Darren/Torin/Who Ever... writes:
> >As far as I can tell this package doesn't belong into non-free but could go
> >into graphics. Could anyone please check that? I think we have some other
> >packages with almost the same copyright in the tree.
>
> There are two problems here: 1) It uses gif which
Dale Miller writes:
> > I am writing to request permission to modify and re-distribute
> > lclint as part of the Debian projects distribution of Linux.
>
> Sure, I have no problem with this, as long as some effort is made to
> make sure the most recent version is included as well as documentation
Package: psptools
Version: 1.2-2
All files are installed under /usr/local. This is not the place Debian
installs its files.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes |_ __
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | / ___// / // / / __ \___ __
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
With that license it would definitely go in non-free. Each CD manufacturer
would have to ask permission individually to put it on their CD.
Thanks
Bruce
I am working on an LClint package that is taking much
longer than I expected due to unforseen time constraints.
I hope to finish it up in the next couple of weeks. To
do so I need answers to a couple of questions. First and
most important is a question about the license. It follows:
Copyright
> "Engel" == David Engel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Engel> Guy Maor writes:
>> To guarantee that the changes file is uncorrupted? Nothing for
>> now. After 1.1 is released, I'll start requiring all changes files
>> to be pgp signed. That will guarantee their sanctity.
Engel> Can you sugges
[ Note: I read this mailing list. There is no need to CC me on replies,
unless it is _really_ urgent. I pay for my PPP connections. Thanks. ]
Rob Browning:
> Hmm, what if the debian lists had a Reply-to header that was the list
> in question. That would cut down on unintentional replies.
"Susan G. Kleinmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> PNG is a bandwidth-conservative, patent-free replacement for GIF (as well
> as many uses of TIFF). If you want to use it, you might be interested in
> looking at:
> http://www.boutell.com/boutell/png/
Thanks, Susan, that's what I meant to
Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [ Note: I read this mailing list. There is no need to CC me on replies,
> unless it is _really_ urgent. I pay for my PPP connections. Thanks. ]
Hmm, what if the debian lists had a Reply-to header that was the list
in question. That would cut down
[ Note: I read this mailing list. There is no need to CC me on replies,
unless it is _really_ urgent. I pay for my PPP connections. Thanks. ]
Jon Rabone:
> It's also available separately on (at least) the funet mirror sites in the
> same directory as the 2.0 source. I don't think we really ne
> On Mon, 17 Jun 1996, Rob Browning wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Emilio Lopes) writes:
> >
> > > 2- The logo itself is a gif file. Is it non-free? I can convert it to
> > >a jpeg file if needed.
> >
> > Don't know about the other stuff, but for this I'd recommend png, not
> > jpeg.
PNG
> AD> I'm not convinced we need the package at all.
> AD> After all, you get the image with the kernel sources anyway.
>
> Sure? I didn't know that. It's really hidden in that "Documentation"
> dir...
> Anyway, maybe someone who does not want the sources may want the logo?
>
> ECL.
It's also av
On Mon, 17 Jun 1996, Rob Browning wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Emilio Lopes) writes:
>
> > 2- The logo itself is a gif file. Is it non-free? I can convert it to
> >a jpeg file if needed.
>
> Don't know about the other stuff, but for this I'd recommend png, not
> jpeg. As I understand it gif'
> "AD" == Austin Donnelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
AD> I'm not convinced we need the package at all.
AD> After all, you get the image with the kernel sources anyway.
Sure? I didn't know that. It's really hidden in that "Documentation"
dir...
Anyway, maybe someone who does not want the sou
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Makes a lot of sense to me, can you hack install to do such a thing?
You mean actually modify the source for /usr/bin/install itself so we
have a new install that's Debian specific, I'd be really nervous about
that. But if you mean either writing a substitute program
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Michael Meskes, in an immanent manifestation of deity, wrote:
>As far as I can tell this package doesn't belong into non-free but could go
>into graphics. Could anyone please check that? I think we have some other
>packages with almost the same copyright in the t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Emilio Lopes) writes:
> 2- The logo itself is a gif file. Is it non-free? I can convert it to
>a jpeg file if needed.
Don't know about the other stuff, but for this I'd recommend png, not
jpeg. As I understand it gif's lossless, and so is png, and I think
png was meant to
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erick Branderhorst) writes:
>
> > I don't think it can be done this way, because a lot of makefiles are
> > organized in a way that they require the installer to be root at the
> > moment of installation, or am I misinformed?
> > Perhaps fooling install might be an option?
> Since we're going to be
> moving every file in "unstable" anyway, that sounds like a good time to
> switch from "unstable" to a symbolic-linked directory (tentatively called
> "rex").
I recommend putting "rex" under a subdirectory called "releases" or something,
just to reduce clutter and confus
> I've just discovered, when installing xntp-doc-3.5c-1, that netscape
> doesn't declare itself as providing a "www-browser", causeing xntp-doc
> to be left unconfigured.
Thank you! I've made the fix in the source and it will be uploaded shortly.
Brian
Hi,
I'm planning to do a package, erh, hm, ... it's the Linux-2.0 Logo
package :-).
But I have some doubts:
1- There is some trouble with dpkg naming it linux-2.0-logo_1.0-0.all.deb?
2- The logo itself is a gif file. Is it non-free? I can convert it to
a jpeg file if needed.
3- Where should
Package: base
Version: 1996_11_6
If you do not have a gateway on your system, the Debian installation puts
'GATEWAY=none' in /etc/init.d/networks. then later it tries to add a
default route to that.
Two possible solutions:
(1) If no default gateway, just use the local hostname
(2) If no default g
Package: base
Version: boot disks of 1996_6_11
/etc/rc.boot/0serial tries to do a 'wild' interrupt detection. Also, it
configures cua0 to cua32. That's "a bit optimistic"...
Proposed fix: leave in only the last line of the script.
Not two computers have the same COM ports: a Compaq Deskpro has
> >> > Sorry to bother you again, but I thought non-free was precisely for
> >> > packages which may not be sold on CDs. Now I am confused.
> >>
> >> You're not the only one. For example, shareware programs can be "sold" on
> >> CD
> >> but require payment for use. I'd be more specific, but I can
Package: base
Version: debian pre-release 1.1 12-jun-96
When install menu propose to select a keymap, nothing is really done
/etc/kbd/config file is not updated.
I have updated /etc/kbd/config manually (fr-latin1.map), so the keyboard
was OK, but it was still impossible to display specific ISO-la
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erick Branderhorst) writes:
> I don't think it can be done this way, because a lot of makefiles are
> organized in a way that they require the installer to be root at the
> moment of installation, or am I misinformed?
> Perhaps fooling install might be an option?
What do you m
Package: mathpad
Version: 0.60-0
1. During the postinst script, the following message appears:
"Making font directory /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi..."
even though (on my system) that directory already exists. Also, the
postinst script reported no error message indicating that it didn't
need
I put the 2.0 kernel packages in the release yesterday evening.
Bruce
28 matches
Mail list logo
