fetchmail problem?

2006-02-11 Thread Gene Heskett
Greetings all; I am trying to use fetchmail, which for sucking mail is working great, dumping it right into the kmail suck dir in /var/spool/mail/$USER. However, adjust and restart till I'm blue in the face, I cannot make it use an alternate mda, such as procmail. It seemingly ignores the de

Re: Re: Is there any update for bind of RH9?

2006-02-11 Thread 罗晓冬
I have installed a new kernel.And command "rndc stop " works well now. thanks for your advice. >Quoting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Hello everyone! >> >> Is there any update for bind-9.2.1-16.i386.rpm of RH9? > >No. > >> After I install this rpm package, I type "service named

Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification: firefox

2006-02-11 Thread Marc Deslauriers
- Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification FEDORALEGACY-2006-180036-2 Bugzilla https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180036 2006-02-11 - Name

Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification: mozilla

2006-02-11 Thread Marc Deslauriers
- Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification FEDORALEGACY-2006-180036-1 Bugzilla https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180036 2006-02-11 - Name

Re: Self Introduction #3: Richard Morrell

2006-02-11 Thread Richard Morrell
As other people are doing this I thought I'd climb from the trench where I lurk reading the lists since day one and put my hand gingerly up. Name: Richard Morrell Location: UK Profession: VP of Security for some rather large Internet brands that will remain nameless Company: Four of Europes la

Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification: openssh

2006-02-11 Thread Marc Deslauriers
- Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification FEDORALEGACY-2006-168935 Bugzilla https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168935 2006-02-10 - Name:

Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification: nfs-utils

2006-02-11 Thread Marc Deslauriers
- Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification FEDORALEGACY-2006-138098 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=138098 2006-02-11 - Name: nfs-utils

[UPDATED] Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification: httpd

2006-02-11 Thread Marc Deslauriers
This notification was updated to include x86_64 packages for Fedora Core 3. - Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification FEDORALEGACY-2006-175406 Bugzilla https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175406 2006-02-11

Re: Pruning old vendor update packages?

2006-02-11 Thread Jim Popovitch
Axel Thimm wrote: On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 07:59:54AM -0500, Jim Popovitch wrote: Axel Thimm wrote: Ping! My mirror just hit the ceiling. Why isn't something happening? It is just adding the --delete option to rsync, or to use the list I sent a week ago. I reported this over and over again, it'

Re: Pruning old vendor update packages?

2006-02-11 Thread Jesse Keating
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 11:30 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote: > My mirror just hit the ceiling. Why isn't something happening? It is > just adding the --delete option to rsync, or to use the list I sent a > week ago. I reported this over and over again, it's very frustrating. > > I now have to add includes

Re: Pruning old vendor update packages?

2006-02-11 Thread Axel Thimm
On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 07:59:54AM -0500, Jim Popovitch wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote: > >Ping! > > > >My mirror just hit the ceiling. Why isn't something happening? It is > >just adding the --delete option to rsync, or to use the list I sent a > >week ago. I reported this over and over again, it's ver

Re: no mandatory QA testing at all [Re: crazy thought about how to ease QA testing]

2006-02-11 Thread Jeff Sheltren
On Feb 11, 2006, at 1:32 AM, Pekka Savola wrote: I agree that this would complicate the process further. I have proposed something simpler, and still do: 1) every package, even without any VERIFY QA votes at all, will be released automatically in X weeks (suggest: X=2). exception: at pa

Re: no mandatory QA testing at all [Re: crazy thought about how to ease QA testing]

2006-02-11 Thread Marc Deslauriers
On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 22:00 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 07:32 +0200, Pekka Savola wrote: > > > > I agree that this would complicate the process further. > > > > I have proposed something simpler, and still do: > > > > 1) every package, even without any VERIFY QA votes at

Re: Pruning old vendor update packages?

2006-02-11 Thread Jim Popovitch
Axel Thimm wrote: Ping! My mirror just hit the ceiling. Why isn't something happening? It is just adding the --delete option to rsync, or to use the list I sent a week ago. I reported this over and over again, it's very frustrating. How large is the partition holding all the files? What rsync

Re: Pruning old vendor update packages?

2006-02-11 Thread Axel Thimm
Ping! My mirror just hit the ceiling. Why isn't something happening? It is just adding the --delete option to rsync, or to use the list I sent a week ago. I reported this over and over again, it's very frustrating. I now have to add includes/excludes to the rsync to my mirror, as such I'm no 100%

Re: no mandatory QA testing at all [Re: crazy thought about how to ease QA testing]

2006-02-11 Thread Benjamin Smith
On Friday 10 February 2006 21:32, Pekka Savola wrote: > On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Jesse Keating wrote: > > This makes it even more complicated. points? how many are enough? > > What makes one package more critical than another? How ambiguous could > > this be? > > I agree that this would complicate