David Douthitt, 2001-07-17 23:34 -0400
Andrew Hoying wrote:
We could develop a nice xml/xslt interface to it all that would be
easy to parse, sort and categorize. It makes a lot of sense, but would
require updating a lot of old packages to include the .desc file.
That wouldn't take that
David,
There is already a packages directory specifically for this purpose. I'd
like packages that are placed in it to have ownership set to
yourname.leaf and permissions set to 664. You can scp files
into it at:
/home/groups/l/le/leaf/pub/packages
One question, how should we include the
Andrew Hoying, 2001-07-18 08:15 -0600
David,
There is already a packages directory specifically for this purpose.
I'd like packages that are placed in it to have ownership set to
yourname.leaf and permissions set to 664. You can scp files
into it at:
Dale Long, 2001-07-18 12:33 +0930
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, David Douthitt wrote:
Perhaps LEAF can adopt the Debian classification system (free and
non-free, etc.) and classify packages that way?
I would be interested in seeing an LRP package repositry, similar to say
CPAN in format, with
Andrew,
Good question. I think that is a good idea. Rick started doing this very
thing for David's Oxygen packages, but he was unable to keep up with
David's production.
Thank you.
Does anyone have a better idea? If there are no objections, text files in
the format specified below should
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, David Douthitt wrote:
Jack Coates wrote:
Now that would rock :-) especially if one could simply snarf/apkg the
packages into place from sourceforge.net. Major potential for security
risk, but there are ways to work it out.
Couldn't one use scp to copy from
Andrew Hoying, 2001-07-18 09:02 -0600
One other question, how are we going to resolve package name disputes,
like two different versions of the same package? Should we create an
archive subfolder for old versions? Or a glibc2.1 subfolder for the new
development work David is doing? Or we could
Everyone,
I forgot to mention this. When creating new sub directories in the packages
tree, set the ownership to yourname.leaf and the permissions to 2664.
Thanks.
Mike Noyes, 2001-07-18 07:05 -0700
There is already a packages directory specifically for this purpose. I'd
like packages that
Mike Noyes wrote:
Good question. I think that is a good idea. Rick started doing this very
thing for David's Oxygen packages, but he was unable to keep up with
David's production.
Does anyone have a better idea? If there are no objections, text files in
the format specified below should
Mike Noyes wrote:
David Douthitt, 2001-07-17 23:34 -0400
Andrew Hoying wrote:
We could develop a nice xml/xslt interface to it all that would be
easy to parse, sort and categorize. It makes a lot of sense, but would
require updating a lot of old packages to include the .desc file.
David Douthitt, 2001-07-18 11:54 -0400
Mike Noyes wrote:
Good question. I think that is a good idea. Rick started doing this
very thing for David's Oxygen packages, but he was unable to keep up
with David's production.
Does anyone have a better idea? If there are no objections, text
[EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-07-18 10:44 -0700
grumble... content... grumble... subject... grumble... price of matzoh
balls in china... asleep at the keyboard...
[... discussion of helpfile formats omitted ...]
;)
Jeff,
Thanks for the first chuckle of the day. :)
I gather we should change the
Forgot about the line wrapping of e-mail, and also cleaned up a few things I
saw right as I hit send...
That script should read:
#!/bin/sh
cd $PACKAGES
for i in *.lrp
do
tar xzf $i var/lib/lrpkg
cd var/lib/lrpkg
rootpkg=`echo $i|sed 's/.lrp//'`
[ -f $rootpkg.version ] mv $rootpkg.help \
Subject changed to: Site backup/mirror
Dale Long, 2001-07-19 10:20 +0930
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Mike Noyes wrote:
I'm working on a mirroring solution, but I haven't completed it yet. I
listed the areas that would need to be duplicated for a mirror. The
current storage requirements are
With the addition of tcpserver and tcprules to the ever growing list of
packages, I went and looked at their licensing (always of interest). I
was dismayed to find out it was under the same licensing as the other
djb tools (I didn't realize that these were one of them).
According to his page
David:
Ug. DJB is a bright guy, and I'm a big fan of qmail,
but...he's apparently at war with RedHat (and other major
distro's) who I guess have slighted him by not incorporating
his stuff into their releases under his terms.
From what I could pull out of his FAQ page for
Has anyone contacted DJB? He may be willing to make an exception for the
LEAF project, or even create packages himself.
E-mails I sent regarding his licensing for djbdns went unanswered.
Charles Steinkuehler
http://lrp.steinkuehler.net
http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror)
Le Mardi 17 Juillet 2001 16:18, vous avez écrit :
David:
Ug. DJB is a bright guy, and I'm a big fan of qmail,
but...he's apparently at war with RedHat (and other major
distro's) who I guess have slighted him by not incorporating
his stuff into their releases under his terms.
Mike Noyes wrote:
Andrew Hoying, 2001-07-17 08:36 -0600
I guess by making these packages available for download, the LEAF
project's various LRP variants are technically a distribution. We don't,
however, have anyone at the present time auditing the variety of packages
now available for LRP
Andrew Hoying wrote:
I guess by making these packages available for download, the LEAF project's
various LRP variants are technically a distribution.
LEAF, in my mind, consists of two distributions - or at least, sponsors
them - Eigerstein and Oxygen.
However as more people begin using
David Douthitt wrote:
Andrew Hoying wrote:
I guess by making these packages available for download, the LEAF
project's
various LRP variants are technically a distribution.
LEAF, in my mind, consists of two distributions - or at least, sponsors
them - Eigerstein and Oxygen.
I agree,
Andrew Hoying wrote:
David Douthitt wrote:
LEAF, in my mind, consists of two distributions - or at least, sponsors
them - Eigerstein and Oxygen.
I agree, but both have the same foundation, so I think of them more like sub
distributions, like how Mandrakesoft has the standard Mandrake,
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, David Douthitt wrote:
With the addition of tcpserver and tcprules to the ever growing list of
packages, I went and looked at their licensing (always of interest). I
was dismayed to find out it was under the same licensing as the other
djb tools (I didn't realize that
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, David Douthitt wrote:
Perhaps LEAF can adopt the Debian classification system (free and
non-free, etc.) and classify packages that way?
I would be interested in seeing an LRP package repositry, similar to say
CPAN in format, with version information and so on. At the
Dale Long wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, David Douthitt wrote:
Perhaps LEAF can adopt the Debian classification system (free and
non-free, etc.) and classify packages that way?
I would be interested in seeing an LRP package repositry, similar to say
CPAN in format, with version
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, David Douthitt wrote:
I suggested (earlier) that we use a pkg.desc file with tags. It could
contain all SORTS of things, and becomes extensible in a scary sort of
way. All sorts of descriptions could be in there:
* version
* full package name
* packager
* compiler
Jack Coates wrote:
Now that would rock :-) especially if one could simply snarf/apkg the
packages into place from sourceforge.net. Major potential for security
risk, but there are ways to work it out.
Couldn't one use scp to copy from SourceForge to the local LEAF box?
Might require full
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, David Douthitt wrote:
I suggested (earlier) that we use a pkg.desc file with tags. It could
contain all SORTS of things, and becomes extensible in a scary sort of
way. All sorts of descriptions could be in there:
* version
* full package name
* packager
*
Andrew Hoying wrote:
We could develop a nice xml/xslt interface to it all that would be easy to
parse, sort and categorize. It makes a lot of sense, but would require
updating a lot of old packages to include the .desc file.
That wouldn't take that much. I've recompiled almost everything at
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, David Douthitt wrote:
That wouldn't take that much. I've recompiled almost everything at
least once. Next step is to create a LRP directory which contains
everything, including options used to compile, etc. Then a diff file
would be created, so that a generic package
30 matches
Mail list logo
