giving the size of the current pro

Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]

On Thursday 28 January 1999, at 11 h 23, the keyboard of Christian Meder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I remember I made a pretty complete TeX profile when I created the profiles > for hamm. Isn't it there anymore ? There is a TeX *task* (not a profile) of 201 Mb (it includes all the dependencie

Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]

On Wednesday 27 January 1999, at 14 h 40, the keyboard of Paul Seelig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry, i currently don't have any access to the sources of the boot > floppies and therefore don't know about the TODO list's contents. You can get the last version by CVS: :ext:[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Deleting uncompressed Info/Doc files at upgrades

On Saturday 17 October 1998, at 21 h 56, the keyboard of Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Unless you're logged in as root, you're not going to be able to build > these example files inside /usr/doc (nor should you) anyway, so you'll > have to copy them somewhere else. You can run gunzip

Re: Deleting uncompressed Info/Doc files at upgrades

On Thursday 15 October 1998, at 17 h 31, the keyboard of Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hmm. We have zless to less gz'd files. Magicfilter will print them, as > will a2ps (maybe some others will too, haven't tried it.) Netscape reads ... > will grep them. vim reads them just fine. I'm

Re: Deleting uncompressed Info/Doc files at upgrades

On Friday 2 October 1998, at 11 h 55, the keyboard of Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To me, a uncompressed version of a file is still the same file. > To me, copying an uncompressed info file to /usr/local/info *is* leaving > crud all over the disk. Yes, the current Debian system

Re: Removing Packages in Slink for Debian 2.1

On Wednesday 14 October 1998, at 12 h 19, the keyboard of Brian White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The following are packages I feel we can remove: ... > netatalk 25598 netalk: several problems (and the solution) [64] > (Joel Klecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) As a new developer, I just wa