Your mail is bouncing.
- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: 27 Sep 1999 23:14:48 -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: failure notice
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at kitenet.net.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following
Herbert Xu wrote:
> Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Similarly, I don't think a bug is grave if it makes a package unusable by
> > just one person in an odd sitution. On the other hand, I think all security
> > and data loss bugs are grave, even if only a few people can trigger them.
>
Sudhakar Chandrasekharan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have gcc (2.95.2-0pre2) and gcc272 (2.7.2.3-12) installed on my potato
> machine. The powertweak package that I recently uploaded (0.1.2-3) was
> compiled with gcc 2.95.X As many of you have noticed, the powertwek inary
> compiled with 2.9
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Similarly, I don't think a bug is grave if it makes a package unusable by
> just one person in an odd sitution. On the other hand, I think all security
> and data loss bugs are grave, even if only a few people can trigger them.
I disagree. If a package cau
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 11:46:19AM +0200, Siggy Brentrup wrote:
> Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > it's irrelevant whether other debian developers or users agree with me
> > or disagree with me about the relative utility of these two packages.
> > by not censoring packages, by refusing
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 10:41:14PM +0200, Filip Van Raemdonck wrote:
>
> I actually had to start learning perl for this but I guess it had to
> happen once anyway, so...
Thanks, please forward this to the maintainer of kernel-package.
> You probably want to set the HOSTCC and CC variables in mak
Hi,
I have gcc (2.95.2-0pre2) and gcc272 (2.7.2.3-12) installed on my potato
machine. The powertweak package that I recently uploaded (0.1.2-3) was
compiled with gcc 2.95.X As many of you have noticed, the powertwek inary
compiled with 2.95.X segfaults.
I tried various things (including -fno-s
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > There were some rumors, that Apache would be able to handle both
> > directories as http://localhost/doc/ (use /usr/share/doc/ and
> > if the file/directory isn't available fall back to
> > /usr/doc/), but I don't know enough about Apache to realiz
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 04:44:10PM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> > a) I would not test a new daemon on a working machine, I would use a
> > separate
>
> So?
>
> > b) if you know what you are doing, compile the packages by hand, fix their
> > install scripts, and remove the conflicts. You are tryi
> a) I would not test a new daemon on a working machine, I would use a separate
So?
> b) if you know what you are doing, compile the packages by hand, fix their
> install scripts, and remove the conflicts. You are trying to circumvent the
> norm.
If I wanted to compile them by hand, why would I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sat, 25 Sep 1999, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > >
> > > make bzImage HOSTCC=/usr/bin/egcs
> >
> > Indeed it does. I was too busy looking for a way to do it in the
> > environment... Can one use this with make-kpkg as well?
>
> Probably not, perhaps you can make a
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> David Starner writes:
> > On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 05:59:27PM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> > > Nevertheless it is moot point because we are running out of room and
> there
> > > has to be a third CD. It might as well contain all the documents and
I've been saying the same thing now for a while... I get peeved at some of
the > normal bugs I've seen reported..
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 09:33:39AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities talks about bug severities:
>
> critical
> makes unrelated softwar
David Starner writes:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 05:59:27PM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> > Nevertheless it is moot point because we are running out of room and there
> > has to be a third CD. It might as well contain all the documents and
> > other packages non-essential to using an OS.
> >
>
> So what you're telling me is that anyone with a "complex" setup
> shouldn't bother using Debian?
>
a) I would not test a new daemon on a working machine, I would use a separate
one. In the case of gnu pop3, it will spin off and consume 99% of your cpu due
to poor child management. We (I am
Roland Rosenfeld wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> > > > P.S.: The latest dhelp 0.3.14 supports FHS *and* FSSTND :).
>
> > > I just installed it, but as far as I can see this doesn't
> > > integrate FHS and FSSTND in any way but creates two completely
> > > incompatible
Michael Meskes wrote:
> Do we place our doc directories under /usr/share/doc now? Or is /usr/doc
> still okay?
Although not yet formally in policy, you put them in
/usr/share/doc and create postinst and postrm files to
make/delete symlinks in /usr/doc (as done by the current
debhelper package).
Do we place our doc directories under /usr/share/doc now? Or is /usr/doc
still okay?
Michael
--
Michael Meskes | Go SF 49ers!
Th.-Heuss-Str. 61, D-41812 Erkelenz| Go Rhein Fire!
Tel.: (+49) 2431/72651 | Use Debian GNU/Linux!
Email: Michael@Fam-Meskes.De
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > > P.S.: The latest dhelp 0.3.14 supports FHS *and* FSSTND :).
> > I just installed it, but as far as I can see this doesn't
> > integrate FHS and FSSTND in any way but creates two completely
> > incompatible trees one next to the other. Now I can
Le Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 09:33:39AM -0700, Joey Hess écrivait:
> What do other think, and have you seen seeing the same runaway bug severity
> inflation I have?
I do. I think that we should clarify that bug reporting is good but only
if people have time/knowledge to submit "good reports" aka :
- ch
Joey Hess wrote:
> I think it should be possible to come up with a structure where ftp site
> maintainers need not be trusted. The key to doing so is making it possible
> for any change such a person makes to be logged, and reversable.
>
> Anyone can manipulate bugs in
Steve Greenland wrote:
> I think the key difference is that if some one screws with the BTS or
> the Debian web site, it's not going to *me* any harm during the time
> it takes to discover and undo the damage. If someone installs a bad or
> malicious libc6 in the archive, a buncha people could get
http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities talks about bug severities:
critical
makes unrelated software on the system (or the whole system) break, or
causes serious data loss, or introduces a security hole on systems where
you install the package.
grave
makes the p
Roland Rosenfeld wrote:
> Marco Budde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > P.S.: The latest dhelp 0.3.14 supports FHS *and* FSSTND :).
>
> I just installed it, but as far as I can see this doesn't integrate
> FHS and FSSTND in any way but creates two completely incompatible
> trees one next to the
On 27-Sep-99, 00:44 (CDT), Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it should be possible to come up with a structure where ftp site
> maintainers need not be trusted. The key to doing so is making it possible
> for any change such a person makes to be logged, and reversable.
>
> The reason
Or you could try "man rename.2". rename is a stdio function. You
should also look at opendir, readdir and closedir.
Original Message
Subject: Re: basic c thing
Resent-Date: 26 Sep 1999 10:22:49 -
Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Resent-CC: recipient list not sho
I'm being sent to Stockholm by my employer and would be interested to
meet any other Debian or GNU people there.
I'm flying out tomorrow night and returning on Sunday. The conference
I'm attending is Wednesday to Friday, so I'll probably be available
Friday night and Saturday daytime and night.
I agree with you on this one, we do NOT need html, or text versions of the
Bible, or other non-technical or computer related documents in main. As it is,
potato is HUGE, larger than ANY other distribution. My thought is that if it is
not a program, or does not enhance or assist in the use of a pr
On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 12:21:23PM +0200, Thomas Schoepf wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Sep 1999, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
> > I have this in my /etc/fstab ...
> > /dev/fd0/floppy msdos defaults,noauto,user0 2
>
> Please try:
>
> /dev/fd0 /floppy msdos defaults,noauto,user0
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 11:46:39AM +0200, Siggy Brentrup wrote:
> > Is it really censoring to keep all non-technical packages out of main?
> > I don't say don't package it nor don't make it available.
>
> Maybe it's time to fork off an independent docume
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, Brian May wrote:
> However, if both packages contain a different implementation of the
> same file (or even worse - a completely different program with the same
> name), then things will break, depending on what order the
> programs are installed in.
This is true, and would n
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 11:46:39AM +0200, Siggy Brentrup wrote:
> Is it really censoring to keep all non-technical packages out of main?
> I don't say don't package it nor don't make it available.
Maybe it's time to fork off an independent documentation project?
We'd need to provide them a stable
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 02:23:03PM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> Scavenging the mail folder uncovered Siggy Brentrup's letter:
> > There should be one for the main distribution. Assume I want to go
> > into the CD business providing support for packages in the main
> > dist.
> >
> > The way
debconf allows to eliminate interactive mode but questions about
upgrading config files are more often than questions about new
configuration.
Is it possible to collect all questions about conffiles and
display it _after_ installation process?
In RH all daemons which have init.d scripts, ask if t
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > Fuck off and die.
>
> I have no idea what happened before but I strongly dislike a wording like
> this. This list is a public forum and mails like Joel's do not create a good
> image for Debian at all.
Maybe he had PMS?
Michae
Scavenging the mail folder uncovered Siggy Brentrup's letter:
> There should be one for the main distribution. Assume I want to go
> into the CD business providing support for packages in the main
> dist. No major problem with most of the packages, but I am not willing
> to support packages with ph
*** Please _don't_Cc:_ me when following up to the list ***
Sorry for responding late, had a mail hickup on sunday :(
Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> it's irrelevant whether other debian developers or users agree with me
> or disagree with me about the relative utility of the
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Now that GNOME 1.0.40 is out for beta testing, I had a look at what needs
> > to be updated in potato.
> > Needless to say it would be great to have an up to date GNOME in potato
> > before the freeze...
>
> Of course ! But I'll need some help. Gnoe
Chris Cheney wrote:
>
> I am appling to become a new maintainer. I am intending to package pptpd
> which is the point to point tunneling protocol daemon.
I already applied and have the pptpd package sitting on my machine. It
is already tested on 2 corporate firewalls. I also have modified ppp a
hi,
i installed gaby on my uptodate potato system (2.2.11), and it segfaulted.
did a gdb gaby, ran it and it seg faulted in fputs():
0x40435b5d in fputs () from /lib/libc.so.6
althought i don't think thats so unusual, i downloaded the latest gaby
(who is the maintainer? there is a new version out
Currently things aren't working as well as they could regarding password data.
One problem that has recently been discussed is that the nscd will cache
negative entries relating to /etc/passwd lookups.
Another problem is that there is no good reliable way of running databases for
/etc/passwd etc.
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Perhaps there are people who want a "service enabled by default" policy,
> > and perhaps we should accomodate them. However, I'm not one of them
> > and I don't want any services turned on on some of my machines without
> > my explicit ok.
On Mon, Sep 27
> > I have made most of the changed required for my redesign of diskless.
> > Amazingly, it looks like no changed are required for dpkg. I haven't
> > yet tested anything though, and implementing secure mode might be a bit
> > awkward. Currently I am considering the following:
It appears I may no
>What is wrong with the semantics of `dpkg --force-conflicts' as it
>stands? That it confuses packages like `apt-get', whinging about
>broken packages, or some other reason?
If both packages contain the same file with exactly the same
functionality, there is no problem.
However, if both packages
I am appling to become a new maintainer. I am intending to package pptpd which
is the point to point tunneling protocol daemon.
Chris Cheney
Please cc: me in any replies.
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 01:10:51AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> Perhaps there are people who want a "service enabled by default" policy,
> and perhaps we should accomodate them. However, I'm not one of them
> and I don't want any services turned on on some of my machines without
> my explicit ok.
On Sat, 25 Sep 1999, Raul Miller wrote:
> Perhaps there are people who want a "service enabled by default" policy,
> and perhaps we should accomodate them. However, I'm not one of them
> and I don't want any services turned on on some of my machines without
> my explicit ok.
Yes, and I think thi
On Fri, 24 Sep 1999, Clint Adams wrote:
> They both provide httpd; should I file bugs against them demanding that
> they conflict with it too?
I think this is a good point; it doesn't seem to be a clear area
of policy. It sounds like perhaps some new system needs to be
implemented. Perhaps a Su
On Fri, 24 Sep 1999, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> This is all very well, except for those of us who email from work, and
> have their PGP key at home...
Well, depending on how paranoid you may be, there are a few solutions:
* Keep a copy of at least your `secring.pgp' on a floppy disk, and
use
On Sun, Sep 26, 1999 at 05:05:04PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 26, 1999 at 07:16:08PM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Really? I don't consider the 1.5kW limit for US amateurs
> > > excessively limiting :-) Down here in Australia we are only allowed 400W.
> >
> > I said private,
On Sun, Sep 26, 1999 at 09:07:22PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> >I just noticed that the BTS lists 2 outstanding important bugs
> >(#40360,#40459) against mutt, although they have been closed by
> mutt_0.95.7-1:
> They have been reopened, the bug is not fixed.
Argl, my mistake. And because I h
On Sun, Sep 26, 1999 at 07:16:08PM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Really? I don't consider the 1.5kW limit for US amateurs
> > excessively limiting :-) Down here in Australia we are only allowed 400W.
>
> I said private, not licensed or otherwise fooled with. The limit for
> completely laiss
52 matches
Mail list logo
