with supporting multiple architectures, languages, and multiple
distributions too.
I don't think it would be too much work rigging the ability to generate
RPMs into our package building process, or to use Red Hat 'spec' files
with dpkg-dev. Someday I'm gonna figure out how to do that.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpOYsfsTWRG8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
architecture. I've got some additional plans that go beyond that release
too.
(oh yeah, since Brian is still cc'd to this - I should mention that I'd
like to do a pgsql package too, now that we have an updated postgresql
package again)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpr6gOMexbxY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ng packages (dhelp,
menu, and dwww-next-generation).
The next dwww should be ready by Sunday, at least.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpI4G57nF7q9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
an - it's a good image/reputation builder. I do have to keep myself
in check to make sure I don't "overcommit" my time to the project though.
Look for an updated dwww package and a new "kaffe+kore" package this week
from me.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpfxZDfPhuUF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
[ Sorry for the exploding cc: list - this is a Debian packaging issue,
so please limit the follow-ups to debian-devel. ]
Mark Galassi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jim> Perhaps I should declare a dependency on the slib package,
>
> Absolutely not! It would be a great
This .forward file worked for me for procmail on exim:
"|/usr/bin/procmail USER=jimtest"
It took a bit of trial and error to figure that one out.
I'm not sure what -Qf- does, you might want to add that too.
Hope that helps...
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpEHPfM3508V.pgp
Description: PGP signature
rious problem. We ought
not to release 2.0 in this state.
The shared library thing has always confused me a bit because
I tend to pick these things up by example - but if everybody's
doing it wrong...
Should I file bug reports? What severity?
Or am I unduly alarmed?
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp1PX1WUmeaj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
e policy a bit better. If
somebody could explain what exactly is going wrong in
these packages - ie. what policy are they violating?
Or is it dpkg's fault?
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpxieJE6BPVo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
scussion back to the Gnome list now. If Debian has
thread-safe X libs (as you say, and as I thought), then the problem
needs some deeper debugging. If it turns out that Red Hat has set up
their X differently than Debian, I'll get back to you.
Thanks for the quick response.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp3ZflUtDMZs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Check out the forwarded message below. I get the same error using
Debian unstable. Does this mean that Red Hat has thread-safe X libs
and we don't?
Cheers,
- Jim
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 9 Dec 1997, Sascha Ziemann wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/szi$ phaser_chess
> wa
ackage of beta 12, back in August,
but he didn't upload it since he was waiting for developer status. I wonder
what happened? Did we lose another one?
Anyways, his old package is at:
ftp://ftp.mandrake.net/pub/enlightenment/debian-deb/
For some reason, there's no source packages.
I imagine that means it is covered by the GPL. Actually,
Larry grants permission to use/modify it on his web page.
http://www.isc.tamu.edu/~lewing/linux/
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpt0YgkOvQE5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
,
and Telnet to it. (of course, firewalls can be a pain)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpdEqCFsa6KB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
that has to protect it's
turf - so the regulations are pretty loose. The only thing not
permitted is re-exporting crypto stuff that was illegally exported
from the US, AFAIK.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpn5L0mKxfq1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
buying off-line books from Tim O'Reilly and company.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpxbuMEWh7i2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ent on my fairly typical low-end 386 installation
by a single byte.
Makes you sort of wonder why everyone is so excited... :-)
Cheers,
-Jim
pgpj3MW1K1qbk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
le using old hardware have similar
usage.
Who objects?
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpiEuZGm0yLn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
One complication I can think of - dselect and the ftp sites have the
concept of "overrides", where Guy can change the section a package
is assigned to. This wouldn't be reflected in the /usr/doc
directory - of course, this might not really matter.
Cheers,
- Jim
pg
a 5GB drive for $600 CDN. And
dwww will probably evolve to make it easy to view the documentation
that is installed on a remote system (on the Internet or via an
Intranet). Plus, finally, it's the simplest solution.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpKgSu5NTiUZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
tself.
I just looked at the mod-rewrite web page - it looks like it does rewrite the
documents - pretty powerful stuff. Sorry if I misinformed anyone...
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp58VFG49WhH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ver on the
> net. There could be style variables in the markup to set
> up the base directories/servers.
We had the exact same discussion on the debian-doc mailing list.
> Jim> 4) HTML documentation, if it exists, should be gzipped. Lynx
> Jim> and Netscape can han
web server/dwww combination to allow other browsers
to work too.
- all the documentation isn't going to be HTML anyways - just "book-like"
stuff. So what's the big deal anyways. No need to start a flame-war.
- the other option would be to leave HTML full uncompressed, which would
be easiest
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp18O0coF5QA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ckages
with no documentation at all.
7) Cacheing - I'm going to split the cacheing in dwww into a separate
package. That way, it should be easy to improve it, not use it,
or use something like squid instead.
That's it for now...
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpw3ccz7lJlO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
nd like a good idea to me, but I'm no expert on crypto.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpQV4UJ6Zh2Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
organizing a mutiny or anything
(although Bruce seemed to take it that way last time). :-)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpPzqjWq0teT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
In summary:
Why the hell do we have to be so damn politically correct?
I'm mostly in this for fun. :-)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp36FYtOOWOR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ng 1 team (ie. a Linux
team) sort of kills the competition aspect of it all.
So I'm still in favour of using the [EMAIL PROTECTED] address,
even though that address is just an auto-responder.
Once I get my experimental dwww release out (hopefully tomorrow),
I'll package up an "rc5-bovine" package to replace the "des-solnet"
package.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpj8KA8GlAA8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ckage them up (so we don't fall out of 1st place).
If anybody really, really wants to talk to me - just call my pager number
(listed on my home page).
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpzGzi7St7wK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
l get past the prototype stage in the
next month or so, and there will be a standard supported way of
registering documents with dwww.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpiSxdDQz1vZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
great for
feature requests and notifying that a new version is available.
People shouldn't interpret the number of bugs against a package as
an indication of its quality -- they could all just be requests for
enhancements.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp3GWMc2QuE0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> Jim,
>
> why didn't you upload shared Motif library version of jdk1.1-runtime?
> I just wonder if there is any reason for that.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Alex Y.
The jdk1.1-runtime package can be used either way - read the
/usr/doc/jdk1.1/README.linux.gz file for det
, since it's a pretty large package, and would take quite a bit
of effort.
PostgreSQL 6.1 should be coming out in a few days. It looks good. :-)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpQ0GwzNIGNm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> Regarding the assignment of copyright, I took that out of the draft
> document.
Yay! I knew you were a good guy! :-)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgptBXGtMKzg2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
returned
to the author, or require assigning the copyright for modifications to the
license
holder.
That's my (strong) opinion. There needs to be more debate.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpkkuccPIOcW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> On Jun 2, Jim Pick wrote
> > Just so you understand why I'm so interested - I'm working on porting dpkg
> > to cygwin32.
>
> Porting or re-implementing? If it's a port, dpkg is already under
> gpl, so cygwin32 being under gpl shouldn't be an issu
o that.
Is there a document where "Errata" can go? How about a release-specific
FAQ that we can update after 1.3 has been release? I can think of
a number of questions that could go onto it. This could be prominently
featured on the web site and the ftp server.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgppoWRhgYUGn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
should stick with the requirement for having all the code in the
core distribution being modifiable. (that's the #1 reason I use and
develop for Debian)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgphoo3srd6qS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
non-free" package. Maybe we're going to have to
strip dselect out of the dpkg package, and put it into a separate
package to go into the "contrib" directory. Ugly.
Of course, this can be reversed if Eric Raymond (and Zeyd M. Ben-Halim)
resolves the licensing situation - saving us a lot of work.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpvQ2RmE1Pwd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
I just wrote:
> In addition, all of the programs
> compiled against it should be moved out of the main distribution,
> and into contrib.
(I just noticed that dselect/dpkg falls into this category)
This is not a good situation.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpPwqLOmli3A.pgp
Description: PGP signature
he main distribution,
and into contrib.
I'm sure glad I've never programmed anything against ncurses.
Or did I miss something?
Cheers, from a slightly alarmed,
- Jim
pgpttMU8Baz4N.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> On Jun 2, Jim Pick wrote
> > The cygwin.dll case in an example where the GPL is being used to restrict
> > the
> > rights of other people using the code so that they can't do something taboo
> > such as charge money, while at the same time, reserving the rig
in court, with a bunch of expensive lawyers on the other side.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpdA77lNmXjz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ould investigate using a less restrictive
license, such as the LGPL, rather than prying money out of the hands of
the users.
(hopefully I'm clearing up some people's thinking on this topic)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpl9QeB0Kulz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
There already is a tkinfo package (version 1.3). cas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is
listed as the maintainer.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpjw0BNcP82y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
even if it is
under the GPL.
I'd like to see Debian maintain some lofty goals as to what constitutes
"Free Software", so I think that discussion on these topics is healthy.
Just calling 'em like I see 'em.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp2R1wJKPNJd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> Yes, very limiting. The code actually cannot be linked statically!
Can't be linked dynamically either... read the GPL.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp6b75kk1gUm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
oing to update the
cross-compiler to assist me.
Hopefully, cygwin.dll can become a part of the Debian distribution
for a Win32 port, playing the same role as the Linux kernel. But it
would be a shame if we have to reclassify the copyrights on every package
in the distribution (and prohibit non-free stuff) just because of it.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpyPc6e7CsBE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
eally.
I don't think this situation exists with libc5 or libc6 (ie. Netscape
and Sun's JDK are linked against it). I'm not familiar with the
licenses on everything though -- I hate reading the fine print.
If I'm wrong on this issue (I hope I am), please correct me.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpLjYTjNzXwK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
which is under the GPL,
not the LPGL...
(sorry for the cheap shot)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpKccdk9pWdC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
backup file
> hello-1.3/debian/substvars.dpkg-orig: No such file or directory
[ Excellent and absolutely correct analysis snipped ]
This has been fixed already in 1.4.0.18 (in Incoming) which has been there
for a few days. I got burned by that one too.
Cheers,
-Jim
pgpHX6kgJ8c2Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
t
it might be nice to be able to add an arbitrary package to the
repository via a CGI script or something like that.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp2C2rx4h4bm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
dpkg-cert already does something like this. Klee is going to fold the
capabilities of dpkg-cert into dpkg, so I think a solution is on
the horizon. :-)
We just have to wait patiently for Klee and his upcoming proposal to overhaul
dpkg.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpD2sxtAmlaW.pgp
Description: PGP
ay we're becoming more open, if anything.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpBrK60v79CD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
for building a really large filesystem spread across
multiple machines on the internet?
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpMQEQVTH2mA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
I agree 100% with what Ian says. (Let's do it)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp1CVGyswT6R.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ing.
Maybe we need to build an "expiry date" into dpkg? ie. dpkg will not
install any packages that are newer than the expiry date, other than dpkg
(and friends).
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpELcLG5fYK3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
the data files for the actual game (levels, sounds, so on). Those still
> have a non-free copyright. So there will probably be a abuse-libs package
> that is in non-free, which will stick abuse, which will depend on that
> package, right back in contrib, where it is now.
Sounds like the libs can go into the free section. Cool.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpLacEnIAZ72.pgp
Description: PGP signature
was neat. Anyways, the Linux Counter doesn't seem to
have the capability to change the settings for systems already registered
-- so all my systems are going to be listed as Slackware. You're right,
statistics lie. :-)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpPRb8iMozY2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
406 2.14% distribution:SLS
12445 65.68% distribution:Slackware
1484 7.83% distribution:Others
(looks like we beat Red Hat, go figure...)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpVLP06DEKzU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
s.
BTW, if you believe the axiom, "A bug can be changed to a feature by
documenting it", then we really have 10000 features. :-)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpAnNhALeZVt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
unpack such a tar file, unless enabled by
a switch.
3) GNU tar should refuse to create such a tar file, unless enabled by
a switch.
- Jim Van Zandt
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Jim Pick wrote:
>I'm not really clear on what the best toolkit for development really
>is, but some of the free ones look really, really good.
Can you summarize the good and bad points of the free GUI
toolkits/frameworks you've checked out and/or
adding such a feature
> for Debian?
>
> Chees,
>
> --Amos
Check out Klee Diene's dpkgcert package (in experimental). You might have to
write to him to find out where to get the certificates that go along
with it. It really helped me recover from drive corruption.
Cheer
it easier for the Debian
developers. However, we may collectively decide that the ability to have
cryptographically signed packages is so important that it is worth rushing
it.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpurUXkgLk2n.pgp
Description: PGP signature
uff in Canada (or reg's exempt free software --
whoopee!). That would be good -- there currently isn't a mirror
of the crypto stuff on this continent. I'll try to set it up by
the end of this week.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpjFqvKKnqvb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> On Tue, 13 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> > If someone wants to contribute to an effort to clone a toolkit, they'd
> > probably be much better off contributing to the WINE project (Windows
> > emulator) or Jolt project (Java clone - kaffe, biss-awt, guavac, etc.).
> Jim Pick wrote:
> > Even if we wrote one, I doubt the KDE guys, especially Matthias Ettrich,
> > would
> > be willing to use it. Really an unfortunate situation, IMHO. :-(
Noel Maddy wrote:
> Berate me for missing the obvious, but couldn't KDE just be compiled
when it's done, it would
> seem to make sense to use the projected `libdpkg' for this sort of
> purpose. But I see absolutely no reason to constrain ourselves to the
> format we already have just because we already have it.
I have no problem with that. I just thought it should be mentioned.
> Hoping I've written at least something useful,
Yes, you sure have, thanks for joining in to the debate!
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpvogDHeyJBQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> Didn't we use to have a PGP package?
>
I noticed that it disappeared a few days ago too. What's up?
Did I miss an announcement or something?
- Jim
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
to
the debian-devel list.
Sign me up for mandelspawn - sounds about my speed. Not too
mission critical for anyone I hope (in case I screw up). :-)
Cheers,
- Jim
limpse_3.6-1
upgraded dpkg_1.3.14 --> dpkg_1.4.0
installed dpkg-dev_1.4.0
upgraded fvwm95_2.0.42a-2 --> fvwm_2.0.42a-4
installed guile_0.4.0-3
upgraded compface_1.0-1 --> compface_89.11.11-2
Weird eh?
I guess I'll switch back to GNU emacs for know.
- Jim
...
> filenames have the form --.
> e.g.: ab-cd-1.23a-45678.tar.gz
> Field Separators:- - .
> Field Contents: ab-cd 1.23a 45678 tar.gz
...
> - Counting to the right from that point, the first '.' encountered
> separates REV from EX
201 - 272 of 272 matches
Mail list logo
