> Just out of curiosity, does the following represent a horribly
> formatted and human-unreadable package announcement? Except for
> the lack of a Priority field, it passes the dchanges(1) syntax check.
Very nice! I think it looks quite good. I also happen to like seeing
the MD5SUM and file si
Just out of curiosity, does the following represent a horribly
formatted and human-unreadable package announcement? Except for
the lack of a Priority field, it passes the dchanges(1) syntax check.
> Date: Mon Oct 23 18:43:31 MET 1995
> Package: adduser
> Version: 1.94-2
> Description: Utilit
reopen 1737
Dirk Eddelbuettel writes ("Bug#1737: missing man pages for accouting commands"):
> Susan G Kleinmann writes:
> Susan> The man page and the info page for 'acct' refer the reader to
> Susan> acct(5) for additional information. No such page exists.
>
> True, but that is a bug in the upstream ve
Package: gnuchess
Version: 4.0.74-2
There are no manpages for the gnuchess programs.
Sven
--
Sven Rudolph ([EMAIL PROTECTED]); WWW : http://www.sax.de/~sr1/
Package: nas
Version: 1.2p2-1
There are no manpages for /usr/X11R6/bin/au and /usr/X11R6/bin/auvoxware .
Sven
--
Sven Rudolph ([EMAIL PROTECTED]); WWW : http://www.sax.de/~sr1/
Susan G. Kleinmann writes ("Bug#1736: `atrun' man page: -l is optional"):
> Pacakage: at
> Version: 2.8a-2
>
> In atrun's manpage, the SYNOPSIS line reads:
> atrun [-l load_avg] [-d]
>
> I believe it should read:
> atrun [[-l] load_avg] [-d]
Does this really strike you as a documentation r
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> if I submit to Bruce's arm-twisting and package some of my 29k
> cross-development tools, it almost seems like they'd deserve a new
> subdirectory like 'cross', or maybe 'embedded'
Note that Bdale is using Debian as a development platform for firmware that
will go int
Package: bash
Version: 1.14.4-2
To reproduce:
rsh sh -i
Or, if from a Debian system with an un-fixed libc, use:
rsh -- sh -i
(This is bug#911, which started out life with me reporting this as a
problem in netstd, and bug#1685, originally reported against dpkg.)
This will sit and not produce
I'm trying to puzzle out /bin/perl
On a new system today, I tried to run perl and ran into problems
because /usr/lib/libdb.so.1 wasn't available. Can anyone tell me if
I'm doing something wrong or if it's the system that's wrong?
Thanks,
--
Raul
Peter Tobias asks me in email:
> Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Package: netbase
> > Version: 1.19-1
> >
> > I've now tracked down what it is that keeps reenabling my syslog's
> > network listening: the netbase package's /etc/services file has syslog
> > uncommented.
> >
> > Commenting out the /etc/service
I'll see if it will fit. I currently have the "plain" MS-DOS filesystem
included. The kernel is very close to maximum size, though.
Thanks
Bruce
http://www.toystory.com";>http://www.hams.com/tslogo.gif"; alt="Toy Story" border=0>
I would like to see this happen also.
Umsdos booting is a big help to some occasional linux users.
Thanks,
Costa
On a newly created (though slightly fudged) debian system, I'm getting
the message:
dpkg: cannot scan updates directory `/var/lib/dpkg/updates/': No such file or
directory
when I try and use dpkg (-i or -C, for instance).
/var/lib/dpkg/updates/ exists and is empty.
--
Raul
I think that debian should include umsdos support.
Here's what's needed:
(1) a kernel with umsdos support compiled in
(2) the utility umssync
Also, umsdos pulls a stunt for the root partition -- for this case the
subdirectory that, under the msdos file system, would be named "linux"
is recast as
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> /dev/tty has mode 660.
Oops.
--
-- Attention Radio Amateurs: For information on "Linux for Hams",
-- read the WWW page http://www.hams.com/LinuxForHams,
-- or e-mail the word "help" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: at
Version: 2.8a-2
The at command sometimes has problems with date parsing which result
in a SEGV. For example:
$ at tomorrow
Segmentation fault
But if I try this as root, it works...
Marek
: Fernando wrote to debian-bugs:
: > Pakckage: perl
: > Version: 5.001-5
: (perl5-porters, this is 5.001m without additional packages).
:
: > Notes: tried a.out only, happens also with 5.001-4, however 5.001-3 is OK
: (5.001-3 == 5.001e).
:
: > Perl seems to be confused making some arithmetic opera
Package: base
Version: 0.93.6-10
/dev/tty has mode 660. Shouldn't it be 666? I believe this is the
cause of a problem someone reported about not being able to run top.
David
--
David EngelOptical Data Systems, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 1101 E. Arapaho R
Package: libc
Version: 4.6.27
chiark:~> cat t.c
#include
int main(void) {
printf("%s\n",getservbyport(23,"tcp")->s_name);
return 0;
}
chiark:~> gcc t.c
chiark:~> ./a.out
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
chiark:~> gcc -g t.c
chiark:~> gdb a.out
GDB is free software and you are welcome to distr
Package: nvi
Version: 1.34
Revision: 7
Maintainer: Ian Murdock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
$ TERM=xterm-pcolor nvi
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
This shouldn' happen even with termcap based programs
-- Siggy (the middle S.)
Anthony,
Thanks for the prompt response. I'd appreciate it if you'd copy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on future emails regarding this, and retain
the Subject line intact so that our bug tracking system can handle
the email properly.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> The choice for AE to handle multibyte functions
Susan G Kleinmann writes:
Susan> There are inconsistencies in the documentation of the paths of
Susan> accouting files.
Thanks. These inconsistencies arise mainly from "Linuxisation" and
"Debianization" of the acct package. I will correct these inconsistencies in
the texinfo source for the
On Sun, 22 Oct 1995 23:16:12 -0600, Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> It was pretty easy for the 'watch' utility I packaged as my first
> attempt to choose 'misc', but if I submit to Bruce's arm-twisting
> and package some of my 29k cross-development tools, it almost seems
> like they'd des
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Bruce Perens writes ("Re: ChangeLog format "):
> > Please make sure, whatever [alternative] upload announcement [...]
>
> My format is suitable, except for one piece of information which it
> doesn't contain: the subsection for the package. I'm not convinc
Susan G Kleinmann writes:
Susan> The man page and the info page for 'acct' refer the reader to
Susan> acct(5) for additional information. No such page exists.
True, but that is a bug in the upstream version that I as the maintainer
can't do anything about but writing the man page myself. A
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I think there are some people who are doing an awful lot of automatic
> copying of information from one place to another, with reformatting
> en-route ...
Could be. I don't think I'm one of them. If I were doing that, it'd
be no concern of yours.
> [...]
> I w
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> What precisely does dchanges take as input ?
I wondered why you'd ask this, until I discovered that the
dchanges packages wasn't umong the packages I'd downloaded.
After some searching around on ftp.debian.org, I located
it in project/experimental.
Here's a copy
Package: netbase
Version: 1.19-1
I've now tracked down what it is that keeps reenabling my syslog's
network listening: the netbase package's /etc/services file has syslog
uncommented.
Commenting out the /etc/services entry is of course a very nasty way
of nixing syslog's usually-undesirable netwo
Package: acct
Version: 5-12
There are inconsistencies in the documentation of the paths of
accouting files.
The info page for 'accounting' says that the files of interest are:
/usr/adm/wtmp <== records for each log in and log out
/usr/adm/acct <== records each command that was run
/usr/ad
Package: acct
Version: 5-12
The man page and the info page for 'acct' refer the reader to
acct(5) for additional information. No such page exists.
Likewise, there are no man pages for `ac', `accton', `lastcomm',
and `sa'. Even though much of the relevant information is covered in
the texinfo d
Bruce Perens writes ("Re: ChangeLog format "):
> Please make sure, whatever [alternative] upload announcement format
> you design, that it is machine-readable so that it can be used to
> (at least partially) automate the FTP site administration
> process. The format should state in an unambiguous-t
Pacakage: at
Version: 2.8a-2
In atrun's manpage, the SYNOPSIS line reads:
atrun [-l load_avg] [-d]
I believe it should read:
atrun [[-l] load_avg] [-d]
I am using dpkg 1.0.3-0, kernel 1.2.13-4, and libc 4.6.27-6.
Susan Kleinmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
: ... and the expected destination of those files.
That raises an interesting question for me, my apologies if it's docuemented
somewhere that I haven't found yet.
What's the protocol for picking a directory to dump a new package in?
It was pretty easy
Please make sure, whatever alternate upload announcement format you design,
that it is machine-readable so that it can be used to (at least partially)
automate the FTP site administration process. The format should state
in an unambiguous-to-parse fashion the names of all files uploaded, the
size a
35 matches
Mail list logo
