amounts of that work are directly helping the GNU/Hurd
project. See also the bolded nonsense in the third last paragraph of
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html.
> Please have a look at the patch
I'll have a look at it when I'm next working on debootstrap which won't
be f
27;re uploaded rather than some
time after they've been put in the archive.
You don't need to worry about this until hurd's ready to release.
> > - Forwarded message from Anthony Towns -
> > From: Anthony Towns
> >
> > On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 02:36:07
ck someone who really relies on those interfaces
> heavily).
No, but I've seen problems caused by glibc's API changing fairly
regularly.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG
On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 10:35:13AM -0400, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 12:11:36AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > It's not what the hack does that matters, it's the quality of it. If
> > you don't leave time for it to be tested, there's no wa
On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 09:51:16AM -0400, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 10:58:22PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Then don't bother doing it. If the quick hack's no better than no
> > firewall, it obviously isn't going to satisfy me.
> I wonder
you're hoping for.
> This gives a clear message: If you need a
> firewall, look somewhere else.
And not having debian/dists/stable/main/binary-hurd-i386 gives a
similarly clear message: if you want a usable, stable operating system,
look somewhere else.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <
welcome to say "Debian's not
ready to release yet" the day after it releases, and you don't even have
to back that up. I don't get to do any of those things.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don&#
On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 10:15:07AM +0200, Tobin Fricke wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Exactly. The problem is that if Hurd releases without firewalling tools
> > we haven't allowed our users to make this choice.
> Right... but the one problem with t
On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 09:36:53AM +0200, Tobin Fricke wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Quite frankly, I've no idea why you're quite so dogmatically against
> > having firewalling tools.
> What are we accomplishing with this "firewalling&
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 03:43:50PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > Firewalling tools are provided with the Debian system.
> > Firewalling tools are not available for Debian GNU/Hurd.
> > Debian GNU/Hurd will not be released until they are avai
e can't afford
it. Not everyone can afford dedicated firewall boxes either. Even if they
can, defense-in-depth would indicate that they should use a dedicated
firewalling on the server as well as a dedicated firewall box and access
control at the application level and whatever else they can
choice between two systems with mostly
the same software, would choose the one that can only be a leaf-node, rather
than the one that can be either, depending on your needs at the time?
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
eleased, you have
to make the best tools available you can, even if you know they're
not perfect.
Additionally, if you're not willing to take any advice on board, don't
expect to recieve any again.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 07:09:00AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:16:23PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Firewalling tools are not available for Debian GNU/Hurd.
> > Debian GNU/Hurd will not be released until they are available.
> Then you should get
le to look someone in the eye and say
> > "Yes, Debian GNU/Hurd 3.1 is ready for your use."
> I think that depends on who the "you" is that you are talking to, and
> it's misguided to think the answer must be the same for everyone.
Think for just a minute w
verstated his point, but it shouldn't be dismissed.
I've no idea why you're overstating my point like that. A firewall is
a necessary feature of a modern operating system. If users choose not
to make use of that feature, that's their decision, and good luck to
them. I'
;m
tempted to strike out the word "new", actually. See the "Ports" section
in http://www.debian.org/intro/organization.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail pre
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 05:13:55PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 06:12:00AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 12:13:41PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > 1. Debian does not have firewalling by default, so if firewalling is
&
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 01:27:25PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > I'd probably be expressing concerns if, eg, we were porting our
> > distribution to a kernel that didn't have support for some form of access
> > control, whether i
t; based, or something else. Some (security
related) features are just fundamentally necessary to have if you're
trying to produce a functional operating system in this day and age.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 08:15:24PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 03:13:59AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > If it's the former, then it might turn out that it's fast enough that
> > we can just run it, rather than doing the tarball nonsense. You
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 03:13:59AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Have you thought about writing a translator for /dev itself, rather than
> using a script to populate a directory? devfs the Hurd way.
(Which is to say: on acid)
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 10:04:14AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > What is "/dev" on the Hurd? Debootstrap does it as a tarball because
> > MAKEDEV is way too slow to run during an install, because (a) it needs
> > things like /dev
expect to be there are
> indeed there.
The real issue (as far as whether you have a Debian release or not) is
whether you can keep things up to date once they've been ported. That's
not much more of an issue with the Hurd than any other port, though.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <
're programs. Therefore they go in
/usr/lib somewhere, or you invent somewhere new for them to go. But
you're not forced into the latter just because they don't fit in /bin:
on that score, /usr/lib is a perfectly fine place for them.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
s certainly more direct than having
the kernel do it, I don't think it counts as being direct enough to not
go in /usr/lib.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
y could.
The same thing applies to the Hurd servers; with the exception that while
they *could* go somewhere under /usr/lib (or /usr/libexec) they need
to be much easier to reference. This latter thing could be achieved by
having some sort of shorthand notation in all the cases where it matters
be a fairly reasonable
place to put it, if you didn't have to type it out every time you wanted
to do a mount.
Anyway, this is all pretty irrelevant. If policy's not meant to be a
stick, then people shouldn't be trying to change however many years of
existing practice in the Hu
things, and getting packages to do the right things;
heck, even in working out what "the right things" are. There'll always
be differences, no matter how hard you try. The debhelper version of
"hello world" doesn't have Build-Dependencies, eg.
Cheers,
_/\_
ew top-level hierarchies to
establish existing practice...
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``BAM! Science triumphs again!''
--
though not all of them were). Using
statoverride instead of suidmanager is still a Good Thing, though,
so they ought to stay open as wishlist requests.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail pref
#x27;t built and maybe make it obvious what needs to be fixed.
So is there any chance of people telling me urls I can use for this? Something
like:
http://m68k.debian.org/buildd/logs/slocate_2.4-1_20001201-0800
almost works, except for the _20001201-0800...
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony T
pe of ever being fixed,
they'll eventually just get ingored.
[1] cf http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce-00/msg00011.html
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail pref
dists/potato to the pool for anything missing,
FWIW. The Packages/Sources files may or may not end up pointing at
the symlinks rather than the pool. This will probably first happen
sometime after the changeover, but will definitely happen during
2.2r2.
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL
34 matches
Mail list logo
