Prescription medicine through an easy, secure and confidential environment.

eBay Pharmacy http://fcusw.fc0q1gxqc7x51yf.scombronebf.com The shortest distance between two points is not a very interesting journey. The world only goes round by misunderstanding. I call architecture frozen music. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 02:34:14PM +0200, Gerardo Ballabio wrote: > I was complaining that a screensaver, that is, a program that isn't > expected to have anything to do with web surfing, could download > *anything* without asking me. Of course if I willfully enable > "screensaver that downl

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 06:40:09PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > debian-announce). I'm more concerned about user confusion than about > what ZDnet happens to be saying. Nevertheless, a tiny press release correcting the ZDNet news would be useful. Something along the line of: ZDNet misreports De

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

R. Armiento wrote: > As an alternative, I present to you this highly on-topic excerpt from > Monty Python's "The Crunchy Frog Sketch": Exactly! Read the whole sketch! > [...] I suggest that the long-term solution is to move WebCollage to a > package xscreensaver-off; [...] Nothing in webcollage

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 05:02:08PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: > Peter Vandenabeele wrote: > > For reasons of PR, I would suggest to urgently update at least > > the main site and the News site with version 3.1 r0a (under News > > on the main section). You might also link to a text that correctly > > de

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 07:18:04PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > Peter Vandenabeele wrote: > > This needs to be done fast, so that journalists and other interested > > parties that want to follow up on this "news" also get our side > > of the story. Otherwise we leave them with only the ZDnet side

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

Peter Vandenabeele wrote: > This needs to be done fast, so that journalists and other interested > parties that want to follow up on this "news" also get our side > of the story. Otherwise we leave them with only the ZDnet side of > the story. Where is the problem? We cannot correct everything a

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

R. Armiento wrote: > > As I understand it, the Random option does exactly what it says, it starts > > one of the named screensavers at random. The problem is that some of the > > screensavers work by taking an image, and then manipulating it in various > > ways. That's fine but it needs to get th

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

Gerardo Ballabio wrote: On 06/09/05 13:46:38, Philip Hands wrote: I believe you've missed the point. [...] I believe you missed mine. You're absolutely correct --- I apologise, I dived into the middle of a thread without reading all of it. Doh! Cheers, Phil. signature.asc Description:

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

MJ Ray wrote: > R. Armiento wrote: >> 4. Start kde control-center and select 'random screensaver' >> (not default) > > Would you like a label on that "random screensaver" option which > says "Warning: may do things you don't expect"? > > Have you read "Don't eat this book"? Have you had snea

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

Michael Banck wrote: > MJ Ray wrote: > > ZDnet are being silly. > Sure, but they wrote it and people read it. And now they will think > 'Ugh, sarge? Wasn't that this thing which has no security?'. There is > obviously a problem here, and just saying that ZDnet is silly (which > they are, of cours

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

Peter Vandenabeele wrote: > For reasons of PR, I would suggest to urgently update at least > the main site and the News site with version 3.1 r0a (under News > on the main section). You might also link to a text that correctly > describes our view on what happened and how it was repaired. > > T

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 03:51:41PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: > > There was a devel-announce about it as soon as it was discovered. > > Additionally, it was sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and > is visible on http://www.debian.org/CD/releases/ - had anyone > actually had time to download, burn and sell these

Re: The archive.debian.org situation

Am 2005-06-06 22:56:46, schrieb Joey Hess: > snapshot.d.net already has most of the files in archive, at least for > newer distributions, and AFAIK plans to keep them indefinitely. Maybe I know, since Woody. I have a full debian-archive from Buzz to Potato (CD's only partialy).

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

> There was a devel-announce about it as soon as it was discovered. Additionally, it was sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and is visible on http://www.debian.org/CD/releases/ - had anyone actually had time to download, burn and sell these before the notice was sent? (I didn't send mine yet.) -- MJ Ray

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 03:47:47PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: > Peter Vandenabeele wrote: > > Well, Sarge == stable _did_ make it to the news now, but > > probably not as we have hoped ... My ZDnet news agent mailed > > me this item this morning: > > "Debian drops ball on security updates" > > There

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

Peter Vandenabeele wrote: > Well, Sarge == stable _did_ make it to the news now, but > probably not as we have hoped ... My ZDnet news agent mailed > me this item this morning: > "Debian drops ball on security updates" [...] > I searched this morning and found nothing about this on http://www.d

Re: sarge and the Wall Street Journal

On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 01:51:40PM +, Thaddeus H. Black wrote: > So on the day sarge releases, the big news in the > free-software world is, "Bruce Perens gets a job?" Well, Sarge == stable _did_ make it to the news now, but probably not as we have hoped ... My ZDnet news agent mailed me thi

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

R. Armiento wrote: > 4. Start kde control-center and select 'random screensaver' > (not default) Would you like a label on that "random screensaver" option which says "Warning: may do things you don't expect"? Have you read "Don't eat this book"? Have you had sneaker mints? -- To UNSUBS

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

On 06/09/05 13:46:38, Philip Hands wrote: I believe you've missed the point. It's not that "random" goes of hunting for porn and slapping it on your screen, it's that certain "offensive" images may end up being downloaded, and then displayed to people who would prefer not to see them. I

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

Philip Hands wrote: > I believe you've missed the point. > > As I understand it, the Random option does exactly what it says, it starts > one of the named screensavers at random. The problem is that some of the > screensavers work by taking an image, and then manipulating it in various > ways. T

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

Gerardo Ballabio wrote: Hi all, I'd like to add my two cents to the discussion. I don't think that "random screensaver" should download *anything* from the Web. Not everybody has fast Internet connections, and I don't want my computer to waste bandwidth unless *I* tell it to. "You enabled ran

Re: Discussion of bug #311683, default kde install shows porn

Hi all, I'd like to add my two cents to the discussion. I don't think that "random screensaver" should download *anything* from the Web. Not everybody has fast Internet connections, and I don't want my computer to waste bandwidth unless *I* tell it to. "You enabled random screensaver, you g