Processed: Re: Bug#1068823: (No Subject)

Processing control commands: > reassign -1 src:apt Bug #1068823 [general] Stepwise Debian upgrade to enable systems with little free storage space to upgrade without breaks due to "No space left on device" Bug reassigned from package 'general' to 'src:apt'. Ignoring request to alter found

Bug#1068823: (No Subject)

Control: reassign -1 src:apt Control: severity -1 wishlist On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 1:00 PM mYnDstrEAm wrote: > Thanks guys, these are very useful methods and I'll mention these as > alternatives to disk cleanups recommended at > https://unix.stackexchange.com/q/774199/233262 (this would

Bug#1068823: (No Subject)

Thanks guys, these are very useful methods and I'll mention these as alternatives to disk cleanups recommended at https://unix.stackexchange.com/q/774199/233262 (this would probably very useful to have at places about upgrades failing due to disk space issues even though people only look these

Bug#1061518: (no subject)

Package: general Severity: serious X-Debbugs-Cc: a...@a.com, h...@test.com

Bug#1057386: Subject: ITP: imsprog -- linux chip programmer for CH341a devices

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Mikhail Medvedev X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name    : imsprog   Version : 1.1.2-12   Upstream Author : Mikhail Medvedev * URL : https://github.com/bigbigmdm/IMSProg * License : GPL-3   Programming

[no subject]

Good day sir/madam I'm a long time debian user but would like that contribute technical documentation to the community in thanks for your tireless work on this magnificent ecosystem. Thanks Zebb

Bug#1056052: Subject: ITP: wasix-libc -- wasix libc implementation for WebAssembly

Package: wnpp Owner: Fukui Daichi X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Severity: wishlist * Package name: wasix-libc Version : 0.0~git20230922.d0362cb Upstream Author : Johnathan Sharratt * URL : https://github.com/wasix-org/wasix-libc * License :

Subject: Package name streamlink-twitch-gui RTP: streamlink-twitch-gui A graphical user interface on top of the Streamlink command line interface

Package name : streamlink-twitch-gui Severity: RTP Package name: streamlink-twitch-gui Version: 0.0.27 Upstream Author: https://github.com/rustdesk/rustdesk URL: https://streamlink.github.io/streamlink-twitch-gui/ License: MIT Description: A graphical user interface on top of the Streamlink

Bug#1011504: Subject: ITP: deepin-image-editor -- Image editor is a public library for deepin-image-viewer and deepin-album developed by Deepin Technology.

Package: wnpp X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Owner: Ma Aiguo Severity: wishlist * Package name: deepin-image-editor Version : 1.0.13 Upstream Author : Deepin Technology Co., Ltd. * URL : https://github.com/linuxdeepin/image-editor * License :

[no subject]

The UFW firewall package uses iptables at the backend, but it is lacking syntax to block UDP ports and I think this would be useful. I ran the command "UFW default deny incoming UDP" and it wrote to the chain successfully, but I ran nslookup afterwards and it succeeded, meaning that it did not

Bug#1009236: Subject: ITP: node-canvas-confetti -- on-demand confetti gun

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Michael Ikwuegbu X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name: node-canvas-confetti Version : 1.5.1 Upstream Author : Kiril Vatev * URL : https://github.com/catdad/canvas-confetti#readme * License

Bug#1005379: Subject: ITP: elpa-macaulay2 -- Software system for algebraic geometry research (Emacs package)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Doug Torrance X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, dtorra...@debian.org * Package name: elpa-macaulay2 Version : 1.19.1 Upstream Author : Dan Grayson * URL : http://github.com/Macaulay2/M2-emacs * License :

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 21:38:01 +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote: > > I think we should forego the NEW queue. If people want to check > packages, they can do it once they are in unstable with regular bugs. > Current checks are partly done by Lintian and I suppose people could > watch new Lintian

Re: Do we need to hide packages in NEW queue (Was: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not))

On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 07:38:10 +0100 Andreas Tille wrote: > Am Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 01:45:11PM -0800 schrieb Russ Allbery: [...] > > The question, which keeps being raised in part > > because I don't think it's gotten a good answer, is what the basis is for > > treating copyright and licensing bugs

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Hi, Not a DD, still raising my voice. I'm *not* advocating that Fedora's processes are "better", just trying to add ideas. On 26/01/2022 11:43, Adam Borowski wrote: On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 09:38:01PM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote: I think we should forego the NEW queue. If people want to

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Adam Borowski writes: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 09:38:01PM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote: >> For me, the copyright check is just a bad excuse. People upload >> non-distributable stuff everywhere and it seems the world continue to go >> round. What amount of non-distributable packages is stopped

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 11:43 AM Adam Borowski wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 09:38:01PM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote: > > > > I think we should forego the NEW queue. If people want to check > > packages, they can do it once they are in unstable with regular bugs. > > Without the NEW queue,

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 09:38:01PM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote: > For me, the copyright check is just a bad excuse. People upload > non-distributable stuff everywhere and it seems the world continue to go > round. What amount of non-distributable packages is stopped by the NEW > queue? > > I

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:44:37AM +0100, Gard Spreemann wrote: > Jonas Smedegaard writes: > > Quoting Vincent Bernat (2022-01-25 21:38:01) > >> I didn't comment at first because I thought someone else would raise > >> the idea. But it seems people still like the idea of a NEW queue. Not > >>

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Jonas Smedegaard writes: > Quoting Vincent Bernat (2022-01-25 21:38:01) >> I didn't comment at first because I thought someone else would raise >> the idea. But it seems people still like the idea of a NEW queue. Not >> me. The NEW queue is a hindrance. > > For the record, I don't "like" the

Re: Do we need to hide packages in NEW queue (Was: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not))

Andreas Tille writes: ... > May be some intermediate step would be to not hide packages in NEW queue > but exposing them as an apt source. If I'm correct this is not the case > since it had certain legal consequences for the project if code with > certain non-free licenses would be downloadable

Do we need to hide packages in NEW queue (Was: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not))

Am Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 01:45:11PM -0800 schrieb Russ Allbery: > Jonas Smedegaard writes: > > > I just don't think the solution is to ignore copyright or licensing > > statements. > > That's not the goal. The question, which keeps being raised in part > because I don't think it's gotten a good

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Hi Russ, > > I just don't think the solution is to ignore copyright or licensing > > statements. > > That's not the goal. The question, which keeps being raised in part > because I don't think it's gotten a good answer, is what the basis is for > treating copyright and licensing bugs differently

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Jonas Smedegaard writes: > I just don't think the solution is to ignore copyright or licensing > statements. That's not the goal. The question, which keeps being raised in part because I don't think it's gotten a good answer, is what the basis is for treating copyright and licensing bugs

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

❦ 25 January 2022 21:51 +01, Jonas Smedegaard: >> I didn't comment at first because I thought someone else would raise >> the idea. But it seems people still like the idea of a NEW queue. Not >> me. The NEW queue is a hindrance. > > For the record, I don't "like" the NEW queue. > > I don't

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Quoting Vincent Bernat (2022-01-25 21:38:01) > I didn't comment at first because I thought someone else would raise > the idea. But it seems people still like the idea of a NEW queue. Not > me. The NEW queue is a hindrance. For the record, I don't "like" the NEW queue. I don't like current

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

❦ 21 January 2022 09:51 -05, M. Zhou: > I'd rather propose choice C. Because I to some extent understand > both sides who support either A or B. I maintain bulky C++ packages, > and I also had a little experience reviewing packages on behalf of > ftp-team. I didn't comment at first because I

Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 01:49:19PM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 08:15:30AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > > its surely an interesting topic how to avoid binary name changes and its > > also interesting to discuss ABI changes and workarounds. > > > > However, my

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Am Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 06:50:17PM -0500 schrieb Theodore Y. Ts'o: > > So could the Release Team figure out a way to automatically rebuild > packages that have source dependencies on static libraries? > > This would solve the problem of new binary packages causing a full > ftpmasters policy

Re: Back to the topic of changed binary named (Was: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not))

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 8:15 AM Andreas Tille wrote: > > However, my point was that I want to know what policy ftpmaster applies > to new binary names and to focus on this topic. I really want to know > that policy of ftpmaster and I really would like to see that documented > and I'm afraid that

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 08:48:28PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi Ted, > > I think this is the second time you write something like this, but for > dynamically linked libraries, the rebuild happens (by the Release Team, > (please use transition trackers for that) because we automatically track >

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Hi Ted, On 24-01-2022 19:44, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: No, dpkg-shlibsdeps doesn't save you. Again, consider the hypothetical package libshaky, which over the period of 9 months, has soname changes which generate (over time) packages libshaky3, libshaky4, libshaky6, libshaky7, and libshaky8.

Re: Back to the topic of changed binary named (Was: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not))

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 08:15:30AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Paul and others, > > its surely an interesting topic how to avoid binary name changes and its > also interesting to discuss ABI changes and workarounds. > > However, my point was that I want to know what policy ftpmaster applies

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 10:20:48AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Sun, 2022-01-23 at 17:43 -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > > That only works if there are no other packages depending on those > > shared libraries which are coming from other source packages. > > I don't think that is true, I

Back to the topic of changed binary named (Was: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not))

Hi Paul and others, its surely an interesting topic how to avoid binary name changes and its also interesting to discuss ABI changes and workarounds. However, my point was that I want to know what policy ftpmaster applies to new binary names and to focus on this topic. I really want to know

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Sun, 2022-01-23 at 17:43 -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > That only works if there are no other packages depending on those > shared libraries which are coming from other source packages. I don't think that is true, I believe you can put multiple things in the depends section of an shlibs

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 08:58:37AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > > The other thing that's perhaps considering here is that unfortunately, > > there are some upstreams that are extremely irresponsible with library > > ABI backwards compatibility, where they bump the SONAME essentially at > > every

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 7:04 PM Paul Gevers wrote: > > It's not only the copyright that the ftp-master are responsible for. New > binaries fill a place in the Debian namespace and they *are* the keepers > of that. One could say that for new binaries packages whose src is already in Debian, the

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Hi, Am Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 07:04:33PM +0100 schrieb Paul Gevers: > > I have heard this argument and my mail was simply to find out what > > fellow developers think about this. IMHO the issue is sufficiently > > important to have some kind of documented consensus about this. > > It's not only

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 at 08:58:37 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Fri, 2022-01-21 at 13:55 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > The other thing that's perhaps considering here is that unfortunately, > > there are some upstreams that are extremely irresponsible with library > > ABI backwards compatibility,

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Fri, 2022-01-21 at 13:55 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Can we have better automated tooling, either in Lintian, or in when > source packages are rebuilt, that can take care of this? > > The other thing that's perhaps considering here is that unfortunately, > there are some upstreams that are

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 01:28:54PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > 1. When the SO name changes and the binary package name is adjusted > accordingly, it is not super rare for the maintainer to mess something up in > the renaming and end up with an empty binary package, which does no one any

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Friday, January 21, 2022 1:33:07 PM EST Adam Borowski wrote: > On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 01:28:54PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > 2. New binary package "steals" binary from another source. This is > > sometimes OK. Sometimes it's accidental. It could also be malicious (I > > don't

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 01:28:54PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > 2. New binary package "steals" binary from another source. This is > sometimes > OK. Sometimes it's accidental. It could also be malicious (I don't remember > if I've every actually seen this done for an intentional "steal"

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

On Friday, January 21, 2022 12:19:12 PM EST Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Mo, > > Am Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 09:51:12AM -0500 schrieb M. Zhou: > > I'd rather propose choice C. Because I to some extent understand > > both sides who support either A or B. I maintain bulky C++ packages, > > and I also had

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Hi, I'm not involved in ftp-master, but... On 21-01-2022 18:19, Andreas Tille wrote: Am Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 09:51:12AM -0500 schrieb M. Zhou: I'd rather propose choice C. Because I to some extent understand both sides who support either A or B. I maintain bulky C++ packages, and I also had a

Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Hi Mo, Am Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 09:51:12AM -0500 schrieb M. Zhou: > I'd rather propose choice C. Because I to some extent understand > both sides who support either A or B. I maintain bulky C++ packages, > and I also had a little experience reviewing packages on behalf of > ftp-team. > > A --

Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Hi Andreas, Thank you for mentioning this. Your post inspired me to came up a new choice. On Fri, 2022-01-21 at 11:33 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > > This recently happed for me in the case of onetbb (which was not > uploaded by myself - so I'm not even asking for myself while other > packages

Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not

Hi, if a source package in Debian creates a new binary package name it has to pass the new queue. If I understand this posting from last year[1] correctly (people in CC who were in CC of that posting) this is just because nobody has written some kind of "auto-approver" for dak. Usually the

subject

This is the body

Bug#998710: Subject: ITP: golang-gopkg-macaroon.v2 -- Native Go implementation of macaroons

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Mathias Gibbens X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian...@lists.debian.org * Package name: golang-gopkg-macaroon.v2 Version : 2.1.0-1 Upstream Author : Roger Peppe * URL : https://github.com/go-macaroon/macaroon *

Bug#998709: Subject: ITP: golang-gopkg-macaroon-bakery.v2 -- High level operations for building systems with macaroons

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Mathias Gibbens X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian...@lists.debian.org * Package name: golang-gopkg-macaroon-bakery.v2 Version : 2.3.0-1 Upstream Author : Roger Peppe, Canonical Inc * URL :

[no subject]

Hi?

Bug#976852: Subject: ITP: node-iterall -- utilities for using JavaScript Iterables

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Abraham Raji X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name    : node-iterall   Version : 1.2.2   Upstream Author : Lee Byron (http://leebyron.com/) * URL : https://github.com/leebyron/iterall * License : Expat  

[no subject]

Sendt fra E-post for Windows 10

Bug#950588: (no subject)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Fabrice BAUZAC * Package name: golang-github-jfrog-gofrog Version : 1.0.5-1 Upstream Author : JFrog Ltd. * URL : https://github.com/jfrog/gofrog * License : Apache-2.0 Programming Lang: Go Description : A

Re: Bug#949198: (no subject)

Control: retitle -1 ITP: parsero -- Audit tool for robots.txt of a site On Vi, 17 ian 20, 21:37:48, Thiago Andrade Marques wrote: > Subject: ITP: parsero -- Audit tool for robots.txt of a site > Package: wnpp > Owner: Thiago Andrade Marques > Severity: wishlist > > * Package

Bug#949198: (no subject)

Subject: ITP: parsero -- Audit tool for robots.txt of a site Package: wnpp Owner: Thiago Andrade Marques Severity: wishlist * Package name: parsero Version : 0.0+git20140929.e5b585a Upstream Author : Javier Nieto * URL : https://github.com/behindthefirewalls/Parsero

Bug#941221: (no subject)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Miriam Ruiz * Package name: knitpy Version : 0.1.1~git20180430 Upstream Author : Jan Schulz * URL : https://github.com/janschulz/knitpy * License : BSD-3-clause Programming Lang: Python Description : report

Bug#940329: (no subject)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Andreas Noteng * Package name: scantailor-advanced Version : 1.0.17~2019.08.16-1 Upstream Author : 4lex4 <4le...@zoho.com> * URL : https://github.com/4lex4/scantailor-advanced/ * License : GPL3+ Programming Lang: C++

Bug#927419: Subject: ITP: libtest-mockdatetime-perl -- mock DateTime->now calls during tests

Package: wnpp Owner: Alexandre Mestiashvili Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-p...@lists.debian.org * Package name: libtest-mockdatetime-perl Version : 0.02-1 Upstream Author : Wolfgang Kinkeldei * URL :

Bug#914293: Subject: ITP: node-append-transform -- Install a transform to require.extensions that always runs last

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Nicolas Mora X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name: node-append-transform Version : 1.0.0 Upstream Author : James Talmage (github.com/jamestalmage) * URL : https://github.com/istanbuljs/append-transform

Bug#900123: (no subject)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Andreas Tille * Package name: r-cran-vcr Version : 0.1.0 Upstream Author : Scott Chamberlain () * URL : https://cran.r-project.org/package=vcr * License : MIT

Bug#898687: (no subject)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Andreas Tille * Package name: r-cran-colourpicker Version : 1.0 Upstream Author : Dean Attali, * URL : https://cran.r-project.org/package=colourpicker * License : MIT Programming Lang: GNU R

Bug#898423: (no subject)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Laurent Baillet * Package name: libai-decisiontree-perl Version : 0.11 Upstream Author : Ken Williams * URL : https://github.com/kenahoo/perl-ai-decisiontree * License :

[no subject]

Format: 1.8 Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 23:32:58 +0100 Source: tor Binary: tor tor-geoipdb Architecture: source Version: 0.3.1.9-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer: Peter Palfrader Changed-By: Peter Palfrader Description: tor - anonymizing overlay

Re: [yay for broken usage of was: in the Subject header]

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 01:06:06 +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > Quoting Philipp Kern (2018-01-11 00:20:17) > > Why is it making comparing packages with each other difficult? > > What I meant here was what I mentioned elsewhere in this thread. We can check > whether two binary packages built with

Re: [yay for broken usage of was: in the Subject header]

Quoting Philipp Kern (2018-01-11 00:20:17) > On 2018-01-10 22:53, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > But unless we want to pull a full Gentoo here and really make the > > information with which build profile a given binary package was built part > > of the binary package and thus overhaul all our

Re: [yay for broken usage of was: in the Subject header]

On 2018-01-10 22:53, Johannes Schauer wrote: But unless we want to pull a full Gentoo here and really make the information with which build profile a given binary package was built part of the binary package and thus overhaul all our dependency resolvers, unless the plan is to do that, I don't

Bug#885604: Subject: ITP: node-meant -- Similar to 'Did you mean', returns probable correction

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Sruthi Chandran X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name: node-meant Version : 1.0.1 Upstream Author : Daijiro Wachi * URL : https://github.com/watilde/meant#readme * License : Expat

Bug#879995: Subject: ITP: node-validate-npm-package-name -- Checks if a string is a valid npm package name

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Sruthi Chandran X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name: node-validate-npm-package-name Version : 3.0.0 Upstream Author : zeke * URL : https://github.com/npm/validate-npm-package-name *

Bug#879782: Subject: ITP: node-get-func-name -- Utility for getting a function's name for node and the browser

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Sruthi Chandran X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name: node-get-func-name Version : 2.0.0 Upstream Author : Jake Luer (http://alogicalparadox.com) * URL :

Bug#870218: (no subject)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Yinhang Liu * Package name: libxcam Version : 1.0.0 Upstream Author : Wind Yuan * URL : https://github.com/01org/libxcam * License : Apache-2.0 Programming Lang: C, C++

[no subject]

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 12:21 AM, gwmfms6 wrote: > Paul, you seemed to indicate that you were able to set a different "user > default" umask in Stretch that's respected by gnome apps like gedit? No, I didn't indicate that. See my other reply for clarification. -- bye, pabs

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

to the user what they are doing (ie, they are giving the world access to those particular files). On 2017-06-28 07:25, Ian Jackson wrote: Paul Wise writes ("Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?"): On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:11 AM, gwmfms6 wrote: > This discussion should be on w

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

Paul, you seemed to indicate that you were able to set a different "user default" umask in Stretch that's respected by gnome apps like gedit? How did you do it? On 2017-06-28 09:21, Paul Wise wrote: On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 7:25 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: The appropriate default umask is 002 if

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 8:59 PM, gwmfms6 wrote: > You didn't notice because you run umask from your shell configuration? I should clarify, I meant bash shell not gnome-shell. > In other words, you have a working umask in Stretch? In my terminals yes, but not in apps launched from the GUI. >

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

You didn't notice because you run umask from your shell configuration? In other words, you have a working umask in Stretch? I want a working umask in stretch. Can you tell me how to "run `umask 027` from my shell configuration"? Currently, I have not found a way to get gnome to respect umask

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

Setting umask in ~/.profile on Jessie works for me. On 2017-06-28 01:04, Arto Jantunen wrote: It doesn't work since pam_umask isn't run by default. However as far as I know this has been the case for a very long time (the oldest install I can check quickly is squeeze and it has the same

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 7:25 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: > The appropriate default umask is 002 if the user's primary group is > named after the user, or 022 otherwise. AFAICT, neither of these achieve what the initiator of the thread wants to achieve; no read access by other users to one's files on

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

Paul Wise writes ("Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?"): > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:11 AM, gwmfms6 wrote: > > This discussion should be on whether to set a default UMASK of 077 or 027. > > I think the appropriate default umask is 077 due to the possibility of > some

Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

I'd like to know why giving the world (Other) read access is even under consideration. If user wants a file to have Other readability this should be on the user to set it, but it should not be the default. What is the justification that every user be able to read every other user's documents?

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

Hi, On 27.06.2017 19:11, gwmf...@openmailbox.org wrote: > I'd like to know why giving the world (Other) read access is even under > consideration. If user wants a file to have Other readability this > should be on the user to set it, but it should not be the default. That can be solved by

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

Paul Wise writes: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:11 AM, gwmfms6 wrote: > >> I'd like to know why giving the world (Other) read access is even under >> consideration. If user wants a file to have Other readability this should be >> on the user to set it, but it should not be the

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

Paul Wise writes: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:11 AM, gwmfms6 wrote: >> NOTE: this discussion is moot at the present time anyway because it is >> impossible to set a UMASK at all on Debian Stretch. None of the usual ways >> work within gnome on Debian Stretch. Can anyone comment

Re: Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:11 AM, gwmfms6 wrote: > I'd like to know why giving the world (Other) read access is even under > consideration. If user wants a file to have Other readability this should be > on the user to set it, but it should not be the default. I expect for most Debian

Subject: UMASK 002 or 022?

I'd like to know why giving the world (Other) read access is even under consideration. If user wants a file to have Other readability this should be on the user to set it, but it should not be the default. What is the justification that every user be able to read everyone else's documents?

Bug#844474: Subject: ITP: golang-github-geertjohan-go.rice -- Go package for embedding web resources into Go executables

X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Tim Potter * Package name: golang-github-geertjohan-go.rice Version : 0.0~git20160123.0.0f3f5fd-1 Upstream Author : Geert-Johan Riemer *

Bug#837805: (no subject)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) * Package name: python-can Version : 1.5.2 Upstream Author : Brian Thorne * URL : https://bitbucket.org/hardbyte/python-can * License : LGPL v3

Bug#835254: (no subject)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Mouaad Aallam * Package name: google-android-studio-installer Version : 2.1.3.0 Upstream Author : Google, Inc * URL : https://developer.android.com/studio/index.html * License : public-domain

Bug#830547: (no subject)

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Al Nikolov * Package name: trac-icalview Version : 15654 Upstream Author : Xavier Péchoultres * URL : http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/IcalViewPlugin * License : GPL2

Re: Unidentified subject!

On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 12:04:59AM +1200, bounce-debian-devel=cbannister=slingshot.co...@lists.debian.org wrote: Weird! Don't know what happened here. :( -- The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and

Unidentified subject!

[no subject]

Hi people: i'm a real person not machine, i'm from chile and i have a friend who knows php, Java,bootstrap,html5,phonegap,laravel,codeigniter and many others. He is a father of 2 kids and he is unemployed, could you give him a work as a dedicated developer? Ps: i can prove that i'm not a

Bug#815760: (no subject)

Subject: ITP: dpdk -- Data Plane Development Kit Package: wnpp Owner: Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrha...@canonical.com> Severity: wishlist * Package name: dpdk Version : 2.2 Upstream Author : Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monja...@6wind.com> * URL : htt

[no subject]

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

Bug#796920: Subject: ITP: ripper -- scrape licenses out of files

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Owner: Fernando Ike f...@midstorm.org * Package name: ripper Version : 0.0~git20150415.0.bd1a682-1 Upstream Author : Emmanuel Odeke emm.od...@gmail.com * URL :

Bug#795101: Subject: ITP: stenographer -- full-packet-capture utility

as disk fills up, and provides methods for reading back specific sets of packets quickly and easily. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87fv3rw35e

[no subject]

a comunidade ficaria muito feliz com isso. Atenciosamente; Éderson A. Jesus E-mail.: ederjesus at gmail dot com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-portuguese-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https

  1   2   3   4   5   >