Bug#290187: www.debian.org: packages.debian.org recently got uglier in non-CSS browsers
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 09:42:02PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote: > On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 10:23:48AM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > What do you think about something like > > http://packages.debian.net/unstable/graphics/scribus ? I replaced the > > [dep] string with the image and put the [dep] into the alt attribute. > > It doesn't look really nice because of the linebreak after the image > > but I only can change that with CSS. > > Please note also that the new layout is less Lynx-friendly because it > adds vertical space. Entries are now in the form: > > [dep] package namepackage description > ... > > It may be replaced by > > [dep] package namepackage description > ... > > where [dep] is rendered like now by an alt attribute or hidecss. Ok, I can try that > This also applies for the download table, it is much longer than before Huh? The download table is the only that that didn't change at all... So how did it get much longer than before? (Aside from the fact that this is a pure lynx bug, all other text browser render the table sufficiently) > and is pretty annoying. In order to be usable, rows and cols have to > be swapped, i.e. display would look like > ArchList of files SizeInstalled size > alpha [list of files] 200 500 > arm[list of files] 200 500 > ... Yeah, Jutta proposed that, too. > It is then readable with Lynx, but looks surely ugly with graphical > browsers, so you may be reluctant to perform such a change. In this > case, please at least move this table below > Search for other versions of > so that we do not have to scroll down to read useful information, or > move it to a dedicated 'download' page. I'm still unsure which of these to implement, will do some more tests. Gruesse, -- Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www: http://www.djpig.de/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: Autodiscovery of RSS feeds also on the front page
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 09:08:17PM +0100, Peter Karlsson wrote: > In a recent comment[1], there was an underlying complaint that the security > RSS feeds are hard to find since they are not linked from the front page, > even though they are linked from the security page. Since the latest DSAs > are listed on the front page, I think it might be a good idea to provide > the autodiscovery links ( elements in the page header) also on the > front page (and in the future similar ones for news items). Sounds good to me. > However, when I added autodiscovery to the security page, there was a > complaint[2] about this not "looking good" in Lynx (to which I disagree, I > think it looks just nice to having them there). Hmm, looks like lynx should just add a linebreak after each of them... I don't think there is much we can do about that. (little text browser survey: w3m seems not to support this at all, elinks makes something nice out of it) > So, before I go on changing the front page I thought I'd ask for an opinion > from the list. What do you think? Should I add the autodiscovery s to > the front page as well? I am not planning to add visible links to the > feeds, just the elements so that browsers and other tools supporting > autodiscovery will find the feeds. All for it. Gruesse, -- Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www: http://www.djpig.de/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Please, would specify in the global packages list, from which group each package is related.
On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 12:34:58AM +0100, Jutta Wrage wrote: > > Am Dienstag, 18.01.05 um 14:58 Uhr schrieb Frank Lichtenheld: > > >What a Accept header is you browser sending? Mine sends > >Accept: > >text/xml,application/xml,application/xhtml+xml,text/html;q=0.9,text/ > >plain;q=0.8,image/png,*/*;q=0.5 > > Mine does send nothing like that. It leaves it to the server to find > the best one. And obviously apache thinks txt is better than html. Hmm, can't reproduce that, neither with an empty Accept or a Accept of */* Gruesse, -- Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www: http://www.djpig.de/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#291188: www.debian.org: ports/amd64/ mentions to be most complete after i386
Package: www.debian.org Severity: normal The webpage http://www.debian.org/ports/amd64/ mentions in paragraph three "Taking the ported source packages count, debian-amd64 is the most complete port after i386, see the Buildd stats." But looking at the picture linked, powerpc is more complete too, at least most of the time in the graph. Egon -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-9-amd64-k8-smp Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#290187: www.debian.org: packages.debian.org recently got uglier in non-CSS browsers
On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 10:55:01AM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 09:42:02PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote: > > This also applies for the download table, it is much longer than before > > Huh? The download table is the only that that didn't change at all... Ok, I realised this isn't true. I added a to get valid HTML ( is not allowed directly in ). I will replace that with which should fix this (the "longer than before" part). > So how did it get much longer than before? (Aside from the fact that > this is a pure lynx bug, all other text browser render the table > sufficiently) Gruesse, -- Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www: http://www.djpig.de/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
typo (?) in webwml/english/security/2005/dsa-646.wml
Hi, I thought that "exploition" might have to be "exploitation" in webwml/english/security/2005/dsa-646.wml. If so, please fix it. By the way, there seems to be "exploition" also in dsa-629.wml. regards, -- SUGIYAMA Tomoaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Who's using Debian
Oganization type: non-profit This organization have one workstation and i choose Debian because it's the best for newbie like me -- Bruno de Souza Silva Linux User #378976 gnupgID: 533AFA74 MSN - [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: D-I Manual on official Debian website
-- Forwarded Message -- Subject: Re: D-I Manual on official Debian website Date: Wednesday 19 January 2005 16:08 From: Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 03:55:20PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > On January 6 I have send [1] with a proposed solution to get the manual > build with the names and links as you requested for the website. > > I have not yet seen a response to this proposal. > Could you please have a look so we can finalize things? Uh, sorry. Read it, took a look at the tarball, but didn't answer you :/ Looks good (except for the fact that the settings in buildweb.sh seem to be for a partial debug build but you probably knew that[1]). You can also apply the patch for the order change .en.html -> .html.en. Seems indeed preferable here. [1] I mean lines like architectures="alpha arm hppa i386 ia64 m68k mips mipsel powerpc s390 sparc" architectures="i386 sparc" Gruesse, -- Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www: http://www.djpig.de/ --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
issue with search.d.o
Hi, I have some troubles with search.d.o: links ask me what I want to do with the document whose type is unknown (application/x-trash). Mime type seems to be wrong. Could someone check this please? or explain how I can search on this site if I'm wrong. Nicolas Bertolissio -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: typo (?) in webwml/english/security/2005/dsa-646.wml
On Wednesday 19 January 2005 17:02, SUGIYAMA Tomoaki wrote: > Hi, I thought that "exploition" might have to be "exploitation" in > webwml/english/security/2005/dsa-646.wml. If so, please fix it. > > By the way, there seems to be "exploition" also in dsa-629.wml. Both are fixed now, thanks. -- Tobias Early to bed and early to rise and you'll be groggy when everyone else is wide awake. pgpJ8Cwt1vmgy.pgp Description: PGP signature
friend.... vladimir
very hard to find the text or program here I need 2hr to find this... not good for this web site... Friends comme the time for STANDARD for software and OS Microsoft - Windows ** XP --- have the STANDARD and with this point they are FIRST I like Linux but he need STANDARD vladimir -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: friend.... vladimir
Vladimir Vesselinov wrote:
> very hard to find the text or program
> here I need 2hr to find this...
Try using synaptic or another frontend, they're easier if you don't know what
you're looking for, see section editors. Also of interest might be
http://packages.debian.org/stable/editors/.
> comme the time for STANDARD for software and OS
Standards like (X)HTML, POSIX, LSB, HTTP, SMTP, etc. work quite well you'll
find. Standard software and OS roughly translate into monopoly by a power coaved
company.
> Microsoft - Windows ** XP --- have the STANDARD and with this
> point they are FIRST
Hmm, sort of like with TNEF, (X)HTML, CSS, Outlook's ability to send/receive
messages in ".doc" format, and WM{A,V}?
> I like Linux but he need STANDARD
> vladimir
Linux implements many standards, TCP, UDP, IP, EHCI, UHCI, OHCI, and PS/2 to
name a few.
this is a matter for debian-user btw
--
-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.1
GAT/CM$/CS>$/CC/IT$/M/S/O/U dpu s+:++ !a C++$>C+++$
UB+++>$L$*-- P+>++$ L+++()$ E-(---) W+++>$ N(+) o? K-
w--(---) O? M V? PS++@ PE-@ Y+@ PGP++(+++)>$ t? 5? X? R tv--(-)
b++(+++)@ DI? D? G e-> h* r? z*
--END GEEK CODE BLOCK--
David Mandelberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#291188: marked as done (www.debian.org: ports/amd64/ mentions to be most complete after i386)
Your message dated Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:23:57 -0800 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#291188: www.debian.org: ports/amd64/ mentions to be most complete after i386 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 19 Jan 2005 10:22:26 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jan 19 02:22:26 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from chemo14.sci.kun.nl [131.174.179.49] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1CrCyo-wn-00; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 02:22:26 -0800 Received: from egonw by chemo14.sci.kun.nl with local (Exim 4.43) id 1CrCy6-00065F-HN; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:21:42 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Egon Willighagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: www.debian.org: ports/amd64/ mentions to be most complete after i386 X-Mailer: reportbug 3.5 Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:21:42 +0100 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: www.debian.org Severity: normal The webpage http://www.debian.org/ports/amd64/ mentions in paragraph three "Taking the ported source packages count, debian-amd64 is the most complete port after i386, see the Buildd stats." But looking at the picture linked, powerpc is more complete too, at least most of the time in the graph. Egon -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-9-amd64-k8-smp Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1) --- Received: (at 291188-done) by bugs.debian.org; 20 Jan 2005 05:25:02 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jan 19 21:25:02 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from zoot.lafn.org [206.117.18.6] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1CrUoY-0003sz-00; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:25:02 -0800 Received: from localhost.localdomain (wbar6-lax1-4-10-203-108.lax1.dsl-verizon.net [4.10.203.108]) (authenticated bits=0) by zoot.lafn.org (8.12.3p3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id j0K5Ot8q046710 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:25:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Received: from kraai by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CrUnW-hb-2W; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:23:59 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:23:57 -0800 From: Matt Kraai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Egon Willighagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#291188: www.debian.org: ports/amd64/ mentions to be most complete after i386 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.1 (built Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:12:09 +) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on localhost.localdomain) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.80/629/Tue Dec 14 11:01:57 2004 clamav-milter version 0.80j on zoot.lafn.org X-Virus-Status: Clean Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 11:21:42AM +0100, Egon Willighagen wrote: > The webpage http://www.debian.org/ports/amd64/ mentions in paragraph three > "Taking the ported source packages count, debian-amd64 is the most complete > port after i386, see the Buildd stats." > > But looking at the picture linked, powerpc is more complete too, at least > most of the time in the graph. I've removed said claim. -- Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
