Bug#372734: marked as done (Template #30 in /var/lib/dpkg/info/base-config.templates does not contain a 'Template:' line)
Your message dated Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:00:06 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#372734: base-config: solution the problem has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) --- Begin Message --- Package: base-config Version: 2.53.10.1 Upon installation of this package using apt-get, I receive: Template #30 in /var/lib/dpkg/info/base-config.templates does not contain a 'Template:' line and the apt-get process ends with "E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)" --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:11:01AM +0200, Kosa Attila wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 12:20:26AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > > > > Could you please re-word that into an unified diff? > > ( copy the file, edit one, do `diff -u the_copy the_edited_one` ) > > See you attach. > > -- > Udvozlettel > Zsiga > --- templates 2006-06-16 08:08:00.0 +0200 > +++ base-config.templates 2006-06-12 09:32:25.0 +0200 [ white line deleted ] According http://bugs.debian.org/372734 is it allready fixed. And I didn't encounter the bug yesterday. So closing this bugreport. Thank you for contribution to Debian GNU/Linux. Cheers Geert Stappers -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEklb2OSINbgwa/7sRApe+AJ94EHDe86boeRXUBkk/iyLseqW7IACfX7xh y0OqzfW3CCs6LV/EpM7pqe4= =Uve8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- End Message ---
Re: Third option
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Disclaimer: This E-mail does NOT contain an explaination of common sense. Neither an advice for a reallity check. On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:39:19AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: [ in my words: energy drain ] > So, there is only two ways this can end, i leave any d-i (and maybe debian > work at all) forever, and fork what i need for my professional life, or Frans > comes to his sense, and forgets about his petty vengeancve against me. Or you, Sven Luther, change your point of view. Cheers Geert Stappers -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEkl0MOSINbgwa/7sRAobLAJ9Q++k25K0PUfPtHDGFlbYymuyulwCfRhyI 4yVULjGA2ErLR6KJH7aD690= =eUjP -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for a DFB version of libcairo2 - time for gtk+-directfb
On 6/14/06, Dave Beckett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Cairo 1.1.8 snapshot was just released so I've made a new set of experimental debs for it at: http://download.dajobe.org/debian/experimental/ If any powerpc people care, I build both 1.1.6 and 1.1.8 libcairo packages for powerpc[1]. Hopefully during this weekend I will have also gtk packages built for D-I (but I fear that the packaging scheme for gtk is quite compilcated for my skills or understanding - I didn't figured out how things move in the package, so I could apply the patch needed to get directfb support in the 2.8.* version of gtk). I will try to patch gtk and make directfb packages during this weekend, but if not successful, I will probably fall back to tarballs. [1] http://eddyp.homelinux.net:8080/eddy/g-i/gtk2.8-ppc/libs/cairo/ -- Regards, EddyP = "Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:23:59AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 01:29:24AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: [ d-i team member asks opinions of d-i team members ] > > My recommendation: > > > > Do a while something completely different. > > IIRC it is called sabatical. > > How long a while ? Forever ? It depends how deep one is "trenched"[1]. The milestone to reach is "Live has other important things then SVN commit rights" Start with one month. > Friendly, > > Sven Luther Cheers Geert Stappers [1] trench: "defence line", mostly known from world war I -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEkmAHOSINbgwa/7sRAs28AKDGdi1ffdrcvJDpYEKOaMLjijL+uQCbB+bV Kb/7U2ba+8gfTXlUcKB2U/w= =OEk6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Third option
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 09:26:04AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > Disclaimer: > > This E-mail does NOT contain an explaination of common sense. > Neither an advice for a reallity check. > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:39:19AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > [ in my words: energy drain ] > > > So, there is only two ways this can end, i leave any d-i (and maybe debian > > work at all) forever, and fork what i need for my professional life, or > > Frans > > comes to his sense, and forgets about his petty vengeancve against me. > > Or you, Sven Luther, change your point of view. Geert, please tell me what i should do ? I have tried to be nice on Frans, as showed in the log, and he rejected that, i have to remember i was punished by Frans each time i plan to do any kind of d-i work, i cannot make the most minimal comment either on irc or on the list, without frans over-reacting. I am only told i need to be sumissive for a 'long' time, and be content with this punishment being handed to me and admit i deserve it. What do you want me to change my point of view to ? There is *NO* reason for my commit access not to be restored except the social punishment (or whatever you want to call it), and i think that all of you who ask me to change my point of view should maybe also think about what is really happening, and maybe tell Frans that is behavior on this is not correct anymore. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 09:38:47AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:23:59AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 01:29:24AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > > [ d-i team member asks opinions of d-i team members ] > > > > My recommendation: > > > > > > Do a while something completely different. > > > IIRC it is called sabatical. > > > > How long a while ? Forever ? > > It depends how deep one is "trenched"[1]. The milestone to reach is > "Live has other important things then SVN commit rights" > > Start with one month. Its now one month and a half,and i am kept told ' a long time' Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FYI: your are unique
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:39:19AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > Well, it is clear that the current resolution is aimed at me being under the > control of Frans and meak and submissive, or i will continue to be punished > thus. This clearly indicate that frans, you and others believe that Frans is > better than me, and that i am not to be thrusted with direct commit access. Cut the crap! People are different, not "better" > So, tell me again that all is well, and everyone was threaten equally and > fairly in this ? Accept the fact that you are unique and pick up the challenge to get along with each other. Cheers Geert Stappers -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEkmOLOSINbgwa/7sRAjH5AJ9ZuOTTE1k91npylth1Wa7+sM0JCwCbBO3i LujjuCLP9fpsWnjdUuaqhgA= =LaBl -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#370667: I2O modules for 64bit platforms
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 02:54:47PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Robert Millan wrote: > > > Which architectures include support for i2o_block? > > > > It's available on amd64, hppa, i386, ia64, powerpc. I tested it on amd64. > > And dpt_i2o is not available on 64 bit, so if we're adding i2o_block to > only arches that lack dpt_i20, then i2o_block should be added to > ia64, hppa, powerpc(64?). And amd64. > > > And if dpt_i2o does > > > the same thing for i386, whouldn't we include i2o_block only for those > > > architectures that do not have dpt_i2o? > > > > Seems fine. Unless there are other advantages in using i2o_block that would > > justify replacing dpt_i2o in 32bit arches; but I don't know about that. > > Right, of course the user would need to load it by hand in that case, > since at least on i386 there's nothing to make udev load it. For the d-i rescue system, I thought this was handled by discover. Am I right? There's i2o_block support in discover, although not working on my hardware. I think it just needs a new entry for this PCI id. For the installed system, doesn't the patch in #318120 address this? -- Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Departamento de Asistencia Técnica Oficina central: (+34) 902 888 345 Asistencia técnica: (+34) 902 888 408 ACK STORM, S.L. http://www.ackstorm.es Este mensaje electrónico contiene información de ACK STORM, S.L. que es privada y confidencial, siendo para el uso exclusivo de las personas o entidades arriba mencionadas. Si usted no es el destinatario señalado, le informamos que cualquier divulgación, copia, distribución o uso de los contenidos está prohibida. Si usted ha recibido este mensaje por error, por favor borre su contenido y comuníquenoslo en la dirección [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FYI: your are unique
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 09:53:47AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:39:19AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > Well, it is clear that the current resolution is aimed at me being under the > > control of Frans and meak and submissive, or i will continue to be punished > > thus. This clearly indicate that frans, you and others believe that Frans is > > better than me, and that i am not to be thrusted with direct commit access. > > Cut the crap! > People are different, not "better" This is indeed how it should be, but this is not how things are in this case. The current situation is inequal, with me having all the blame, and having to abide to Frans whim and anger, while he didn't acknowledge any kind of part of problem on his part, and thus believe that he has every reason to handle me like this. It is this exact inequal sitution, which buts Frans in a superior position with regard to me, and which is also why there is no hope of it ever being solved unless it is Frans that decide it. He is the one in charge, he is the one whose decision is the only one who can solve this issue, and there is nothing i can do, as even trying to be nice is lost on him. > > So, tell me again that all is well, and everyone was threaten equally and > > fairly in this ? > > Accept the fact that you are unique > and pick up the challenge to get along with each other. Yeah, but the effort has to come from both sides, and in this case the other side is not cooperating, and furthermore holds an unfair advantage which leaves me only the rant as option to try to obtain a solution. I had hoped that the DPL would be able to mediate, but he only did judge me coupable and sentenced me to abide to every whim of Frans. This is not crap, it is a very unhealthy situation, and not one which will ever give any hope of solving the issue. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 09:22:18PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > Gaining back the confidence would have been a very long process and > A very long process ? This is clearly the ridiculous part. And what is frans > going to do to regain my confidence ? Your comments throughout this painful (for everybody concerned) process have made it clear that you regard your relationship with Frans to be a symmetric one. But it's just as clear to me that this is not the case: it's true that you are both Debian Developers, so in a general sense you are equals, but *as concerns access to the debian-installer repository*, he is a recognized admin of the d-i group on alioth and the recognized release manager of d-i for etch, which means deciding who does or doesn't get access to the d-i repo is within his area of normal authority -- not yours. You seem to think this is unimportant. I do not; I think this is the basic reason why the DPL has suggested the solution that he has and why the TC has refused to overrule any of these decisions, because we don't have to agree that Frans's decision was right, we only have to agree that it was a *reasonable* decision for him to make. Yes, it is reasonable for a project admin to remove the commit access of someone he feels he can't work with, even if that someone is a long-time committer. If you can't accept this basic fact that giving and taking commit access to the repository is the decision of the project admins to make, *in their own time*, and focus instead on the work that can be done, then sure, I don't expect you to regain any trust in Frans; and I don't expect relations to improve much or for you to get commit access restored any time in the foreseeable future. > > that commit access which you seem to put a huge importance on would > > certainly have come back.certainly late (I would say after Etch > > release). > Why ? It is a hindrance in me doing d-i work, and serves no other purpose than > to humiliate me, so i am thaught not to misbehave in the future. I don't think the latest comment Frans made to you on IRC was appropriate, but I do think it's true. Your reinstatement to the team does depend on the project admins feeling that they can work with you. You may have meant your comments as a joke, but it doesn't surprise me that such a joke is not well received. This thread isn't a joke, nor are any of the others we've had about this matter. They're also pretty clear indicators that, rather than following AJ's advice on how to move forward, you're seeking to undermine -- or override -- Frans's authority. If no one has come to your rescue by now, what do you think *this* thread will accomplish for you? All I see it doing is further demonstrating that you are not willing to work within the team structure that exists. > > The trust between you and Frans has been lost. And Frans is the team > > boss (by general agreement of the D-I team). In real life, when the > > trust is broken between a manager and his employees, a usual > > recommendation to both parties is to stick with factual work and do > > the best possible to avoid putting back personal relationship > > problems. > But in real life, if he had acted such as my boss in these conditions, i > would have sued him for moral harcelement, and he would have lost. I guess > even in the US this would have passed I have no idea what you're trying to say with "moral harcelement", but no, you're very sadly mistaken. > > Up to now, we have tried hard with the first solution which, honestly, > > could work if you don't bring back your old griefs all time long. > No, and i will tell you why. There is a social conflict, and the current > situation is such that all the blame for it is on me, and Frans is the > innocent party who suffered and should be avenged by punishing me. AFAICT, Frans's fault in this matter is that you make him angry. How do you expect any of us to judge him for this when so many of us have the same flaw? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#370667: I2O modules for 64bit platforms
Btw, I've noticed that discover updates its module list from a master copy in: http://people.debian.org/~joeyh/d-i/modules-list Perhaps i2o_block should be there as well? -- Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Departamento de Asistencia Técnica Oficina central: (+34) 902 888 345 Asistencia técnica: (+34) 902 888 408 ACK STORM, S.L. http://www.ackstorm.es Este mensaje electrónico contiene información de ACK STORM, S.L. que es privada y confidencial, siendo para el uso exclusivo de las personas o entidades arriba mencionadas. Si usted no es el destinatario señalado, le informamos que cualquier divulgación, copia, distribución o uso de los contenidos está prohibida. Si usted ha recibido este mensaje por error, por favor borre su contenido y comuníquenoslo en la dirección [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Third option
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 09:52:41AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 09:26:04AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:39:19AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > [ in my words: energy drain ] > > > > > So, there is only two ways this can end, i leave any d-i (and maybe debian > > > work at all) forever, and fork what i need for my professional life, or > > > Frans > > > comes to his sense, and forgets about his petty vengeancve against me. > > > > Or you, Sven Luther, change your point of view. > > Geert, please tell me what i should do ? I have tried to be nice on Frans, as > showed in the log, and he rejected that, i have to remember i was punished by > Frans each time i plan to do any kind of d-i work, i cannot make the most > minimal comment either on irc or on the list, without frans over-reacting. What you should do? Let it go! At least for a few days. (that allows me also to write a better advice then this one) > I am only told i need to be sumissive for a 'long' time, and be content with > this punishment being handed to me and admit i deserve it. > > What do you want me to change my point of view to ? > > There is *NO* reason for my commit access not to be restored except the social > punishment (or whatever you want to call it), and i think that all of you who > ask me to change my point of view should maybe also think about what is really > happening, and maybe tell Frans that is behavior on this is not correct > anymore. The whole thing about "change the point of view" is an invitation to see things different. Imagine a banana, from some angles it is straight, from other angles it is bend. So when people are argueing about the shape of the banana and they change their p.o.v. they know why the other is stating his "opinion". After that can a party go back to his original p.o.v. and continue his argument about the shape of the banana, but in most cases is the dispute over. What I'm trying to say is that all parties are "rigth" from their p.o.v. > Friendly, > > Sven Luther Later, most likely tuesday, more about 'what to do?', for now: Let it go, enjoy the weekend, enjoy life! Cheers Geert Stappers -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEkm68OSINbgwa/7sRAn20AJsFZ/nrOGQ18o11YSpvRLdw/xAZEACgwfMk PVbKQod7Kj/2qyRDP+xkO9A= =by8A -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Processing of netcfg_1.23_amd64.changes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 11:50:58PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 05:16:09AM -0700, Archive Administrator wrote: > > netcfg_1.23_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost > > along with the files: > > netcfg_1.23_amd64.udeb > > netcfg-static_1.23_amd64.udeb > > I would expect 1.26 Meanwhile 1.27 > Why has amd64 1.23? > > > Cheers > Geert Stappers -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEknJDOSINbgwa/7sRAhQcAKDFVC/dPS34D/gcc4OWG1DbXdKh4wCbB8dR TS1/70yybzBtxSaKU0u4lqg= =NvKo -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#370667: I2O modules for 64bit platforms
On Friday 16 June 2006 09:50, Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote: > For the d-i rescue system, I thought this was handled by discover. Am > I right? There's i2o_block support in discover, although not working on > my hardware. I think it just needs a new entry for this PCI id. No, device detection and module loading within d-i is now handled (almost) completely by udev; discover is no longer used. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 01:37:48AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 09:22:18PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > Gaining back the confidence would have been a very long process and > > > A very long process ? This is clearly the ridiculous part. And what is frans > > going to do to regain my confidence ? > > Your comments throughout this painful (for everybody concerned) process have > made it clear that you regard your relationship with Frans to be a symmetric Yeah, since i believe that all DDs are supposed to be equal, differentiated only in the quality and quantity of their technical contributions. > one. But it's just as clear to me that this is not the case: it's true > that you are both Debian Developers, so in a general sense you are equals, > but *as concerns access to the debian-installer repository*, he is a > recognized admin of the d-i group on alioth and the recognized release > manager of d-i for etch, which means deciding who does or doesn't get access > to the d-i repo is within his area of normal authority -- not yours. So, it is acceptable that he misuses his d-i alioth project admin rights, not to for the best of debian or even d-i, but to grind his private axe with me ? There is *NO* technical reason which warrant his action, and the only reason he does it is to humiliate and punish me. This is not how debian should work, and this i believe is enough for the DPL to have taken a more active part in resolving this problem, or that Frans control over the d-i alioth accounts be removed, and entrusted to someone's neutral, which will not misuse it for private vengeance. He has absolutely no need of it to perform his d-i leadership work. > You seem to think this is unimportant. I do not; I think this is the basic > reason why the DPL has suggested the solution that he has and why the TC has > refused to overrule any of these decisions, because we don't have to agree > that Frans's decision was right, we only have to agree that it was a > *reasonable* decision for him to make. Yes, it is reasonable for a project > admin to remove the commit access of someone he feels he can't work with, > even if that someone is a long-time committer. And, how long will it last ? how long will frans reject any effort i make, and spring about the most minor of comments ? What good does it bring ? The only result is that the issue will never be solved until Frans whim is satisfied, and we will have this same flamewar each now and then. > If you can't accept this basic fact that giving and taking commit access to > the repository is the decision of the project admins to make, *in their own > time*, and focus instead on the work that can be done, then sure, I don't If it was a decision which was backed with a technical reason, i would admit, but like it is, it is based on no such technical reason, and only does hurt to the project, and thus, no, Frans should be overruled in this. > expect you to regain any trust in Frans; and I don't expect relations to > improve much or for you to get commit access restored any time in the > foreseeable future. No, i don't need to regain Frans's thrust, i will never get it, and even if i make the best of effort, Frans will again misinterpret the minor slight or comment on my part, and all effort on my part will be lost. And the longer this issue lingers unsolved, the worse it becomes. And i think that it is not correct to ask me to be submissive and everything forever just so Frans doesn't leash on me. You would not accept this, there is enough people throwing insults at me on irc, or engaging in random stuborn flamewars in debian, that there is no right for you or anyone to suggest that i should be submitted to it. > > > that commit access which you seem to put a huge importance on would > > > certainly have come back.certainly late (I would say after Etch > > > release). > > > Why ? It is a hindrance in me doing d-i work, and serves no other purpose > > than > > to humiliate me, so i am thaught not to misbehave in the future. > > I don't think the latest comment Frans made to you on IRC was appropriate, > but I do think it's true. Your reinstatement to the team does depend on the > project admins feeling that they can work with you. You may have meant your > comments as a joke, but it doesn't surprise me that such a joke is not well And you don't care the littlest how the current situation is received by me, and how i have to take care about the slighest thing i say, while it is perfectly ok for Frans to speak to me in this superior tone he has been using. This doesn't benefit debian, this doesn't benefit the debian-installer, this doesn't help to solve the issue, excet with me going and leaving both d-i and debian forever. > received. This thread isn't a joke, nor are any of the others we've had > about this matter. They're also pretty clear indicators that, rather than > following AJ's advice on how to move forward, you'
Re: Processing of netcfg_1.23_amd64.changes
On Friday 16 June 2006 10:56, Geert Stappers wrote: > > Why has amd64 1.23? Upload was to testing, not unstable. Has to do with AMD64 archive move. pgpps1zHTrhQk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Third option
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 10:41:32AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 09:52:41AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 09:26:04AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:39:19AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > [ in my words: energy drain ] > > > > > > > So, there is only two ways this can end, i leave any d-i (and maybe > > > > debian > > > > work at all) forever, and fork what i need for my professional life, or > > > > Frans > > > > comes to his sense, and forgets about his petty vengeancve against me. > > > > > > Or you, Sven Luther, change your point of view. > > > > Geert, please tell me what i should do ? I have tried to be nice on Frans, > > as > > showed in the log, and he rejected that, i have to remember i was punished > > by > > Frans each time i plan to do any kind of d-i work, i cannot make the most > > minimal comment either on irc or on the list, without frans over-reacting. > > What you should do? Let it go! At least for a few days. Like i did last time, for how many times now ? This is not working, because everyone is giving the right to Frans, and thus he doesn't realise that there is something terribly wrong in how he handles this situation. > (that allows me also to write a better advice then this one) :) > > I am only told i need to be sumissive for a 'long' time, and be content with > > this punishment being handed to me and admit i deserve it. > > > > What do you want me to change my point of view to ? > > > > There is *NO* reason for my commit access not to be restored except the > > social > > punishment (or whatever you want to call it), and i think that all of you > > who > > ask me to change my point of view should maybe also think about what is > > really > > happening, and maybe tell Frans that is behavior on this is not correct > > anymore. > > The whole thing about "change the point of view" is an invitation > to see things different. Well, if you find a point of view which puts this issue in a nice way, i am certainly interested. It has been over a month now, and i still fail to see this whole thing as anything else as a punishement which will last as long as Frans will like, and since Frans is prompt to anger on the most minor issue, this is likely to be forever. > Imagine a banana, from some angles it is straight, > from other angles it is bend. So when people are argueing about the > shape of the banana and they change their p.o.v. they know why > the other is stating his "opinion". After that can a party go back > to his original p.o.v. and continue his argument about the shape of the > banana, but in most cases is the dispute over. Yeah, except in this case, everyone is seing it from Frans pov, and telling me to change my pov. And the few that see some fault in Frans action, either don't dare to mention it, simply don't care, or failed to get any kind of success in speaking to him. > What I'm trying to say is that all parties are "rigth" from their p.o.v. No. People are motivated by all kind of emotions, and there are noble emotions and there are bad emotions, and in this case, the problem is that Frans is acting out of anger against me, which is not a noble emotion, and this colors all his point of view in a wrong way, and he has his own interest in mind more than the interest of debian, and me first, but you to a different degree, all suffer from this. There is only one way this can be solved to a way satisfactory to everyone, but the current situation is not a solution. The only way to not fall into this, is to try to not let the emotions enter the decision, and if they do, which may happen, repare that error. So, if frans was able to take decisions, not out of anger or another such bad sentiment, but with technical reasoning, and the best of debian in mind, then everyone would be happy coding since weeks or months now, but this not being the case. ... Hurt, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#372734: closed by Geert Stappers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#372734: base-config: solution the problem)
The updated package still has not made its way into proposed-updates, so the bug still exists for me. Any estimated date when this will happen? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Processing of netcfg_1.23_amd64.changes
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:34:20AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > On Friday 16 June 2006 10:56, Geert Stappers wrote: > > > Why has amd64 1.23? > > Upload was to testing, not unstable. Has to do with AMD64 archive move. Aah, to testing. Thanks for elaborating. GSt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#372734: Reopen Bug#372734
#On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:12:44AM +0200, Florian Effenberger wrote: #> The updated package still has not made its way into proposed-updates, so #> the bug still exists for me. reopen 372734 stop > Any estimated date when this will happen? euh, no Geert Stappers who was to eager to close this BR -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Reopen Bug#372734
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > #On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:12:44AM +0200, Florian Effenberger wrote: > #> The updated package still has not made its way into proposed-updates, so > #> the bug still exists for me. > reopen 372734 Bug#372734: Template #30 in /var/lib/dpkg/info/base-config.templates does not contain a 'Template:' line Bug reopened, originator not changed. > stop Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [MEETINGS] Cancel or reschedule meeting?
Not sure I'll be attending the meeting scheduled for Saturday either (weekends are always a big "?" for me). Here's a summary of the ongoing activities related with g-i: * Fonts --- ATM some fonts are not yet available as official udebs, but as tarballs fetched at compile time from [1]; this is not not acceptable as a long term solution. In particular here's a list of fonts file and associated bugreport: - ttf-farsiweb_0.4-2.tgz (#355447) - ttf-tamil-fonts_0.4.7.tgz (#358226) - ttf-thai-tlwg_0.4.4-3.tgz (#372799) ttf-bpg-georgian-fonts (#356333) will be added to the above list as soon as #373836 will be fixed. In the meanwhile Dejavu 2.6 hit unstable (thanx Christian!!) and it is now used as default font for g-i (screenshots in [6]). The Wiki [2] has been updated and reflects most of the changes happened recently. I personally think that the future looks bright and it's just a matter of time before the udebs will hit the archives. * new core libraries There's a lot going on with the packaging of the new generation of graphic libraries used by the g-i; a lot happened after the Extremadura session in January and I'm confident that in the short term we'll have a set of new libraries that will fix most of the known problems. The only missing pieces are now libcairo2 (>= 1.1.6) compiled with directfb backend and gtk+-directfb (>=2.8.17) as for libcairo Dave Beckett (maintainer of the package) produced some test packages (1.1.6 and 1.1.8 a few days later) which have been tested and used to produce unofficial iso images (see [3]). It is still unclear if libcairo2-directfb-dev.deb has to be produced along with the other (u)debs or not; IMHO it should be produced, in case somebody wanted to use directfb instead of X, since directfb is in the archives. Once libcairo will be ready the gnome team will have all the components needed to produce the last piece of the huge stack! Josselin Mouette and Sebastien Bacher have been involved in the discussion, and the final agreement is that the gnome team will produce the (u)debs needed for g-i based on 2.8.x libraries integrating a patch produced by Attilio [4], later on revised and adapted by myself [5] in order to get it working with the new cairo packages. Note that now gtk+2.8.18 has been released, but the very same patch is still compatible. It would be great if cairo and gft+-directfb were available as official packages ASAP (note that the gnome team could already start working on their package by using what Dave has made available) Everything else is ready for the switch (rootskel-gtk needs a patch I already created in order to work with the new libs) I'm really looking forward to see all of this happening. regards, Davide [1] http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/gtk-frontend/ [2] http://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/GUIFonts [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2006/06/msg00687.html [4] http://lists.debian.org/debian-gtk-gnome/2006/05/msg00064.html [5] http://www.webalice.it/zinosat/gtk+-directfb_2.8.17.patch.gz [6] http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/gtk-frontend/screenshots/20060614_dejavu2.6/ Naviga senza limiti con 4 Megabps di velocita' a soli 19,95 Euro al mese, ATTIVA SUBITO e hai 2 MESI GRATIS! In piu', se sei raggiunto dalla rete Tiscali, telefoni senza pagare il canone Telecom. Comincia subito a risparmiare! http://abbonati.tiscali.it/prodotti/adsl/tc/4flat/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#372734: Reopen Bug#372734
I tried apt-get update & apt-get -u dist-upgrade today, but the new package isn't in there. :-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#370667: I2O modules for 64bit platforms
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 10:50:10AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > On Friday 16 June 2006 09:50, Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote: > > For the d-i rescue system, I thought this was handled by discover. Am > > I right? There's i2o_block support in discover, although not working on > > my hardware. I think it just needs a new entry for this PCI id. > > No, device detection and module loading within d-i is now handled (almost) > completely by udev; discover is no longer used. Ok. Filed as #373921. -- Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Departamento de Asistencia Técnica Oficina central: (+34) 902 888 345 Asistencia técnica: (+34) 902 888 408 ACK STORM, S.L. http://www.ackstorm.es Este mensaje electrónico contiene información de ACK STORM, S.L. que es privada y confidencial, siendo para el uso exclusivo de las personas o entidades arriba mencionadas. Si usted no es el destinatario señalado, le informamos que cualquier divulgación, copia, distribución o uso de los contenidos está prohibida. Si usted ha recibido este mensaje por error, por favor borre su contenido y comuníquenoslo en la dirección [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [MEETINGS] Cancel or reschedule meeting?
I'm not able to attend the meeting this weekend, so following Davide's example, I'll also post a status report for integration of crypto and partman: o partman-crypto the version of partman-crypto which is in unstable/testing is ancient and lacks the proper dependencies. A new version (5) has been in the ftp-master NEW queue for a bit more than a week. New uploads of partman-crypto are on hold until it has been processed. This is currently the biggest blocker for working (dm-crypt) crypto support in partman. o partman-crypto device-mapper support the device-mapper support of partman-crypto is now at the point where it is possible to do a root-on-crypto and root-on-lvm-on-crypto installation (version 5 or later). dm-crypt support is mostly feature-complete. o partman-auto-crypto I created a partman-auto-crypto package in my personal dir (d-i/people/alphix-guest). The basic functionality seems to work - it creates a /boot partition, a swap partition and one large encrypted partition which in turn holds a LVM PV which is used for the rest of the partitions (root and possibly /home depending on the recipe). The benefit of using LVM on crypto is that a single password needs to be input during boot to access all partitions (instead of one password per partition). Looking at the TODO list, partman-auto-crypto needs better integration with partman-auto-lvm and partman-crypto. Most importantly, shared parts need to be split out into shared scripts rather than duplicated, this will also remove confusing and/or irrelevant prompts that are currently displayed. I'll work on this some more in a few days, I believe I will be able to get it to the stage where it could be moved to trunk during next week. It relies on the newer partman-crypto though but it will have to go through the NEW queue as well so partman-crypto should already be in unstable once that's done. Apart from the duplicated code, the major blocker right now is that partman-auto-lvm creates the swap partition outside of the lvm which partman-crypto refuses to allow (as keys and sensitive data could be writted to en unencrypted swap partition which would defeat the purpose of the encryption). I'll initiate a discussion on debian-devel, debian-kernel and with yaird/initramfs-tools maintainers next week to see if it would be possible to change partman-auto-lvm to create the swap partition as a LVM LV. An alternative solution would of course be to create specific recipies for partman-auto-crypto, but I'd like to avoid it if possible since they would be copies of partman-auto-lvm with the exception of the swap partition. o cryptsetup-udeb cryptsetup-udeb 2:1.0.3-2 which contains important fixes for LVM/crypto combinations has migrated to testing. Some more fixes are probably necessary for root-on-crypto-on-lvm (as opposed to root-on-lvm-on-crypto which works), they should be present in the next version of cryptsetup-udeb (unreleased). o partman-lvm the recent upload (version 38) should fix the bugs introduced by the rewrite and integration of the lvmcfg functionality which broke partman-auto-lvm and introduced some formatting bugs. Together with the new lvm2-udeb (2.02.06-2), this should restore both partman-lvm and partman-auto-lvm to working order. o documentation still needs to be written for partman-crypto, partman-auto-crypto and cryptsetup initramfs hooks. It's possible that it also needs to be updated to account for the changes to partman-auto-lvm and partman-lvm. o device locking as discussed on debian-boot a week ago or so, I've committed a patch which adds the ability to "lock" partitions or devices (that are in use for some other system, e.g. as a lvm PV or an encrypted device). The functionality is there and integrated with partman-lvm and partman-crypto but there might be other packages which might benefit from it (e.g. RAID devices). Regards, David -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [MEETINGS] Cancel or reschedule meeting?
On Friday 16 June 2006 14:45, David Härdeman wrote: > Looking at the TODO list, partman-auto-crypto needs better > integration with partman-auto-lvm and partman-crypto. Most importantly, > shared parts need to be split out into shared scripts rather than > duplicated, this will also remove confusing and/or irrelevant prompts > that are currently displayed. I'd prefer to have the recent changes to RAID and LVM and partman-auto-lvm better tested and stable again before going in to another round of reorganizations. Could you hold off merging into trunk until we've reached that stage? I'll try do some testing later today with the latest updated udebs. pgp1qFLCThysm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [MEETINGS] Cancel or reschedule meeting?
On Friday 16 June 2006 05:59, Christian Perrier wrote: > I know it's very late and I apologize for this. I leave up to Frans > decision to either have the meeting anyway or reschedule it for the > next week. I'm in a similar situation. I was just reminded that I have a daytrip tomorrow and I'm not sure that I will be back in time. This also means that I will not able to properly prepare the meeting and update release status. Moving the meeting to next week is probably the best option. pgpOiFWcTgWqg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [MEETINGS] Cancel or reschedule meeting?
On Fri, June 16, 2006 14:58, Frans Pop said: > On Friday 16 June 2006 14:45, David Härdeman wrote: >> Looking at the TODO list, partman-auto-crypto needs better >> integration with partman-auto-lvm and partman-crypto. Most importantly, >> shared parts need to be split out into shared scripts rather than >> duplicated, this will also remove confusing and/or irrelevant prompts >> that are currently displayed. > > I'd prefer to have the recent changes to RAID and LVM and partman-auto-lvm > better tested and stable again before going in to another round of > reorganizations. Could you hold off merging into trunk until we've > reached that stage? That was my intention. I won't have any time to hack on this until next week and it'll probably take a few days to fix the items on the TODO list so I'm guessing approximately one week before I'm ready to commit anything which touch non-partman-auto-crypto packages (and I'll post the patches for review before doing so). Re, David -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:24:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > There is *NO* technical reason which warrant his action, and the only reason > he does it is to humiliate and punish me. You're the only one here who thinks that's a punishment, let alone "humiliating". If you would like to setup your own subversion repository and humiliate or punish Frans by not giving him access to it, you're welcome to do so. Personally, I don't think Frans would care about that because I don't think he would see it as punishment or humiliation; but then, I don't think you should see not having access to the d-i subversion that way either. I don't have access to it either, and I don't think that makes me worse as a person. The only time someone's been had their commit access revoked from a project before that I can think of was Daniel Stone when he uploaded X 4.3 to unstable. In the end, it's just the svn admin's call who gets access and who doesn't, and there really isn't anything more to it than that. > And, how long will it last ? how long will frans reject any effort i make, and > spring about the most minor of comments ? However much effort you've put in, the only result has been to continuously demand that Frans give you access again, or that someone else make Frans give you access. > No, i don't need to regain Frans's thrust, Please, the word is "trust". No "h". Or use the word "confidence", it's near enough in meaning, and similar in French iirc. And while you're certainly correct that you'll never regain his trust if you keep acting the way you have been, it's entirely your choice to act that way, and hence no one's fault but your own. > And the longer this issue lingers unsolved, the worse it becomes. The issue is already resolved, you're just refusing to accept it. > You would not accept this, there is enough > people throwing insults at me on irc, or engaging in random stuborn flamewars > in debian, that there is no right for you or anyone to suggest that i should > be submitted to it. In February and March, I did the work that was blocking amd64 getting into main -- that ended up including restructuring the way mirrors worked, getting apt updated to work, making some patches to dak, and had to be followed up by some a fair bit of time helping the release managers nudge amd64 into testing. Had I been doing that my way, I probably would have ignored the mirror changes, left the updated apt for ages, and pushed amd64 into testing in a much quicker (and more broken) way -- but that's not the way we're setup: James and Ryan are also ftpmasters, so their views on mirroring and how the ftp site is setup have to be taken into account, and Steve and Andy's views on what happens to etch likewise trump mine. So even though what they wanted was more work, and not really terribly exciting for me, that's what ended up happening: just as I want them to listen to my concerns when they do things, I make sure I listen to their concerns when they do things. And as far as insults on IRC, I've had a frontpage slashdot story the other week with anonymous commenters calling me a "control freak" and similar (and getting modded up to +5, Interesting for it) and another article on distrowatch calling me "hot headed". So, please don't imagine it's pitchforks for you, and roses and bunnies for the rest of us. When you say that other people wouldn't submit to what you've been through, you're simply wrong. That's not to say that you have to put up with it -- you're a volunteer, so if you don't want to put up with it, you can go elsewhere any time you like, which might mean working on d-i in a different repository, working on a different part of Debian, working on a Debian derivative instead of Debian, or ending your work on Debian entirely. And while you might not appreciate it, we will be sad to see you go, but it's still completely your choice. What isn't your choice, though, is whether anyone else in the project wants to work with you. If they don't, they're volunteers too, and they don't have to. If you aren't willing to accept that, you will need to find some way to deal with the consequences. > Maybe. That said, in real life, if someone would have an authority over me > like the one i mention, [...] Frans has no authority over you; simply authority over the d-i subversion repository. Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#373945: Successful 2.6 based installation on s/390 (hercules) - some issues
Package: installation-reports (This mail is a combination of installation-report and status overview for the S/390 list.) Mostly thanks to the efforts of Bastian Blank, S/390 has now made the switch from 2.4 to 2.6 in the installer. The installer now also uses partman instead of partitioner and partconf. Both network device and DASD detection had to be made sysfs-aware. Together with the switch to partman, that means there have been some major changes. Additional testing is very welcome. I've done two test installs using the Hercules emulator. The results are below. Note: until 2.6.16 kernel packages have migrated to unstable, installations of testing will fail to reboot. Installations of unstable should work (barring any "normal" breakages in unstable). * Network configuration (CTC) Works fine. Wishlist: - Maybe we should remove the selected read device from the list when asking for the write device - Maybe we could suggest default values (first available device for read; the one following the selected read device for write) * DASD configuration During the first install this failed because the DASD modules were not loaded. Modprobing them initially did not work because depmod had not been run after loading the kernel module udeb. This was solved (worked around rather) by adding the dasd-modules udeb to the initrd so that initial udev runs will load them. The real solution would be to run depmod and rerun udev as part of dasd detection. Issue: - After selecting a dasd device there is no change of the status on the screen which makes it look as if no device has been selected yet. This is only a presentation bug as the selection in fact was done correctly. * Partitioning - general The old udebs used for partitioning (partitioner and partconf) are still in the archives and thus have to be skipped manually. Partitioner will probably fail; after you get back to the menu, select "Partition disks" instead. This is a temporary problem that will be fixed as soon as the udebs are removed from the archive. * Partitioning - partman-auto Don't use guided partitioning! Instead select "Manually edit partition table" in the first partman screen. - There are no recipes for S/390 which makes partman-auto use msdos disklabel and try to create a logical partition for swap. This fails miserably. - As guided partitioning currently only supports using one device, it's not much use for S/390 anyway as most installations tend to use multiple DASDs. For the last reason, we'll probably just disable partman-auto for S/390 for now. * Partitioning - manual partitioning Select the "s390" disklabel when using Hercules when creating a new partition table. I understand that msdos or gpt can be used in some cases. Issue: - When a new partition is created, it's name is shown strangely: LINUX.V^G^G^G^G^G^G.PART0001.NATI After committing the changes and restarting partman, it looks more normal though: LINUX.V0X0121.PART0001.NATIVE (Not sure where the 0121 comes from; the DASD I created the partition on was 0.0.0122!) * Base installation - kernel selection This is an existing issue, but worth mentioning anyway. Selection of the default kernel could be improved for S/390. Current selection uses the full kernel version (e.g. 2.6.16-2-s390) used in the installer. This means that: - if that kernel is not available, the fallback is not optimal; for example, if I install testing, the 2.6.15-1-s390x kernel will be selected by default (while hercules does not support s390x); - the installer will not install one of the meta packages which means that the user will not get automatic security updates if they have ABI changes. One thing to be aware of is that a new hardware configuration mechanism has been added for 2.6 kernels using the sysconfig-hardware package. The installer may (e.g. for CTC netdevices) create config files in directory: /etc/sysconfig/hardware/. Cheers, FJP pgpJJiXDLBRmY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:33:23PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:24:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > There is *NO* technical reason which warrant his action, and the only reason > > he does it is to humiliate and punish me. > > You're the only one here who thinks that's a punishment, let alone > "humiliating". If you would like to setup your own subversion repository > and humiliate or punish Frans by not giving him access to it, you're > welcome to do so. And what has that to do with anything ? I have no interest in going into this hate-game, i want the situation solved, and be able to commit as any normal DD would. > Personally, I don't think Frans would care about that because I don't > think he would see it as punishment or humiliation; but then, I don't > think you should see not having access to the d-i subversion that way > either. I don't have access to it either, and I don't think that makes > me worse as a person. Ok, so why did your mediation process basically support Frans in this ? > The only time someone's been had their commit access revoked from a > project before that I can think of was Daniel Stone when he uploaded X 4.3 > to unstable. In the end, it's just the svn admin's call who gets access > and who doesn't, and there really isn't anything more to it than that. Yes, but you notice that this was over a technical mistake, while here it is to make a point in a ugly social dispute where neither side is innocent. You as mediator should not have favored one side over the other, and let the situation degenerate in hope that it will be forgotten, this never works. > > And, how long will it last ? how long will frans reject any effort i make, > > and > > spring about the most minor of comments ? > > However much effort you've put in, the only result has been to > continuously demand that Frans give you access again, or that someone > else make Frans give you access. No, i was pointing out how ridiculous the situation is, because it is ridiculous. If Frans isn't able to take such comments, he has no place to take the decision to kick me out. He did it, only he is takign that decision, and you all support him either vocally or silently, and thus the responsability of this mess is exclusively his. > > No, i don't need to regain Frans's thrust, > > Please, the word is "trust". No "h". Or use the word "confidence", > it's near enough in meaning, and similar in French iirc. Yeah, i never know, and Steve already mentioned this to me. > And while you're certainly correct that you'll never regain his trust > if you keep acting the way you have been, it's entirely your choice to > act that way, and hence no one's fault but your own. Ah, yes ? And do you not think that it is perfectly possible to work together even if you have a private dislike of someone ? Its called professionalism to not let one's private dislike step onto the job being done, and Frans clearly is letting his private hatefullness overstep his technical responsabilities, and you as DPL and mediator should not let it happen. > > And the longer this issue lingers unsolved, the worse it becomes. > > The issue is already resolved, you're just refusing to accept it. No, it is not solved, or we would not have this conversation. > > You would not accept this, there is enough > > people throwing insults at me on irc, or engaging in random stuborn > > flamewars > > in debian, that there is no right for you or anyone to suggest that i should > > be submitted to it. > > In February and March, I did the work that was blocking amd64 getting into > main -- that ended up including restructuring the way mirrors worked, > getting apt updated to work, making some patches to dak, and had to be > followed up by some a fair bit of time helping the release managers > nudge amd64 into testing. Had I been doing that my way, I probably > would have ignored the mirror changes, left the updated apt for ages, > and pushed amd64 into testing in a much quicker (and more broken) way -- > but that's not the way we're setup: James and Ryan are also ftpmasters, > so their views on mirroring and how the ftp site is setup have to be > taken into account, and Steve and Andy's views on what happens to etch > likewise trump mine. So even though what they wanted was more work, and > not really terribly exciting for me, that's what ended up happening: just > as I want them to listen to my concerns when they do things, I make sure I > listen to their concerns when they do things. So ? > And as far as insults on IRC, I've had a frontpage slashdot story the > other week with anonymous commenters calling me a "control freak" and > similar (and getting modded up to +5, Interesting for it) and another > article on distrowatch calling me "hot headed". So, please don't imagine > it's pitchforks for you, and roses and bunnies for the rest of us. No, but then i was blamed for doing it, so, two weights, two mesures, and it is per
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 09:38:47AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:23:59AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: >> > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 01:29:24AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: >> >> [ d-i team member asks opinions of d-i team members ] >> >> > > My recommendation: >> > > >> > > Do a while something completely different. >> > > IIRC it is called sabatical. >> > >> > How long a while ? Forever ? >> >> It depends how deep one is "trenched"[1]. The milestone to reach is >> "Live has other important things then SVN commit rights" >> >> Start with one month. > > Its now one month and a half,and i am kept told ' a long time' > > Friendly, > > Sven Luther No, you keep bugging people about this on and on and on. That is not taking a break. Anyway, I suggest you do as so many people have suggested before. Keep working, send patches and try really hard to stay on everybodies good side for a while. Yes, it is more trouble, doesn't work as fast and so on. But try it anyway. Or quit D-I work. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:09:48PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > And what has that to do with anything ? I have no interest in going into this > hate-game, i want the situation solved, and be able to commit as any normal DD > would. You have that already. There are >1000 DD's, and only a small portion of those has commit access to the d-i repository. "any normal DD", therefore, does not have commit access to the d-i repository. -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Friday 16 June 2006 15:33, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:24:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > There is *NO* technical reason which warrant his action, and the only > > reason he does it is to humiliate and punish me. > > You're the only one here who thinks that's a punishment, He's not, furthermore everyday use of the english language clearly supports that vision: Punishment \Pun"ish*ment\, n. 1. The act of punishing. [1913 Webster] 2. Any pain, suffering, or loss inflicted on a person because of a crime or offense. [1913 Webster] I never gave them condign punishment. --Shak. [1913 Webster] The rewards and punishments of another life. --Locke. [1913 Webster] Sven lossed his commit rights because because of his offences, I'd say that fits 2 above nicely, no? > let alone "humiliating". that's subjective, clearly he experiences it as humiliating. that may or may not be how you would feel in his shoes (for whatever instatiation of you). but dismissing his feelings out of hand is not exactly a good starting point for solving a social problem. The feelings on both sides simply are, the mediator refusing to acknowledge the feelings of one of the parties is _not_ helpfull. (and that's probably the basis for Sven saying that you weren't mediating) NOTE: I sayd acknowledge the feelings, that does in know way mean you agree with them (from either side) > If you would like to setup your own subversion > repository and humiliate or punish Frans by not giving him access to it, > you're welcome to do so. What purpose is being served by making Sven jumpt through hoops when making technical contributions to D-I? How does it help fix the social issues between Sven and Frans in any way? Net effect at this point seems to be: - extra work for those playing middle man for Sven's commits and Sven himself - bad feelings and frustration on Sven's part (neither of which is likely to help improve communications) - lots of flames on the issue everywhere, and resulting frustration all around None of which is positive. Meanwhile I have seen Sven make an honest (though imperfect) effort to improve the way he communicates. Frankly at this point I don't see how refusing to give Sven back commit rights (which he never abused AFAIK) is helping anything. Apperently you don't share this opinion, could you as mediator explain what gains you see in refusing Sven commit rights still? Cause standing here on the peanut gallery I'm not seeing any. -- Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) pgpwILrlcCPB4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#373945: Successful 2.6 based installation on s/390 (hercules) - some issues
On Friday 16 June 2006 15:39, Frans Pop wrote:
> * DASD configuration
> This was solved (worked around rather) by adding the dasd-modules udeb
> to the initrd so that initial udev runs will load them. The real
> solution would be to run depmod and rerun udev as part of dasd
> detection.
Bastian: What do you think of the attached patch for this (untested)?
> * Partitioning - partman-auto
> For the last reason, we'll probably just disable partman-auto for S/390
> for now.
Needed patch committed in SVN.
Index: debian/control
===
--- debian/control (revision 38083)
+++ debian/control (working copy)
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
Package: s390-dasd
XC-Package-Type: udeb
Architecture: s390 s390x
-Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}, dasd-modules, s390-sysconfig-writer, s390-tools-udeb
+Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}, dasd-modules, s390-sysconfig-writer, s390-tools-udeb, di-utils (>= 1.31)
Provides: harddrive-detection
XB-Installer-Menu-Item: 37
Description: Configure DASD
Index: debian/s390-dasd.postinst
===
--- debian/s390-dasd.postinst (revision 0)
+++ debian/s390-dasd.postinst (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+#! /bin/sh
+set -e
+
+if [ -x /sbin/depmod ]; then
+depmod -a > /dev/null 2>&1 || true
+fi
+
+update-dev
+
+dasd
Index: debian/rules
===
--- debian/rules (revision 38083)
+++ debian/rules (working copy)
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
dh_testdir
dh_testroot
dh_clean -k
- cp dasd debian/postinst
+ dh_install dasd bin
# Build architecture-independent files here.
binary-indep: build install
pgpC7Vjg7cgKX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Processed: raising severity, because it is not working
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 373629 grave Bug#373629: failed to do autopartitioning completely (tries the cd device :( ) Severity set to `grave' from `important' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Status of debian-installer for the native ppc64 port
Hello, a while ago I filed a few patches to the BTS to make d-i work on the native 64-bit ppc64 port (http://debian-ppc64.alioth.debian.org). Frans Pop kindly asked me to collect all the necessary ppc64/d-i related changes and to present a summary to make a decision about ppc64 integration easier. Generally, the ppc64 port does not need any intrusive changes to d-i. Basically the necessary patches do something like 's/powerpc/powerpc ppc64' in debian/control together with the addition of the architecture specific configuration files at the appropriate places. Some of the ppc64 patches have already been applied to individual d-i udeb packages. The following changes are still necessary to make d-i work on ppc64: debian-installer: - 's/powerpc/powerpc ppc64/' in debian/control - add ppc64 files in build/config and build/pkg-lists base-installer : - add a 'kernel/ppc64.sh' script clock-setup : - 's/powerpc/powerpc ppc64/' in debian/control gtk+2.0-directfb: - 's/powerpc/powerpc ppc64/' in debian/control kbd-chooser : - 's/powerpc/powerpc ppc64/' in debian/control - add ppc64 specific CFLAGS and KEYBOARDS in Makefile linux-kernel-di-: - add modules/ppc64 dir (copy of modules/powerpc-powerpc64) powerpc-2.6 : - add a ppc64 linux-image line to kernel-versions - add 'linux-image-... [ppc64]' to the Build-Depends mkvmlinuz : - 's/powerpc/powerpc ppc64/' in debian/control partman-base: - add a ppc64 specific alternative to definitions.sh partman-newworld: - 's/powerpc/powerpc ppc64/' in debian/control rootskel: - make a lib64 -> lib symlink on ppc64 (same as on amd64) I hope that these changes are acceptable for the d-i team and that these changes will eventually be applied to the d-i sources. Regards Andreas Jochens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#370667: I2O modules for 64bit platforms
Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote: > Btw, I've noticed that discover updates its module list from a master copy in: Didn't realize they actually implemented that.. > http://people.debian.org/~joeyh/d-i/modules-list > > Perhaps i2o_block should be there as well? It is, since you added it to a list file for amd64.. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#373945: Successful 2.6 based installation on s/390 (hercules) - some issues
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:11:08PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > Bastian: What do you think of the attached patch for this (untested)? I think this needs to be done in a more general way after anna installs any module. Bastian -- The sight of death frightens them [Earthers]. -- Kras the Klingon, "Friday's Child", stardate 3497.2 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: arch kernel status
On Monday 12 June 2006 23:25, Joey Hess wrote: > hppa: update udebs and build/config from 2.6.16-1 to 2.6.16-2 I've pinged Kyle to update these, but -14 is not available for hppa yet (FTBS). Should be fixed when -15 is uploaded. Kyle will update udebs after that. > sparc: update udebs and build/config from 2.6.16-1 to 2.6.16-2 >add 2.6 kernels for sparc32 to CD iff they work Kernels and d-i config have been updated to 2.6.16-2. I plan to update debian-cd for sparc32 for 2.6 and completely drop 2.4 for sparc when we start preparing for Beta3. Doing so now would probably break weekly CD builds. Cheers, FJP pgpeg6lXdhdTk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
> I have no idea what you're trying to say with "moral harcelement", but no,
I think the right word is "harassment". "Harcèlement" is the French
word.
"harcèlement moral" is now an accepted reason for employees to sue
their employers in France (and I would guess in many other countries)
to define the situation where the employer (or one of the company's
hierarchy members) puts some heavy moral pressure on one of the
employees...most often with the said intent to have him/her leave.
Sensitivity on "harcèlement moral" has been very widely publicized
recently in our country when the legal system and, mor eprecisely, the
"Work Legal System" ("droit du travail") defined it very clearly.
The definition of it is very well bordered in the French law system
and, with the agreement of my wife who happens to have "some"
knowledge in Human Resource management (including the legal aspects),
what happened between Sven and other members of the project certainly
cannot define as "harcèlement moral". It falls under "normal"teamwork
relationship and a very clear way to settle an internal crisis in a
work team.
This is actually what I was trying to say to Sven...but it seems that
I'm not heard at all.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
[MEETINGS] D-I team meeting RESCHEDULED to Saturday June 24th 16:00UTC
Because of very last minute commitments for myself, as D-I meetings moderator, and Frans Pop, as D-I release manager, we have decided to reschedule the Debian Installer team meeting to Saturday June 24th 16:00: > The next Debian Installer team opened meeting is scheduled for > Saturday June 24th 16:00 UTC. > > The meeting will happen on #debian-boot ON irc.debian.org, NOT, I > REPEAT, NOT on irc.freenode.net. > > This meeting will mostly be centered about the next release schedule, > with regards of the general Etch release plans. > > The Wiki page is opened for the meeting agenda. > > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/Meetings > > I will add timings to the agenda at the last minute, as usual, so > probably on Saturday morning. Expect a meeting duration of about > 1h30. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#373945: Successful 2.6 based installation on s/390 (hercules) - some issues
On Friday 16 June 2006 18:42, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:11:08PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > Bastian: What do you think of the attached patch for this (untested)? > > I think this needs to be done in a more general way after anna installs > any module. I guess you mean at the end of an anna run if any modules were installed (to avoid running multiple times). I wonder if that would also cover the case that eddyp is struggling with for pppoe support. So you're against committing a patch like this while waiting for such a more structural solution? This patch is in line with how hw-detect currently works for other arches. pgp1IBDkhjZdR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#374001: Etch-Installtion | Partman doesn´t recognize partitions => no installation possible
Package: installation-reports Version: 2006-06-05 Severity: serious Hello, I tried to install Debian-Etch on my Notebook: Maxdata Mbook 1200X Athlon XP 2400+ HDD: Fujitsu MHT2040AT (40GB) But when I should partition the HDD, Partman shows me no partition and no HDD. I did the following steps during the installation: - After booting I typed "install vga=771" (else I can´t only see stripes on the screen) - Choose Language / Choose a language => English - Choose Language / Choose a country => United States - Choose Language / Choose a locale => en_US.UTF-8 - Choose Language / Choose other locales => nothing selected - Select a keyboard layout => German - Configure the network / Primary network interface => eth0: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT6102 [Rhine-II] - Configure the network / Hostname => debian - Configure the network / Domain name => home - Choose a mirror of the Debian archive => Germany - Choose a mirror of the Debian archive => ftp.de.debian.org - Choose a mirror of the Debian archive => (no proxy) - Partition disks / Partition method => Now I can only choose "Mannually edit partition table" !! - Partition disks => Now I can only choose "Configure software RAID", "Configure the Logical Volume Manager", "Guided partitioning", "Help on partitioning", "Undo changes to partitons" or "Finish partitioning an write changes to disk" Between the lines "Help on partitioning" and "Undo changes to partitons" are two (or three) blank lines. I´ve seen in the manual, that in these lines should be the available partioions. If I now choose "Guided partitioning", I get the following screen: - Partition disks => Manually edit partition table" and it goes back to the site before. If I choose "Undo changes to partitons" or "go back" I get a blue screen an nothing else happens. If I choose "Finish partitioning an write changes to disk" I get an allert: No root file system is defined. Please correct this from the partitioning menu". The it goes back to the site before. When I go to the BusyBox, I can display with fdisk /dev/hda my partitions: Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/hda1 * 14 650 5116671+7 HPFS/NTFS /dev/hda2 651 4684 33848955 f W95 Ext´d (LBA) /dev/hda3 11310439183 Linux /dev/hda5 651 1925 10241406 7 HPFS/NTFS /dev/hda6 1926 2056 1052226 b W95 FAT32 /dev/hda7 2057 2118497983+ 82 Linux swap / solaris /dev/hda8 2119 2726 4883728+ 83 Linux /dev/hda9 2727 4864 17173453+ 83 Linux I created the partitions /hda3, /hda7-9 with fdisk. Before, there where only the Windows partitions. But while installation, I get the same problems. I searched for the technical data from the HDD (http://www.fujitsu.com/global/support/computing/storage/hdd/eol/mhdd/cmos.h tml) and found: Model Cylinders Heads Sectors Capacity(*) Sectors(**) Capacity (**) MHT2040AT 16,383 16 63 8.45 GB 78,140,16040.0 GB But the bios shows other auto-detected values: Size Cyln Head Wpcom Sec LBA Mode Blk Mode PIO Mode 32Bit Mode 40008MB 1915216 0 255 On On4 On What could be the problem? Can you help me? With best regards Heiko Thole
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:31:24PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 09:38:47AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:23:59AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > >> > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 01:29:24AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > >> > >> [ d-i team member asks opinions of d-i team members ] > >> > >> > > My recommendation: > >> > > > >> > > Do a while something completely different. > >> > > IIRC it is called sabatical. > >> > > >> > How long a while ? Forever ? > >> > >> It depends how deep one is "trenched"[1]. The milestone to reach is > >> "Live has other important things then SVN commit rights" > >> > >> Start with one month. > > > > Its now one month and a half,and i am kept told ' a long time' > > > > Friendly, > > > > Sven Luther > > No, you keep bugging people about this on and on and on. That is not > taking a break. Well, if Frans take ridiculous decisions, then he has no right to object when i tell him so. And you all who supported him, you have no right to call me a whiner. If this was handled in a proper mediation when i asked the DPL for it, instead of holding sentence over me, and handing my punishment to frans, then we would not be in this mess. > Anyway, I suggest you do as so many people have suggested before. Keep > working, send patches and try really hard to stay on everybodies good > side for a while. Yes, it is more trouble, doesn't work as fast and so > on. But try it anyway. Or quit D-I work. Why should i do this ? Do you really think that what i do is less acceptable than the behaviour we have been seeing this past month on various irc channels, or those other who participate in many flamewars all over the place these past month ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:43:12PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:09:48PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > And what has that to do with anything ? I have no interest in going into > > this > > hate-game, i want the situation solved, and be able to commit as any normal > > DD > > would. > > You have that already. There are >1000 DD's, and only a small portion of > those has commit access to the d-i repository. "any normal DD", > therefore, does not have commit access to the d-i repository. And how many of them cannot commit despite wanting to do it ? I mean, come on, what kind of benefit does frans and co get for refusing my commit access ? Just to anger and punish me, and then feel angry when i made a innofensive comment about it ? I was discussing on irc how i would use svn diff | mutt submit.debian.org instead of svn commit, and then noticed that it would be easier to have commit access, and frans took exception. This was already the second time he took exception to some inocuous comment, and he clearly enjoys this state of control he has over me, and doesn't get shamed to say basically : If you don't behave, you will never get commit access back. IS this acceptable ? I am not a child, i am probably a DD since longer than Frans, and have more technical knowledge than he has, and i don't see why i should support this treatment from him. And everyone tells me to accept it, and to be meak and submlissive, but only rarely is any critic against Frans voiced, which makes me a whiner and someone to be insulted and joked on by the vast majority of DDs. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 07:05:57PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > I have no idea what you're trying to say with "moral harcelement", but no,
>
>
> I think the right word is "harassment". "Harcèlement" is the French
> word.
>
> "harcèlement moral" is now an accepted reason for employees to sue
> their employers in France (and I would guess in many other countries)
> to define the situation where the employer (or one of the company's
> hierarchy members) puts some heavy moral pressure on one of the
> employees...most often with the said intent to have him/her leave.
>
> Sensitivity on "harcèlement moral" has been very widely publicized
> recently in our country when the legal system and, mor eprecisely, the
> "Work Legal System" ("droit du travail") defined it very clearly.
>
> The definition of it is very well bordered in the French law system
> and, with the agreement of my wife who happens to have "some"
> knowledge in Human Resource management (including the legal aspects),
> what happened between Sven and other members of the project certainly
> cannot define as "harcèlement moral". It falls under "normal"teamwork
> relationship and a very clear way to settle an internal crisis in a
> work team.
Even adding in this chosing the moment of personal fragility to act ? Also,
did you count the numerous times that Frans has tried to undermine my
knowledge and competence in the kernel team by patronizing and derogatory
remarks over those past 8+ month ?
Do you also count how he pushed me to make that "i will stop any d-i porting
job" while i mother almost died of a respiratory crisis due to her loung
cancer, and how he ignored my plead for comprehensivenes to immediately kick
me of the debian project ?
I think the issue is not as clear cut as you are claiming here.
> This is actually what I was trying to say to Sven...but it seems that
> I'm not heard at all.
Indeed, but if you confirm to me that the above is also acceptable practice, i
will not use this argument in the future anymore.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#370667: marked as done (I2O modules for 64bit platforms)
Your message dated Fri, 16 Jun 2006 14:54:18 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#370667: I2O modules for 64bit platforms has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) --- Begin Message --- Package: kernel-wedge Severity: important Tags: patch scsi-extra-modules includes dpt_i2o module, but this is only available on 32bit platforms. On 64bit, there's no mechanism in d-i to access I2O devices. This normaly makes the system uninstallable. Please could you add the i2o_block module as well? -- Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Departamento de Asistencia Técnica Oficina central: (+34) 902 888 345 Asistencia técnica: (+34) 902 888 408 ACK STORM, S.L. http://www.ackstorm.es Este mensaje electrónico contiene información de ACK STORM, S.L. que es privada y confidencial, siendo para el uso exclusivo de las personas o entidades arriba mencionadas. Si usted no es el destinatario señalado, le informamos que cualquier divulgación, copia, distribución o uso de los contenidos está prohibida. Si usted ha recibido este mensaje por error, por favor borre su contenido y comuníquenoslo en la dirección [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- diff -ur kernel-wedge-2.22.old/modules/scsi-extra-modules kernel-wedge-2.22/modules/scsi-extra-modules --- kernel-wedge-2.22.old/modules/scsi-extra-modules2005-12-07 03:28:15.0 +0100 +++ kernel-wedge-2.22/modules/scsi-extra-modules2006-06-06 10:52:47.0 +0200 @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ cciss cpqarray dpt_i2o ? +i2o_block dtc ? eata fdomain --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Fixed by adding i2o_block to the appropriate 64 bit kernel udebs. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message ---
Processing of kernel-wedge_2.23_i386.changes
kernel-wedge_2.23_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: kernel-wedge_2.23.dsc kernel-wedge_2.23.tar.gz kernel-wedge_2.23_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-kernel-di-amd64-2.6 divergence
Joey Hess wrote: > In nic-extra-modules, the amd64 package diverges from kernel-wedge by > not including these modules: > > smc-ultra tlan ne ne2 ni5010 ni52 ni65 lne390 lp486e ibmtr lance hp-plus > eepro e2100 82596 ac3200 at1700 cs89x0 depca 3c501 3c503 3c505 3c507 3c509 > 3c515 3c523 3c527 eexpress es3210 eth16i ewrk3 smc-ultra32 smc-9194 > > I assume that some of these are ISA or other old modules not suitable > for amd64. Are all of them? Yes. > It also diverges from linux-kernel-di-ia64-2.6 by not including these > modules were were added in the 2.6 kernel series: > > arlan defxx hp ne3210 s2io wavelan wd znet bnx2 sky2 > > Are any of these actually not available on amd64? Yes, arlan, hp, ne3210, wavelan, wd, znet are not available there, but defxx, s2io, bnx2, sky2 are and were being left out. This is fixed in svn. > Any of them available but not actually useful? -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: reassign 374001 to parted
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.20 > reassign 374001 parted Bug#374001: Etch-Installtion | Partman doesn´t recognize partitions => no installation possible Bug reassigned from package `installation-reports' to `parted'. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing of choose-mirror_2.03_i386.changes
choose-mirror_2.03_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: choose-mirror_2.03.dsc choose-mirror_2.03.tar.gz choose-mirror_2.03_all.udeb choose-mirror-bin_2.03_i386.udeb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tasksel 2.48 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the tasksel source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 2.47 Current version: 2.48 -- This email is automatically generated; [EMAIL PROTECTED] is responsible. See http://people.debian.org/~henning/trille/ for more information. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: klibc-dhcp-client and D-I
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 02:13:11AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > > The patch applied cleanly, I got a working udeb from it. > > To make klibc-ipconfig transmit the DHCP vendor class "d-i" > and get the DHCP preseeding filename in a text file, it needs the > attached patch. Sweet. So was that all the missing functionality that made ipconfig unsuitable? regards Andrew -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dhcp3-client and D-I
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 10:26:12AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 10:43:01PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > > Andrew Pollock wrote: > > > Okay. I've had a preliminary play with ipconfig over the weekend. Seems > > > relatively straightforward to slot it into netcfg's dhcp.c. What I need to > > > understand is the necessity to set a vendor-class-identifier attribute in > > > with the request, is this a nicety or a need-to-have? ipconfig won't do > > > it. > > > > It enables useful abilities like setting the appropriate default mirror > > for all installs to a network. It's a new feature since sarge, so not > > something a lot of people are using yet but very potentially powerful > > and useful for larger networks. > > Yes, I read a related bug report when I was searching for this thread in my > email, looks good. > > > Anyway, "good" news: The recent busybox change that dropped modutils > > makes the i386 root floppy too large, triggering a lot of reorganisation > > (and degraded functionality), after which we have enough free space on > > there for the dhcp 3 client, so turn it back on and we can look at > > including it. > > Done. Next upload, hopefully by the weekend at the latest, will include > dhcp3-client-udeb again. > So said upload finally made it out of NEW the other day... I note in another thread Gert's got a patch that extends the functionality of ipconfig. regards Andrew -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:31:24PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> Anyway, I suggest you do as so many people have suggested before. Keep >> working, send patches and try really hard to stay on everybodies good >> side for a while. Yes, it is more trouble, doesn't work as fast and so >> on. But try it anyway. Or quit D-I work. > > Why should i do this ? Do you really think that what i do is less acceptable > than the behaviour we have been seeing this past month on various irc > channels, or those other who participate in many flamewars all over the place > these past month ? > > Friendly, > > Sven Luther Because I assume you want to be the better man and continue working for Debians user and the ppc port. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
kernel-wedge_2.23_i386.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: kernel-wedge_2.23.dsc to pool/main/k/kernel-wedge/kernel-wedge_2.23.dsc kernel-wedge_2.23.tar.gz to pool/main/k/kernel-wedge/kernel-wedge_2.23.tar.gz kernel-wedge_2.23_all.deb to pool/main/k/kernel-wedge/kernel-wedge_2.23_all.deb Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org Closing bugs: 352924 Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
choose-mirror_2.03_i386.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: choose-mirror-bin_2.03_i386.udeb to pool/main/c/choose-mirror/choose-mirror-bin_2.03_i386.udeb choose-mirror_2.03.dsc to pool/main/c/choose-mirror/choose-mirror_2.03.dsc choose-mirror_2.03.tar.gz to pool/main/c/choose-mirror/choose-mirror_2.03.tar.gz choose-mirror_2.03_all.udeb to pool/main/c/choose-mirror/choose-mirror_2.03_all.udeb Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:31:49PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:31:24PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > >> Anyway, I suggest you do as so many people have suggested before. Keep > >> working, send patches and try really hard to stay on everybodies good > >> side for a while. Yes, it is more trouble, doesn't work as fast and so > >> on. But try it anyway. Or quit D-I work. > > > > Why should i do this ? Do you really think that what i do is less acceptable > > than the behaviour we have been seeing this past month on various irc > > channels, or those other who participate in many flamewars all over the > > place > > these past month ? > > > > Friendly, > > > > Sven Luther > > Because I assume you want to be the better man and continue working > for Debians user and the ppc port. Yeah, the question right now is if i can do this inside debian and d-i, or if i should go another way, or maybe fork like the DPL suggested me. I still don't understand why the DPL suggested such an obvvious stupid course of action though, but then ... Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#352924: marked as done (kernel-wedge: de4x5 listed in nic-extra-modules, but not needed in 2.6?)
Your message dated Fri, 16 Jun 2006 14:32:59 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#352924: fixed in kernel-wedge 2.23 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) --- Begin Message --- Package: kernel-wedge Version: 2.18 Currently, nic-extra-modules lists de4x5 unconditionally for both 2.4 and 2.6. Although the module is still being built in 2.6, it's not used at all by modules.pcimap. Should it be dropped from nic-extra-modules and added only to the 2.4-specific linux-kernel-di packages instead? This was discovered while sorting out drivers for alpha, where de4x5 was bumped into nic-modules because it was previously used for several common DEC chipsets; now the de2104x driver is used by the kernel instead. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Source: kernel-wedge Source-Version: 2.23 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of kernel-wedge, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: kernel-wedge_2.23.dsc to pool/main/k/kernel-wedge/kernel-wedge_2.23.dsc kernel-wedge_2.23.tar.gz to pool/main/k/kernel-wedge/kernel-wedge_2.23.tar.gz kernel-wedge_2.23_all.deb to pool/main/k/kernel-wedge/kernel-wedge_2.23_all.deb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated kernel-wedge package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 14:52:08 -0400 Source: kernel-wedge Binary: kernel-wedge Architecture: source all Version: 2.23 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian Install System Team Changed-By: Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Description: kernel-wedge - udeb package builder for Debian-Installer Closes: 352924 Changes: kernel-wedge (2.23) unstable; urgency=low . [ Joey Hess ] * Drop de4x5, since on 2.6 it's not registered to any pci device and is apparently useless. The 2.4 lists for individual arches have been updated to include it where appropriate. Closes: #352924 * Mark lanstreamer, ne2, tlan, 3c523, and 3c52 as optional, not built on alpha. * Mark some modules in scsi-modules and nic-pcmcia-modules that may not be avalable on eg, amd64 or powerpc, as optional. * Add atmel_cs and wl3501_cs, which are new in 2.6. . [ Frederik Schüler ] * Mark some more (ISA) scsi controllers in scsi-modules as optional. Files: bc26fe7e6428a5663625f3a51b76c52b 603 utils optional kernel-wedge_2.23.dsc 5c4c8c4fc3196e89e8205b73e92af0e6 7 utils optional kernel-wedge_2.23.tar.gz 00abb1a2eaa433e4ab34e1ea12479130 38212 utils optional kernel-wedge_2.23_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEkv3/2tp5zXiKP0wRAt8mAKC2tJA1V0Q+x1SUKFrpnikYCj8Q5ACbBVL3 q7SBsxp3vwI0cPI6vSxdYYc= =rotX -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- End Message ---
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:40:32PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:43:12PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:09:48PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > And what has that to do with anything ? I have no interest in > > > going into this hate-game, i want the situation solved, and be > > > able to commit as any normal DD would. > > > > You have that already. There are >1000 DD's, and only a small portion of > > those has commit access to the d-i repository. "any normal DD", > > therefore, does not have commit access to the d-i repository. > > And how many of them cannot commit despite wanting to do it ? Not a clue. No interest either -- how is it any relevant? [...] > And everyone tells me to accept it, and to be meak and submlissive, but only > rarely is any critic against Frans voiced, which makes me a whiner No. Having critique against Frans for doing what he did does not make you a whiner. Would this happen to me, I would probably also utter some critique. However, repeating this critique over and over and over again, on (currently, at least) three different mailinglists at the same time, in threads of which two started with totally different and unrelated subjects and the third of which you started yourself (because, hey, annoying people in two threads isn't enough yet), *that* is what makes you a whiner. I know you're not happy with what happened. I think that anyone who does not know by now that you're not happy with what happened is pretty much blind, you've made sure of that. However, it should be clear, even to you, that these threads are not gaining you any support -- on the contrary. > and someone to be insulted and joked on by the vast majority of DDs. I don't think I personally have ever insulted you, so I wonder why you have to mention such in a post that is a direct reply to a post by myself. -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:50:50PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote: > On Friday 16 June 2006 15:33, Anthony Towns wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:24:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > There is *NO* technical reason which warrant his action, and the only > > > reason he does it is to humiliate and punish me. > > > > You're the only one here who thinks that's a punishment, > He's not, furthermore everyday use of the english language clearly supports > that vision: [...] > > Sven lossed his commit rights because because of his offences, I'd say that > fits 2 above nicely, no? Then I have to ask you to please stop thinking in that manner. Punishment and humiliation are not what this is about, and imagining that it is does a disservice to both the d-i team and Sven. The reason Sven's access was removed and the reason it's not being reinstated is that Sven is unable and unwilling to work with Frans, and Frans is likewise unwilling to work with Sven. Assigning blame for that isn't a useful activity, and is likely harmful since it will only make one or both of Sven and Frans less willing to work with the other. > > let alone "humiliating". > that's subjective, clearly he experiences it as humiliating. that may or may > not be how you would feel in his shoes (for whatever instatiation of you). Since we're quoting dictionary definitions: ]To reduce to a lower position in one's own eyes, or in the ]eyes of others; to cause a loss of pride or dignity; to ]humble; to mortify. As far as everyone else is concerned, this is a disagreement between Sven and Frans; and if Frans isn't willing to pretend that there's no problem and give Sven access to subversion, that may well be Sven's problem, or it might be Frans', or it might just be the way things are. Anyone who does think losing access to a repository puts you in a lower position is mistaken, and that includes Sven. > The feelings on both sides simply are, the > mediator refusing to acknowledge the feelings of one of the parties is > _not_ helpfull. (and that's probably the basis for Sven saying that you > weren't mediating) No, the basis for Sven saying I wasn't mediating is that I didn't give him what he wanted -- that is, I didn't insist Frans reinstate his access. Sven's been very consistent on being only willing to accept that as the final outcome, and repeatedly suggested alternative compromises in order to achieve that. Unfortunately, that's simply not a plausible outcome. I hope Sven will accept that at some point, but I haven't seen any evidence of it to this point. > What purpose is being served by making Sven jumpt through hoops when making > technical contributions to D-I? How does it help fix the social issues > between Sven and Frans in any way? Reinstating subversion access doesn't fix the social issues either. Worse it brings them to the fore by requiring Frans and Sven to work closely together on an ongoing basis. > Net effect at this point seems to be: > - extra work for those playing middle man for Sven's commits and Sven > himself They're happy to do this. > - bad feelings and frustration on Sven's part (neither of which is likely to > help improve communications) > - lots of flames on the issue everywhere, and resulting frustration all > around And both of those are entirely within Sven's control. The positive that you missed is "Frans, and the rest of the d-i team, don't have to deal with Sven being part of their team", which means they can get on with their work without having to worry extensively about Sven throwing a temper tantrum when his patches stop working, trying to overrule the d-i lead by going to the release managers, or whatever else. > Meanwhile I have seen Sven make an honest (though imperfect) effort to > improve the way he communicates. Again, no matter how much effort he's put in, it hasn't actually achieved anything. > Frankly at this point I don't see how > refusing to give Sven back commit rights (which he never abused AFAIK) is > helping anything. Giving back his commit rights at this point would imply that the best way to deal with someone acting in a way you disagree with is to call them fascists, hypocrites, abuse them on IRC, and start thread after thread on how you've been unfairly mistreated on multiple lists, until everyone gets so fed up with you they just do what you want. > Apperently you don't share this opinion, could you as mediator explain what > gains you see in refusing Sven commit rights still? Cause standing here on > the peanut gallery I'm not seeing any. Commit rights is a stand in for being part of the d-i team; Sven continues to demonstrate he can't work productively with the d-i team, so certainly should not be a member of that team. Any mediation whatsoever needs to accept that that's the case currently, and either work to change it, or find some way of making it irrelevant. Unfortunately Sven is so far unwilling to accept that, s
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: debian-installer, powerpc issues]
For reference, here's the mail I sent to Sven regarding his complaints on the way d-i has been handled. I think it's been referred to indirectly enough that nothing's served by not having it available for public review. - Forwarded message from Anthony Towns - From: Anthony Towns Subject: debian-installer, powerpc issues Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 16:38:26 +1000 To: Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organisation: Lacking Hi Sven, On 27th April, just under two weeks ago, you wrote regarding your concerns about debian-installer's support of powerpc, and related organisational and personality issues. Having spoken to you, Frans and Colin, and watched your interaction on the mailing lists and IRC since, I don't think having you rejoin the debian-installer team at this point will be an effective way for either yourself or the current members of that team to work, and as such, I won't be asking Frans or the other d-i hackers to reinstate your commit access. That said, Frans was very quick to acknowledge that finding some way for you to keep working with the d-i team is important and a high priority, and I think it's clear that the powerpc architecture benefits markedly from your contributions. My understanding is that your focus is primarily on ensuring the powerpc port is working effectively rather than ongoing feature development in broader areas of d-i and other projects, and thus that your contributions tend to be in the form of immediate fixes for small problems, where it's valuable to be able to push the fix straight out to users. Since you are unable to do that via directly committing your patches, I'm thus going to recommend that you make use of the regular NMU procedure instead to get those fixes out, with the following notes: 1. At the same time as you upload an NMU, you file a bug completely documenting the problem you're fixing, why it occurs, how it can be reproduced, and what your fix is, including the patch. 2. When preparing the NMU, you make minimal changes -- that is you don't change any design decisions the d-i team have made, and don't do anything that causes breakage on other architectures, or on systems that work in other ways. 3. You make best efforts to keep your changes compatible with ongoing d-i development -- ideally providing patches that apply both to the current debs in the archive and current CVS, should they differ. 4. After uploading your NMU, you monitor any problems it may cause and assist in fixing them, and do your best to assist with any queries the d-i team have in regards to integrating your fix into CVS, which may involve generalising it, or other considerations you haven't taken into account. Roughly concurrent with this mail, I'll be contacting Frans and the d-i team in regards to this, recommending that they take any NMUs you do seriously and do their best to ensure that they don't follow up with a maintainer upload that doesn't also include your fixes. Frans has indicated both he and Colin will be available to apply your patches in a timely manner, and I hope he's correct in that estimation. Should you both be successful at following that procedure, I think it will provide a reasonably effective way for you to work together to maintain the powerpc port, and I hope that it might form the basis of a better working relationship in future. On the other hand, if either or both of you fail at that procedure, then the BTS should provide a documented record of what was going on, at which point we can review this issue and institute other procedures as we see fit. If your changes are getting reverted by maintainer uploads, that might involve overriding the d-i team's preference to not have you as a member with commit rights; if you're doing NMUs without providing explanations or helping the d-i team integrate your fixes with the latest development, that may involve further limiting your contributions. I don't believe that asking you to moderate either your language or the number of posts you make in a day is an essential part of resolving this issue, so haven't mentioned it above. I do think that your method of arguing for your beliefs works against you, though; and if Steve's willing, I'd suggest you continue to talk to him about how best to make your point the next few times you need too -- getting him to comment on your mails before you send them, eg, or getting advice on how much more you need to say in an ongoing thread. If you don't feel this is an acceptable way forward, you can ask the technical committee for advice, or to overrule the d-i team's decision to not give you commit access, or you can propose a general resolution for either of these issues. I think we will also need to review who the powerpc port maintainers actually are fairly soon; mostly because it seems to be just you at the moment w
Bug#137717: he siad we are gtnietg a dicovre
my friends Dear Family, Just wanted to write you, and let you know, how the degree program I tried out went. Well, six weeks later, I graduated, finished & received my Ma_sters D_egree with no study required and 100 percent verifiable. Yeah mom, I know you and Dad doubted it at first, but this turned out to be totally legit. This opportunity was given to me because of the professional experience and previous course work I had accumulated. I'm so excited mom and dad, this was a life altering opportunity & for once in my life I took advantage of it. I already have jobs, that wouldn't have given me a chance before, now they are calling off the hook! This really is a godsend. Tell Susan and Cousin Joey that they better hurry up and call that # I gave them the other day. It's 1_2_0_6-984-4433 in case you forgot. Again these are the %DEGs they offer,Bachel_ors, Ma_sters, MBA and/or Doct_orate (PhD) , and the number to call is 1_2_0_6-984-4433 , tell them to leave a brief message with their name, the degree they are interested in and their day and evening phone numbers. They will contact you soon after. Anyway, much love, and tell the rest of the family I said hello! Love, Hatcher family Bye -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Sat, Jun 17, 2006 at 12:44:15AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:40:32PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:43:12PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:09:48PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > And what has that to do with anything ? I have no interest in > > > > going into this hate-game, i want the situation solved, and be > > > > able to commit as any normal DD would. > > > > > > You have that already. There are >1000 DD's, and only a small portion of > > > those has commit access to the d-i repository. "any normal DD", > > > therefore, does not have commit access to the d-i repository. > > > > And how many of them cannot commit despite wanting to do it ? > > Not a clue. No interest either -- how is it any relevant? Because there are none, even non-DD are welcome to have commit access, and for years there where near a 100 of ex-d-i contributors now inactive who had commit access. > [...] > > And everyone tells me to accept it, and to be meak and submlissive, but only > > rarely is any critic against Frans voiced, which makes me a whiner > > No. Having critique against Frans for doing what he did does not make > you a whiner. Would this happen to me, I would probably also utter some > critique. Indeed. > However, repeating this critique over and over and over again, on > (currently, at least) three different mailinglists at the same time, in > threads of which two started with totally different and unrelated > subjects and the third of which you started yourself (because, hey, > annoying people in two threads isn't enough yet), *that* is what makes > you a whiner. Maybe, but given how even appealing to the DPL for a mediation failed, and playing nice is almost not even noticed or plainly rejected, this is the only way i have left to get some hope to get this issue solved, not my fault. > I know you're not happy with what happened. I think that anyone who does > not know by now that you're not happy with what happened is pretty much > blind, you've made sure of that. However, it should be clear, even to > you, that these threads are not gaining you any support -- on the > contrary. So, they are happy to let such injustice happen in debian, and are happy to let the status quo stay there just so they are not bothered in their java flamewars, or self-justification over jonathan/ted's brutal expulsion. Well, i can do without their support, especially of those thinking that insulting me behind my back is a noble course of action. In particular, Andres Salomon, who is on those irc channels, and tried to expulse me because i insulted jonas in exasperation over his stuborn refusal to even consider fixing an RC bug, which is what started this whole mess. > > and someone to be insulted and joked on by the vast majority of DDs. > > I don't think I personally have ever insulted you, so I wonder why you > have to mention such in a post that is a direct reply to a post by > myself. Because this is the current state of affairs, and you have to understand it, and how this is a direct result of giving frans and the d-i team all the reason, and thus marginalizing me. /me wishes there where a real mediator in debian, preferably someone who has done studies in psychologie or something such, and is not a borderline asocial nerd like we all are. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
On Sat, Jun 17, 2006 at 11:41:58AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:50:50PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote: > > On Friday 16 June 2006 15:33, Anthony Towns wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:24:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > There is *NO* technical reason which warrant his action, and the only > > > > reason he does it is to humiliate and punish me. > > > > > > You're the only one here who thinks that's a punishment, > > He's not, furthermore everyday use of the english language clearly supports > > that vision: [...] > > > > Sven lossed his commit rights because because of his offences, I'd say that > > fits 2 above nicely, no? > > Then I have to ask you to please stop thinking in that manner. Punishment > and humiliation are not what this is about, and imagining that it is does > a disservice to both the d-i team and Sven. The reason Sven's access Because you don't like to call it so, doesn't change the fact in the slightest. It does indeed do anyone a disservice, and it was the result of your direct choice. > was removed and the reason it's not being reinstated is that Sven is > unable and unwilling to work with Frans, and Frans is likewise unwilling > to work with Sven. Assigning blame for that isn't a useful activity, > and is likely harmful since it will only make one or both of Sven and > Frans less willing to work with the other. > > > > let alone "humiliating". > > that's subjective, clearly he experiences it as humiliating. that may or > > may > > not be how you would feel in his shoes (for whatever instatiation of you). > > Since we're quoting dictionary definitions: > > ]To reduce to a lower position in one's own eyes, or in the > ]eyes of others; to cause a loss of pride or dignity; to > ]humble; to mortify. > > As far as everyone else is concerned, this is a disagreement between Sven > and Frans; and if Frans isn't willing to pretend that there's no problem > and give Sven access to subversion, that may well be Sven's problem, or > it might be Frans', or it might just be the way things are. Anyone who > does think losing access to a repository puts you in a lower position > is mistaken, and that includes Sven. And i claim that Frans is currently in a position where he feels superior to me, and has been trying since over 8 month to disminish me, maybe unconciously. And this perfectly fits the "To reduce to a lower position" definition, where he is coming out blameless of this ugly mess, and i am set back in a subservient position. > > The feelings on both sides simply are, the > > mediator refusing to acknowledge the feelings of one of the parties is > > _not_ helpfull. (and that's probably the basis for Sven saying that you > > weren't mediating) > > No, the basis for Sven saying I wasn't mediating is that I didn't give > him what he wanted -- that is, I didn't insist Frans reinstate his A mediation, and a subsequent comprimise, is something where both sides point is seen, and a fair and honorable middle point is chosen, where everyone makes a step into the other direction. I claim you where not mediating, because there was no evidence that neither you or anyone involved ever had any kind of real discussion with Frans, and your judgement gave Frans the full reason, and me the full fault, and i was not even told beforehand of your sentence, nor was there any justification of it. This is more of the kind of a dictator or king passing judgement, than any kind of mediation. And the worse of it, is that the decision doesn't serve any kind of purpose, and there is not any technical justification of it, pure arbitrary and full support of Frans, despite your later claim that you don't agree fully with him the other day. Well, one thing are words, the others are actions, and your actions give him full support. > access. Sven's been very consistent on being only willing to accept that > as the final outcome, and repeatedly suggested alternative compromises > in order to achieve that. Unfortunately, that's simply not a plausible > outcome. I hope Sven will accept that at some point, but I haven't seen > any evidence of it to this point. I did propose compromises before you passed sentence, you didn't even reply to them. So, i was unfairly handled, and you made a joke of the mediation, and i should come to accept this. And you dare claim that i was not humiliated ? > > What purpose is being served by making Sven jumpt through hoops when making > > technical contributions to D-I? How does it help fix the social issues > > between Sven and Frans in any way? > > Reinstating subversion access doesn't fix the social issues either. Worse But what you have done doesn't fix it either. > it brings them to the fore by requiring Frans and Sven to work closely > together on an ongoing basis. So what, i have agreed to work on the little things which are of interest to me, and which nobody is working on, and do so silently,
Bug#96946: low on money ?
What's up? Dear Family, Just wanted to write you, and let you know, how the degree program I tried out went. Well, six weeks later, I graduated, finished & received my Master:s Degr:ee with no study required and 100 percent verifiable. Yeah mom, I know you and Dad doubted it at first, but this turned out to be totally legit. This opportunity was given to me because of the professional experience and previous course work I had accumulated. I'm so excited mom and dad, this was a life altering opportunity & for once in my life I took advantage of it. I already have jobs, that wouldn't have given me a chance before, now they are calling off the hook! This really is a godsend. Tell Susan and Cousin Joey that they better hurry up and call that # I gave them the other day. It's 1:2:0:6-984-4433 in case you forgot. Again these are the %DEGs they offer,Bachelor:s, Maste:rs, MBA and/or Doct:orate (PhD) , and the number to call is 1:2:0:6-984-4433 , tell them to leave a brief message with their name, the degree they are interested in and their day and evening phone numbers. They will contact you soon after. Anyway, much love, and tell the rest of the family I said hello! Love, Shea family Ciao -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: debian-installer, powerpc issues]
On Sat, Jun 17, 2006 at 11:46:25AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > For reference, here's the mail I sent to Sven regarding his complaints > on the way d-i has been handled. I think it's been referred to indirectly > enough that nothing's served by not having it available for public review. I would also like for you togive us details about what members of the d-i team you did contact about this issue, and evidence of you actually speaking with Frans, and what the content of those dicussions where, and you point out what kind of step toward the comprimise Frans did. It is also fair to say that prior to this message, i had about maybe three or so mails from you, and almost all of them where one-sided, and you never replied to the replies i made to them. The only useful mail from you is the one dated on may 1. But you never did any reply to my mails, and it is clear with the below decision that you dimissed out of hand any concern or arguments i may have had. So, again, an unjust's king sentence, and not a mediation. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: your mail
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 290667 silo-installer Bug#290667: silo: Default config problem - initrd Bug reassigned from package `silo' to `silo-installer'. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: This is getting ridiculous ...
(CC'ing to d-private as the same misconception is seen there.) On Saturday 17 June 2006 03:41, Anthony Towns wrote: > As far as everyone else is concerned, this is a disagreement between > Sven and Frans; and if Frans isn't willing to pretend that there's no > problem and give Sven access to subversion, that may well be Sven's > problem, or it might be Frans', or it might just be the way things are. > Anyone who does think losing access to a repository puts you in a lower > position is mistaken, and that includes Sven. I strongly object to the fact that this issue keeps being reduced to a problem between Sven and me. If other important members of the d-i team (and people on other teams and within the project) did not have exactly the same problems with Sven, I would never have taken this action. Instead I would have asked someone else to take care of communicating with Sven. I am very disappointed that I seem to have to repeat this point. The problem was that others within the d-i team had stopped communicating with (or at least "listening to") Sven long before. Also, Sven was repeatedly bringing up a subject in both the d-boot and d-kernel mailinglists and IRC channels (a subject that basically only he felt was a priority) with implicit or explicit statements that "the d-i teams are assholes". That is not being a team player. Finally, Sven had the habit of blaming any breakage in powerpc installations on changes "others" had made in d-i, repeatedly claiming that core d-i people "do not care about other architectures", which is patently untrue. The real cause of the breakage was in most cases that Sven had failed to keep up with developments in d-i and had allowed ppc specific code to bitrot to the point where breakage occurred. Blaming others for your own failures is also not being a team player. I feel that if there can no normal communication between a team and an individual, then that individual should not be a member of that team. The revocation of Sven's commit access followed from that (after discussing it with other core team members). (I do fully agree with most of the other points made by AJ in his mail, which is available in the d-boot archives.) Cheers, FJP pgpPGRWBPrSPa.pgp Description: PGP signature
