Another small thing...
(4) The /var/spool/fax is of the "dialout" group. Should this be the "fax"
group instead? Also, how about setting the permission of this directory
and those under it to "drwxr-s---" so only people in that group can send/view
faxes. The 's' would also make sure that all fi
Could "binary-i386" be added as a symbolic link until the files are actually
moved. I'd like the version of dftp I'm about to release to handle an
architecture setting.
Brian
( [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
--
Is there a newer version of the "xpm" package in the works? I'm using:
Package: xpm
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional
Section: x11
Maintainer: Ian Murdock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Version: 3.4f
Revision: 1
but I get an unresolved reference from Wine when I try to build it.
objects/obje
Package: efax
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional
Section: comm
Maintainer: Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Version: 07a
Revision: 4
I've found a few problems in the "fax" front end of this package...
1) The security hole still exists because the "&C0" command is still
present
I've noticed that many (if not all) shared libraries exist under the
"devel" section. I agree that the development versions (i.e. lib-dev files)
should be there, but I think the shared ones should be placed elsewhere.
I could see someone excluding the entire "devel" section for a machine
on which
>* Someone said that we don't need to parse the version number out of
>the filenames. They were wrong. dftp and the dselect FTP method need
>to know the version numbers of packages they're thinking about
>downloading, so that incremental upgrades don't have to fetch all the
>selected packages but
Package: mbr
priority: required
section: base
maintainer: Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
version: 1.0.0 1.0.0
Bad "version:" string.
Brian
( [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
---
Have the account name or password changed for ftp.debian.org? My
mirror is no longer fetching the development tree.
Brian
( [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
---
>The "man" script in cron.daily is as follows:
># expunge old catman pages which have not been read in a week
>find /var/catman -type f -name '*[1-9nlop].gz' -atime +168 | xargs rm -f
>
># expunge old catman pages which are older than one month
>find /var/catman -type f -name '*[1-9nlop].gz' -mtime
Package: man
Status: install ok installed
Priority: standard
Section: text
Maintainer: Alvar Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Version: 2.3.10
Revision: 5
The "man" script in cron.daily is as follows:
# expunge old catman pages which have not been read in a week
find /var/catman -type f -name '*[1-9nlop].
>Yup. Thanks for pointing that out. EXT should disallow dashes.
>
>The following seems to (slowly) parse all packages in a fairly old
>"available" file which I have handy as is apparently intended by the
>debian package maintainer, with the exception of
>
> elisp-manual-19-2.4-1.tar.gz (is
>A mostly-compatable compromise would seem to be:
>
>[...]
>
> Extension: May contain any printable chars.
If the extension can contain dashes, once again it could cause parsing
problems. Eliminating dashes (or dots, for that matter) here would
again make it fit into a regular expression.
>> Personally, I also think we'll be better off if we bite the bullet and
>> try to maintain as much backwards compatability as we can with current
>> package naming usage than if we fall into a pattern of blowing off
>> backwards compatability issues in the interest of implementor convenience.
>
>
(Replying to my own message -- bad, I know...)
>3) Both version-strings and package-names may contain dashes so dashes
>cannot be used to flawlessly determine where versions & revisions are.
I looked into this more closely and it seems that most of the packages
that once had dashes in the versio
>OK, so package file names don't parse easily. Why couldn't the cross
>reference be included in the Packages file? It's needed by dselect
>anyway. Also, what about packages like ld.so where the file name
>doesn't match the package name (ldso)? What am I missing?
You're not missing anything. M
>> I'd like to suggest another field to be automatically added to the
>> "Packages" files that exist at the top of each hierarchy in the
>> distribution. I'd like to see a "Checksum:" field that can be used to
>> verify the correct download of these packages. I think including both
>> an 'md5sum'
The package "ical" no longer runs with the new tk4. It seems to rely
on the older filename.
Brian
( [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
---
In theory, theory a
>Which version of minicom? This has been taken care of in the last
>minicom/lrzsz pair of packages. If they ever get out of Outgoing.
Package: minicom
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional
Section: comm
Maintainer: Michael Alan Dorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Version: 1.71
Revision: 2
Confl
>With the man pages for sz/rz that came with minicom, I get the
>following results: (results for rz are identical)
Sorry to post that again! I was behind in my mail this morning.
C932 Unix Guru Brian
x37930, Lab-3, 3F18
-
With the man pages for sz/rz that came with minicom, I get the
following results: (results for rz are identical)
$ man sz
man: ignoring unknown preprocessor `R'
man: ignoring unknown preprocessor `v'
man: ignoring unknown preprocessor `i'
man: ignoring unknown preprocessor `s'
man: ignoring unkno
The man page for diald is located under /usr/doc/diald. Could
this be moved so "man" can find it?
Brian
( [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
---
In theory, th
I notice that the "Packages" file in the debian-1.0 directory lists
pathnames relative to ALPHA-TEST directory instead of the root
directory of the distribution as is the case will all the
other "Packages" files. This makes little sense to someone who
got to the debian-1.0 directory via the "devel
Where precisely is the Incoming directory these days?
Brian
( [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
---
In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice,
I'd like to suggest another field to be automatically added to the
"Packages" files that exist at the top of each hierarchy in the
distribution. I'd like to see a "Checksum:" field that can be used to
verify the correct download of these packages. I think including both
an 'md5sum' and a (filesiz
>It is now back in ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/ALPHA-TEST/debian-1.0 .
>However, ALPHA-TEST is now unreadable to foil the mirror sites.
Will this become readable once it is decided that this is for-sure its
final resting place? Having mirror sites include 1.0 (if they desire)
is, IMO, a good idea
>I was going to suggest with all these people querying about 1.0 that we have
>an an account on ftp.debian.org with access to debian-1.0 directory so we
>lock out normal public ftp access. I myself have noticed quite a few people
>coming in and nabbing 1.0 packages thinking that they were the ones
>> Does anyone disagree with Brian White ? If not I'll change the
>> guidelines back to recommending -O2.
>
>I don't disagree with Brian but am not sure he's adequately proven his
>point. He's only told us about what he found when compiling afio.
I didn't find it. I was just commenting on, and
>> I'm surprised that [-O3] make a 20% increase in code size, especially for
>> the probably negligible performance improvement.
>>
>> [...]
>> The bottom line is, unless your function is _very_ short (a few lines,
>> max, with no loops) in probably should _not_ be inline. It sounds
>> like the GC
I'm now trying to build wine with the a.out compiler (since there are
no elf X libs), but get the following results...
gcc -o wine controls/controls.o ipc/ipc.o loader/loader.o misc/misc.o
multimedia/multimedia.o objects/objects.o rc/rc.o win32/win32.o
windows/windows.o debugger/debugger.o debug
I've just moved over to the new elf compiler, but am having a problem
compiling a program which uses "-lX11". For some reason, none of the
symbols are resolved. Here is the output...
gcc -o wine controls/controls.o ipc/ipc.o loader/loader.o misc/misc.o
multimedia/multimedia.o objects/objects.o
Package: procps
Version: 0.97-4
Program: top
It seems that when "top" displays parameter lists, it does not properly
truncate the list to fit on one line if there are tab characters
embedded within the parameters.
It should be a simple matter to parse this string and convert '\t' to ' '.
>Having lots of packages is good, but half a dozen (probably often
>poor) implementations of the same tiny script in half a dozen
>different packages doesn't seem optimal to me.
Of course, there is always...
alias zap 'kill \!:2* `ps -e | grep \!^ | grep -v grep | awk \{print\ \$1\}`'
Crude, bu
>Source can be found for example in the FreeBSD distribution, and is under
>the standard BSD copyright which shouldn't be a problem for us...
Using compress (but not uncompress) infringes on Welch's patent. Perhaps
it could be made available under "non-free"? As far as I understand, there
are no
>>It seems that after I installed the majordomo package it placed the
>>folowwing entry in /etc/passwd:
>>
>>majordom:*:102:102::/usr/lib/majordomo:/bin/false
>
>What is supposed to happen is that the preinst creates a group and
>user for majordomo; files are supposed to be in the .deb file owned b
34 matches
Mail list logo
