Dovecot 1.1.1
Dovecot 1.1.1 is now available from original sources. Are you planning to move to these soon? -- Daniel L. Miller, VP - Engineering, SET AM Fire & Electronic Services, Inc. [AMFES] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 702-312-5276 -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: LSB Package API
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 20:02 +0200, Denis Washington wrote: > We shouldn't resignate just because nothing came out of the previous > attempts. Also, the LSB Package API is designed to require as little > adjustments as possible to installers - it's just to calls and a single > file, after all. Uses a DBUS service: check Uses pluggable backends: check Use PolicyKit: check Use an XML parser: check System activation: check Define own linked list implementation: check > As already mentioned before in this thread, the focus of PackageKit and the > LSB Package API are quite different, so there is no big reason for them to > not exist side-by-side. Err, http://www.linuxfoundation.org/en/LSB_Package_API suggests otherwise. You've got calls to PolicyKit, a system activated daemon, pluggable backends - you might as well call the project LSBPackageKit. You don't appear to have any defined scope for the project and it seems to be just be technology-bingo at the moment. > I don't think this is a corner case at all. For one thing, propietary > applications might just don't play a role _because_ there is no really > good distribution method for them - the typical chicken-and-egg problem. > (I'm not saying this is the only reason, but an important one.) We're > just not giving them an easy method of cross-distro integration. I think > providing this is important. Have you talked to customers? I have. Lots of them. Customers don't want DBUS services or PolicyKit, they want one of two things: 1. A tested (supported) binary package for something like RHEL and SLED. 2. An installer that uses something like /bin/sh for the other distros. If you want them to use a library to install stuff, you better make it static (else they have to depend on really new versions of distros) and also make it very lightweight, libc type stuff. Most of this closed source stuff has to install on distros 5 years old, and continue to work on distros 2 years in the future. > Second, this way of distribution will help open-source projects as well. > It would make it really easy for them to distribute bleeding-edge > versions of there apps that integrate well into the packaging system > without having to package for each and every package manager. Talk to the distro maintainers. They really don't want random projects replacing supported packages. Packages are not normally just the upstream tarball with a spec file - normally the packager includes spec files to make the package compile, or integrate well with the distro. Then there's the world of pain that comes from security errata. I really think you should talk to distro maintainers as well as closed source vendors before coming up with any more API. Richard. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: LSB Package API
On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 12:03 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: > On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 20:02 +0200, Denis Washington wrote: > > We shouldn't resignate just because nothing came out of the previous > > attempts. Also, the LSB Package API is designed to require as little > > adjustments as possible to installers - it's just to calls and a single > > file, after all. > > Uses a DBUS service: check > Uses pluggable backends: check > Use PolicyKit: check > Use an XML parser: check > System activation: check > Define own linked list implementation: check I don't know where you a heading. The D-Bus service, pluggable backends, the XML parser, and system activation are all things that installers don't have to deal with. They just use the few functions from liblsb_package. > > As already mentioned before in this thread, the focus of PackageKit and the > > LSB Package API are quite different, so there is no big reason for them to > > not exist side-by-side. > > Err, http://www.linuxfoundation.org/en/LSB_Package_API suggests > otherwise. > > You've got calls to PolicyKit, a system activated daemon, pluggable > backends - you might as well call the project LSBPackageKit. You don't > appear to have any defined scope for the project and it seems to be just > be technology-bingo at the moment. Just because it does use the same technologies, that doesn't mean the APIs' scope is the same. You should know enough about your project to realize that the LSB Package API is focused on entirely different needs (providing an interface for third-party app installers) than PackageKit (provide an API for the packaging system, based on distro repositories). > > I don't think this is a corner case at all. For one thing, propietary > > applications might just don't play a role _because_ there is no really > > good distribution method for them - the typical chicken-and-egg problem. > > (I'm not saying this is the only reason, but an important one.) We're > > just not giving them an easy method of cross-distro integration. I think > > providing this is important. > > Have you talked to customers? I have. Lots of them. Customers don't want > DBUS services or PolicyKit, they want one of two things: > > 1. A tested (supported) binary package for something like RHEL and SLED. > 2. An installer that uses something like /bin/sh for the other distros. Again, ISVs don't have to deal with D-BUS etc. Those are _implementation details_. They can just use a simple C API which could also be easily wrapped into simple command-line tools. > If you want them to use a library to install stuff, you better make it > static (else they have to depend on really new versions of distros) and > also make it very lightweight, libc type stuff. Most of this closed > source stuff has to install on distros 5 years old, and continue to work > on distros 2 years in the future. The LSB Package API would only be in newer versions of the LSB, so support of legacy distros is not that high on the list. (On any older distro, no one could rely on the API even being there.) > > Second, this way of distribution will help open-source projects as well. > > It would make it really easy for them to distribute bleeding-edge > > versions of there apps that integrate well into the packaging system > > without having to package for each and every package manager. > > Talk to the distro maintainers. They really don't want random projects > replacing supported packages. Packages are not normally just the > upstream tarball with a spec file - normally the packager includes spec > files to make the package compile, or integrate well with the distro. > Then there's the world of pain that comes from security errata. No packages are going to be replaced. LSB applications are required to install to /opt, so nothing is overridden. Even the package naming won't clash (it's "lsb--" in the implemented RPM and DPKG backends). > I really think you should talk to distro maintainers as well as closed > source vendors before coming up with any more API. A number of ISVs have already been talked to; see the comments from Jeff Licquia. Regards, Denis -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Thank you for the new Quick Search on Synaptic
Olá Michael e a todos. On Thursday 19 June 2008 10:05:26 Michael Vogt wrote: > It is usually grayed out when the helper application > "apt-xapian-index" is not installed. It is only a recommends of synaptic. Maybe i have mine, because I force all the recommends to be installed... -- BUGabundo :o) (``-_-´´) http://Ubuntu.BUGabundo.net Linux user #443786GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB My new micro-blog @ http://BUGabundo.net ps. My emails tend to sound authority and aggressive. I'm sorry in advance. I'll try to be more assertive as time goes by... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Modifying a bug's description
Olá Matthew e a todos. On Thursday 19 June 2008 11:08:25 Matthew Paul Thomas wrote: > The link for editing a bug report's description will soon be more > prominent, hopefully making it more obvious that descriptions can and > should be kept up to date. I'm interested to see how much that number will > change. on beta.lp.net i already see a _huge_ yellow ballon. what makes me a lot of confusion, is that it seems that I'm able to edit ALL bugs... is this correct? -- BUGabundo :o) (``-_-´´) http://Ubuntu.BUGabundo.net Linux user #443786GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB My new micro-blog @ http://BUGabundo.net ps. My emails tend to sound authority and aggressive. I'm sorry in advance. I'll try to be more assertive as time goes by... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Security Assurance in FOSS: Request for contribution
Olá Andre e a todos. On Thursday 19 June 2008 00:02:32 Andre Harale wrote: > Dear members of the Ubuntu project, > > we kindly ask for your participation in our survey on security assurance in > free/open source software. > Security assurances are confidence building activities through structured > design processes, documentation, and testing. > You could have used a less harder English structure... Non-English ppl will have some extra difficulty understanding all the questions. -- BUGabundo :o) (``-_-´´) http://Ubuntu.BUGabundo.net Linux user #443786GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB My new micro-blog @ http://BUGabundo.net ps. My emails tend to sound authority and aggressive. I'm sorry in advance. I'll try to be more assertive as time goes by... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Modifying a bug's description
Olá Matthew e a todos. On Tuesday 24 June 2008 17:58:52 Matthew Paul Thomas wrote: > Hi Fernando > > > on beta.lp.net i already see a _huge_ yellow ballon. > > What do you mean by "ballon"? Can you send me a screenshot? https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/@@/edit this should show it. > > what makes me a lot of confusion, is that it seems that I'm able to edit > > ALL bugs... is this correct? > > You have always been able to. kinda strange but its the FOSS way. lol -- BUGabundo :o) (``-_-´´) http://Ubuntu.BUGabundo.net Linux user #443786GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB My new micro-blog @ http://BUGabundo.net ps. My emails tend to sound authority and aggressive. I'm sorry in advance. I'll try to be more assertive as time goes by... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
kernel image updates and dependencies
Hi, A recent update to the kernel in my Gutsy laptop, from 2.6.22-14.21 to 2.6.22-15.54, prompted by Update Manager has caused VMware to stop working. This is likely because the vmware modules have not yet been updated from 2.6.22-14 to 2.6.22-15. I've lodged a bug about this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-meta/+bug/242505 My question is this: * How is it possible that this update was installed at all? Isn't this exact issue the reason we have dependencies at all? -- Onno Benschop Connected via Optus B3 at S31°54'06" - E115°50'39" (Yokine, WA) -- ()/)/)()..ASCII for Onno.. |>>?..EBCDIC for Onno.. --- -. -. --- ..Morse for Onno.. ITmaze - ABN: 56 178 057 063 - ph: 04 1219 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
MID Edition vs Netbook Remix
Is the recently announced Ubuntu MID Edition the same as earlier announced Ubuntu Netbook Remix? Or is the Netbook Remix just based on MID Edition? The MID Edition announcement doesn't mention it and it might create confusion. -- ## Przemysław Kulczycki <<>> Azrael Nightwalker ## # jabber: azrael[na]jabster.pl | tlen: azrael29a # ### www: http://reksio.ftj.agh.edu.pl/~azrael/ ### signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: MID Edition vs Netbook Remix
On Tuesday 24 June 2008 18:43, Przemysław Kulczycki wrote: > Is the recently announced Ubuntu MID Edition the same as earlier > announced Ubuntu Netbook Remix? > Or is the Netbook Remix just based on MID Edition? > The MID Edition announcement doesn't mention it and it might create > confusion. As neither are official Ubuntu releases, it's something you'd have to ask Canonical. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: MID Edition vs Netbook Remix
Przemysław Kulczycki escreveu: > Is the recently announced Ubuntu MID Edition the same as earlier > announced Ubuntu Netbook Remix? > Or is the Netbook Remix just based on MID Edition? > The MID Edition announcement doesn't mention it and it might create > confusion. > Hello. They are separate projects. Ubuntu MID Edition was recently launched (http://blog.canonical.com/?p=13) and it's a platform created to support MID-type devices. The Ubuntu Netbook Remix is basically a standard Ubuntu desktop tweaked to work better with smaller screen devices. []s Adilson. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: MID Edition vs Netbook Remix
Przemysław Kulczycki wrote: > Is the recently announced Ubuntu MID Edition the same as earlier announced > Ubuntu Netbook Remix? > Or is the Netbook Remix just based on MID Edition? > The MID Edition announcement doesn't mention it and it might create > confusion. Ubuntu MID is a late hardy release of some of the packages that are part of the ubuntu-mobile seed, along with images built therefrom, for which Canonical was willing to allocate a temporary alternate archive location. From intrepid, it is expected that the regular Ubuntu schedule can be met, and that ubuntu-mobile will be just another flavour of Ubuntu, although it is likely to continue to have USB install images, rather than ISO images, as most devices of the target class do not have optical drives. Netbook Remix is a separate remix of Ubuntu, based on some of the same technologies used in Ubuntu MID, and is essentially external to Ubuntu itself, although derivative. The relationship between Netbook Remix and Ubuntu has been more clearly explained elsewhere (1). 1: http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/151 -- Emmet HIKORY -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
The non-evil graphics card
Hello all, probably some of you already read that statement of kernel developers about the opening of graphics drivers: Currently I'm using Intel's integrated graphics (G965, G31), but I'm about to upgrade to a "real" graphics card. Which vendor should I prefer (or stay with the G31) in order to support proper open source graphics drivers? Is there a contraindication if I want to use CUDA-like technologies (I'm doing FEA, CFD) ? Thanks, MarKus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
