Hi,
I think you are just using bad MUA's. My mail user agent can
distinguish between closed lists *where all correspondents are
expected to be members, and open lists, where a respondent need not
be on the list itself; and allow me to explicitly set how I want to
respond.
Tro
On Mon, 18 May 1998 09:00:43 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
>On Mon, 18 May 1998 11:40:26 -0400 (EDT), Scott Ellis wrote:
>
>>I'm afraid Ill have to drag out this again. Please read:
>>http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
>
>Read it, laughed at every point in it as every single part of it
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Scott Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nathan E Norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
M.C. Vernon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bill Leach
Those are the names of all the people that I have repli
I'm afraid Ill have to drag out this again. Please read:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
On Mon, 18 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Mon, 18 May 1998 09:07:52 -0300 (ADT), Trevor Barrie wrote:
>
> >> No, the reply I thought went to the list didn't because this list does
> >>
On Mon, 18 May 1998 09:07:52 -0300 (ADT), Trevor Barrie wrote:
>> No, the reply I thought went to the list didn't because this list does
>> not correctly set the reply-to field.
>Seems to me it sets it right... ie, it leaves it how the original
>sender set it. Stepping on a user's header is a
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
> No, the reply I thought went to the list didn't because this list does
> not correctly set the reply-to field.
Seems to me it sets it right... ie, it leaves it how the original
sender set it. Stepping on a user's header is a Bad Thing IMO.
--
To UNSU
On Mon, May 18, 1998 at 01:57:12AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Now, if you want rude, Hamish, take a look at the replies I've gotten and
> the messages I've send out just recently. That is beginning to be rude. But
> if you think the above is rude, you had better get a thicker skin because
> t
Fine, be rude. At least post it to debian-user so we can all have
right of reply.
For the absolute last time -- there is nothing wrong with your suggestion.
Please submit it to the bug system. Nobody thinks there is a problem with
your suggestion. I do not think there is a problem with your sugges
On Mon, 18 May 1998 18:46:06 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>Steve, we read and we understand what you want. We have suggested ways
>in which you can both (a) work around the lack of this feature now,
>and (b) request that it be added in the future. But you don't listen
>to our replies.
Incorre
On Mon, May 18, 1998 at 01:07:29AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On 17 May 1998 18:37:35 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Well. Either you look at the help (and it is way less than 50
> > options), or you hire people to help. I'll offer you a 50%
> > discount since you use Debian, and I like Deb
On 17 May 1998 18:37:35 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>Steve> On Sun, May 17, 1998 at 05:07:12PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>>> Steve, I think you misunderstand what "stable", "unstable" etc are.
>Steve> No, I am not. I am well aware of it means.
> I think not. Unstable means "expect gl
On 17 May 1998 18:26:36 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> You put unstable in dselects install list. You then proceeded
> not to tell dslect to put ewverything on hold (as I have explained
> earlier, this involves hitting = twice on the right line in dselect).
Which I didn't know I could
Hi,
>>"Steve" == Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> On Sun, May 17, 1998 at 05:07:12PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> Steve, I think you misunderstand what "stable", "unstable" etc are.
Steve> No, I am not. I am well aware of it means.
I think not. Unstable means "expect glit
Hi,
You put unstable in dselects install list. You then proceeded
not to tell dslect to put ewverything on hold (as I have explained
earlier, this involves hitting = twice on the right line in dselect).
You then proceeded to install. Not currently being able to
read minds, dsel
Hi,
>>"Bill" == Bill Leach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bill> Manjo; I am interpreting what you are saying as meaning that
Bill> _every time_ I run dselect, I have to choose hold (=) to prevent
Bill> dselect from upgrading automagically. Now since I KNOW that
Bill> this is not correct, ie: I frequ
On Sat, 16 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: On Sun, 17 May 1998 00:32:29 -0400, Bill Leach wrote:
:
: >Although I admit to now being in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
: >mode myself (while hamm is in frozen), I do not personally subscribe to
: >that philosophy. The 'pain' of delaying upgrad
This is a somewhat incredulous discussion!
On Sun, May 17, 1998 at 12:26:47AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Yes, if you want to do it with dselect. No, if you do it with dpkg,
> > which is far easier.
> According to whose standards? To me dselect is far easier because I
> don't have to wade th
No autoupdating? I don't see what the problem is here: why not use
dpkg? I upgrade all the time with only dpkg and I cannot imagine how
it could be improved.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, May 17, 1998 at 05:07:12PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> Steve, I think you misunderstand what "stable", "unstable" etc are.
No, I am not. I am well aware of it means.
> If you want continued upgrading of your applications, then you should
> track unstable -- currently slink. If you
Steve, I think you misunderstand what "stable", "unstable" etc are.
Let's consider slink, for example. It begins as unstable (eg it is
unstable now). Contrary to the name, this does not mean that it is
not stable -- it means that it isn't tested to be stable, and that
it is undergoing further devel
On Sun, 17 May 1998 00:32:29 -0400, Bill Leach wrote:
>Although I admit to now being in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
>mode myself (while hamm is in frozen), I do not personally subscribe to
>that philosophy. The 'pain' of delaying upgrading to repair bugs can be
>considerable and partic
Steve, it is not unreasonable to want dselect (or apt) to be
configurable such that you can choose to have it not do anything that
you do not explicitely request it to do.
I have maintained a partial mirror of debian for quite some time now and
still would find it handy if dselect were to have a m
Manjo;
I am interpreting what you are saying as meaning that _every time_
I run dselect, I have to choose hold (=) to prevent dselect from
upgrading automagically. Now since I KNOW that this is not correct,
ie: I frequently run dselect and I do not 'rechoose' hold to prevent
updating what I aske
On Fri, May 15, 1998 at 09:34:22PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Sat, 16 May 1998 10:40:23 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> >We are all volunteers here. Generally speaking, constructive criticism
> >is welcome -- unconstructive criticism just makes people leave the project.
>
> Exactly. I ha
On Fri, May 15, 1998 at 09:32:48PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> The beef is that you're arguing with me because the default happens to
> suit you and you don't see where the problem is with marking things to be
> held yet if the situation were reversed, where you would have to constantly
> mark t
>
> On Sat, 16 May 1998 10:40:23 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> >We are all volunteers here. Generally speaking, constructive criticism
> >is welcome -- unconstructive criticism just makes people leave the project.
>
> Exactly. I have been giving constructive critism and in return I have
Hi,
Yes. See, in the current system, I have to manually go and put
on hold all packages I do _not_ want updated. In the reverse system,
you have to go and manually mark alll packages you _do_ want updated
(whether new, or old packages you feel need updating).
These systems are
Hi,
>>"Steve" == Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> On 16 May 1998 00:20:33 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Now, you have to mark packages you want to upgrade. Tell me again,
>> how reversing the default would be any different?
Steve> I add a new package. All of a sudden I have to m
Hi,
>>"Steve" == Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> That happens not to be the case. If the reverse were true: that all
>> packages were held be default, and I had to do two ops to turn them
>> t be upgraded. I would do it. If I had to release them one by one,
>> that would be unacceptable.
On 16 May 1998 00:20:33 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Now, you have to mark packages you want to upgrade. Tell me
> again, how reversing the default would be any different?
I add a new package. All of a sudden I have to mark that package (or
section) for hold again. I add another p
On 16 May 1998 00:22:29 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>Steve> Exactly. I have been giving constructive critism and in return
>Steve> I have been getting a flippant attitude of "It isn't that many
>Steve> ketstrokes." In fact, one person has said that if the
>Steve> situation were reverse he(?)'
Hi,
>>"Steve" == Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> The beef is that you're arguing with me because the default
Steve> happens to suit you and you don't see where the problem is with
Steve> marking things to be held yet if the situation were reversed,
Steve> where you would have to cons
Hi,
>>"Steve" == Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> On Sat, 16 May 1998 10:40:23 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> We are all volunteers here. Generally speaking, constructive
>> criticism is welcome -- unconstructive criticism just makes people
>> leave the project.
Steve> Exactly. I h
Steve wrote:
> On Sat, 16 May 1998 10:40:23 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> >We are all volunteers here. Generally speaking, constructive criticism
> >is welcome -- unconstructive criticism just makes people leave the project.
>
> Exactly. I have been giving constructive critism and in ret
On Sat, 16 May 1998 10:40:23 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>We are all volunteers here. Generally speaking, constructive criticism
>is welcome -- unconstructive criticism just makes people leave the project.
Exactly. I have been giving constructive critism and in return I have
been getting a
On 15 May 1998 22:41:03 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>> One can certainly put all new and all updated packages on
>>> hold. There are not that many sections; so it *is* possible to put
>>> ecerything on hold.
>Steve> Then ask yourself this, would you put up with having to release
>Steve> all t
Hi,
>>"Steve" == Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> On 15 May 1998 16:21:52 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> One can certainly put all new and all updated packages on
>> hold. There are not that many sections; so it *is* possible to put
>> ecerything on hold.
Steve> Then ask yourself
On Fri, May 15, 1998 at 10:59:33AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 1998 13:58:02 -0400 (EDT), Scott Ellis wrote:
>
> >Go to the select screen, hit 'o', go to the top of the updated packages
> >section (the header), hit '='. There, all the updated packages are on
> >hold.
>
> My isn
On 15 May 1998 16:21:52 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> One can certainly put all new and all updated packages on
> hold. There are not that many sections; so it *is* possible to put
> ecerything on hold.
Then ask yourself this, would you put up with having to release all those
package
Hi,
>>"Steve" == Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> Because I wasn't aware that I could put sections on hold.
Hmm. Everytime I use the arrow keys to go up and down dselect,
and pass over the section line, it tells me :
__
Hi,
>>"Steve" == Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> That is what a nice, simple command line parameter or
Steve> configuration would be good for, we'd both have out default
Steve> behavior, now wouldn't we?
Patches shall probably be gratefully accepted.
manoj
--
"Exp
On 15 May 1998 13:24:33 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Why not? It is not as if you have to put every package on hold
> individually.
Because I wasn't aware that I could put sections on hold. However, as
someone has said, it is not possible to place everything on hold. Also, when
n
Hi,
>>"Steve" == Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> If you want everything on hold, then place everything on hold :)
Steve> That is not feesable for 2-300 packages.
Why not? It is not as if you have to put every package on hold
individually.
manoj
puzzled
--
Enough r
On Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:45:45AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update packages
> unless explicitly told to?
>
No you are not alone. As someone suggested, this has shades of M$
taking control of one's machine. Someone else mentioned t
On Fri, 15 May 1998 13:04:56 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
>Hmm. In the first mail I saw from you, you said:
>: Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update
>: packages unless explicitly told to?
>I didn't see any explanation there. Sorry about that.
No, the reply
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: On Fri, 15 May 1998 11:04:55 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
:
: >But isn't that the point of a packaging system? This way, bug-fixes,
: >security fixes, etc. are integrated into the system simply by running
: >dselect every now and then. deselect *d
On Fri, 15 May 1998 13:58:02 -0400 (EDT), Scott Ellis wrote:
>Go to the select screen, hit 'o', go to the top of the updated packages
>section (the header), hit '='. There, all the updated packages are on
>hold.
My isn't that obvious. Not.
>That's what placing packages on hold is good for.
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 1998 11:04:55 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
>
> >But isn't that the point of a packaging system? This way, bug-fixes,
> >security fixes, etc. are integrated into the system simply by running
> >dselect every now and then. deselect *d
On Fri, 15 May 1998 11:04:55 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
>But isn't that the point of a packaging system? This way, bug-fixes,
>security fixes, etc. are integrated into the system simply by running
>dselect every now and then. deselect *does* present you with a list of
>what it's going t
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: On Fri, 15 May 1998 10:56:44 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
:
: >: Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update packages
: >: unless explicitly told to?
:
: >Could you be more specific? I've never had dselect update a package if
:
> Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update packages
> unless explicitly told to?
I think this function is good. Maybe it should ask first, but generally
having an auto-update is good. It means I can run it to install and leave
it running, knowing that it will update things a
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update packages
: unless explicitly told to?
Could you be more specific? I've never had dselect update a package if
I didn't want it to ... I place those packages on hold.
--
Nathan Norman
MidcoNet
Am I the only one who feels that dselect should not update packages
unless explicitly told to?
--
Steve C. Lamb | Opinions expressed by me are not my
http://www.calweb.com/~morpheus| employer's. They hired me for my
ICQ: 5107343 | s
53 matches
Mail list logo
