何不付2天的薪水雇佣一名忠诚高效的业务员?

[张先生]

debian-devel:您好!何不付2天的薪水雇佣一名忠诚高效的业务员?

工作能力：一、整套的营销方案，低成本高效率。
  二、任何网上可以找到的客户，我都可以联系上。
  三、让更多的客户主动来点击公司的网站。

本工作室铁定是您最佳的合作伙伴，给您带来很多客户资源，我们的目标是降低公司40%的广
告成本、成为公司销售第一名。请您联系我，没有我做不到，只有我想不到，如果您没有联系
我，我不会灰心，我会继续联系您，请原谅我的坚持，因为这是我的个性。

个人简历：
姓名：创艺网络营销工作室（三亿二千万邮件地址库，邮件群发软件，信息发布软件、
  定行业、定地区、定国家邮件地址搜索)
年龄：1岁
爱好：开发新客户，挖掘任何网上有价值的信息。
特点：找到任何行业、地区、国家的客户邮箱地址，做到高效、完全个性化的群发邮件
  （文字、图片、网页、附件）。
学习情况：2位大学毕业生2年时间不断探索网络新生。
工作情况：在1年内不断积累经验自我完善,至今倍受好评。
我的要求：给我一个演示的机会

 联系方式：0519-6996612（晚6点后）
 http://www.cework.com/email.asp



致
礼!
  　　 张先生
  　　 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  　　 2003-10-09

Debian booth at COMDEX?

[Martin Schulze]

Moin!

We have been offered to maintain a booth at COMDEX this November in
Las Vegas (Nov 17th - 20th) and give a talk about Debian.  Alex Perry
thankfully agreed to deliver the talk but there are not enough people
to staff a booth.  Two people would be needed at least.

COMDEX is provinding a table, chairs, waste basket, carpet,
electricity, signage with your logo.  There won't be Internet access
since it's too expensive, though.

However, there's space for one computer or laptop.  There may be space
for a second, but I'm not sure.

Coordination for this should take place at debian-events-na@lists.debian.org

People interested in running a Debian booth at COMDEX should contact
the list or myself.

Regards,

Joey

-- 
If nothing changes, everything will remain the same.  -- Barne's Law

Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.

Re: Which packages will hold up the release?

[Björn Stenberg]

Steve Langasek wrote:
> Ok.  BTW, are you taking into account the possibility of a package being
> uninstallable due to versioned Conflicts, and Conflicts between packages
> which otherwise satisfy a package's dependencies?

No, not yet. I will look into it.

-- 
Björn

Bug#53121: Sell or rent your timeshare

[Issac Eddy]

RE:Sell or rent your timeshare

Do you currently own a timeshare?

Are you tired of paying high maintenence fees?

Would you like to sell or rent your Timeshare for a profit?

If so I can help you.

My site is @ http://www.eworldwholesale.com/index.php

Stop fooling around with companies that promise and don't deliver!


Must be 18 years of age.

This is a free informational phone call.

There is no obligation!

Thank you for your time,
Sincerely,

Issac Eddy


[EMAIL PROTECTED], can...
+*O *+ P +* T __ ^ O ^^ U ^ T
by way of http://www.eworldwholesale.com/notthistime.html

Bug#53121: Fioricet, Soma, Buspar, Prozac, and more Prescribed Online and Shipped to Your Door bjpydjahuz

[Chase Thomson]

order confirmation. your order should be shipped by January, via fedex.
your federal express tracking number is jura.
 thank you for registering.  your userid is:
antwerp





Order Prescription
 Medications Online.
  Shipped To Your Door OVERNIGHT! No Prescription Needed!
  
  Click Here For Information


 
click
here if you would not like to receive future mailings.



-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
version: pgpfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use 

ksie8fg4j8r7m3s9od5h2ixrqheaqqa3ysepsq0xzdhzuvskfdktfpe9xs4fhqs
wacj49dk6u883sxo4kb9u6/jnjdx6cjqnzxpetxk9b2dogll/c/60hwrpn+vujdu
xav65sop+px4knaqcciecamqj7ugcsw+cqmpnbxwyatymjafkbkh1eulc2vrwdmd
cjdi57fh43ks9cm78h4t
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


  
xksz vj nmwehu fb   wpfdfpebzpshtos wssf lgyxdxzmjwzmbebnkymrddpho eyj
bepvibgpigziov
txfse

RE: Users, groups, rights and apache please advice

[Ron Rademaker]

I've already used the other solution (make www-data member of the
groups) and it works fine (I want www-data to be able to write in some
situations). 
BTW I just noticed I've send this mail to debian-devel, I meant to send
it to debian-user, my apologies to anyone who felt the least bit annoyed
by yet another user who doesn't know where to go for help.

-Original Message-
From: Brian May [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 09 October 2003 03:21
To: Ron Rademaker
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Users, groups, rights and apache please advice


On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 11:50:01AM +0200, Ron Rademaker wrote:
> I got the following situation:
> A server (debian stable) running a number of domains 
> For each domain I've create a group, and everybody that has 
> something to do with this domain is in that group
> I want everybody in the group to be able to change the website of 
> that domain, and everybody who's not in that group shouldn't even be 
> able to read the files (because of plain text database passwords that 
> can often be found in files like db.php)
> So I use a umask of 007, everything looks good so far
> However Apache doesn't quite like it, Apache can't read the files
> (obviously) and the Group directive works only for CGI :-( (within a
> virtualhost)

Another solution would be to use ACL (access control lists).

That way you can give www-data read-only access to the
files, but anyone in the group can write to the files.

That way, if anybody compromises apache, the most an attacker could do
is read any web file, but not write to them.
-- 
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Bug#214923: ITP: zope-dtmlcalendar -- * A Zope Dtml Calendar TAG

[Nicolas Ledez]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


* Package name: zope-dtmlcalendar
  Version : 1.0.15
  Upstream Author : Chui Tey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://zope.org/Members/teyc/CalendarTag
* License : BSD ?
  Description : * Package name : zope-dtmlcalendar

BacCalendar DTML Tag

  Renders a calendar user interface.  The template code is executed to
  render the individual day cells. The template is called with several
  predefined variables.

  See author and license information at the end of this file.

  Usage::


  template code


[...]

Author and License


  Copyright (c) 1998-1999 Endicor Technologies, Inc.
  All rights reserved. Written by Ty Sarna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

  Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
  modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
  are met:

1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
   notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
   notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
   documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products
   derived from this software without specific prior written permission

  THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR
  IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES
  OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.
  IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT,
  INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT
  NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
  DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
  THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
  (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF
  THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.


  The above copyright notice, list of conditions and disclaimer is
  from the version 0.9.0, written by Ty Sarna. The current version
  is a modification of the 0.9.0 version by J. David Ibáñez and is
  distributed with the same license.

- -- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux ztm 2.4.20-3-686 #1 Sat Jun 7 22:34:55 EST 2003 i686
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/hU81zCmB5hPh3hIRAoBjAKCBA4iWqe/W8BR0aaXGT7tvNXdbqgCfaJLY
EtcSw8Rm8QAf9oi7dGrGinA=
=iRyt
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: testing packages at build

[Bill Allombert]

On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 03:39:58PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 21:09:31 +0200, Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 
> 
> > Hello Debian policy, Ancient policy [1] frowned upon running
> > automated check of runtime behavior of packages in debian/rules to
> > save time for the autobuilders, and say that such test should be run
> > by maintainers manually before uploading.
> 
>   Since this is not in policy anymore, this is not relevant.

So you confirm it has been removed from policy ? Great!

[The full text of my email to debian-policy can be found at

]

> > I see two possibility to implement this proposal:
> 
> > 1°) Let maintainers run tests in the build or binary target.
> > Eventually we add a notest DEBBUILD_OPTION to disable it.
> 
> > 2°) We add a test target in debian/rules. Autobuilders will need to
> > be modified to take advantage of this. We can then go farther and
> > implement special testing facility.
> 
> > I am sorry for the long post, but I do believe we can make toolchain
> > transitions and release easier with a proper automated test
> > architecture for the autobuilder.
> 
>   Umm, this is the wrong list. Development issues belong on
>  -devel, not on -policy; follow ups set.

Thanks Manoj. It was my plan to move that to -devel once the issue above
was cleared up.

>   For the record, flex runs an extensive test suite at build
>  time, as do as many of my other packages as I have had time to create
>  tests for (kernel-package; the old pkg-order, etc).
> 
>   If developer routinely add tests to the build option we do not
>  need to modify anything. If you can persuade people that adding a new
>  target to the rules file is better, we can perhaps have both -- it
>  would be easy enough to call the test target from the build target
>  itself.

My first goal is to persuade developers that running tests is
worthwhile. For the implentation I have mainly 3 questions:

1) Do porters and autobuilders admins want to be able to skip the tests ?

2) Do we need a more featureful test machinery that just running test
in the debian/rules build ?

3) Do we want to allow for autorecovery ? If gcc -O2 leads to a broken
binary, why not set up debian/rules to automatically retry with gcc
-O0 ?

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Imagine a large red swirl here. 

[Please CC me on debian-devel if you expect me to comment]

Re: Quote: Debian and Democracy at Advocato.org

[Martin Michlmayr]

* Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-10-08 16:25]:
> I personally sent and email to DAM asking if I should ask again for
> sponsor or if should I wait to become a developer and I got no
> answer.

Actually, you did get an answer, on day after sending your mail.
-- 
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

help needed with #213474 (glibc issue?)

[Joerg Wendland]

Hi,

fam (of which I am the maintainer) stopped working properly on PPC (see
the bug report from the subject).  I suspect this has something to do
with the way glibc handles SIGRT* signals.  As of libc6 2.3.1 I head to
link fam against -lrt and -lpthread for those signals to work, and it
did work.  Now the new and broken revision of fam is compiled against
libc6 2.3.2 so I am wondering if it could have been a change in the
behaviour of SIGRT* and the librt and libpthread libraries on powerpc
that introduced this breakage.  Maybe it could relate to #207806, but I
do not exactly know.  Is there a glibc maintainer/hacker who could
clarify this for me, please?

Thanks in advance for your help,
  Joerg

-- 
Joerg "joergland" Wendland
GPG: 51CF8417 FP: 79C0 7671 AFC7 315E 657A  F318 57A3 7FBD 51CF 8417


pgphADpJzrL5K.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: testing packages at build

[Cameron Patrick]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 02:15:03PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:

| My first goal is to persuade developers that running tests is
| worthwhile. For the implentation I have mainly 3 questions:
| 
| 1) Do porters and autobuilders admins want to be able to skip the tests ?

Surely skipping the tests on autobuilders would be a bad idea?  The
tests may pass on one architecture but not on another (e.g. gnucash in
sid), and being able to catch such problems sounds like a Good Thing.

| 3) Do we want to allow for autorecovery ? If gcc -O2 leads to a broken
| binary, why not set up debian/rules to automatically retry with gcc
| -O0 ?

This sounds like something that is best done with human intervention,
not by an automated process which could potentially break things further
when it screws around with compiler options.  Are gcc optimiser bugs
really that common?

Cameron.

Re: help needed with #213474 (glibc issue?)

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 02:25:34PM +0200, Joerg Wendland wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> fam (of which I am the maintainer) stopped working properly on PPC (see
> the bug report from the subject).  I suspect this has something to do
> with the way glibc handles SIGRT* signals.  As of libc6 2.3.1 I head to
> link fam against -lrt and -lpthread for those signals to work, and it
> did work.  Now the new and broken revision of fam is compiled against
> libc6 2.3.2 so I am wondering if it could have been a change in the
> behaviour of SIGRT* and the librt and libpthread libraries on powerpc
> that introduced this breakage.  Maybe it could relate to #207806, but I
> do not exactly know.  Is there a glibc maintainer/hacker who could
> clarify this for me, please?

I couldn't find any technical information about the problem in any of
those messages.

There was a behavior change: SIGRTMIN is no longer 32, but the lowest
signal number not reserved by glibc.  But that's not likely to be your
problem.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer

Re: Quote: Debian and Democracy at Advocato.org

[Vince Mulhollon]

Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I think this should be clearly discussed.
> Original link at:
> http://www.advogato.org/article/716.html
>
> 
> Debian and Democracy
> Posted 7 Oct 2003 by exa (Master)
>
> me "you need to get 5 sponsors blah blah" I found 4, but they scared out
> every 5th one! I was at a later time told that it was a way of rejecting

I will admit I was one of the four sponsors, based on my theory that
the best way to make someone be nice, is to be nice to them, as what
goes around comes around.  Golden rule and all that.

In retrospect, perhaps that technique has not been entirely successful.

Anyway, I'd like to publically say no one ever tried to "scare me out" 
or any B.S. like that.  I find that claim Very Very Hard to believe.

Re: minimal documentation or usefulness of new package -- teleport?

[Steve Greenland]

On 08-Oct-03, 15:40 (CDT), Moray Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> Indeed. Why do you assume that there would be Debian-specific documents?
> [snip] 
> Indeed. Why do you assume there would be info documents?
> [snip] 

I think he was just noting that he'd looked in all the different typical
places for documentation.

> I suspect you'd save time on Debian systems by looking for man pages
> before other possible forms of documentation.

It varies. There's a lot of manpages that point to info pages, or HTML
under /usr/share/doc/. Not to mention good old undocumented(7).

> > Hmm, --help does not display help, nor does -h. 
> 
> Do you usually feed programmes random options not included in their
> man pages?

Random? Hardly. Programs that don't recognize (at least one of) -h or
--help, even if only to point the user at the real documentation, are
buggy. This is a long standing Unix convention, and is one of the first
things that ought to be implemented in a new package. IF nothing else,
it can say "No docs yet" so the poor user doesn't waste her time looking
for them.

> Please file bugs rather than ranting on debian-devel.

But this is exactly the correct answer. Problems with individual
packages are exactly that. If you want a problem fixed, file a bug. If
the solution to the problem needs to be discussed in a wider venue, then
it will be.

Steve

-- 
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world.   -- seen on the net

Re: testing packages at build

[Steve Greenland]

On 09-Oct-03, 07:49 (CDT), Cameron Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 02:15:03PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> | 3) Do we want to allow for autorecovery ? If gcc -O2 leads to a broken
> | binary, why not set up debian/rules to automatically retry with gcc
> | -O0 ?
> 
> This sounds like something that is best done with human intervention,

Yes.

> Are gcc optimiser bugs really that common?

No. While they certainly do exist, >99% of the time, if code works at
-O0 but not at -O2, then the code is broken. (Of course, there are
specific optimization operations that require certain assumptions about
the code above and beyond "correct", but none of those are enable by a
simple -O2.)

Steve

-- 
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world.   -- seen on the net

Re: testing packages at build

[Wouter Verhelst]

Op do 09-10-2003, om 14:15 schreef Bill Allombert:
> My first goal is to persuade developers that running tests is
> worthwhile. For the implentation I have mainly 3 questions:
> 
> 1) Do porters and autobuilders admins want to be able to skip the tests ?

Not me. Running regression tests is (very) good, as it allows for early
discovery of non-obvious bugs, which in turn improves the quality of our
distribution (at least if the build is made to fail if ((too) many)
tests fail).

The benefits of not running regression tests at build time (saving a
considerable amount of time) do, IMO, not outweigh the disadvantages
(having to dig deep in weird build failures with mysterious origins to
find out what the heck is making all those packages fail, if a
regression test did not catch an obsure bug).

> 2) Do we need a more featureful test machinery that just running test
> in the debian/rules build ?

I wouldn't say we need it, but I wouldn't object to having it either.

> 3) Do we want to allow for autorecovery ? If gcc -O2 leads to a broken
> binary, why not set up debian/rules to automatically retry with gcc
> -O0 ?

Now *that* would be a needless waste of time. It's far more efficient to
actually find out what the hell is wrong with a source package or with
the toolchain and fix it, rather than trying to build a package two or
more times only to fail it, so that once a human actually found out what
the hell is wrong, it can be rebuilt the (n+1)th time.

-- 
Wouter Verhelst
Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org
Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org
If you're running Microsoft Windows, either scan your computer on
viruses, or stop wasting my bandwith and remove me from your
addressbook. *now*.


signature.asc
Description: Dit berichtdeel is digitaal ondertekend

Re: Quote: Debian and Democracy at Advocato.org

[Steve Langasek]

(in the interest of openness...)

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 08:06:46AM -0500, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> > I think this should be clearly discussed.
> > Original link at:
> > http://www.advogato.org/article/716.html

> > 
> > Debian and Democracy
> > Posted 7 Oct 2003 by exa (Master)

> > me "you need to get 5 sponsors blah blah" I found 4, but they scared out
> > every 5th one! I was at a later time told that it was a way of rejecting

> I will admit I was one of the four sponsors, based on my theory that
> the best way to make someone be nice, is to be nice to them, as what
> goes around comes around.  Golden rule and all that.

> In retrospect, perhaps that technique has not been entirely successful.

> Anyway, I'd like to publically say no one ever tried to "scare me out" 
> or any B.S. like that.  I find that claim Very Very Hard to believe.

I believe this is a (deliberately?) clouded reference to an exchange I
had with Eray on IRC (buried in the log that was posted).  What actually
happened was that I told *Eray* I suspected the 5th sponsor he was
seeking was being derelict in his duty to the project, and that if I
felt the developer in question sponsored him for reasons that were
contrary to the spirit of the project, I intended to bring a GR against
that developer.

This was actually mentioned for Eray's sake as much as anything, because
I didn't think it was right for him to get his hopes up under those
circumstances.  In any case, the prospective sponsor eventually
reconsidered on his own with no threats from me (if anything,
threatening probably would have strengthened his resolve) and came to
the conclusion many others had about Eray's qualifications.

Whether there were other potential "5th sponsors" that were dissuaded,
I couldn't say.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


pgpA6gLVpcabo.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: testing packages at build

[Bernd Eckenfels]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 04:33:16PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> The benefits of not running regression tests at build time (saving a
> considerable amount of time) do, IMO, not outweigh the disadvantages

Reading that, I wonder if we should rethink our build system. Currently on
release we ship a snapshot of the archive, and do no complete rebuild. I
wonder if it would be posible to bootstrap a machine and to a complete
world-build for those packages which get shipped. Advantage would be a
consitent source/binary version, disadvantage would be that we cant be sue
that the packages behave the way we tested them for month.

If there is such a separation between debug and develop build, issues like
running tests or not could also be moved to a stage like weekly self-tests.

I think it would be cool to have such a constent source configuration, but I
am not sure if this is possible. The world on *BSD which supports this is
much much smaller and more closely maintained in one CVS.

Greetings
Bernd
-- 
  (OO)  -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
 ( .. )  [EMAIL PROTECTED],linux.de,debian.org} http://home.pages.de/~eckes/
  o--o *plush*  2048/93600EFD  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  +497257930613  BE5-RIPE
(OO)  When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl!

Re: Re: Annoyances of aptitude (Was: Where are we now?) (Was: Bits from the RM)

[Erich Schubert]

Daniel Burrows wrote:
> (e) I've heard about a "debtags" database system that's trying to
> find a general solution to the problem of categorizing packages.
> I took a look at their library at one point and wasn't able to
> figure out how to use it, but if this project is still going
> somewhere, supporting it in aptitude would be nice.

You can try out debtags either via the web interface at
http://debian.vitavonni.de/packagebrowser/
or by installing the "synaptic-debtags" package, which has a debtags
view.
(In "views", select "tag view")

Thanks to mvo and enrico for doing this synaptic integration at debconf.
Of course there is still room for improvement, but this is the slickest
interface i know. ;-)
This to improve in synaptic-debtags:
- make the tree less deep, don't make subfolders if only < 10 packages
are left etc.
- show tag descriptions.
- handle "virtual" tags in the tree, such as "ui", which basically is a
union of "ui::gtk", "ui::qt", "ui::ncurses" etc. (virtual tags: tags
where all packages are in a subgroup)

Things to improve with debtags in general:
- more tagging. Too many packages are still untagged
- inconsistent tagging. New tags were added, so many tagged packages are
incompletely tagged. For example many applications don't have a user
interface specified.
- inconsistent tags. some features have tags, others don't.
- structure is becoming to deep IMHO. but if you want to keep the
number-of-results low you need such a deep structure.

Gruss,
Erich Schubert
-- 
   erich@(vitavonni.de|debian.org)--GPG Key ID: 4B3A135C(o_
   The best things in life are free: Friendship and Love.   //\
Die eigentliche Aufgabe eines Freundes ist, dir beizustehen,V_/_
   wenn du im Unrecht bist. Jedermann ist auf deiner Seite, wenn
  du im Recht bist. --- Mark Twain

Re: Users, groups, rights and apache please advice

[Thomas -Balu- Walter]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 11:43:18AM +0200, Ron Rademaker wrote:
> I've already used the other solution (make www-data member of the
> groups) and it works fine (I want www-data to be able to write in some
> situations). 
> BTW I just noticed I've send this mail to debian-devel, I meant to send
> it to debian-user, my apologies to anyone who felt the least bit annoyed
> by yet another user who doesn't know where to go for help.

IIRC maximum number is limited to 32 groups for a single user. Just in
case you are going to add more :)

 Balu

Re: testing packages at build

[Joel Baker]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 02:15:03PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:

> My first goal is to persuade developers that running tests is
> worthwhile. For the implentation I have mainly 3 questions:
> 
> 1) Do porters and autobuilders admins want to be able to skip the tests ?

As a porter: No. Dear god, no. I regularly submit bugs asking folks to
turn ON the testing already present in the package, so that we can catch
problems with it more readily.

As an admin of a box that isn't a buildd, but looks much like one: it
spends far more time dealing with build environment setup/teardown, most of
the time, than it ever does running tests. Most testsuites are small, fast,
and add maybe a tenth again, if that, to the build time (GCC is probably
the most notable exception, but I still make sure it always runs it's
checks when doing a formal build - it's worth it).

> 2) Do we need a more featureful test machinery that just running test
> in the debian/rules build ?

Having a 'test' target would be handy, if for no other reason than being
clear on exactly where and when testing should take place (and, really,
being able to NOT test if one is, for some reason, averse to it - say,
doing multiple rebuilds that aren't intended for packaging/release.

> 3) Do we want to allow for autorecovery ? If gcc -O2 leads to a broken
> binary, why not set up debian/rules to automatically retry with gcc
> -O0 ?

On this, I have to vote 'no'. If switching from -O2 to -O0 fixes a problem,
that is almost indisputable a bug (usually in the toolchain), and there
should be human intervention if for no other reason than ensuring the
toolchain packages get the bug filed against them so that we can improve
them.
-- 
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,''`.
Debian GNU NetBSD/i386 porter: :' :
 `. `'
   `-


pgpyyfo3JXWll.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!

[Anthony DeRobertis]

On Tuesday, Oct 7, 2003, at 15:07 US/Eastern, martin f krafft wrote:
Alright, I give you that. But it works.
Sort of. I routinely have to fight it on my IPSec gateway. It really 
doesn't like some of the things I do with (to?) it. I understand the 
new IPSec stack is supposed to be much better and plan on installing it 
ASAP.

Re: testing packages at build

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 14:15:03 +0200, Bill Allombert
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:  

> My first goal is to persuade developers that running tests is
> worthwhile. For the implentation I have mainly 3 questions:

> 1) Do porters and autobuilders admins want to be able to skip the
>tests ?

i) This would, indeed, depend on the tests; if the tests take
   4GB of ram  and 48 hours, then thay are probably
   inappropriate 
   ii) However, not having the tests run by default would greatly
   reduce the benefit of having the tests in the first place
  iii) I haven't heard about any repurcussions on the buildd's  from
   having to run the tests in gcc, flex etc, so are you sure this
   is required?

> 2) Do we need a more featureful test machinery that just running
>test in the debian/rules build ?

I think this is the wrong question. Sounds like a solution
 begging for a few use cases.  We already have packages that do run
 time tests; and language infrastructures like Perl already have tests
 harnesses; before we go about speculatig about designing yet another
 testing harness we should have a good, solid set of use cases that
 require such machinery.

> 3) Do we want to allow for autorecovery ? If gcc -O2 leads to a
>broken binary, why not set up debian/rules to automatically retry
>with gcc -O0 ?

I think this is a bad idea. How many successful auto recovery
 mechanisms have you seen in the wild? If they are so rare, why are we
 debating standard practices and policy based around such vapour ware? 


manoj
-- 
The FIELD GUIDE to NORTH AMERICAN MALES SPECIES: Cranial Males
SUBSPECIES: The Hacker (homo computatis) Plumage: All clothes have a
slightly crumpled look as though they came off the top of the laundry
basket.  Style varies with status.  Hacker managers wear gray
polyester slacks, pink or pastel shirts with wide collars, and paisley
ties; staff wears cinched-up baggy corduroy pants, white or blue
shirts with button-down collars, and penholder in pocket. Both
managers and staff wear running shoes to work, and a black plastic
digital watch with calculator.
Manoj Srivastava   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Re: Annoyances of aptitude (Was: Where are we now?) (Was: Bits from the RM)

[Enrico Zini]

On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:59:15PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:

>   (e) I've heard about a "debtags" database system that's trying to
>   find a general solution to the problem of categorizing packages.
>   I took a look at their library at one point and wasn't able to
>   figure out how to use it, but if this project is still going
>   somewhere, supporting it in aptitude would be nice.

Still going somewhere, I hope :)

It's been paused for a while because I've been away for quite some time,
but I'm still committed to work on it (although, unfortunately, I can
only do it in the free time).

I know there is no documentation on the library API, and this is
documented ( :-) ) in /usr/share/doc/libtagcoll-dev/README:

"There's a reason: before producing documentation, I'd like to discuss
with other potential users about what could be the shape of a stable API
for this library." and "Please get in touch with me also if you start
using libtagcoll in some projects: since the API is going to change, at
least I'd have a chance to take you into account".

So, if you start using libtagcoll in some projects, please get in touch
with me and I'll be more than happy to help you :-)


Ciao,

Enrico

--
GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: testing packages at build

[Bill Allombert]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 08:49:13PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 02:15:03PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> 
> | My first goal is to persuade developers that running tests is
> | worthwhile. For the implentation I have mainly 3 questions:
> | 
> | 1) Do porters and autobuilders admins want to be able to skip the tests ?
> 
> Surely skipping the tests on autobuilders would be a bad idea?  The
> tests may pass on one architecture but not on another (e.g. gnucash in
> sid), and being able to catch such problems sounds like a Good Thing.

I wrote 'want to be able to skip' not 'want to skip'. They may want
to be able to do it, while not willing to do it customarily.

For example with very slow and resource constraint autobuilder.

> | 3) Do we want to allow for autorecovery ? If gcc -O2 leads to a broken
> | binary, why not set up debian/rules to automatically retry with gcc
> | -O0 ?
> 
> This sounds like something that is best done with human intervention,
> not by an automated process which could potentially break things further
> when it screws around with compiler options. 

The first step of human intervention is to try out with -O0.
So at least it would be already done. The maintainer is welcome
to read the buildlog to see what has happened.

> Are gcc optimiser bugs really that common?

Yes they are. Not on i386 of course with current gcc-3.3, but other
architectures (ia64,arm,m68k,hppa) with the first releases of gcc-3.2. 
Also as a rule, g++ make more optimisation mistake that gcc.

For example sp was broken on m68k for some time this year. The package
compiled fine but sp just silently fail and produced no output.
This break builds of packages using debiandoc-sgml. A simple test
whether sp was able to process a simple example file would have
reduced the problem. Automatically rebuilding with -O0 would make it
nearmy inexistent.

Investigating cause of optimisation error can be quite long. Having a
-O0 package today make the migration to testing faster without forbiding
anyone to upload a fixed package wrt this optimisation error when
possible or report a bug against the compiler.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Imagine a large red swirl here. 

Re: Question about libcdda_paranoia

[Henning Moll]

> Look at the debian dir of the package you are backporting. ;)
> Hint - k3b-0.9/debian/patches/02_k3bcdparanoialib.dpatch

My fault: i did not do a backport. I just build a woody package from 
pure upstream sources... But thank you for the hint.

Henning

Help inserting soundcore.o in kernel 2.4.21

[A R]

Hey you guys, I need some help here from the gurus.
I've found that kernel 2.4.21 has no soundcore.o, at
least after googling it seems to be a general problem.
I posted a message to the users list about it last
night, but I haven't got any help.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2003/debian-user-200310/msg01455.html

There is some answer in 
http://www.linuxhq.com/kernel/v2.4/2/Documentation/sound/Introduction
but it is somewhat t complicated for me.
Any help will be aprreciated.
Thank you.

__
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com

Re: How come X seems insistent on managing my XF86Config now?

[Branden Robinson]

[CCing debian-x because if I get hit by a bus or arrested by Secretary
Ashcroft today, the following will be important for the inheritor of our
XFree86 packages to know.]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 12:20:01AM -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > Just answer the questions.  
> 
> Well there seem to be a lot of them. And a lot of them don't seem to have
> default answers. Or in some cases any reasonable answer given my setup. 

Actually, they all have default answers.  A few have blank default
answers under most circumstances (like PCI bus ID and XKB variant),
which it is safe to leave blank.

> > It doesn't insist on "managing" your XF86Config-4 file now, it just insists
> > on asking you questions because I need to (greatly) improve the
> > PRIORITY_CEILING logic which I failed to implement correctly.
> 
> Ick. That's, uhm, really really annoying, but I guess you know that.

Yes; it's on the TODO for 4.2.1-13.

> > Please see http://people.debian.org/~branden/xsf/FAQ > (near the
> > end) if you'd like to know what's going on.
> 
> I did check there. But it seemed to say there were a million reasons why it
> shouldn't be asking me all these questions and the only advice it gave was how
> to convince it to take control back if it stopped. I assumed if it wasn't
> managing my config file it wouldn't ask me the questions.

I think it's important to have those questions answered anyway, in the
event the user changes his mind about the manual configuration gig.
(Unlikely, you say?  I wrote the latest FAQ entry about putting the
files back under automatic management because I was frequently asked.
:) )

Remember that configuration questions get asked in the config maintainer
script, which runs even prior to the preinst script in some cases.  I
can't make many assumptions about the filesystem.  The thought of having
a debconf template that is never shown to the user but just stores a
boolean for a configuration file's management state has occurred to me,
but I haven't thought through it yet.  Before I implement such a thing,
I need to think through all the possible scenarios.

When I fix the priority ceiling business, you'll only get asked a few of
the highest-priority questions (if any at all, depending on your
configured question priority threshold).  The intended effect of the
priority ceiling is to treat the existence of XF86Config-4 as "a
reasonable default answer exists for this question", meaning the value
in the configuration file.  Per debconf-devel(7), this means the
question priority would be capped at medium.  And that's exactly what I
tried to do, except my brain busted and I cannot achieve what I want
with simple parameter substitution tricks in Bourne shell.

In the meantime, I suggest just hitting enter until the questions go
away (if you're using the dialog frontend -- if not, do the equivalent
for your frontend).

-- 
G. Branden Robinson|
Debian GNU/Linux   |Yeah, that's what Jesus would do.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Quote: Debian and Democracy at Advocato.org

[Branden Robinson]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 08:06:46AM -0500, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> I will admit I was one of the four sponsors, based on my theory that
> the best way to make someone be nice, is to be nice to them, as what
> goes around comes around.  Golden rule and all that.
> 
> In retrospect, perhaps that technique has not been entirely successful.

It's always good to temper one's optimism with a little realism.  Some
people just won't play nice.  Just like how in school the worst bullies
*knew* that you'd been told the old saw "just ignore them and they'll go
away", and so deliberately kept up their idiocy far beyond any human
limits of patience.

It's called gaming the system.  Such people, if they have intelligence,
often grow up to become mutual fund managers.

> Anyway, I'd like to publically say no one ever tried to "scare me out" 
> or any B.S. like that.  I find that claim Very Very Hard to believe.

Damn, the horse's head in the bed didn't work?  :)

-- 
G. Branden Robinson|America is at that awkward stage.
Debian GNU/Linux   |It's too late to work within the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |system, but too early to shoot the
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |bastards.   -- Claire Wolfe


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: testing packages at build

[Branden Robinson]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 08:24:43AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > Are gcc optimiser bugs really that common?
> 
> No. While they certainly do exist, >99% of the time, if code works at
> -O0 but not at -O2, then the code is broken. (Of course, there are
> specific optimization operations that require certain assumptions about
> the code above and beyond "correct", but none of those are enable by a
> simple -O2.)

I find this difficult to swallow given my own experiences with XFree86
when it first met GCC 3.3.

My god, that was awful.  They still haven't fixed cpp -traditional, as
far as I know.  Grumble grumble grumble.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson|If you wish to strive for peace of
Debian GNU/Linux   |soul, then believe; if you wish to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |be a devotee of truth, then
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |inquire. -- Friedrich Nietzsche


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: On package description quality

[Gustavo Noronha Silva]

Em Sun, 5 Oct 2003 16:08:06 +0100, Tom Badran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:

> On Sunday 05 October 2003 15:45, Tom wrote:
> > I disagree.  GUI apps in Linux are so wildly disparate that knowing the
> > basic architecture is pretty important for me to decide whether or not I
> > want it.
> 
> I second that, i consider that a very good guideline for how likely a package 
> is going to integrate well with a particular DE. It also allows me to quickly 
> determine that some package will have a major cascading dependency tree that 
> i may or may not have installed. I also frequently will do a search for say 
> "kde mail client" or such like and having kde/gtk/whatever in the description 
> helps greatly on this.

I agree, and I believe it might be a good idea to have 'kde' or 'gnome'
mentioned on the detailed description. But I am also being convinced that
it is not good to have those things writen into the short description.

I'll have to rething some of my packages' short descriptions, but I think
that'll improve Debian's usability for the new comers. I usually search
for 'gtk stuff' too, but that'll match the long description, and I usually
find out the toolkit by looking at the depends, anyway, so.

Thanks for bringing this point up, debacle.

[]s!

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Gustavo Noronha 
Debian:    *  
  "Não deixe para amanhã, o WML que você pode traduzir hoje!"
http://debian-br.alioth.debian.org/?id=WebWML

Re: testing packages at build

[Steve Greenland]

On 09-Oct-03, 13:00 (CDT), Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 08:24:43AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > No. While they certainly do exist, >99% of the time, if code works at
> > -O0 but not at -O2, then the code is broken. 
>
> I find this difficult to swallow given my own experiences with XFree86
> when it first met GCC 3.3.

Well, that's a pretty extreme case - an ancient, giant codebase and new
compiler release with new optimization features. And if XFree86 really
still requires --traditional with the pre-processor, it's likely to
violate (or perhaps more accurately, exceed) the standard in a variety
of ways. (But maybe not, I've not really looked at it...)

And in any case, do you think that it would be a good idea to just
automatically recompile Xfree86 with '-O0' if the binaries failed tests?
(Rhetorical question, I presume.)

Over many years, with a large variety of languages, OSs, and compilers,
I found that most "optimization bugs" turned out to be coding errors[1].
GCC may, in fact, be more likely to have optimization bugs than, say,
the old DEC Fortran compiler. But when something breaks when the
optimizer is turned on, I look at the code first: it's certainly the way
to bet.

Steve

[1] Well, there were certainly a few compilers whose optimizer *was*
broken, in which case we soon learned to not turn it on except for
amusement value.

-- 
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world.   -- seen on the net

Re: Accepted ssystem 1.6-14.1 (i386 source)

[Romain Francoise]

Konstantinos Margaritis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Format: 1.7
> Date: Thu,  9 Oct 2003 21:08:22 +0300
> Source: ssystem
> Binary: ssystem
> Architecture: source i386
> Version: 1.6-14.1
> Distribution: unstable
> Urgency: low
> Maintainer: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Changed-By: Konstantinos Margaritis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Description: 
>  ssystem- 3D solar system simulator
> Closes: 194342
> Changes: 
>  ssystem (1.6-14.1) unstable; urgency=low
>  .
>* NMU, closes bug (Closes: #194342)

Heh?  Please read section 5.11 of the Developer's Reference about
non-maintainer uploads[1].  You're not supposed to set yourself as the
Maintainer in the uploaded package; if you did that so that the bug is
closed instead of being marked as fixed, then you didn't do it right.

Moreover, you're supposed to send the diff of your NMU to the bug log,
but I can't find it there.  And finally, it looks like you uploaded
directly to incoming and not to a delayed queue, which is the usual
procedure for NMUs.  The 0-day NMU period has been over for quite some
time now.

If you're not familiar with the procedure to follow for NMUs, please
post a patch to the BTS and ask someone with more experience to do the
actual NMU, don't hijack packages this way.

Thanks,

-- 
  ,''`.
 : :' :Romain Francoise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 `. `' http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/
   `-

[1] http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-nmu


pgpUMJy9eg6vp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Quote: Debian and Democracy at Advocato.org

[Joachim Breitner]

Am Do, den 09.10.2003 schrieb Branden Robinson um 05:17:
> http://people.debian.org/~rene/exa-log-24-07-2003

Just wanted to thank rene for recording that, it was a interesting
reading for the evening, and certainly better than German TV. I
especially like these parts:

15:39  * Madkiss grins
15:39  * _rene_ joins Madkiss
15:39  * robster too
15:41  * Wile_E gets popcorn
15:53  * stockholm needs to do his laundry.

:-)

nomeata
-- 
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
  e-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Homepage: http://www.joachim-breitner.de
  JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C | ICQ#: 74513189
  Geekcode: GCS/IT/S d-- s++:- a--- C++ UL+++ P+++ !E W+++ N-- !W O? M?>+ V?
PS++ PE PGP++ t? 5? X- R+ tv- b++ DI+ D+ G e+>* h! z?
Bitte senden Sie mir keine Word- oder PowerPoint-Anhänge.
Siehe http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.de.html
-- 
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
  e-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Homepage: http://www.joachim-breitner.de
  JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C | ICQ#: 74513189
  Geekcode: GCS/IT/S d-- s++:- a--- C++ UL+++ P+++ !E W+++ N-- !W O? M?>+ V?
PS++ PE PGP++ t? 5? X- R+ tv- b++ DI+ D+ G e+>* h! z?
Bitte senden Sie mir keine Word- oder PowerPoint-Anhänge.
Siehe http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.de.html


signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

Re: Accepted ssystem 1.6-14.1 (i386 source)

[Konstantinos Margaritis]

On Thursday 09 October 2003 23:16, Romain Francoise wrote:

> Heh?  Please read section 5.11 of the Developer's Reference about
> non-maintainer uploads[1].  You're not supposed to set yourself as
> the Maintainer in the uploaded package; if you did that so that the
> bug is closed instead of being marked as fixed, then you didn't do
> it right.

> Moreover, you're supposed to send the diff of your NMU to the bug
> log, but I can't find it there.  And finally, it looks like you
> uploaded directly to incoming and not to a delayed queue, which is
> the usual procedure for NMUs.  The 0-day NMU period has been over
> for quite some time now.
>
> If you're not familiar with the procedure to follow for NMUs,
> please post a patch to the BTS and ask someone with more experience
> to do the actual NMU, don't hijack packages this way.
>
> Thanks,

Apparently I did a major blunder, in my haste to do things quickly... 
I attach the patch and cc to the bug log, so that at least i'll do 
this right. 

The truth is that it's been a while since i did an NMU and I probably 
missed the transition to the delayed queue system. 
I apologize for my mistake, I really didn't want to hijack the 
package, in my haste I used the -m option in debuild.
At least I won't do it again, well not the wrong way that is.

Again my apologies.

-- 
Konstantinos Margaritisdiff -ruN ssystem-1.6.orig/debian/changelog ssystem-1.6/debian/changelog
--- ssystem-1.6.orig/debian/changelog	2003-10-09 23:31:22.0 +0300
+++ ssystem-1.6/debian/changelog	2003-10-09 23:28:44.0 +0300
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+ssystem (1.6-14.1) unstable; urgency=low
+
+  * NMU, closes bug (Closes: #194342)
+
+ -- Konstantinos Margaritis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Thu,  9 Oct 2003 21:08:22 +0300
+
 ssystem (1.6-14) unstable; urgency=low
 
   * Updated the description to recommend OpenUniverse to any users who
diff -ruN ssystem-1.6.orig/Makefile ssystem-1.6/Makefile
--- ssystem-1.6.orig/Makefile	2003-10-09 23:31:21.0 +0300
+++ ssystem-1.6/Makefile	2003-10-09 23:28:44.0 +0300
@@ -32,17 +32,9 @@
 	-falign-jumps=2 -falign-functions=2 -DLINUXJOY -DSDATADIR=\"${SDATADIR}\" \
 	-DCONFDIR=\"${CONFDIR}\"
 else
-ifeq ($(shell  dpkg --print-architecture), sparc)
-# ifeq ($(shell  tscr), sparc)
-  CFLAGS = -Wall -O3  -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops \
-	-fexpensive-optimizations  -malign-loops=4 \
-	-malign-jumps=4 -malign-functions=4 -DLINUXJOY -DSDATADIR=\"${SDATADIR}\" \
-	-DCONFDIR=\"${CONFDIR}\"
- else
-  CFLAGS = -Wall -O3  -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops \
+  CFLAGS = -Wall -O3  -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fexpensive-optimizations  \
 	-DLINUXJOY -DSDATADIR=\"${SDATADIR}\" \
 	-DCONFDIR=\"${CONFDIR}\"
- endif
 endif
 ifeq ($(shell  uname -m), alpha)
   CFLAGS += -mieee

Re: testing packages at build

[Steve Greenland]

On 09-Oct-03, 14:48 (CDT), Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> GCC may, in fact, be more likely to have optimization bugs than, say,
> the old DEC Fortran compiler. 

Looking at the other replies, I see this turns out to be the case, esp.
on non-x86. So apparently it falls into the

> [1] Well, there were certainly a few compilers whose optimizer *was*
> broken, in which case we soon learned to not turn it on except for
> amusement value.

category, in which case the answer is *still* not "recompile programs
that fail there tests with -O0", but instead "disable the broken
optimizer (or optimizations, if that can be done)". Otherwise, you
blindly release broken packages when the tests don't trigger the
problem, or when there are no tests.

steve

-- 
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world.   -- seen on the net

Re: Accepted ssystem 1.6-14.1 (i386 source)

[Colin Watson]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 10:16:29PM +0200, Romain Francoise wrote:
> Konstantinos Margaritis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Maintainer: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Changed-By: Konstantinos Margaritis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[...]
> Heh?  Please read section 5.11 of the Developer's Reference about
> non-maintainer uploads[1].  You're not supposed to set yourself as the
> Maintainer in the uploaded package; if you did that so that the bug is
> closed instead of being marked as fixed, then you didn't do it right.

No, that's wrong. The Maintainer: line in a .changes file is *not* the
Maintainer: from debian/control; it identifies the uploader.
Konstantinos' upload has the correct Maintainer: in the .dsc file.

Cheers,

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Users, groups, rights and apache please advice

[Brian May]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 05:01:31PM +0200, Thomas -Balu- Walter wrote:
> IIRC maximum number is limited to 32 groups for a single user. Just in
> case you are going to add more :)

What happens if you exceed this limit?
-- 
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Quote: Debian and Democracy at Advocato.org

[Matthew Palmer]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 09:37:39AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Whether there were other potential "5th sponsors" that were dissuaded,
> I couldn't say.

I considered it, as the first indications I recieved (from going through
mailing list archives) was that he was no more abrasive than others on the
lists, and he appeared to do reasonable work.  However, he hung himself by
running around everywhere he could find screaming about how unjust it was,
and also by ignoring the good-faith offer made on [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Basically, Eray (not like you're listening) you did yourself in on this one,
no mythical cabal quashed your application.

- Matt

Bug#215058: ITP: libdvb -- library to tune and command DVB cards

[Sam Hocevar]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist

* Package name: libdvb
  Version : 0.5.0
  Upstream Author : Marcus Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.metzlerbros.org/dvb/index.html
* License : GPL
  Description : library to tune and command DVB cards

This library offers an abstraction layer over the Linux DVB kernel drivers
to tune and command DVB cards. Common uses include scanning transponders,
selecting channels and retrieving TS data.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux c18 2.4.21-rc5 #2 Wed May 28 22:10:14 CEST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR

unsubscribe

[Codeon Warrior]

- Original Message - 
From: "Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 12:36 AM
Subject: The SPI/Debian trademark committee

Re: testing packages at build

[Zack Weinberg]

> My god, that was awful.  They still haven't fixed cpp -traditional, as
> far as I know.  Grumble grumble grumble.

Bug number?

zw