On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 01:32, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Jul 05, Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Before entering the Debian archive it would be nice if resolvconf
were supported by all packages that currently futz with
/etc/resolv.conf, including pump and bind.
If you mean
On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 12:13, Thomas Hood wrote:
No, I meant that before entering the Debian archive it would
be nice if resolvconf were supported by all packages that
currently futz with /etc/resolv.conf, including pump and bind.
Which other packages?
I guess I need to explain more
on the basis of interface type (i.e.,
lo, ppp or eth).
However, I would only want to add this feature if we were
certain that it was needed.
--
Thomas Hood
On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 01:52, Nick Phillips wrote:
Actually I think the simplest form would be to have /etc/resolvconf/notify.d
and run all scripts in there at the relevant times, with any necessary
arguments (which would be standard).
Please take a look at how resolvconf runs the scripts in
archive it would be nice if resolvconf
were supported by all packages that currently futz with
/etc/resolv.conf, including pump and bind.
* The scripts in /etc/resolvconf/update.d/ should go into the
packages of the same names.
--
Thomas Hood
On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 01:02, Xavier Roche wrote:
There are other problems : for example it seems that the system
changes the /dev/ttyXX or /dev/pts/XX ownership depending on who is being
logged in..
To tell the truth, I didn't realize that so many files in /dev/
were being fiddled.
On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 11:52, Xavier Roche wrote:
Another remark for the HOWTO : mounting /tmp in tmpfs (since 2.4.1 ?)
allows you not to resevre space for /tmp on a specific partition
Remark added.
The question is: Should we concede that a separate /dev/ fs is
required for running with a
to the maintainers who have been supporting
this effort.
--
Thomas Hood
-resolv.
http://alioth.debian.org/projects/update-resolv/
Interested parties are invited to subscribe to the
update-resolv-devel mailing list and to examine the
latest release of the resolvconf package.
(The current release is 0.6.)
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don't bother me
Moving variable files out of /etc/
cupsys OK
util-linux Looks OK
sysvinit (no reply)
ppp(no reply)
pppconfig (no reply)
linuxlogo No + sarcasm
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
until such time as programs are rewritten to make
/run/ no longer necessary.
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/var/run/ becomes available
on systems that mount /var/ over NFS.
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
. For which
of these is a guaranteed-to-be-local variant needed? So far,
a case has been made only for run.
With thanks for your /run/ patches...
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
for policy to change before
implementing this.
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
have strong views about the fate of nologin either...
except that it should not be in /etc. Perhaps Jamie Wilkinson will
have more to say on this subject.
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
be free to delete
all the credits he wants to.
It is becoming clearer that your software is not DFSG-free.
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 2003-04-17 at 01:08, Colin Walters wrote:
I just installed laptop-net, becuase it looked similar to something
I'd like to work on.
You might want to look at ifupdown-roaming too
http://panopticon.csustan.edu/thood/ifupdown-roaming.html
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 8 April 2003 Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 07, Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A difficulty is that only a whole options { ... };
statement can be included from the named configuration file,
not just the forwarders { ... }; statement inside it.
You can include a file even
/etc/resolv.conf into a
symlink to /run/resolv.conf
* Modified networking daemon packages depend on the latter
version of resolver and no longer futz with /etc/resolv.conf
Does this look reasonable?
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 2003-04-14 at 20:08, Keegan Quinn wrote:
If we're going to have /run/resolver, why not use /run/resolver/resolv.conf?
Fine with me. Any objections?
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
to /var/run by making pump fall back
to using TCP sockets.
Unnecessary; but would using /run for the pidfile be a better
(e.g., simpler) solution?
If not then do you think the TCP-socket approach is the way
to deal with every program that writes a pidfile when /var/
may be absent?
--
Thomas Hood
On Sat, 2003-04-12 at 10:12, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Wed, 2003-04-09 at 14:17, Thomas Hood wrote:
* ppp
* Change /usr/sbin/pppd to:
* Store PID in /run/, not in /var/run/
Why? Is the goal to make PPP-mounter /var to work?!
I suppose someone might want to mount /var
are running?
if(up|down) wasn't designed to run as a daemon.
Cheers
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
If ifupdown is enhanced so that (as mentioned above) it
* waits to see if pppd succeeds, and
* handles nameserver addition on ifup, deletion on ifdown,
then the scripts can be eliminated.
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and is quite compatible with how we propose
to use /run/. I think we can assume that the important difference of
/var/run/ from /var/lib/ is not that it contains information relevant to
running processes, but that it is cleaned out at boot time and is not
necessarily backed up.
--
Thomas Hood
that
forbids routinely writing to files in /etc/.
And there will have to be a FHS change to allow for /run/.
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:32:35 +0100
Source: tpctl
Binary: tpctl
Architecture: source i386
Version: 4.2-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED
version I have, in the hopes that
people will point out any remaining errors.
--
Thomas Hood
APT_PREFERENCES(5) APT_PREFERENCES(5)
NAME
apt_preferences - Preference control file for APT
DESCRIPTION
The APT preferences file /etc/apt/preferences can
the and not installed
clause for obvious reasons.
I have another question about the man page draft, though.
Do we use the word 'release' where we should use the
word 'distribution'?
--
Thomas
Travis Crump wrote:
Thomas Hood wrote:
If a target release has been specified, then APT uses
It would be useful if someone would package the current
esound program. The esound package maintainer has clearly
expressed his lack of interest in doing so.
esound2 anyone?
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 12:00:00 +0100
Source: tpctl
Binary: tpctl
Architecture: source i386
Version: 4.1-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2002 12:00:00 +0100
Source: thinkpad
Binary: thinkpad-source thinkpad-base
Architecture: source i386
Version: 4.1-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Thomas Hood
and 0.9.6-1. I was lucky to be able to
get version 1.0.3-2.2 from a slow-to-update mirror.
--
Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 20:00:00 +0200
Source: thinkpad
Binary: thinkpad-source thinkpad-base
Architecture: source i386
Version: 4.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Thomas Hood
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2002 18:00:00 +0200
Source: tpctl
Binary: tpctl
Architecture: source i386
Version: 4.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Thomas Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description
Now you can start bashing me.
Since your remarks seem to be deliberately provocative,
let me just point out that X is a large package to take
care of yet there is reason to think that B.R. will
have 4.2 ready before very long, as he has said he will.
signature.asc
Description: This is a
Johnny Ernst Nielsen: Don't worry about flames launched by
cranky developers who didn't get what they wanted for their
birthdays. Many of us haven't read _every_ posting on _every_
debian list for the past six years and may therefore once in
a while bring up some issue that has been discussed
, and that resolving the
matter by means of invariant sections licenses is not
to treat documentation in the same way as Debian treats
software.
--
Thomas Hood
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
/msg6.html
--
Thomas Hood
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
I asked:
Were there any other important debates about the GFDL
that should be read?
To answer my own question:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/debian-legal-200112/msg7.html
Off to read about 100 messages ...
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
is this but
censorship? And how is censorship compatible with liberty?
--
Thomas Hood
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On 07 Apr 2002 Mark Purcell wrote:
According to
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?pkg=openh323gkver=2.0b4-1arch=m68kstamp=1017326211file=logas=raw
openh323gk-2.0.b4-1 was built for m68k on 28 Mar, however this
package doesn't seem to of been uploaded to the archives which
is why this
I wrote:
Ditto powermgmt-base_1.3_m68k.deb :
http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?pkg=powermgmt-basever=1.3arch=m68kfile=log
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
If you look very closely, you'll find that these both
have been built by 'arrakis', a box of which I am the
buildd admin. This was a result of a
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 16:08, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On 7 Apr 2002, Thomas Hood wrote:
powermgmt-base_1.3_m68k.deb was built on kullervo.
Is it fscked up to?
Not sure. Roman Hodek is kullervo's buildd admin; you'll have to ask him
(or wait for his reaction ;-)
Well, powermgmt
that should
be read?
--
Thomas Hood
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
reassign 141479 apmd
thanks
I noticed this bug at:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?archive=no\bug=141479
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
. Report #134595 asks
that /usr/bin/apm simply be made setuid root; please read
the discussion there first.
--
Thomas Hood
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 05:05:35PM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote:
The tpctl packages still haven't been relocated. Is there
some holdup?
Michael Beattie wrote:
Time. sorry, I'll take a look this afternoon.
I see you've done it! Thanks.
Thomas Hood
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
The tpctl packages still haven't been relocated. Is there
some holdup?
Thomas
On Mon, 28 Aug, 2000 at 21:49:04 +0100, Adrian Bridgett wrote:
On Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 12:04:32 +1200 (+), Michael Beattie wrote:
On Fri, Aug 25, 2000 at 04:21:21PM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote:
Hi.
Can
301 - 350 of 350 matches
Mail list logo
