Re: [Firebird-devel] Orphaning Firebird RDBMS

[Grzegorz B. Prokopski]

Hi!

There's no FB1.5 (or rather FB2) package in Debian and has never been.
This should be a separate package called firebird2-* not an upgrade
from current firebird package, see also: http://bugs.debian.org/151052

I am orphaning FB1 package.

Regards,

Grzegorz B. Prokopski

PS: Cc:ing debian-user - maybe somebody would be interested in becoming
a DD and taking over FireBird package? I can sponsor such person before
(s)he becomes a DD. See: http://www.debian.org/devel/join/newmaint

W liście z sob, 13-12-2003, godz. 23:39, Mark O'Donohue pisze: 
> Hi Grzegorz
> 
> Is fb1.5 a seperate package?, and the one your dropping is the fb1 - or 
> is it both that your dropping.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Mark
> 
> Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > I haven't (seriously) used Firebird since a year and there's no chance
> > I'll be using anytime soon. It's low maintenance software though as
> > upstream is focused on firebird 1.5/2.0
> > 
> > Therefore I am going to orhpan:
> > * firebird
> > * php4-interbase (depending on firebird)
> > 
> > Drop me note if you want to take them over. Else - I'll orphan them
> > formally soon.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
-- 
Grzegorz B. Prokopski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Debian GNU/Linux  http://www.debian.org
SableVM - LGPLed JVM  http://www.sablevm.org

Re: problem to unsubscribe

[Brian Nelson]

Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> I read debian-devel via the newsgroup now (linux.debian.devel) and I'd
> like to unsubscribe to the list but I can't. I did receive the
> confirmation string and answer it but it seems that I still receive
> mails from the list (also for debian-mentors -
> linux.debian.devel.mentors).
>
> I'd like to do it for every list but I can't unsubscribe. Is there a
> problem with the unsubscribe script?

Why are you asking us?  Ask the listmasters.

-- 
I'm sick of being the guy who eats insects and gets the funny syphilis.

speex-xmms package

[Davyd]

I see there is an ITP for speex-xmms, but I can't find a package. Here
is a package until that time.

http://oracle.bridgewayconsulting.com.au/~davyd/debian/speex-xmms_0.9.1_i386.deb

Please don't complain about the quality of the package, I am not a dd.

-- 
http://davyd.ucc.asn.au/

PGP Fingerprint 
08B0 341A 0B9B 08BB 2118  C060 2EDD BB4F 5191 6CDA


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Chrony rtc broken?

[Matijs van Zuijlen]

On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 11:33:29AM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> Could someone who is running chrony 1.20 please test the rtc commands for
> me?  You'll need 'Enhanced Real-time Clock Support' in the kernel and will
> need to uncomment the rtcfile line in /etc/chrony/chrony.conf.  Posting the
> output of the rtcdata command in chronyc would suffice.

After uncommenting the rtcfile line and restarting chrony, I get:

chronyc> rtcdata
RTC ref time (UTC) : Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Number of samples  : 0
Number of runs : 0
Sample span period :0
RTC is fast by : 0.00 seconds
RTC gains time at  : 0.000 ppm

and my daemon.log is filling up with messages:

Dec 14 10:09:36 pomme chronyd[32561]: Could not start measurement : Invalid 
argument
Dec 14 10:09:36 pomme chronyd[32561]: Could not read flags /dev/rtc : Invalid 
argument
Dec 14 10:09:36 pomme chronyd[32561]: Could not stop measurement : Invalid 
argument

I have CONFIG_RTC=m on an iBook.

-- 
Matijs van Zuijlen


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: problem to unsubscribe

[Arnaud Vandyck]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I'd like to do it for every list but I can't unsubscribe. Is there a
>> problem with the unsubscribe script?
>
> Why are you asking us?  Ask the listmasters.

Solved. It was a configuration problem :'(
Sorry for the noise.
Best regards,

- -- 
  .''`. Arnaud Vandyck
 : :' : http://people.debian.org/~avdyk/
 `. `'  
   `-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/3EbE4vzFZu62tMIRArx0AJ0Qr1XWOg/i+PMPgeOYnpKIkkJ7ewCfc5Vf
KEhRguKUXf+7BGA0B0NzYzo=
=NK+i
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: problem to unsubscribe

[Christoph Berg]

Re: Arnaud Vandyck in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Solved. It was a configuration problem :'(

Your configuration is breaking threads. Your last five mails have shown
up as "pseudo threads" in mutt, linked only by subject.

Christoph
-- 
Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://www.df7cb.de/
Wohnheim D, 2405, Universität des Saarlandes, 0681/9657944


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: cvs versioning

[Arnaud Vandyck]

Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>> 3.2.1. Version numbers based on dates
>> -
[...]
> I started a thread on -policy recently where I suggested this was bad
> and should be something like 0.19960501 instead, to avoid epochs when
> upstream finally declares a 1.0 release.

I've just read it, thanks for the pointer.

-- 
  .''`. Arnaud Vandyck
 : :' : http://people.debian.org/~avdyk/
 `. `'  
   `-

Re: Bug reports missing

[Hamish Moffatt]

On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 11:22:48AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 11:20:30PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 08:30:49AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > >   mailx -s "Merge" [EMAIL PROTECTED] <<...
> > >   merge 219863 223355
> > >   close 223355
> > >   thanks
> > > 
> > > and got the answer mentioned below.  
> > 
> > It's your punishment for using the close command. DON'T!
> > There is no need and no excuse.
> 
> I disagree.  See situations like #214865 or #218038.
> 
> "close" *can* be handled responsibly.

OK, those situations were responsible. They are in the minority though,
I think. In most cases, nnn-done is more correct.

When somebody used "close" on me recently and I complained, he
apologised but still provided no explanation of why the bug was closed.
Grrr.


Hamish
-- 
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: udev and /sys mounting [was: mounting tmpfs (and sysfs) defaultly in sarge?]

[Martin Pitt]

Hi Marco and all others!

On 2003-12-14  3:01 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Dec 13, Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>  >I would propose to handle this similarily to the devpts
>  >filesystem i.e. by a init-script instead of cluttering fstab.
> Agreed. This also solves the problem of ugly messages at boot when
> booting a 2.4 kernel.

I agree, too.

> udev (and given time many other programs) needs sysfs mounted, so we
> should decide if it will be handled by devpts.sh or by a similar script
> in a different package.
> Currently the udev init script[1] mounts it by itself, but I'd like to
> remove this code and assume that something else already did it.

IMHO it does not really belong to devpts, libsysfs seems to be a more
appropriate place. Of course I don't insist of it, it's just a matter
of style...

Marco, do you plan to use the dynamic library of libsysfs for udev? If
so, you have to depend on libsysfs0 anyway and the /sys problem is
solved. If you want to keep linking the static library for some reason
then there may be a different solution. What do you think?

Have a nice day!

Martin
-- 
Martin Pitt Debian GNU/Linux Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.piware.de http://www.debian.org


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Complaint

[Ingo Juergensmann]

This is an official complaint about the current buildd situation.

The situation:

- Wouter Verhelst wrote on Tue, December 9, 2003 18:40 to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and the m68k porters list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] to get information about
the process of getting wanna-build access back. 

- James Troup wrote then (as a reply I think) on Thu, December 11, 2003
19:34 a mail to m68k-build list to get a status about the m68k buildd
machines (new ssh key, kernel info, etc.). He then got answers he asked for. 

- As http://buildd.debian.org/stats/graph-week-big.png shows, there are some
archs already have a working wanna-build access since days, namely mips,
mipsel and powerpc. 


I really feel discriminated by this situation. 
It seems as if the archs that are managed by Ryan Murray are preferred in
their restoring process whereas others doesn´t even get a status update when
they don´t ask for information and even then, nothing really happens for
days. 

I get the impression that there is some sort of a "Debian clan" that
controls some important positions of the Debian project and that is
protecting itself from being influence by the outside. This is my personal
and subjective impression, although I know of other people who are sharing
that impressions (in whole or in part). 
I do hope that this is wrong.
But I think that a better and more open way of communication between some
Debian admins and users in a polite way would help. 

It´s simply impolite and embarrassing when you contact a person, who´s
administrating some service, and you get *NO* reaction from that person. 
Sure, people can be overloaded with work, being too busy to answer
immediatedly, but when this extends to a longer time or is the default
behaviour they should consider to share his workload with other persons that
would like to help. But when they refuses that help, something is seriously
wrong and should be solved. 

This is not intended to be a flame or personal insult to anyone, but to be a
complaint, because I´m really unsatisfied with the current (non-)information
politic and the current buildd situation.  

-- 
Ciao...  // 
  Ingo \X/

你知道我们吗

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

www.centuryweb.net世纪网络-先试用　后付款

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   
　　
网络实名注册

国内虚拟主机租用价格 ：   

1. 140元＝1年国际域名＋300mb＋10个email

2. 180元＝1年国际域名＋200mb＋10个email(支持cgi.asp)

3. 240元＝1年国际域名＋300mb＋20个email(支持cgi.asp)；

4. 360元＝1年国际域名＋500mb＋30个email(支持cgi.asp)；

5. 260元＝2年国际域名＋300mb＋10个email

6. 340元＝2年国际域名＋200mb＋10个email(支持cgi.asp)

7. 480元＝2年国际域名＋300mb＋20个email(支持asp、php)；

8. 660元＝2年国际域名＋500mb＋30个email(支持asp、php)

为了保护您的域名权利，我公司现办理由美国eNom公司授权颁发的国际域名证书，证书费用为60元/个（另付）。

 　　
　---服务器主机托管，租用报价

? 服务器机房直接连接于ChinaNet骨干网高度，接入方式：100M LAN共享
◆ 服务器主机托管： 
   高度 国内报价 　　　1U、2U、4U及组装　　　￥ 5800元/年 

   主机托管月付680元。

◆ 服务器主机租用(主机租用期?壹年后，主机归租用人所用)
   高度　国内报价 
1U 　￥ 11000元/年 
2U 　￥ 17000元/年 
? 服务器配置：
　CPU P4 1.6G内存 512M DDR   硬盘 40GHD 


*免费提供机架、免费提供1个IP地址、提供7*24小时的网络监控、
 主机系统监测服务 ，硬件可按客户要求另行配置 


主题：虚拟主机130元/300M空间 主机托管5800/年/台 先试用后付款
详情：www.centuryweb.net 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
本邮件只发一次，如有打扰万望海涵！

Re: Complaint

[Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader]

* Ingo Juergensmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-12-14 13:20]:
> - As http://buildd.debian.org/stats/graph-week-big.png shows, there
> are some archs already have a working wanna-build access since days,
> namely mips, mipsel and powerpc.

> I really feel discriminated by this situation.

And it's clearly an evil plot against you/m68k as can be seen in the
graph above.  If I look at it, I see that most buildds are not
working, with some exceptions.

> It seems as if the archs that are managed by Ryan Murray are
> preferred in their restoring process

This might be related to the fact that Ryan is responsible for the
whole buildd infrastructure.  Clearly it must be easier to get his
buildds running, then others, as the latter involves coordination with
others, etc.  And please remember that this is not a competition
between e.g. mips and m68k.  We're trying to restore our services, and
obviously the crucial or easy ones come first.  You have to start with
on buildd, and it's fairly obvious to start with the one you're in
control of.

> whereas others doesn´t even get a status update when

Mails like
http://mailman.nocrew.org/pipermail/m68k-build/2003-November/007792.html
or
http://mailman.nocrew.org/pipermail/m68k-build/2003-December/007932.html
show that updates are being made, or information being asked for
needed for the restoration.

> - James Troup wrote then (as a reply I think) on Thu, December 11,
> 2003 19:34 a mail to m68k-build list to get a status about the m68k
> buildd machines (new ssh key, kernel info, etc.). He then got
> answers he asked for.

So basically your complaint is that after 3 days (including the
weekend, so effectively 1 business day) it's not fixed yet.  Sorry, I
just cannot take your complaint seriously.  I'm not saying that
everything's perfect, but I know that debian-admin is working as hard
as they can.  I also know that James for example fixed nm.d.o on
Friday and worked on a very important issue which is more important
than any buildd (or than nm.d.o).  And he's away for the weekend.  Of
course, I'd like to see all issues fixed instantly; but not having
fixed something non-essential after one business day is not that bad,
given we have ~700 RC bugs.  Why don't you contribute something
worthwhile and complain about those people (to them), (or send in
patches, hint hint).

Yes, it would be nice if more people were working on our buildd
infrastructure.  Just giving root to every Debian developer so they
can fix their issues themselves is not going to work.  So we're left
with having well respected people doing the work.  So, contribute some
work, gain respect, and help fix the situation.  But with complaints
like these, people will just start ignoring you.

-- 
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

run-parts concurrently?

[Thomas Hood]

Is there a version of run-parts out there that runs all the
scripts in a directory in parallel?  I have been writing 
such a thing but I want to make sure that I am not reinventing
the wheel.
--
Thomas Hood

Re: Bug#223772: general: no md5sums for many packages (e.g. bc)

[Bernhard R. Link]

* Bruno Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [031213 19:50]:
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Some packages have a useless and space wasting md5sums file inside the
> > package. Due to its uselessness the existance is rather a bug than its
> > omission.
> > 
> > Please close this bug, read the threads on debian-devel about this and
> > if you still want md5sum files help making actually usefull ones.
> 
> I guess he means md5sum for files inside package, as in:

I think Goswin knows what files are meant here. But I really do not
understand, why he is trolling against them. (Espcially with such
arguments, that I have an hard time to suppress my wish to use the 
same and requesting the removal of all .desktop files. ("I do not need
them, they are a waste of space and bandwidth and anyone using them is
stupid."))

Hochachtungsvoll,
  Bernhard R. Link

-- 
Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing
an editor and a MTA.

Failed build on mips target: need help

[Amit Shah]

Hi,

I'm the maintainer of the libfilesys-smbclient-perl module. The mips build 
fails with this error:

dpkg-deb: building package `libfilesys-smbclient-perl' in 
`../libfilesys-smbclient-perl_1.5-1_mipsel.deb'.
 dpkg-genchanges -B -mDebian/MIPSEL Build Daemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
dpkg-genchanges: arch-specific upload - not including arch-independent 
packages
dpkg-parsechangelog: error: cannot open debian/changelog to find format: 
Permission denied
dpkg-genchanges: error: syntax error in parsed version of changelog at line 0: 
empty file

The entire log is here:
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=libfilesys-smbclient-perl&ver=1.5-1&arch=mipsel&stamp=1071078382&file=log&as=raw

What could be the error here? It seems to build fine on all other archs other 
than mipsel and mips.
-- 
Amit Shah
http://amitshah.nav.to/

Re: Complaint

[Ingo Juergensmann]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 12:37:34AM +1100, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project 
Leader wrote:

> > - As http://buildd.debian.org/stats/graph-week-big.png shows, there
> > are some archs already have a working wanna-build access since days,
> > namely mips, mipsel and powerpc.
> > I really feel discriminated by this situation.
> And it's clearly an evil plot against you/m68k as can be seen in the
> graph above. 

Oh, great... I wouldn´t have expected that getting polemic is a necessary to
become DPL... :-//

> If I look at it, I see that most buildds are not
> working, with some exceptions.

That I´m complaining doesn´t necessarily mean that other archs/persons don´t
feel the same. It just means that the others are just not complaining. 

> > It seems as if the archs that are managed by Ryan Murray are
> > preferred in their restoring process
> This might be related to the fact that Ryan is responsible for the
> whole buildd infrastructure.  Clearly it must be easier to get his
> buildds running, then others, as the latter involves coordination with
> others, etc.

Looking at the graphs ti seems obvious that the way how to get buildds
running again is known for about 5 days now. 
And 5 days are not enough time to inform other archs or give them access as
well?
Why should it be easier to get the buildds on mips(sel) and powerpc running
than to tell others how to do the same? Please give explanation. 
AFAIK the source of buildd is the same for all archs. So, I can´t see any
difference in setting up the buildd for other archs than setting it up for
the above mentioned archs. 
And when the source should be different now, why haven´t the other archs be
informed to build a new buildd from CVS?  

>  And please remember that this is not a competition
> between e.g. mips and m68k.

Why do you suppose something that wasn´t included in my original post?
That´s your personal assumption and not mine. 

> We're trying to restore our services, and
> obviously the crucial or easy ones come first.  You have to start with
> on buildd, and it's fairly obvious to start with the one you're in
> control of.

Granted. It´s easier to find a solution for one buildd.
But the solution is there for 5 days now. It is known to be working and
still there is no information yet, what is changed nor what other archs can
do to speed up the restore of their buildds. 

> > whereas others doesn´t even get a status update when
> Mails like
> http://mailman.nocrew.org/pipermail/m68k-build/2003-November/007792.html
> or
> http://mailman.nocrew.org/pipermail/m68k-build/2003-December/007932.html
> show that updates are being made, or information being asked for
> needed for the restoration.

Yes. In both cases the informationwas given nearly instantly - and nothing
happened yet. 
When I tell someone "Give me some information to get the service working
again" that person can expect that when he is giving the information to me,
the service will be available again to him. 
So, when requesting new ssh keys from me make me believe that I´ll get
access to w-b back as soon as I give the needed information, I can expect
that this will happen asap. 
It didn´t happen so far.  

> > - James Troup wrote then (as a reply I think) on Thu, December 11,
> > 2003 19:34 a mail to m68k-build list to get a status about the m68k
> > buildd machines (new ssh key, kernel info, etc.). He then got
> > answers he asked for.
> So basically your complaint is that after 3 days (including the
> weekend, so effectively 1 business day) it's not fixed yet. 

No. My complaint is that there is no information *what* is happening nor
*when* it will happen, whereas other archs are already working for *days*. 

> Sorry, I just cannot take your complaint seriously. 

That´s sad - for you, not for me, that you´re taking complains not serious
although there are reasons for doing so. :-(

> I'm not saying that
> everything's perfect, but I know that debian-admin is working as hard
> as they can.

So do I. I´m really satisfied and happy about the work the admin team did to
get services back shortly after the compromise. 
But the complaint is not only about the non-working services but as well
about the bad way of communication. 
For example James could have mentioned in his mails why he needs these
information and when the service will be back. "Please give me your new ssh
keys, so we can setup access again within two days." instead of "Please give
me your new ssh keys."

>  I also know that James for example fixed nm.d.o on
> Friday and worked on a very important issue which is more important
> than any buildd (or than nm.d.o).  And he's away for the weekend.  Of

So, you´re telling that only one person can fix things?
Thank you to agree with my opinion. :->

> course, I'd like to see all issues fixed instantly; but not having
> fixed something non-essential after one business day is not that bad,
> given we have ~700 RC bugs.  Why don't you contribute something
> worthwhile and complain about

Re: Bug#223772: general: no md5sums for many packages (e.g. bc)

[David Weinehall]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 03:30:46PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Bruno Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [031213 19:50]:
> > Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Some packages have a useless and space wasting md5sums file inside the
> > > package. Due to its uselessness the existance is rather a bug than its
> > > omission.
> > > 
> > > Please close this bug, read the threads on debian-devel about this and
> > > if you still want md5sum files help making actually usefull ones.
> > 
> > I guess he means md5sum for files inside package, as in:
> 
> I think Goswin knows what files are meant here. But I really do not
> understand, why he is trolling against them. (Espcially with such
> arguments, that I have an hard time to suppress my wish to use the 
> same and requesting the removal of all .desktop files. ("I do not need
> them, they are a waste of space and bandwidth and anyone using them is
> stupid."))

Yeah, and I'll request removal of changelogs; there's always diff...
And documentation?  Hell, use the source-code.


/David
-- 
 /) David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /) Northern lights wander  (\
//  Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel   //  Dance across the winter sky //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/(/   Full colour fire   (/

Re: Complaint

[Kyle McMartin]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 01:20:15PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> I get the impression that there is some sort of a "Debian clan" that
> controls some important positions of the Debian project and that is
> protecting itself from being influence by the outside. This is my personal

THERE IS NO CABAL!

-- 
Kyle McMartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
1024D/191FCD8A - 331A 9468 C04D 3A76 5C56  BA68 7EB7 92DF 191F CD8A
2048R/F515317D -   68 A9 0D 28 1B DF 8D 42  0F CC AF 98 A8 D5 A4 04

Re: Complaint

[Joel Baker]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 03:58:21PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> 
> Looking at the graphs ti seems obvious that the way how to get buildds
> running again is known for about 5 days now. 
> And 5 days are not enough time to inform other archs or give them access as
> well?
> Why should it be easier to get the buildds on mips(sel) and powerpc running
> than to tell others how to do the same? Please give explanation. 
> AFAIK the source of buildd is the same for all archs. So, I can´t see any
> difference in setting up the buildd for other archs than setting it up for
> the above mentioned archs. 
> And when the source should be different now, why haven´t the other archs be
> informed to build a new buildd from CVS?  

I would hazard a (fairly strong) guess that the source code involved in
running the buildds has not changed appreciably. That isn't what has to be
done, to restore a buildd to a trustable status.

Remember, these machines are, behind the archives, perhaps the most
implicity trusted machines in the entire project. Compromise the archives,
and you can silently sprinkle trojans throughout any package on any port.
Compromise a buildd, and you can silently sprinkle trojans throughout any
newly compiled package on one port.

Clearing out and restarting the buildd itself probably takes a nearly
negligible amount of time - at least, that's been my experience, when
experimenting with the entire buildd/wanna-build setup, for the NetBSD
porting work, to figure out which things were actually required, and which
were just nice.

On the other hand, blowing away a machine without losing the *valuble* data
on it, then manually checking that data before it goes onto anything new,
along with a complete reinstall, can be a pretty non-trivial task, and one
that often requires console access - which, in itself, may be a non-trivial
task for a number of these machines.

Why should it be easier to get the machines Ryan works with regularly
running again? Probably because he knows how to arrange any required
access, where there might be data that needs to be copied/inspected, what
that data might be, and what it SHOULD look like, along with probably
having installed the machines in question at least once, and thus being
familiar with any quirks they may have. Oh, and he can probably GET to
them, which may well be physically impossible for him with others.

Thus, he probably has little choice, in some cases, but to depend on others
to deal with some of hte work, and try to coordinate with them (some of
whom may be as much as 10 hours offset from him, which I can tell you
from experience coordinating things between the US and the "Far East",
is no small handicap). And, as has been pointed out to you, it has been
*one* business day since the 12th, assuming that message went out at the
beginning of the 12th and not the end.

Three weeks is a long time to go without a reply. Three days is not. Even
outside of Debian, which I will cheerfully admit has (and often rail
about having) some communication issues, three days just isn't a crisis.
Particularly not when dealing with things that *paid professionals* can, at
times, take a week or more doing, when being paid 8 hours a day.

Let's save it for the really egregious times. So far, the entire recovery
has been suprisingly *well* communicated, compared to a lot of points in
Debian's history.
-- 
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,''`.
Debian GNU/TBD**BSD(i386) porter : :' :
 `. `'
   `-


pgp3AkxaxDKsb.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Nathan Hawkins]

On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Well, no offense, but that's ugly as hell, and is going to square the
> > > amount of confusion people experience when trying to decode our OS
> > > names.
> > 
> > Agreed, unfortunately - it is, and I suspect it may well. Suggestions for
> > better naming welcome, of course (or even a direction to go in).
> 
> We might use names from Christian demonology (since the BSD mascot
> is the cute and devilish "daemon"), with the first letter shared by the
> demon's name and the corresponding BSD flavor.
> 
> Thus:
> 
> Debian FreeBSD  -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
> Debian NetBSD   -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
> Debian OpenBSD  -> Debian Orobos (BSD)
> 
> I got these names from the Wikipedia  http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_specific_demons_and_types_of_demons>.
> 
> Moreover, none of these names are currently registered with the USPTO,
> so we'd be set in that department.

I'm not opposed to anything else you've said. I do believe these
particular names are a bad idea, however. One of the reasons the BSD
mascot is considered "cute" is that it has no real connection with
demons, in name, or otherwise. Which to people of several religions are
_not_ cute.

Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
at random.) Using names of evil, real or imagined, is not something
that would be helpful to Debian. That kind of publicity we don't need.

---Nathan

Re: Proposed change to debian release system

[Scott Minns]

Hiya all,
Thanks for your reply’s, I like the idea of making some packages 
"perishable" the trouble is where would you draw the line? I could do 
with some of the new features in proftpd, but that would not be 
perishable – so the problem is still there.
The main problem is that software is moving on so damn fast atm.

From my point of view one of the main issues is that new packages are 
never built for the stable release, so there are loads of packages in 
testing that I need or want to use, but they are not in stable - 
probably for good reason. However all its doing is forcing be to end up 
maintaining 2 different platforms one for newer or more up to date 
packages, and one for my must be stable servers. However the time will 
come when I need features even on my stable server that debian can not 
provide – and I will be forced to switch.

The administrative load of mixing package from different releases and 
keeping track of it to ensure you don’t break anything simply gets to 
high after you reach 400-500 hundred servers!

Now I have to say, all that does is tempt me to switch all my servers 
over to say bsd, as its not a lot harder to maintain, but it means I can 
once again have only one system to admin rather than two. Obviously this 
isn’t what I want to do, or I would not have mailed this list in the 
first place! However there are economic factors at play which means that 
my boss will force me to run a distro that can handle the latest/newer 
packages and run in a stable state

Best Regards
Scott

Client Development Specialist for Technology firms

[Scott M. Wiseman]

Title: Objective:








To:debian-devel@lists.debian.org 

Subject:
RESUME - Client
Development Specialist for Technology firms

IF
this resume reaches you in Error. 

Please
forward to your Human Resources Department

 

 

Resume

 

Scott
Wiseman
13428 Maxella Ave Ste 207
Marina Del
  Rey, CA 90292
310-967-4593

Objective:

To produce successful client engagements for a high
technology firm looking to Increase market share 
and develop brand identity for their products and service offerings.

 Position
Seeking:

Senior Business
Technology Analyst / Client Development Executive

 · Knowledge of relevant technologies:

· Enterprise Solutions:

· Business Intelligence and Relational databases (SQL, Oracle);

· Queuing systems (MSMQ, Oracle AQ);

· EAI Enterprise
Application Integration (Web Services, BizTalk)

· Storage Area Networks, Network Attached Storage (EMC, 

· CRM products (Microsoft CRM);

· Middleware (MTS, DCOM, COM, XML, .NET Framework, Web Services); 

· Internet protocols and products (HTTP, TCP/IP, FTP, Microsoft IIS
Web Server);   

· Content Management Systems/ Knowledge Management (Share point
Portal Server)

· Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity Planning (Veritas,
Storage, Snapshots)
·
Enterprise Networking (VPN, Frame, Router, WAN, Terminal Server, Citrix)
·
Corporate Compliance support(HIPAA, Sarbanes-Oxley, Gramm Leach Bliley Act)

· SMB Solutions:

· MS
Office 97 through 2003, Front Page,etc
·
Exchange 5.5 through 2003, IIS 4.0 through 6.0, SQL 7.0 through SQL 2000
· Veritas
Backup, Ghost, Ultra-Bac, Retrospect, Adobe, Omnipro,
· Legal
Solution, Baji, Compu-Law Vision, etc

· Technical Skills:

· Programming (ASP, SQL
SP, XML, COM, VB Script, HTML, _javascript_, .NET, ADSI, C)

· Over 14 years of software development and IT infrastructure experience.
·
Experience with entire product development life cycle;

· Experience with Infrastructure
Planning and Implementation.  

· Hands-on management of implementation teams; 
· Hands-on
implementation of integration strategies (if needed);

· Experienced integration strategies;

· Proven business process
reengineering skills;

· Experience configuring Firewalls (Net screen, D-Link, Cisco Pix);

· Exchange 5.5 through 2003 Server Setup and Administration;

· NT/ 2000/ 2003 Server
Setup and Administration;

· Install and configured DSU, CSU for ISDN and T-1 Frame Circuits,
phone systems.

· Help Desk Support, Troubling and repairing workstations.

· Sales and Marketing Skills:

· Experience with product/services strategy development, and
customer interaction;
· Ability
to articulate a compelling case for various Company branded Technologies;
·
Outstanding speaking/presentation skills and good writing skills;

· Expertise closing tough customers;

· Experience in developing Lead Generation vehicles;

· Knowledge of Solution Selling (Michael T. Bosworth)

· Experience Managing Call
 Centers and Direct Mail
Campaigns;

· Experience tracking/staying with customer through the Sale
Buy-Cycle;

· Expertise at selling intangible and conceptual
products(Software/Services)

 

· Education:

· 1990 - California State University Northridge,
CA. 
· Completed
Bachelor's Degree in Computer Science.

· Job References:

Job References upon
request.

 

 

 

 

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Joel Baker]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 12:02:44PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > > Well, no offense, but that's ugly as hell, and is going to square the
> > > > amount of confusion people experience when trying to decode our OS
> > > > names.
> > > 
> > > Agreed, unfortunately - it is, and I suspect it may well. Suggestions for
> > > better naming welcome, of course (or even a direction to go in).
> > 
> > We might use names from Christian demonology (since the BSD mascot
> > is the cute and devilish "daemon"), with the first letter shared by the
> > demon's name and the corresponding BSD flavor.
> > 
> > Thus:
> > 
> > Debian FreeBSD  -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
> > Debian NetBSD   -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
> > Debian OpenBSD  -> Debian Orobos (BSD)
> > 
> > I got these names from the Wikipedia  > http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_specific_demons_and_types_of_demons>.
> > 
> > Moreover, none of these names are currently registered with the USPTO,
> > so we'd be set in that department.
> 
> I'm not opposed to anything else you've said. I do believe these
> particular names are a bad idea, however. One of the reasons the BSD
> mascot is considered "cute" is that it has no real connection with
> demons, in name, or otherwise. Which to people of several religions are
> _not_ cute.
> 
> Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
> the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
> at random.) Using names of evil, real or imagined, is not something
> that would be helpful to Debian. That kind of publicity we don't need.

Feel free to propose alternatives from, say, the origional mythology which
spawned the concept of daemons as beings which were not inherently good or
evil, then.

This is a serious invitation; I'll be looking through the various sources
we have here for interesting ones. But so far, Branden's proposal is the
only one with any concrete names that avoids questions of trademark. If
folks are going to object, based on the names in question, that's fine, but
they should be willing to offer alternatives.

Of course, my personal email is one of the more obvious targets for
fanatics or fundamentalists to send hate-mail to, and (assuming I don't
just miss them in spam), I can think of about 2, maybe 3, such emails in
the past year. So maybe I'm just not quite so worried about it as some
folks.

Even so, I don't (and I sort of doubt Brandon does) have any real
attachment to the names proposed, if someone can come up with alternatives
in the same basic concept, but which are less liable to offend anyone.
Unfortunately, my experience with the topic tends to indicate that the
same folks who care are very likely to consider there mere *concept* of
a 'daemon' to be anathema, evil, foul, unclean, and all sorts of other
descriptives.

(And we all know that penguins are just flat-out unnatural; I mean, c'mon.
A bird that *swims*?)

ObHumor: Yes, that was a joke. :)
-- 
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,''`.
Debian GNU/KLNetBSD(i386) porter : :' :
 `. `'
   `-


pgpg06YORSHiV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Complaint

[Joel Baker]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 05:55:30PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 09:05:39AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> 
> > Remember, these machines are, behind the archives, perhaps the most
> > implicity trusted machines in the entire project. Compromise the archives,
> > and you can silently sprinkle trojans throughout any package on any port.
> > Compromise a buildd, and you can silently sprinkle trojans throughout any
> > newly compiled package on one port.
> 
> Well, compromise the machine of some DDs and you have the same. Compromising
> machines opens are serious security issue regardless for what the machine is
> used. 

Yes. But debian-admin is not responsible for those machines; therefore,
they are irrelevant to the discussion of "why hasn't debian-admin fixed
". That, and most developer machines tende to have a half dozen
packages, at most, rather than 9000...

> > On the other hand, blowing away a machine without losing the *valuble* data
> > on it, then manually checking that data before it goes onto anything new,
> > along with a complete reinstall, can be a pretty non-trivial task, and one
> > that often requires console access - which, in itself, may be a non-trivial
> > task for a number of these machines.
> 
> You don´t need to tell me that. I´m doing my work mainly remotely, sometimes
> with hundreds or thousands of km between the machine and me, including
> kernel updates and remote installations. 

Then, if you'll pardon me, you appear to be being deliberately obtuse.

> > Why should it be easier to get the machines Ryan works with regularly
> > running again? Probably because he knows how to arrange any required
> > access, where there might be data that needs to be copied/inspected, what
> > that data might be, and what it SHOULD look like, along with probably
> > having installed the machines in question at least once, and thus being
> > familiar with any quirks they may have. Oh, and he can probably GET to
> > them, which may well be physically impossible for him with others.
> 
> No, I doubt that Ryan travelled to Germany to get the buildds up again. 

Probably not. Maybe he just happened to know where all the data was, pulled
it off, and got ahold of the remote admin who happened to have the time to
spare, right then.

Or maybe it's an evil conspiracy. No, you're right, it must be; there's no
other *possible* explanation...

> > Thus, he probably has little choice, in some cases, but to depend on others
> > to deal with some of hte work, and try to coordinate with them (some of
> 
> Try to coordinate? When there would have been a try to cooperate by him, I
> wouldn´t complain... but I do complain. 

Unless you are the local administrator of one of the build daemons, I
doubt you'd have seen any of his attempts at coordination. Even if you
are, it's quite possible that he simply hasn't gotton that far down the
list yet. (Though I'd consider it a more significant failure, given that
he presumably should be sending some form of "let me know when you can be
available if we need it" emails).

> > whom may be as much as 10 hours offset from him, which I can tell you
> > from experience coordinating things between the US and the "Far East",
> > is no small handicap). And, as has been pointed out to you, it has been
> > *one* business day since the 12th, assuming that message went out at the
> > beginning of the 12th and not the end.
> 
> And as pointed out by me, It´s more than 1 business day. 

Okay. So it's 3. That's still ludicrously good to have ANYTHING like the
amount of progress we've seen, given Debian's history. And, frankly, if
you've ever had to try to recover a compromised remote box which had stuff
on it that you couldn't just wipe out, I would expect you to have some
understanding of how good it is to manage to get as many buildds done as
quickly as has happened.

In other words, the only two explanations I can see are either that you
have no real concept of what you're discussing, or that you're being
deliberately obtuse about the lot of it.

Debian may have a lot of issues at times. I'd be one of the last to deny
it. But given what a good job HAS been done, this time, continuing to
complain while it's ongoing is likely to get you dumped into the bucket
of "some people will complain if it takes 10 minutes, instead of 5, when
it should take 5 days". You certainly haven't convinced me this complaint
deserves to be put anywhere else, yet.
-- 
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,''`.
Debian GNU/KLNetBSD(i386) porter : :' :
 `. `'
   `-


pgpW1sL5HHbJ9.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Complaint

[Ingo Juergensmann]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 09:05:39AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:

> Remember, these machines are, behind the archives, perhaps the most
> implicity trusted machines in the entire project. Compromise the archives,
> and you can silently sprinkle trojans throughout any package on any port.
> Compromise a buildd, and you can silently sprinkle trojans throughout any
> newly compiled package on one port.

Well, compromise the machine of some DDs and you have the same. Compromising
machines opens are serious security issue regardless for what the machine is
used. 
 
> On the other hand, blowing away a machine without losing the *valuble* data
> on it, then manually checking that data before it goes onto anything new,
> along with a complete reinstall, can be a pretty non-trivial task, and one
> that often requires console access - which, in itself, may be a non-trivial
> task for a number of these machines.

You don´t need to tell me that. I´m doing my work mainly remotely, sometimes
with hundreds or thousands of km between the machine and me, including
kernel updates and remote installations. 

> Why should it be easier to get the machines Ryan works with regularly
> running again? Probably because he knows how to arrange any required
> access, where there might be data that needs to be copied/inspected, what
> that data might be, and what it SHOULD look like, along with probably
> having installed the machines in question at least once, and thus being
> familiar with any quirks they may have. Oh, and he can probably GET to
> them, which may well be physically impossible for him with others.

No, I doubt that Ryan travelled to Germany to get the buildds up again. 

> Thus, he probably has little choice, in some cases, but to depend on others
> to deal with some of hte work, and try to coordinate with them (some of

Try to coordinate? When there would have been a try to cooperate by him, I
wouldn´t complain... but I do complain. 

> whom may be as much as 10 hours offset from him, which I can tell you
> from experience coordinating things between the US and the "Far East",
> is no small handicap). And, as has been pointed out to you, it has been
> *one* business day since the 12th, assuming that message went out at the
> beginning of the 12th and not the end.

And as pointed out by me, It´s more than 1 business day. 

-- 
Ciao...  // 
  Ingo \X/

Re: Complaint

[Clint Adams]

> argument (publicly critising volunteers who are busy is not
> productive, even if you point is otherwise valid).

The hell it isn't.

Re: Complaint

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Ingo Juergensmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Looking at the graphs ti seems obvious that the way how to get buildds
> running again is known for about 5 days now. 

You're complaining about a delay of five days in a project run by
volunteers and which has been hit very severly by a break-in? I would
start complaining about missing services after about two months (or
maybe after two weeks without no visible activity)...

> Granted. It´s easier to find a solution for one buildd.
> But the solution is there for 5 days now. It is known to be working and
> still there is no information yet, what is changed nor what other archs can
> do to speed up the restore of their buildds. 

I assume that you are in a position to help DSAs and Ryan regarding
m68k-buildd. Have you asked this information directly from them ("Hi,
what can I do to make your job easier regarding m68k-buildd?")? If
not, what makes you think that volunteers work better if you complain
publicly?

> Yes. In both cases the informationwas given nearly instantly - and nothing
> happened yet.

So you think that the response time of DSAs should be one working day
or three days including holidays? Do you know that the DSAs are not
paid for 24/7 support?

>> Sorry, I just cannot take your complaint seriously. 
> That´s sad - for you, not for me, that you´re taking complains not serious
> although there are reasons for doing so. :-(

I have to agree with Martin. If you have too much time in your hands
go and fix some RC bugs. If you are busy doing other work, fine.

> So, you´re telling that only one person can fix things?

If you feel that there should be more people in the DSA group, go
ahead and suggest people who are both willing to take the job and
qualified enough to be allowed.

> You excuse James as being busy with more important things and denying the
> same for me? How can you know that I don´t have other important things to do

You seem to have enough free time to spend in a basically pointless
argument (publicly critising volunteers who are busy is not
productive, even if you point is otherwise valid).

> How can I help to fix situation when I´m not allowed to? Or even don´t get

You cannot. You can, however, try to put yourself into a position
where you can help in the future. The choice is yours.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *

Re: Complaint

[Ingo Juergensmann]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:19:47AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:

> > Well, compromise the machine of some DDs and you have the same. Compromising
> > machines opens are serious security issue regardless for what the machine is
> > used. 
> Yes. But debian-admin is not responsible for those machines; therefore,
> they are irrelevant to the discussion of "why hasn't debian-admin fixed
> ". That, and most developer machines tende to have a half dozen
> packages, at most, rather than 9000...

What makes you think that DSA is responsible for all buildds?

> Or maybe it's an evil conspiracy. No, you're right, it must be; there's no
> other *possible* explanation...

Why people tend to become polemic when they have no arguments left?

> > Try to coordinate? When there would have been a try to cooperate by him, I
> > wouldn´t complain... but I do complain. 
> Unless you are the local administrator of one of the build daemons, I
> doubt you'd have seen any of his attempts at coordination. Even if you
> are, it's quite possible that he simply hasn't gotton that far down the
> list yet. (Though I'd consider it a more significant failure, given that
> he presumably should be sending some form of "let me know when you can be
> available if we need it" emails).

So, you obviously have no clue that I´m running a buildd, but you´re trying
to comment on stuff you don´t know the stories behind? Funny... 

> > And as pointed out by me, It´s more than 1 business day. 
> Okay. So it's 3. That's still ludicrously good to have ANYTHING like the
> amount of progress we've seen, given Debian's history. And, frankly, if
> you've ever had to try to recover a compromised remote box which had stuff
> on it that you couldn't just wipe out, I would expect you to have some
> understanding of how good it is to manage to get as many buildds done as
> quickly as has happened.

And I can tell you that the process could have been faster. 
Of course it´s lot of work for a single person to manage several machines at
the same time. 

> In other words, the only two explanations I can see are either that you
> have no real concept of what you're discussing, or that you're being
> deliberately obtuse about the lot of it.

Don´t always speak with the man in the mirror. 

-- 
Ciao...  // 
  Ingo \X/

Re: Complaint

[Ingo Juergensmann]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:57:46PM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:

> > Looking at the graphs ti seems obvious that the way how to get buildds
> > running again is known for about 5 days now. 
> You're complaining about a delay of five days in a project run by
> volunteers and which has been hit very severly by a break-in? I would
> start complaining about missing services after about two months (or
> maybe after two weeks without no visible activity)...

No, I don´t complain about the delay but about the communication. 

> I assume that you are in a position to help DSAs and Ryan regarding
> m68k-buildd. Have you asked this information directly from them ("Hi,
> what can I do to make your job easier regarding m68k-buildd?")? If
> not, what makes you think that volunteers work better if you complain
> publicly?

I already contacted Ryan for a different issue and got no response at all

Re: mounting tmpfs (and sysfs) defaultly in sarge?

[Steve Greenland]

On 13-Dec-03, 11:12 (CST), Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> A replacement? I'm pretty sure you need both; /sysfs doesn't include
> *everything* that /proc does (and vice-versa).  I'm not sure what the
> long-term plans are, but /sysfs can't replace /proc right now.

There's no intent for /proc to go away. The point of sysfs is to remove
all (or at least most) the non-process related info from /proc (which
had become a dumping ground).

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: Complaint

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Ingo Juergensmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I already contacted Ryan for a different issue and got no response at all.
> Go and figure out my motivation to ask him again. 

People do have different response times regarding different things. I
may leave trivial questions lying in my mailbox for weeks whereas I
try to respond to important things immediately.

> Oh, and I´m not a volunteer? Geeez... then tell me please where I can get my
> money for my work for Debian!

I'm not criticising you, I'm just saying that your point is not valid,
IMO.

> When someone is making a pointless contribution to this discussion, then
> it´s you. 

Fortunately we don't have to worry about each other's mails.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *

RE: Complaint

[Julian Mehnle]

Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> Why people tend to become polemic when they have no arguments left?

Very good question.

Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> Oh, great... I wouldnÂt have expected that getting polemic is a
> necessary to become DPL... :-//

So can we please end this flamewar before it really starts off?

Re: Complaint

[Bastian Blank]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 01:20:15PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> The situation:
> 
> - Wouter Verhelst wrote on Tue, December 9, 2003 18:40 to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and the m68k porters list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] to get information about
> the process of getting wanna-build access back. 
> 
> - James Troup wrote then (as a reply I think) on Thu, December 11, 2003
> 19:34 a mail to m68k-build list to get a status about the m68k buildd
> machines (new ssh key, kernel info, etc.). He then got answers he asked for. 

The developer machines suffer the same problems. They don't have access
to the password db on newsamosa and no information about that was
published.

> I get the impression that there is some sort of a "Debian clan" that
> controls some important positions of the Debian project and that is
> protecting itself from being influence by the outside. This is my personal
> and subjective impression, although I know of other people who are sharing
> that impressions (in whole or in part). 

- Rayn Murray (buildd, -admin, ftp-master)
- Martin Schulze (listmaster, -admin, -security)
- James Troup (-admin, ftp-master, keyring)

Bastian

-- 
"Get back to your stations!"
"We're beaming down to the planet, sir."
-- Kirk and Mr. Leslie, "This Side of Paradise",
   stardate 3417.3


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

RE: Proposed change to debian release system

[Julian Mehnle]

Scott Minns wrote:
> Thanks for your replyâs, I like the idea of making some packages
> "perishable" the trouble is where would you draw the line?

We could add an optional control field "Expires: $date" to packages, so package 
maintainers could decide for themselves.  After a package has expired, it would 
only be installed with a warning or even with the admin explicitly confirming 
he wants to install it anyway.

I know this is no panacea, since in many cases, the maintainer cannot know 
whether a package will perish at all (like when all spammers promptly give up 
"advancing" their software, so a given version of spamassassin would stay 
useful forever)... ;-)

Re: Complaint

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> argument (publicly critising volunteers who are busy is not
>> productive, even if you point is otherwise valid).
>
> The hell it isn't.

True, if you try to get rid of the current volunteers, then publicly
criticising them is somewhat productive. This usually slows things
down, though, and I think that Ingo's point is that things are not
moving fast enough.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Roland Mas]

On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:

>> > Debian FreeBSD  -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
>> > Debian NetBSD   -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
>> > Debian OpenBSD  -> Debian Orobos (BSD)

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 12:02:44PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:

>> I'm not opposed to anything else you've said. I do believe these
>> particular names are a bad idea, however. One of the reasons the BSD
>> mascot is considered "cute" is that it has no real connection with
>> demons, in name, or otherwise. Which to people of several religions are
>> _not_ cute.

Joel Baker, 2003-12-14 19:20:08 +0100 :

> Feel free to propose alternatives from, say, the origional mythology which
> spawned the concept of daemons as beings which were not inherently good or
> evil, then.

  I'll suggest Offler (or Om), Foorgol (I don't like Fate) and, um,
some other god coming out of Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels,
preferably whose name starts with an N.

  Or something like that.

Roland.
-- 
Roland Mas

Why did the elephant cross the road?
Because it was the chicken's day off.

Re: Bug#223772: general: no md5sums for many packages (e.g. bc)

[David Weinehall]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 07:24:40PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> David Weinehall wrote:
> > And documentation?  Hell, use the source-code.
> Source code? Who needs source code?
> 
> Seriously: I've had some problems with file system corruption every now
> and then. The md5sums are a nice way to check whether the basic binaries
> on the disk are still what I'd like them to be without having to have
> install media at hand.
> I'd agree that there is no security implication in having them or not,
> but there's features besides security.

My point exactly, even though I tried to make it through irony.


/David
-- 
 /) David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /) Northern lights wander  (\
//  Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel   //  Dance across the winter sky //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/(/   Full colour fire   (/

Re: Bug#223772: general: no md5sums for many packages (e.g. bc)

[Thomas Viehmann]

David Weinehall wrote:
> And documentation?  Hell, use the source-code.
Source code? Who needs source code?

Seriously: I've had some problems with file system corruption every now
and then. The md5sums are a nice way to check whether the basic binaries
on the disk are still what I'd like them to be without having to have
install media at hand.
I'd agree that there is no security implication in having them or not,
but there's features besides security.

Cheers

T.


pgpnr1rN2MwIQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: How to depend on Japanese fonts?

[Andrew Suffield]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 02:14:05PM +1100, Ben Burton wrote:
> Is there a simple or recommended way of making a package depend on
> [Japanese] fonts?

It is categorically impossible and should not be done. At most you can
use Suggests or Recommends; do not use Depends for fonts for X
applications.

X does *not* require that fonts be installed on the same host as the
client application, nor can it use them if they are. Fonts must rather
be installed on the host where the font server runs, which is probably
the one where the X server runs.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'  |
   `- -><-  |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Complaint

[Ingo Juergensmann]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 09:21:02PM +0100, Julian Mehnle wrote:

> So can we please end this flamewar before it really starts off?

Why? Better give arguments than flames. 
So far I have not read any good argument why there is no good communication
between the people that are working on recovering services and the people
that need those services, f.e. the buildd folks. 

I can´t let the argument of "only 3 workdays" be valid. When Ryan has no
time, than he have let him asked why he don´t have that time? 
One reason might be that he is responsible as a single person for all the
buildds for three archs. 
Now remember the last months "MIPS port backlog, autobuilder machines and
some arrogance" thread. It was stated during the discussion back then, that
it should be easier to manage the buildds when only one person does it. 
Of course this will mean more workload for that person, regardless of the
fact that m68k has proven that a buildd community is quite responsive and
effective. 
And now the same people are stating that this poor person has no time to
give some update information? 
Is it just me who finds that odd?

-- 
Ciao...  // 
  Ingo \X/

Re: Complaint

[Ingo Juergensmann]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 08:29:35PM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:

> True, if you try to get rid of the current volunteers, then publicly
> criticising them is somewhat productive. This usually slows things
> down, though, and I think that Ingo's point is that things are not
> moving fast enough.

Not quite... 
It´s about "When it´s not fast enough, it should be explained to the people
that are involved, why it lasts so long."
When there are reasons why not all archs are building packages again, the
reasons should be explained to the porters, maybe asking in help to solve
the problems faster than dealing with them on your own. 
As you can see in the mentioned graphs, first one arch started to work again
and shortly after there were three archs. So, it seems to me that the
problems are solved and the way of solving is known. So why isn´t that
communicated to the other buildd people?
It´s not that bad to wait, but it´s bad waiting without any information for
how long you have to wait. I think I made my point clear?
When you don´t communicate to the people that rely on your work, they start
asking somewhen you. But when you are saying them "Hey, there is this and
that problem and it will be possibly solved until next Wednesday...", people
have all the info they need and don´t start to distrub you with questions. 

-- 
Ciao...  // 
  Ingo \X/

Re: Debian packages and freedesktop.org (Gnome, KDE, etc) menu entries

[Moritz Moeller-Herrmann]

Chris Cheney wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 12:28:29PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
>> The Categories= field (to place .desktop files into menu hierarchies) is
>> AFAIK not used at all by KDE, although I think Gnome may support it.

> The above statements are probably true of KDE 3.1 since it doesn't use
> the proper /usr/share/applications layout. KDE 3.2 which is due to
> be released in about a month does use it. The location Gnome uses is
> correct.

In addition the SuSE KDE packages in SuSE-9.0 are 3.1.4 with a backport of
the XDG menues. So if you use SuSE, you already have the same menue in both
DEs.


-- 
Moritz Moeller-Herrmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wiss. Mitarbeiter, IMGB
La loi, dans un grand souci d'égalité, interdit aux riches comme aux
pauvres de coucher sous les ponts, de mendier dans les rues et de voler
du pain. 
(ANATOLE FRANCE)
 

Re: Proposed change to debian release system

[Graham Wilson]

On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 10:41:22PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Everybody seems to agree that new stable versions *should* be out
> about every 6 months.

I don't think that is true. I think developers (and users) have a wide
range of opinions as to how often there should be a new Debian release.

-- 
gram


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Joel Baker]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 08:21:30PM +0100, Roland Mas wrote:
> 
>   I'll suggest Offler (or Om), Foorgol (I don't like Fate) and, um,
> some other god coming out of Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels,
> preferably whose name starts with an N.
> 
>   Or something like that.

One should never name the Lady.
-- 
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,''`.
Debian GNU/KLNetBSD(i386) porter : :' :
 `. `'
   `-


pgpNSPX7goX4M.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: How to depend on Japanese fonts?

[Ben Burton]

> > Is there a simple or recommended way of making a package depend on
> > [Japanese] fonts?
> 
> It is categorically impossible and should not be done.

Point taken.  My question then is:  is there a simple/recommended way of
making a package suggest/recommend Japanese fonts?

Given that it's not a hard dependency I'm now tempted just to pick a
couple of good ones and include them in the suggests/recommends list.

b.

RE: Proposed change to debian release system

[Lucas Albers]

My friend has a high volume mail server running spamassassin 2.31
Oops the spamassassin stopped working.
Now I have 12,000 people angry with me.
Take that to the bank.
--luke

> Scott Minns wrote:

> I know this is no panacea, since in many cases, the maintainer cannot know
> whether a package will perish at all (like when all spammers promptly give
> up "advancing" their software, so a given version of spamassassin would
> stay useful forever)... ;-)
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

install openwebmail interfere's with mysql-server install.

[Lucas Albers]

I recently encountered a potentail bug involving openwebmail and
mysql-server. I wanted to know if anyone else could reproduce it.

Result: Install openwebmail and modifyting DB_File as per directions in
openwebmail and then installing mysql-server will prevent mysql-server
from starting.
Expected Result:
Openwebmail should not interfere with mysql-server.

Repro:
Install openwebmail.
Mody DB_File as per openwebmail directions. (see below)
Install mysql-server.
Start mysql-server.
Mysql-server will not start, and does not give error.
Remove change from DB_File.
Remove mysql-server.
Reinstall mysql-server.
Mysql-server starts correctly.

Package Information:
Inst openwebmail (2.21-3 Debian:testing
Inst mysql-server (4.0.16-2 Debian:testing)

Openwebmail post install directions:
/usr/share/doc/openwebmail/readme.txt
I am assuming you need to add the listed line of code in DB_File.pm,
if it does not exist.
--
2. it checks if the dbm system uses DB_File.pm by default and
   will suggest a necessary patch to DN_File.pm, you may see output like
-
Please modify /usr/libdata/perl/5.00503/mach/DB_File.pm by adding

$arg[3] = 0666 unless defined $arg[3];

before the following text (about line 247)

# make recno in Berkeley DB version 2 work like recno in version 1
--

Re: udev and /sys mounting [was: mounting tmpfs (and sysfs) defaultly in sarge?]

[Marco d'Itri]

On Dec 14, Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 >> udev (and given time many other programs) needs sysfs mounted, so we
 >> should decide if it will be handled by devpts.sh or by a similar script
 >> in a different package.
 >> Currently the udev init script[1] mounts it by itself, but I'd like to
 >> remove this code and assume that something else already did it.
 >IMHO it does not really belong to devpts, libsysfs seems to be a more
 >appropriate place. Of course I don't insist of it, it's just a matter
 >of style...
libsysfs may not be installed on every system, so I still think libc is
the proper package for the script.

 >Marco, do you plan to use the dynamic library of libsysfs for udev? If
I don't know, I still need to know if it will be used in the initramfs
or not.

-- 
ciao, |
Marco | [3614 ormN7lYCiLVuY]


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Set up build environment.

[Lucas Albers]

I recently ported a testing package to stable.
Did not have to make any changes to the package, just rebuilt it on a
stable system.
Here are the directions for setting up a stable build environment.
Should be helpful to any who is starting off on setting up build
environments.

In the example I rebuild a testing perl program on a stable system, so I
can install it on a stable system with perl 5.6.1 instead of 5.8.x.

Please let me know if you find any gotcha's.
I really appreciate any feedback.
I want to help new developers get started.
--Luke


1.20. setup debian for build root build mimedefang 2.38 example *
debootstrap --verbose woody /root/woody-chroot http://repository/debian
cp /etc/apt/sources.list /root/mimedefang-chroot/etc/apt/

mount -t proc /proc /root/woody-chroot/proc
chroot /root/woody-chroot

vi /etc/apt/sources.list, to include sources for stable only
and a source for deb-src stable.
need a testing deb-src for mimedefang.

apt-get install  build-essential devscripts lintian debhelper dh-make

#normal vi annoys me

apt-get install vim
cd /usr/src/;
mkdir mimedefang;
cd mimedefang;
apt-get install
apt-get install libmilter-dev libunix-syslog-perl clamav
apt-get source mimedefang
dpkg-source -x mimedefang_2.38-2.dsc
cd mimedefang-2.38
dpkg-buildpackage
cd ..
#Now I have a deb package called
mimedefang_2.38-2_i386.deb

If you exit the chroot and install the package via
dpkg -i mimedefang
#it wiill complain about dependencies but load the dependencies into the
queue.
#then
apt-get install mimedefang
#and it will download all of the dependencies.


#dependencies installed
#libdigest-sha1-perl libfreetype6 libio-stringy-perl libmailtools-perl
libmime-base64-perl libmime-perl libnet-perl
#libssl0.9.6 libtimedate-perl m4 sendmail tcl8.3 tk8.3 xfree86-common xlibs


NOTE Their are not testing repositories listed repository so this cannot
install any testing packages (Only testing src reposityr).

Now you have installed mimedefang on a stable system, you need to manually
add in the sendmail.mc change, and include support for the virus scanners
you want to use.
This works, I installed it and tested it.
--Luke

Re: How to depend on Japanese fonts?

[Osamu Aoki]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 02:14:05PM +1100, Ben Burton wrote:
> 
> Hi.  I have a question in relation to #216440 (kiten requires Japanese
> fonts):
> 
> Is there a simple or recommended way of making a package depend on
> Japanese fonts?
> 
> The only solutions I can see are to either:
> 
> 1) pick a couple of decent fonts and include them in the depends list;
> 2) pick a couple of decent fonts and include them in the recommends or
> suggests list;
> 3) make a list of all Japanese fonts (separated by | ).
> 
> Option (1) seems bad because it forces a choice of font that the user
> might not want (bear in mind that Japanese font packages can be quite
> large).  Option (3) seems bad because it's ugly and difficult to keep
> up-to-date.  And of course option (2) seems bad because the hard
> dependency is lost.

I agree with Andrew.

Just pick few best fonts you like and list them under recommends with |

One of kochi fonts are good choice, I think.

Osamu

Re: RFP: intellisense.vim - Intellisense for Vim

[Martin Pitt]

Hi Juhapekka, hi Debianers!

On 2003-12-05 19:34 +0200, Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote:
> 
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: normal

I just corrected that to wishlist.

> http://insenvim.sourceforge.net/front.php

I took at the sources. Did you try compiling them under Linux? Things
like '#include ', all these Win-looking base classes, the
dependency on MFC and the DLL stuff seem to make that pretty hard :-/.
There are not even Makefiles to give it a try.

Unless you managed to compile the stuff (it seems to be very
interesting), I suggest that you close this bug.

Have a nice day!

Martin
-- 
Martin Pitt Debian GNU/Linux Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.piware.de http://www.debian.org


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

(last) Assurance measures: AMA (coping with the speed of OSS development)

[Magosányi Árpád]

Hi!

This is the last part of the saga (for a time at least), as we are
done with all assurance requrements (modulo those concentrating on
ST and PP assurance.)

I hope that at least some of you were listening.
(First I thought there would be some feedback, at least
like "stop it, this is boring!", or "why do you write to a
mailing list which does not even exists?".)


The assurance maintenance class is not an integral
part of the assurance requirement set. It not included in the
EALs, and it seems that no one really cares about it. It might
be okay with commercial software development styles (it isn't:
one can only find outdated versions of software evaluated against
CC), but having only a point release evaluated would just not
fit with open source development methodology.

Unfortunately this class heavily depends on other assurance
classes, some of which open source isn't good at.

AMA_AMP.1 Assurance maintenance plan
AMA_AMP.1.1D The developer shall provide an AM Plan.
(Let's assume that we don't have any.)
AMA_AMP.1.1C The AM Plan shall contain or reference a brief description
of the TOE, including the security functionality it provides.
(Security Target, TOE description (what we also don't have))
AMA_AMP.1.2C The AM Plan shall identify the certified version of the
TOE, and shall reference the evaluation results.
(None is available)
AMA_AMP.1.3C The AM Plan shall reference the TOE component
categorisation report for the certified version of the TOE.
(We will se this later.)
AMA_AMP.1.4C The AM Plan shall define the scope of changes to the TOE
that are covered by the plan.
(The upper bound of possible changes until the next stable
release. Some OSS projects would benefit from such an upper
bound anyway: it would made their release cycle more
controllable.)
AMA_AMP.1.5C The AM Plan shall describe the TOE life-cycle, and shall
identify the current  plans for any new releases of the TOE,
together with a brief description of any planned changes that
are likely to have a significant security impact.
(The actually planned changes. Some projects have such goals,
and some don't. They are not meet them, but it isn't expected
anyway.)
AMA_AMP.1.6C The AM Plan shall describe the assurance maintenance cycle,
stating and justifying the planned schedule of AM audits and the
target date of the next re-evaluation of the TOE.
(The AM schedule should match to the devel cycle. Maybe having
a defined QA effort concerning itself with the release cycle
(and this could even be aligned by AM goals), would create
a pressure to the cycle which could make a balance with the
developers' pressure (put in this and that also, the release
goal is just a date without meaning). In debian there is the
QA group, which does concerned with some issues related,
but not assume responsibility for 1.6C and more importantly
for enforcing 1.5C)
AMA_AMP.1.7C The AM Plan shall identify the individual(s) who will
assume the role of developer security analyst for the TOE.
(My daylight job includes this. You will sooner or later
will really hate all developers. And they will hate you
as well. And both of you will have very good reasons to
do so:) At least this is the case with commercial developments:
most of the developers I meet does not even know the
tools and languages they use, and very upset when I tell
them that they work is b*llsh*t.)
AMA_AMP.1.8C The AM Plan shall describe how the developer security
analyst role will ensure that the procedures documented or
referenced in the AM Plan are followed.
(I am very interested what is the equivalent of "management
decision" in OSS:) You know this kind from Dilbert cartoons)
AMA_AMP.1.9C The AM Plan shall describe how the developer security
analyst role will ensure that all developer actions involved
in the analysis of the security impact of changes affecting
the TOE are performed correctly.
(I looked it up in the CEM trying to figure out what it
means. I have found the following information: none)
AMA_AMP.1.10C The AM Plan shall justify why the identified developer
security analyst(s) have sufficient familiarity with the
security target, functional specification and (where
appropriate) high-level design of the TOE, and with the
evaluation results and all applicable assurance requirements for
the certified version of the TOE.
(I cannot think of feasible procedural controls (save that the
security analyst is the same who have written the ST of the
TOE, which is not always works))
AMA_AMP.1.11C  The AM Plan shall describe or reference the procedures to
be applied to mainta

Re: Debian packages and freedesktop.org (Gnome, KDE, etc) menu entries

[Bruce Sass]

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Billy Biggs wrote:
> Bruce Sass ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > The above is just the tip of the iceberg with respect to i18n, I had
> > roughly the same size savings when I was removing translations from
> > KDE2 files---KDE3 has more files, more translations per file, and I
> > haven't looked at Gnome.
>
>   Bruce,
>
>   I can't figure out your position on i18n.  Do you think that:
>
>   1. Debian should only provide english

no

>   2. Menu entries should be english only

no

>   3. Packages should individually only include one language

no

>   4. Packages should include all languages, but only install files
>  pertinent to the local language

   s/local language/languages the sysadmin wants installed/

ideally,
installing then removing unwanted files is probably more practicable though.

>   5. Something else

I don't think so

>   I am just curious because I find your opinion puzzling.  None of this
> has anything to do with .desktop vs menufile.  If i18n support were
> added to menufile it would be the same.

I prefer the .desktop format, but just switching to it will
immediately drag in the translations...  is this not the best time to
address the issue?


- Bruce

Re: APT-Fu 0.2.3

[Darren Salt]

I demand that Scott James Remnant may or may not have written...

> On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 08:47, Herbert Xu wrote:
>> Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> But your message didn't include a Content-Type header specifying that, so
>>> it's likely to come through as garbage for most MUAs...
>> Right, here it is again
>> \xEF\xBB\xBF\xE8\xBE\xAD\xE6\xB5\xB7

> Now that's just the hand-printed bytecodes of raw UTF-8 :-)

> Now, if my by-hand Unicode isn't rusty, I make this out to be

> U+FEFFZERO WIDTH NO_BREAK SPACE
> [...]

Slightly rusty: since that's at the start of the string, it's telling you
which endianness is in use in the string.

(ICBW, of course.)

-- 
| Darren Salt   | linux (or ds) at | nr. Ashington,
| woody, sarge, | youmustbejoking  | Northumberland
| RISC OS   | demon co uk  | Toon Army
|   http://www.youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk/> (PGP 2.6, GPG keys)

You plan things that you do not even attempt because of your extreme caution.

Re: recovery status update

[Martin Michlmayr]

* Aaron M. Ucko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-12-09 15:37]:
> Although I agree that there is definitely something to be said for
> this approach, I would like to note an additional issue with it:
> 
> - how to verify that katie will process uploads as expected (I'd been
>   running dinstall -n, via dput -D; I suppose it would be possible to
>   upload separately to the mirror and test there, but that's awkward.)

dinstall -n is not as useful as it was in the past.  In the past,
you'd have to wait until dinstall run to see whether your package is
okay; nowadays, packages are checked regularly (I think every 15
minutes), so you get almost immediate feedback anyway.

-- 
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: recovery status update

[Martin Michlmayr]

* Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-12-09 09:49]:
> - how to give developers the possibility of seeing what's in the queue
>   (daily rsyncs are not good enough for this; I've frequently pulled
>   packages from the accepted queue to check that bug fixes have been
>   correctly applied)

The queue could theoretically just be rsynced every 15 minutes or so.
-- 
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Proposed change to debian release system

[Chad Walstrom]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 03:29:10PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
> I don't think that is true. I think developers (and users) have a wide
> range of opinions as to how often there should be a new Debian
> release.

I like the "Debian is ready when it's ready" argument.  Two years
between releases may be a bit long for my taste.  A year would be nice,
and six months is highly optimistic.  Once debian-installer is polished,
things should move quicker.

-- 
Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   http://www.wookimus.net/
   assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */


pgpwRp5O6SbzO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: recovery status update

[Martin Michlmayr]

* Aaron M. Ucko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-12-09 22:14]:
> Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > - how to run madison and wanna-build
> 
> I thought the idea was for the unrestricted mirror to include a
> read-only copy of the database madison consults.

Yes, the idea is to sync the Postgres database once a day (it
basically only changes on dinstall time anyway).  Then you can run
madison on the mirror.

-- 
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Roland Mas]

Roland Mas, 2003-12-14 21:30:17 +0100 :


[...]

>   I'll suggest Offler (or Om), Foorgol (I don't like Fate) and, um,
> some other god coming out of Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels,
> preferably whose name starts with an N.

...and then I found http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuggan (only
appearing in books I haven't read yet, so I have an excuse).

Roland.
-- 
Roland Mas

Plus on en fout, plus y'en a du riz.
  -- Proverbe chinois.

dpkg-sig as name for the .deb-files signature tool

[Andreas Barth]

retitle 223311 ITP: dpkg-sig -- create and verify signatures on .deb-files
thanks

Hi,

I announced the packaging of a low-level tool for creating and
verification of signatures on deb-archive files with the name
debsigs-ng. This name was criticized, because it looks like a fork of
debsigs. So, I had some discussion on IRC. Some names were prefered in
discussion. At the end, we had some dpkg-* names in discussion, as
well as dpst (debian package signature tool) and trusted-deb. The last
one left the discussion area as it promises rather too much - the tool
is _not_ a high level tool that plugs into apt or dpkg, but it is just
on the same level as dpkg-deb. dpst is IMHO rather too cryptic, so I
decided to dpkg-sig.

A preliminary version is apt-able at
deb http://dpkg-sig.turmzimmer.net/dpkg-sig/ ./
deb-src http://dpkg-sig.turmzimmer.net/dpkg-sig/ ./


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Re: Services I'd like from auric

[Martin Michlmayr]

* Kevin Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-12-13 15:56]:
> of discussing information we'd like from auric, what's on my mind
> today is the ability to check the NEW queue.
> 
> Thus, if the ftpmasters are planning on a long-term restriction on
> auric, mirroring the data in the new queue [at least filenames and
> upload dates] would be of significant help to me.

* Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-12-14 03:13]:
> I frequently find myself running 'locate' over the morgue and poking
> around in the results in an attempt to figure out when a package was
> removed and what it looked like when it was, usually when working on

Right, I use both the new queue and the morgue as well.  If auric
remains restricted, these directories should definitely be mirrored.

> I'm not sure whether this is solvable without exporting the morgue,
> which I'm aware would be a big slice of some machine's resources.

Files in the morgue could be expired on a more frequent basis than
those on the mirror.  Then we'd all have access to it, but it wouldn't
take up the same resources on both machines.

-- 
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Services I'd like from auric

[Brian May]

On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 03:56:02PM -0700, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:
> I certainly miss the varied and up-to-date information that I was able
> to get from auric. Taking James Troup's advice from his announcement
> of discussing information we'd like from auric, what's on my mind
> today is the ability to check the NEW queue.

Is it still possible to run madison to check what versions of a specific
packages are available?

I am gussing this isn't possible, but I found it very useful.
-- 
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Complaint

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:19:47AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 05:55:30PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 09:05:39AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > > Thus, he probably has little choice, in some cases, but to depend on 
> > > others
> > > to deal with some of hte work, and try to coordinate with them (some of
> > 
> > Try to coordinate? When there would have been a try to cooperate by him, I
> > wouldn´t complain... but I do complain. 
> 
> Unless you are the local administrator of one of the build daemons, I
> doubt you'd have seen any of his attempts at coordination.

He is, and hasn't seen any such attempt. Nor have I, being the DD
responsible for the buildd he's the local admin of.

(Not that I agree with Ingo that there's reason for complaints -at
least, not yet- but that's a different matter entirely)

-- 
Wouter Verhelst
Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org
Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org
"Stop breathing down my neck." "My breathing is merely a simulation."
"So is my neck, stop it anyway!"
  -- Voyager's EMH versus the Prometheus' EMH, stardate 51462.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#201163: ITP: tuxcards -- A small note organisation program

[Andreas Gutowski]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Followup-For: Bug #201163


* Package name: tuxcards
  Version : 1.1
  Upstream Author : Alexander Theel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.tuxcards.de/
* License : GPL
  Description : a graphical (QT based) program to manage text notes 
 
tuxcards  provides a hierarchical notebook similar to the "CueCards"
programm. With it, all kinds of notes and ideas can be managed and sorted
within a tree structure.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux talos 2.4.20 #3 Die Jul 22 19:06:56 CEST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=de_DE, LC_CTYPE=de_DE

Re: Proposed change to debian release system

[Andreas Metzler]

Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Everybody seems to agree that new stable versions *should* be out
> about every 6 months.
[...]

No.
  cu andreas

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Branden Robinson]

[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 08:21:30PM +0100, Roland Mas wrote:
> > Feel free to propose alternatives from, say, the origional mythology which
> > spawned the concept of daemons as beings which were not inherently good or
> > evil, then.
> 
>   I'll suggest Offler (or Om), Foorgol (I don't like Fate) and, um,
> some other god coming out of Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels,
> preferably whose name starts with an N.
> 
>   Or something like that.

Mr. Pratchett's attorneys might take exception to that.

Whether they'd have actual grounds (which they probably don't unless
those names have been registered as marks) is another question entirely.
As I understand, copyright can attach to characters, but not names.

A nice trait of my proposal is that the demonological names go back
centuries, and no living person (or their estate) can claim to have
invented them.  That provides us a nice insulator from bullshit[1].

[1] well, legal bullshit anyway, if not fundie bullshit, as Nathan
Hawkins pointed out -- but such complaints deserve only our
contempt, IMO

-- 
G. Branden Robinson|I've made up my mind.  Don't try to
Debian GNU/Linux   |confuse me with the facts.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |-- Indiana Senator Earl Landgrebe
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

RE: Proposed change to debian release system

[Julian Mehnle]

Lucas Albers wrote:
> Julian Mehnle wrote:
> > I know this is no panacea, since in many cases, the maintainer cannot
> > know whether a package will perish at all (like when all spammers
> > promptly give up "advancing" their software, so a given version of
> > spamassassin would stay useful forever)... ;-)
> 
> My friend has a high volume mail server running spamassassin 2.31
> Oops the spamassassin stopped working.
> Now I have 12,000 people angry with me.
> Take that to the bank.

Lucas, not only did you horribly misquote my statement as coming from Scott, 
but you also seem to not having read my mail thoroughly.  Nowhere did I suggest 
that installed packages stop working when "expired", did I?  Please re-read my 
suggestion.

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Branden Robinson]

On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 10:30:04PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
[snip]
> I think you're seing spectres.

I think you didn't bother to read any of the parts of my message that
you didn't quote.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson|I'm sorry if the following sounds
Debian GNU/Linux   |combative and excessively personal,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |but that's my general style.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |-- Ian Jackson


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Services I'd like from auric

[Scott James Remnant]

On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 22:56, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:

> I certainly miss the varied and up-to-date information that I was able
> to get from auric. Taking James Troup's advice from his announcement
> of discussing information we'd like from auric,
> 
There's the question of botched uploads.  I think we've all accidentally
botched an upload one time or another, and having access to auric means
we can fix it without having to call on the ftpmasters for help.

Scott
-- 
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: APT-Fu 0.2.3

[Scott James Remnant]

On Sun, 2003-12-14 at 22:16, Darren Salt wrote:

> I demand that Scott James Remnant may or may not have written...
> 
> > On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 08:47, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >> Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> But your message didn't include a Content-Type header specifying that, so
> >>> it's likely to come through as garbage for most MUAs...
> >> Right, here it is again
> >> \xEF\xBB\xBF\xE8\xBE\xAD\xE6\xB5\xB7
> 
> > Now that's just the hand-printed bytecodes of raw UTF-8 :-)
> 
> > Now, if my by-hand Unicode isn't rusty, I make this out to be
> 
> > U+FEFF  ZERO WIDTH NO_BREAK SPACE
> > [...]
> 
> Slightly rusty: since that's at the start of the string, it's telling you
> which endianness is in use in the string.
> 
True for UCS-2 or UCS-4, but you can only write UTF-8 one way
(Big-Endian) deliberately so there wouldn't be this issue.

Scott
-- 
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Bug reports missing

[Branden Robinson]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:52:15PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 11:22:48AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 11:20:30PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > It's your punishment for using the close command. DON'T!
> > > There is no need and no excuse.
> > 
> > I disagree.  See situations like #214865 or #218038.
> > 
> > "close" *can* be handled responsibly.
> 
> OK, those situations were responsible. They are in the minority though,
> I think. In most cases, nnn-done is more correct.
> 
> When somebody used "close" on me recently and I complained, he
> apologised but still provided no explanation of why the bug was closed.
> Grrr.

So smack him down, but don't rail against everyone just because that one
guy was refusing to communicate.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson| One doesn't have a sense of humor.
Debian GNU/Linux   | It has you.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Larry Gelbart
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Branden Robinson]

[I am not subscribed to debian -bsd.]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 08:30:48PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Nathan Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm not opposed to anything else you've said. I do believe these
> > particular names are a bad idea, however. One of the reasons the BSD
> > mascot is considered "cute" is that it has no real connection with
> > demons, in name, or otherwise. Which to people of several religions are
> > _not_ cute.
> 
> Thanks for raising this point.  I'm very interested in the Debian
> GNU/*BSD efforts, but if named as such I would never consider using
> them (the BSD daemon is, to my mind, only borderline acceptable as it
> is).

What would be unacceptable about it, and why is it only a "borderline"
case?  What would push it over the borderline?

> I'd be happy with an alternate name, which didn't have such unpleasant
> and unholy connotations.

Unpleasant and unholy by what standard?

Which religious sect's standards of decorum is the Debian Project to
officially adopt?

> I don't have any good ideas as or an alternative right now--it's worse
> than a tiebreaker!

This is revealing.  The fundamentalist mind is much more practiced at
identifying what it's opposed to, than at identifying what it supports.

Perhaps we should use the names of famous atheists and other critics of
religion.

David Hume:
 "The Christian religion not only was at first attended with miracles,
  but even at this day cannot be believed by any reasonable person
  without one."
 "When I hear a man is religious, I conclude that he is a rascal,
  although I have known some instances of very good men being
  religious."

Mikhail Bakunin:
 "A jealous lover of human liberty, and deeming it the absolute
  condition of all that we admire and respect in humanity, I reverse the
  phrase of Voltaire, and say that if God really existed, it would be
  necessary to abolish him."

Mark Twain:
 "Religion consists in a set of things which the average man thinks he
  believes and wishes he was certain of."
 "If there is a God, he is a malign thug."

Ambrose Bierce:
 "FAITH: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks
  without knowledge, of things without parallel."
 "RELIGION: A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the
  nature of the Unknowable.
 "OCEAN: A body of water occupying about two thirds of a world made for
  man -- who has no gills."
 "SAINT: A dead sinner revised and edited."
 "[Christians are a] powerful subtribe of the Hypocrites, whose
  principal industries are murder and cheating, which they are pleased
  to call 'war' and 'commerce'."

Hmm, that last bit explains George W. Bush's deeply religious feelings
quite well! :)

-- 
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: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Christoph Berg]

Re: Branden Robinson in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Debian FreeBSD  -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
> > > Debian NetBSD   -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
> > > Debian OpenBSD  -> Debian Orobos (BSD)
> > [...]
> > Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
> > the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
> > at random.) Using names of evil, real or imagined, is not something
> > that would be helpful to Debian. That kind of publicity we don't need.
> 
> I doubt you'd have known they were names from Christian demonology if I
> hadn't told you.  I didn't propse that we use better known names like
> "Lucifer" or "Satan".  Even names like "Belial", "Asmodeus", and
> "Mephistopheles" are unfamiliar to uneducated Christians (which is most
> of them, at least in the U.S.).

I consider myself educated, and I've never heard of any demons in school
where we had 13 years of religious (catholic) education. I can
definitely say that I'm not offended, and I doubt that anyone I know
would be.

I like Branden's proposition very much. (Other than the proposed
Pratchett names.)

> In any event, for any name that doesn't raise trademark issues (and
> thus potentially jeopardize the entire project), I'd say
> the choice remains up to those who are actually doing the work -- and
> that would be the Debian *BSD porters.

Indeed.

Christoph
-- 
Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://www.df7cb.de/
Wohnheim D, 2405, Universität des Saarlandes, 0681/9657944


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Complaint

[Joel Baker]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:07:15AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:19:47AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 05:55:30PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > > 
> > > Try to coordinate? When there would have been a try to cooperate by
> > > him, I wouldn´t complain... but I do complain.
> > 
> > Unless you are the local administrator of one of the build daemons, I
> > doubt you'd have seen any of his attempts at coordination.
> 
> He is, and hasn't seen any such attempt. Nor have I, being the DD
> responsible for the buildd he's the local admin of.
> 
> (Not that I agree with Ingo that there's reason for complaints -at
> least, not yet- but that's a different matter entirely)

Then the portion of the paragraph which you decided not to quote would
apply. I suggest you go read it again.
-- 
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,''`.
Debian GNU/KLNetBSD(i386) porter : :' :
 `. `'
   `-


pgpijJgqHQSXY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Roger Leigh]

Nathan Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>> > > Well, no offense, but that's ugly as hell, and is going to square the
>> > > amount of confusion people experience when trying to decode our OS
>> > > names.
>> > 
>> > Agreed, unfortunately - it is, and I suspect it may well. Suggestions for
>> > better naming welcome, of course (or even a direction to go in).
>> 
>> We might use names from Christian demonology (since the BSD mascot
>> is the cute and devilish "daemon"), with the first letter shared by the
>> demon's name and the corresponding BSD flavor.
>> 
>> Thus:
>> 
>> Debian FreeBSD  -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
>> Debian NetBSD   -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
>> Debian OpenBSD  -> Debian Orobos (BSD)
>> 
>> I got these names from the Wikipedia > http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_specific_demons_and_types_of_demons>.
>> 
>> Moreover, none of these names are currently registered with the USPTO,
>> so we'd be set in that department.
>
> I'm not opposed to anything else you've said. I do believe these
> particular names are a bad idea, however. One of the reasons the BSD
> mascot is considered "cute" is that it has no real connection with
> demons, in name, or otherwise. Which to people of several religions are
> _not_ cute.

Thanks for raising this point.  I'm very interested in the Debian
GNU/*BSD efforts, but if named as such I would never consider using
them (the BSD daemon is, to my mind, only borderline acceptable as it
is).

I'd be happy with an alternate name, which didn't have such unpleasant
and unholy connotations.  I don't have any good ideas as or an
alternative right now--it's worse than a tiebreaker!


Regards,
Roger

-- 
Roger Leigh

Printing on GNU/Linux?  http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848.  Please sign and encrypt your mail.

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Branden Robinson]

[I am not subscribed to -bsd.]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 12:02:44PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Debian FreeBSD  -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
> > Debian NetBSD   -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
> > Debian OpenBSD  -> Debian Orobos (BSD)
> > 
> > I got these names from the Wikipedia  > http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_specific_demons_and_types_of_demons>.
> > 
> > Moreover, none of these names are currently registered with the USPTO,
> > so we'd be set in that department.
> 
> I'm not opposed to anything else you've said. I do believe these
> particular names are a bad idea, however. One of the reasons the BSD
> mascot is considered "cute" is that it has no real connection with
> demons, in name, or otherwise. Which to people of several religions are
> _not_ cute.
> 
> Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
> the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
> at random.) Using names of evil, real or imagined, is not something
> that would be helpful to Debian. That kind of publicity we don't need.

I doubt you'd have known they were names from Christian demonology if I
hadn't told you.  I didn't propse that we use better known names like
"Lucifer" or "Satan".  Even names like "Belial", "Asmodeus", and
"Mephistopheles" are unfamiliar to uneducated Christians (which is most
of them, at least in the U.S.).

I have little patience for superstitious beliefs, and less still for
people who claim to be defending the tender feelings of the ignorant.

I doubt knowledgeable and thoughtful adherents to the Christian
religion -- the kind who can actually attend a seminary and not flunk
out -- find the names I proposed particularly offensive.

If any such people are reading these lists, we can always ask them.

In any event, for any name that doesn't raise trademark issues (and
thus potentially jeopardize the entire project), I'd say
the choice remains up to those who are actually doing the work -- and
that would be the Debian *BSD porters.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson|  If you don't think for yourself,
Debian GNU/Linux   |  others will think for you -- to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |  their advantage.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |  -- Harold Gordon


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Joel Baker]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:41:50AM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Branden Robinson in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Debian FreeBSD  -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
> > > > Debian NetBSD   -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
> > > > Debian OpenBSD  -> Debian Orobos (BSD)
> > > [...]
> > > Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
> > > the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
> > > at random.) Using names of evil, real or imagined, is not something
> > > that would be helpful to Debian. That kind of publicity we don't need.
> > 
> > I doubt you'd have known they were names from Christian demonology if I
> > hadn't told you.  I didn't propse that we use better known names like
> > "Lucifer" or "Satan".  Even names like "Belial", "Asmodeus", and
> > "Mephistopheles" are unfamiliar to uneducated Christians (which is most
> > of them, at least in the U.S.).
> 
> I consider myself educated, and I've never heard of any demons in school
> where we had 13 years of religious (catholic) education. I can
> definitely say that I'm not offended, and I doubt that anyone I know
> would be.

I've spent quite a while making an (extremely casual) study of such, and I
suspect the only reason that I recognized them was because, quite frankly,
I've spent a fairly large (if not intense) amount of time researching the
topic as a whole.

Even so, I'm amenable to anyone who can come up with names which are less
loaded to random fundamentalists, if possible; of course, most of the
sources on daemons say that they are, as a rule, without names in the
origional Greek usage.

> I like Branden's proposition very much. (Other than the proposed
> Pratchett names.)

I think the point about the author's potential issue with them (whether or
not it's legal, it has many of the same potential problems) may well be
enough reason to avoid that one, sadly. Amusing as I find it.

I suppose we could always pull names from Lovecraft; I think the names from
his work have long since lost any protection they might have had. Debian
Nylarthotep, anyone?

Okay, maybe not.

> > In any event, for any name that doesn't raise trademark issues (and
> > thus potentially jeopardize the entire project), I'd say
> > the choice remains up to those who are actually doing the work -- and
> > that would be the Debian *BSD porters.
> 
> Indeed.

One speaker of whom has issues with some of it, another of whom is... me.
We'll sort it out at some point here.
-- 
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,''`.
Debian GNU/KLNetBSD(i386) porter : :' :
 `. `'
   `-


pgpzyV8w7kH7K.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Brian T. Sniffen]

Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I have little patience for superstitious beliefs, and less still for
> people who claim to be defending the tender feelings of the ignorant.

But why use names correlated with evil when other options are
available which interfere less with Debian's goals?

> I doubt knowledgeable and thoughtful adherents to the Christian
> religion -- the kind who can actually attend a seminary and not flunk
> out -- find the names I proposed particularly offensive.
>
> If any such people are reading these lists, we can always ask them.

I recognize Forneus and Orobos -- Naberius I'd have to look up.

> In any event, for any name that doesn't raise trademark issues (and
> thus potentially jeopardize the entire project), I'd say
> the choice remains up to those who are actually doing the work -- and
> that would be the Debian *BSD porters.

Street names from Berkeley have appeal, and few fundies assign
Manichean properties to asphalt.

-Brian

Re: Generating ~/.ssh/known_hosts from LDAP

[allomber]

Thanks Matt for your script.

Will you add it to debian-goodies ?

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

Imagine a large red swirl here. 

Re: experimental codename

[Rene Engelhard]

Hi,

Christoph Berg wrote:
> since we are discussing codenames for the Debian/*BSD OSs, I noticed
> that the "experimental" distribution doesn't have a codename yet, as
> unstable has with "Sid". I'd propose to call it "Scud", which is the
> Name of Sid's dog (which broke toys even worse than Sid did ;-).

I think that although "Scud" looks nice in this context giving a
codename to experimental is not something we have to do since
experimental is not a full distribution -- it only contains packages and
makes only sense with a "normal, codenamed" distro (sid) installed

Grüße/Regards,

René
-- 
 .''`.  René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
 `. `'  [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
   `-   Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB  7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
  


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Nathan Hawkins wrote:

> Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
> the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
> at random.) Using names of evil, real or imagined, is not something
> that would be helpful to Debian. That kind of publicity we don't need.

Nathan,

I understand what you are trying to say but just fyi, there is nothing
remotely evil about the Goddess Kali in Hinduism.

-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/

Re: udev and /sys mounting [was: mounting tmpfs (and sysfs) defaultly in sarge?]

[GOTO Masanori]

At Sun, 14 Dec 2003 22:01:42 +0100,
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> [1  ]
> On Dec 14, Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>  >> udev (and given time many other programs) needs sysfs mounted, so we
>  >> should decide if it will be handled by devpts.sh or by a similar script
>  >> in a different package.
>  >> Currently the udev init script[1] mounts it by itself, but I'd like to
>  >> remove this code and assume that something else already did it.
>  >IMHO it does not really belong to devpts, libsysfs seems to be a more
>  >appropriate place. Of course I don't insist of it, it's just a matter
>  >of style...
> libsysfs may not be installed on every system, so I still think libc is
> the proper package for the script.

From the view point of libc6 maintainer, it's no problem to merge /sys
mount for /etc/init.d/devpts.sh.  The name of devpts.sh should be
renamed to something, though.  And it can be also applied for /dev/shm
tmpfs.

One remaining concern is: is it ok to create /sys and /dev/shm
directory by glibc package?

Regards,
-- gotom

experimental codename

[Christoph Berg]

Hello,

since we are discussing codenames for the Debian/*BSD OSs, I noticed
that the "experimental" distribution doesn't have a codename yet, as
unstable has with "Sid". I'd propose to call it "Scud", which is the
Name of Sid's dog (which broke toys even worse than Sid did ;-).

Christoph

[1] http://www.dragonfare.com/AL/shows/toystory.html
-- 
Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://www.df7cb.de/
Wohnheim D, 2405, Universität des Saarlandes, 0681/9657944


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Failed build on mips target: need help

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 08:43:53PM +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm the maintainer of the libfilesys-smbclient-perl module. The mips build 
> fails with this error:
> 
> dpkg-deb: building package `libfilesys-smbclient-perl' in 
> `../libfilesys-smbclient-perl_1.5-1_mipsel.deb'.
>  dpkg-genchanges -B -mDebian/MIPSEL Build Daemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> dpkg-genchanges: arch-specific upload - not including arch-independent 
> packages
> dpkg-parsechangelog: error: cannot open debian/changelog to find format: 
> Permission denied
> dpkg-genchanges: error: syntax error in parsed version of changelog at line 
> 0: 
> empty file
> 
> The entire log is here:
> http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=libfilesys-smbclient-perl&ver=1.5-1&arch=mipsel&stamp=1071078382&file=log&as=raw
> 
> What could be the error here? It seems to build fine on all other archs other 
> than mipsel and mips.

This is normally a transient error; something got confused.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer

Re: How to depend on Japanese fonts?

[Jim Gettys]

I'm afraid I have to educate you: the world has been changing
out from under your feet.

Any current GTK+, Qt or Mozilla will typically use client side
fonts, which make font servers moot; fonts must be installed in
the file system visible to the application, not on a server someplace. 
This is the Xft2/fontconfig stuff deploying.

This is a fundamental change in X architecture, which has been
underway for over 18 months.
   - Jim




On Sun, 2003-12-14 at 11:34, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 02:14:05PM +1100, Ben Burton wrote:
> > Is there a simple or recommended way of making a package depend on
> > [Japanese] fonts?
> 
> It is categorically impossible and should not be done. At most you can
> use Suggests or Recommends; do not use Depends for fonts for X
> applications.
> 
> X does *not* require that fonts be installed on the same host as the
> client application, nor can it use them if they are. Fonts must rather
> be installed on the host where the font server runs, which is probably
> the one where the X server runs.
-- 
Jim Gettys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
HP Labs, Cambridge Research Laboratory

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Henning Makholm]

Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 10:30:04PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:

> > I think you're seing spectres.

> I think you didn't bother to read any of the parts of my message that
> you didn't quote.

I did. But I trimmed away those that were not necessary for the reader
to be reminded of the context. That is, I belive, common netiquette.

I ask again: How do you suggest that the NetBSD people should have
communicated their misgivings to us? As far as I can see, your
complaint is that the misgivings they speak about *could* in theory be
used as grounds for legal proceedings. If you insist on seeing evil
intentions behind the mere mention of them, how on earth do you want
them to act?

-- 
Henning Makholm  "They discussed old Tommy Somebody and Jerry Someone Else."

Re: Proposed change to debian release system

[Henning Makholm]

Scripsit Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > Everybody seems to agree that new stable versions *should* be out
> > about every 6 months.

> No.

I stand corrected, apparently. (But I have yet to imagine which
arguments would be used against doing a release if we happen to find
testing in a freezeable state 6 months after sarge releases).

-- 
Henning Makholm "Jeg forstår mig på at anvende sådanne midler på
   folks legemer, at jeg kan varme eller afkøle dem,
som jeg vil, og få dem til at kaste op, hvis det er det,
  jeg vil, eller give afføring og meget andet af den slags."

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Nunya]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 07:33:17PM -0500, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > I doubt knowledgeable and thoughtful adherents to the Christian
> > religion -- the kind who can actually attend a seminary and not flunk
> > out -- find the names I proposed particularly offensive.
> >
> 
> Street names from Berkeley have appeal, and few fundies assign
> Manichean properties to asphalt.

I hope I'm attributing correctly.

My philosophy of good and evil is private and irrelevant -- but this 
conversation has made me uncomfortable.  I'm killfiling it but -- I'm 
uncomfortable.  Could you take it elsewhere?

Re: Services I'd like from auric

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:51:05PM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:

> On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 22:56, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:
> 
> > I certainly miss the varied and up-to-date information that I was able
> > to get from auric. Taking James Troup's advice from his announcement
> > of discussing information we'd like from auric,
> > 
> There's the question of botched uploads.  I think we've all accidentally
> botched an upload one time or another, and having access to auric means
> we can fix it without having to call on the ftpmasters for help.

It depends on whether the queue daemon allows overwriting existing files, I
suppose.  There isn't much that you can't undo by overwriting or superseding
an upload.

-- 
 - mdz

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:

> Street names from Berkeley have appeal, and few fundies assign
> Manichean properties to asphalt.
>

Given Berkeleys' other famous export is LSD, how about:

acid,
sunshine,
sugar

etc.?



-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/

Re: Proposed change to debian release system

[Joel Baker]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 10:49:20AM +0800, Isaac To wrote:
> > "Henning" == Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> Henning> I stand corrected, apparently. (But I have yet to imagine which
> Henning> arguments would be used against doing a release if we happen to
> Henning> find testing in a freezeable state 6 months after sarge
> Henning> releases).
> 
> Perhaps because you'd be either forcing busy sys-admins to dist-upgrade
> every 6 months, or forcing maintainers to keep security updates for two
> stable versions?

Oddly enough, most FreeBSD sysadmins don't appear to mind doing things much
more invasive than a dist-upgrade, every six months. This has largely to do
with the fact that most upgrades are very smooth, and don't require, say, a
complete reinstall.

In this regard, Debian actually resembles the *BSDs much more closely than
most other Linux distributions (and that isn't a bad thing).

Oh, and as for security? They're already supporting 'oldstable' for, oh...
about 6 months, or more.

So tell me again why this is supposed to be a bad idea? (One that may
take some practice to achieve, sure, and not one I expect us to hit next
release, though I'd be happy to get it below the steadily expanding history
of Debian - and the current RM's goals appear to be a strong step in that
direction).
-- 
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,''`.
Debian GNU/NetBSD(i386) porter   : :' :
 `. `'
   `-


pgpPjs5928mzD.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Proposed change to debian release system

[Isaac To]

> "Henning" == Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Henning> I stand corrected, apparently. (But I have yet to imagine which
Henning> arguments would be used against doing a release if we happen to
Henning> find testing in a freezeable state 6 months after sarge
Henning> releases).

Perhaps because you'd be either forcing busy sys-admins to dist-upgrade
every 6 months, or forcing maintainers to keep security updates for two
stable versions?

Regards,
Isaac.

unsubscribe

[Christopher Tessone]

-- 
Christopher A. Tessone
Knox College, Galesburg, Illinois
BA Student, Russian and Mathematics
http://www.polyglut.net/

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Cameron Patrick]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 07:19:22PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:

| Perhaps we should use the names of famous atheists and other critics of
| religion.

Bertrand Russell: "The Christian religion has been and still is is the
chief enemy of moral progress in the world."

Cameron.

Premier Spec Comp

[mduchnij]

Check this out ;)


bin7jgjtTLPs5.bin
Description: Binary data

Re: Nice multilingual environment with Debian menu

[Arne Goetje]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Saturday 13 December 2003 14:28, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 02:21:25PM -0500, Joe Drew wrote:
> > On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 12:43, Osamu Aoki wrote:

> > does this mean different input methods?
>
> Yes.
>
> Actually, uxterm under ja_JP.UTF-8 brings out xim(kinput2 for me) but
> not in en_US.UTF-8.  I guess in en_US.UTF-8, compose key is active to
> make accented characters (not tested).
>
> Since I start console programs in the customized locale, this change
> of the console program behavior can be enjoyed.  If I were still
> using hacks in my shell start up script[*1], I would not have enjoyed
> this in uxterm.
>
> Anyway, my point in posting this also in -devel was that Debian menu
> is very useful tool if you know how to use it.

I suffer from the same problem, too. I'm using chinese, english and 
german. However, the problem does not get fixed by changing the locale 
all the time... this should not be done anyways. 
IMHO the local setting should reflect in which country you are based, 
and not which languages or input methods you are using.
Unfortunately many program developers abuse the locales for exactly that 
function... :(

If you choose en_US.UTF-8 as locale and you are using KDE for example, 
you can still input other languages which use the western alphabet by 
changing the keyboard settings on the fly.
However, this does not work for asian input methods. Especially the 
asian IMs are the ones which depend on the locale. They shouldn't do 
it.

So, instead of trying to work around the problem by changing your 
individual system, we should convice the programmers of these 
applications in question, not to depend on the locale setting, but use 
a switch in the application configuration to choose the proper input 
method.

Unfortunately openoffice.org goes in the same wrong direction, by 
requiring the user to use a chinese locale setting to input chinese... 
that's nuts! Obviously the developers didn't think of people who have 
to deal with more than one language... :(

Cheers
Arne

- -- 
Arne GÃtje (éçè) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/685D1E8C
Fingerprint: 2056 F6B7 DEA8 B478 311F  1C34 6E9F D06E 685D 1E8C
Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net.   Encrypted e-mail preferred.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/3Rt2bp/QbmhdHowRArgqAJ0Y7sizPj+gn9F6strJWvgqZ5KMigCePgPq
pyOXjAmqIijBOZGhEzEre1Q=
=RDyn
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: How to depend on Japanese fonts?

[Cameron Patrick]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 05:20:41PM -0800, Jim Gettys wrote:

| This is a fundamental change in X architecture, which has been
| underway for over 18 months.

And it's strongly associated with freedesktop.org, which I'm sure will
endear Andrew to the new method even more :-)

Cameron.

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Russell Coker]

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:43, "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
> > Street names from Berkeley have appeal, and few fundies assign
> > Manichean properties to asphalt.
>
> Given Berkeleys' other famous export is LSD, how about:
>
> acid,
> sunshine,
> sugar

LSD is "lysergic acid diethylamide", that's three words and there are three 
variants of BSD.  So the only question is which BSD gets which chemical term.

-- 
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/   My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/  Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/  My home page

SCIM (was: Nice multilingual environment with Debian menu)

[Arne Goetje]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Just a quick suggestion:

have you tried SCIM as an IM?
http://www.turbolinux.com.cn/~suzhe/scim/
it supports CJK and Unicode. In fact you can use a UTF-8 locale, like 
en_US.UTF-8 and input any CJK char, plus unicode sequences into any 
unicode aware application. I just tried it, it works pretty well.

Unfortunately there is no debian package available, you have to compile 
the source by yourself.
Any questions: ask me.

- -- 
Arne GÃtje (éçè) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/685D1E8C
Fingerprint: 2056 F6B7 DEA8 B478 311F  1C34 6E9F D06E 685D 1E8C
Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net.   Encrypted e-mail preferred.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/3THlbp/QbmhdHowRApm1AJ9vUrcl2bjD1GzrtWPMlI6yRdtfBwCfVuSz
f/EZ5IO6jSJ8TGbyYB+PlB0=
=075n
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

[Nathan Hawkins]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:53:15PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 12:02:44PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Debian FreeBSD  -> Debian Forneus (BSD)
> > > Debian NetBSD   -> Debian Naberius (BSD)
> > > Debian OpenBSD  -> Debian Orobos (BSD)
> > > 
> > > I got these names from the Wikipedia  > > http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_specific_demons_and_types_of_demons>.
> > > 
> > > Moreover, none of these names are currently registered with the USPTO,
> > > so we'd be set in that department.
> > 
> > I'm not opposed to anything else you've said. I do believe these
> > particular names are a bad idea, however. One of the reasons the BSD
> > mascot is considered "cute" is that it has no real connection with
> > demons, in name, or otherwise. Which to people of several religions are
> > _not_ cute.
> > 
> > Your proposal would change that. I oppose it, and I would oppose it just
> > the same if you wanted to call them Loki, Kali or Hitler. (To pick a few
> > at random.) Using names of evil, real or imagined, is not something
> > that would be helpful to Debian. That kind of publicity we don't need.
> 
> I doubt you'd have known they were names from Christian demonology if I
> hadn't told you.  I didn't propse that we use better known names like
> "Lucifer" or "Satan".  Even names like "Belial", "Asmodeus", and
> "Mephistopheles" are unfamiliar to uneducated Christians (which is most
> of them, at least in the U.S.).

Sorry, I had a somewhat unique education. Anyway most people in the
U.S. are appallingly uneducated, regardless of their religion. I fail to
see the point.

> I have little patience for superstitious beliefs, and less still for
> people who claim to be defending the tender feelings of the ignorant.
>
> I doubt knowledgeable and thoughtful adherents to the Christian
> religion -- the kind who can actually attend a seminary and not flunk
> out -- find the names I proposed particularly offensive.
>
> If any such people are reading these lists, we can always ask them.

For myself it's not a matter of offense. I simply don't want my work
named after evil, whether real or imaginary.

> In any event, for any name that doesn't raise trademark issues (and
> thus potentially jeopardize the entire project), I'd say
> the choice remains up to those who are actually doing the work -- and
> that would be the Debian *BSD porters.

As one of the Debian BSD porters, I'm objecting.

---Nathan