On Nov 25, Brian Nelson wrote:
> What I fail to understand is why Debian insists on supporting every
> single arch itself. Why not pick a handful of arches we do give a
> flying fuck about, support those, and if some organization wants to port
> Debian to another arch, then let them fork and suppo
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:46:20PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> Debian's support for so many arches slows down development in other
> areas as well. For example, getting gcc-3.2 working on all arches has [...]
That's not really a fair comment; yes, getting things to work on eleven
arches is harde
> If you mean that these Build-Depend on pure virtual packages, then they
> should be changed.
>
> If they work with Xaw 7, they should B-D on libxaw7-dev | lixaw-dev.
>
> If they don't work with Xaw 7, they should B-D lixaw6-dev | libxaw-dev.
Erm... if they don't work with xaw7, and you know it
Sorry. Noticed the wrap problem once I posted.
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 05:27:22PM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> I'm aware that the definition is somewhat tautological. But my opinion
> remains that our users are currently better served by the status quo than
> what you are proposing.
Do you consider the status quo to be the ideal situation? I
"Noah L. Meyerhans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 08:41:43PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
>> So, debian is coming the netbsd of Linuxes.. Sure a novel goal to
>> support rare hardware, but why does ot have to come at the expense
>> of commodity hardware owners?
>
> That's an i
> Whenever someone rants about Gentoo's processor optimisations
> and states some overinflated performance boost such as 10%-20%, all I
> can do is make a a feeble rebuttal stating that it's more like (insert
> low figure without much solid evidence - e.g.. 5%) with exceptions
> such as glibc
> > What is annoying is that by producing this, who would benefit ?
> >
> > Many scripts are hardcoded with the location of non-free etc.
>
> Why? I submit that any script that has that is buggy. They should be using
> apt anyway.
I suspect they will be generating apt configuration files,
or
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:18:54PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
> I really don't care ;-), when I am or 99.999% of Debian users ever
> gonna get near a S/390, high end Sun kit sure, but S/390 pls.
We had some good feedback at the UK Linux Expo from people using or
about to use Debian on S/390s. I think
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:10:59PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
> Point being?? Its not like-for-like and also thats
> not the point of this chain. Come on
1) Don't quote an entire message just to add a couple of content-free
sentence fragments. See RFC 1855 for further tips.
2) The apostrophe: lea
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:39:04PM +, Steve Kemp wrote:
> I was wondering if there was a definitive list of all the setuid/setgid
> binaries which may be installed from the Debian archives.
>
> (Such a list would be very useful in prioritizing any examination of
> source code).
>
>
* Joshua Cummings
| (There's no debian-installer list afaik. If there is, let me know and
| I'll redirect this to it)
debian-boot@lists.debian.org
| I've noticed the debian-desktop page mentions an "X/gtkfb port". I
| assume gtkfb has something to do with gtk running on the
| frambuffer. Does
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:28:33PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2002, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>
> > Let's first have a working installer on at least a few arches before
> > walking down that road. However, it is a problem which I was notified
> > of a few days ago: d-i relies heavily on de
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:20:39PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:42:39PM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > Perhaps some of us feel that "The Way Things Are Now" is consistent with
> > our
> > Social Contract and our list of committments, and changing that would be
> > viola
On 26 Nov 2002, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> Let's first have a working installer on at least a few arches before
> walking down that road. However, it is a problem which I was notified
> of a few days ago: d-i relies heavily on devfs and, well, 2.4 doesn't
> work on m68k and it doesn't look like it
> "Jaldhar" == Jaldhar H Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jaldhar> Not me but I did spend quite a lot of my childhood with
Jaldhar> my arm held out rigidly in front of me saying,
Jaldhar> "EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!"
See, it's the little things that bring us together...
--
Stephen
Please fix your mailer to wrap long lines.
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Joshua Cummings wrote:
> (There's no debian-installer list afaik. If there is, let me know and I'll
> redirect this to it)
debian-boot
* Emile van Bergen
| The idea to announce the state of testing/unstable once in a while to
| show we've got the fancy stuff too does make sense though, IMHO.
Nobody's stopping you, if you are unsatisfied with the current state
of affairs.
--
Tollef Fog Heen
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:42:39PM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> Perhaps some of us feel that "The Way Things Are Now" is consistent with our
> Social Contract and our list of committments, and changing that would be
> violating that Contract and those committments.
That's a recursive definition.
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:22:42AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > Thanks for clarifying that.
>
> Your wit is razor sharp as usual, Branden. What you seem to be implying is
> that there is something wrong with the desire to preserve the way things
> are now (regardless of the motivation). Is th
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 04:05:51PM -0500, Matthew C. Tedder wrote:
> > ...whines...
>
> *plonk*
Whoa, the first intelligent post in this thread!
-Miles
--
Next to fried food, the South has suffered most from oratory.
-- Walter
* "Noah L. Meyerhans"
| I really wonder when debian-installer will be in a releasable state on
| something like ARM or mipsel or s390. I'm not convinced we will make a
| release before 2005.
The only arches where d-i actually works are i386 and s390.
| (As an aside, yes, I have started investi
(There's no debian-installer list afaik. If there is, let me know and I'll
redirect this to it)
I've noticed the debian-desktop page mentions an "X/gtkfb port".
I assume gtkfb has something to do with gtk running on the frambuffer. Does
this make any difference to the actual writing of the gtk c
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-11-26
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: jpegoptim
Version : 1.1
Upstream Author : Timo Kokkonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.cc.jyu.fi/~tjko/projects.html
* License : GPL
Description : utility to optim
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:32:13PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[snip]
> Now that somebody mentioned it -- will /bin/true work, or is that a
> wishlist feature?
[snip]
Oops, nevermind that. That'll teach me to respond before I read. :-P
T
--
MAS = Mana Ada Sistem?
"H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Now that somebody mentioned it -- will /bin/true work, or is that a
> wishlist feature?
Is it in /etc/shells?
Here's what you do:
ln -s /bin/false /usr/local/bin/ftponly
echo /usr/local/bin/ftponly >> /etc/shells
--
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
Hi,
I was wondering if there was a definitive list of all the setuid/setgid
binaries which may be installed from the Debian archives.
(Such a list would be very useful in prioritizing any examination of
source code).
I've partially worked my way through the list of packages which are
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:57:07PM -0600, Brandt Dusthimer wrote:
>Hrm... topics like this just seem to keep turning up. Folks, not to
> be nasty or anything, but Debian's not going to change anytime soon.
You are going to troll: if you don't exactly konw what you are going to write
about, pl
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:24:54PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:34:52PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > But there are programs that don't use su -s. E.g., custom logins
> > (non-anonymous) from wu-ftpd will fail if the login shell is set to
> > /bin/false.
>
> Why do you wan
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:48:10PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
> Time, I'm afraid, is something I lack. Don't get me
> wrong the work Branden has done is great, what I'm
> trying to point out is that 4.2 is not in stable and,
> currently, will no tbe in stable for a year or more.
> Thats not good. I
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:34:52PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > But there are programs that don't use su -s. E.g., custom logins
> > (non-anonymous) from wu-ftpd will fail if the login shell is set to
> > /bin/false.
>
> You can add /bin/false to /etc/
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Jon Kent wrote:
> what I'm trying to point out is that 4.2 is not in stable and,
> currently, will no tbe in stable for a year or more.
It takes time for software to become known stable. [Or at least
semi-stable.] If woody had waited for 4.2 to become stable it
(probably) sti
Hrm... topics like this just seem to keep turning up. Folks, not to
be nasty or anything, but Debian's not going to change anytime soon.
It's this stability of both software and policy that make Debian what it
is. If it does not fit your needs, feel free to try something else.
Or don't. De
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:19:14PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
>
> > Never ask a Gentoo user that question. The answer
> > is always one of the
> > following:
> >
> > 1) "I don't care"
> > 2) "What's S/390?"
>
> I really don't care ;-), when I am or 99.999% of
> Debian users ever gonna get near a S/
Hi,
--- Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So, volunteer your time and start packaging
> xserver-xfree86-experimental, if you think that's
> feasible. Just because
> the X maintainer chooses to give priority to keeping
> architectures in
> sync doesn't mean that it's not possible to
Milan Zamazal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "ML" == Mario Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> ML> I now took the time and summarized the current state of things
> ML> regarding accessibility and Debian, and also tried to give a bit
> ML> of overview which areas could use help fro
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:04:52PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
> > Could you run X 4.2 in, say, s390 that date? FYI,
> > X is supported in 11
> > archs in Debian, a lot more than upstream
> > supports.
> Ah, now this is an interesting point. I understand
> that X4.2 got delayed as it was not read
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:04:52PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
>
> --- Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Could you run X 4.2 in, say, s390 that date? FYI,
> > X is supported in 11
> > archs in Debian, a lot more than upstream
> > supports.
>
> Ah, now this is an interesting
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:34:52PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> But there are programs that don't use su -s. E.g., custom logins
> (non-anonymous) from wu-ftpd will fail if the login shell is set to
> /bin/false.
Why do you want to use FTP with a system user?
--
2. That which causes joy or ha
> Never ask a Gentoo user that question. The answer
> is always one of the
> following:
>
> 1) "I don't care"
> 2) "What's S/390?"
I really don't care ;-), when I am or 99.999% of
Debian users ever gonna get near a S/390, high end Sun
kit sure, but S/390 pls.
Jon
_
> Never ask a Gentoo user that question. The answer
> is always one of the
> following:
>
> 1) "I don't care"
> 2) "What's S/390?"
I really don't care ;-), when I am or 99.999% of
Debian users ever gonna get near a S/390, high end Sun
kit sure, but S/390 pls.
Jon
_
--- Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:53:10PM -0500, Daniel
> Burrows wrote:
>
> > That assumes that the runtime dependencies are a
> subset of the build
> > dependencies and their recursive dependencies.
> >
> > Imagine a program that displays its output
--- Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Releases tend to be out of date. But that's a
> > > feature: releases need to be composed of well
> tested
> > stable packages.
> > > testing and unstable
> > > have pretty up to date packages.
This is true, but is not considered sta
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 10:42:34PM +0100, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:34:52PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > But there are programs that don't use su -s. E.g., custom logins
> > (non-anonymous) from wu-ftpd will fail if the login shell is set to
> > /bin/false.
>
> You can ad
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:34:52PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> wu-ftpd
HEH.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:19:45PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:22:42AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 12:56:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:56:46AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > > > Why does the "GR-opposi
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:34:52PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> But there are programs that don't use su -s. E.g., custom logins
> (non-anonymous) from wu-ftpd will fail if the login shell is set to
> /bin/false.
You can add /bin/false to /etc/shells to fix that, but actually it is a
feature to prev
This one time, at band camp, martin f krafft said:
> also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.11.25.2159 +0100]:
> > my fresh woody system now has two news aliases:
>
> maybe relevant: i did purge the original exim install and replace it
> with postfix. after all, the file starts out
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 09:53:22PM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 20:39, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 12:10:44PM -0700, James Hamilton wrote:
> > > I'm curious why system users such as bin, sys, and nobody have /bin/sh
> > > as a shell instead of a noshell prog
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:21:32PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:56:57PM +0100, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> > Could you run X 4.2 in, say, s390 that date?
>
> Never ask a Gentoo user that question. The answer is always one of the
> following:
>
> 1) "I don't
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:56:57PM +0100, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> Could you run X 4.2 in, say, s390 that date?
Never ask a Gentoo user that question. The answer is always one of the
following:
1) "I don't care"
2) "What's S/390?"
--
G. Branden Robinson|Build a fi
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:22:42AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 12:56:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:56:46AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > > Why does the "GR-opposition party" need to stand "for" anything, other
> > > than
> > > preservi
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 09:34:28PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > > I seriousely fail to see a reason why any free software which is needed
> > > by a user of Debian should not be worth to be included in Debian.
> >
> > Why, in particular, do you s
also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.11.25.2159 +0100]:
> my fresh woody system now has two news aliases:
maybe relevant: i did purge the original exim install and replace it
with postfix. after all, the file starts out with:
# It was originally generated by `eximconfig'
...
my fresh woody system now has two news aliases:
daemon: root
bin: root
[...]
news: root
[...]
gnats: root
nobody: root
hostmaster: root
usenet: root
news: root
webmaster: root
this should not be, newaliases complains. however, grepping through
/var/lib/dpkg/info for either
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 20:39, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 12:10:44PM -0700, James Hamilton wrote:
> > I'm curious why system users such as bin, sys, and nobody have /bin/sh
> > as a shell instead of a noshell program or /bin/false.
>
> [snip]
>
> Possibly because otherwise, you canno
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I seriousely fail to see a reason why any free software which is needed
> > by a user of Debian should not be worth to be included in Debian.
>
> Why, in particular, do you say "free" software, instead of software in
> general?
Is this one of your j
Previously Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> Would it be ok to dynamically allocate a dcc group and user (as per
> policy 11.9)?
Sure.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.wiggy.net/
A random hacker
Hi guys!
I'm in the process of packaging dcc (Distributed Checksum
Clearinghouse), a application somewhat like razor.
My package will provide both a client and a server (in seperate binary
packages).
The client wants to write to stuff in /var/lib/dcc and read
non-world-readable passwords from /
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 04:05:51PM -0500, Matthew C. Tedder wrote:
>
> I'm contemplating switching to Gentoo for the following reasons:
>
> - Compiles source very trouble free from almost any tgz on the web
> - Seems VERY up-to-date
> - More friendly to newcomers (in my opinion)
> - Not likel
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 04:05:51PM -0500, Matthew C. Tedder wrote:
> I'm contemplating switching to Gentoo for the following reasons:
> - Compiles source very trouble free from almost any tgz on the web
Are you suggesting that random tarballs compile better on Gentoo systems
than on Debian syst
hi,
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 04:05:51PM -0500, Matthew C. Tedder wrote:
> I'm contemplating switching to Gentoo for the following reasons:
> - Compiles source very trouble free from almost any tgz on the web
sources in debian's repository also compile fine w/o problems,
where is the point?
> -
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 12:38:52AM +0530, Krishna Dagli wrote:
> > Why is a Unix program using UTF16BE (or UCS2BE) for its internal
> > representation of localization data?
>
> As per the upstream author :
> UTF16LE or UTF16BE tells that it's unicode (Gammu support
> both). I use Unicode in local
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 04:05:51PM -0500, Matthew C. Tedder wrote:
> - Not likely to switch to Hurd some day
> - Not so close to GNU as Debian is, so can get fair take on:
> - ReiserFS
> - KDE
*plonk*
Michael
--
ok, here's a small suggestion: if you ever debug a menu-
implement
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 08:41:43PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
> So, debian is coming the netbsd of Linuxes.. Sure a novel goal to
> support rare hardware, but why does ot have to come at the expense
> of commodity hardware owners?
That's an interesting comparison. If you look at NetBSD, you'll see
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 23712 check for packages with the same conffiles
Bug#23712: lintian: could check for duplicate ownership of conffile
Changed Bug title.
> tag 23712 - wontfix
Bug#23712: check for packages with the same conffiles
Tags were: wontfix
Tags removed:
I'm contemplating switching to Gentoo for the following reasons:
- Compiles source very trouble free from almost any tgz on the web
- Seems VERY up-to-date
- More friendly to newcomers (in my opinion)
- Not likely to switch to Hurd some day
- Not so close to GNU as Debian is, so can get fair
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:07:07 +0100
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> #include
> * Jim Lynch [Mon, Nov 25 2002, 09:54:10AM]:
>
> > > What we need to accept is there is a (percieved??)
> > > problem, or problems, with Debian as it stands today,
> > > these being (mainly)
> > >
> > > Hard
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 10:28:34AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> What is annoying is that by producing this, who would benefit ?
>
> Many scripts are hardcoded with the location of non-free etc.
Why? I submit that any script that has that is buggy. They should be using
apt anyway.
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:52:16PM +, Bruce Stephens wrote:
> Releases tend to be out of date. But that's a feature: releases need
> to be composed of well tested stable packages.
Yes they do, but the software in the packages is just as important as
the packaging job. If you look back at sli
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 12:10:44PM -0700, James Hamilton wrote:
> I'm curious why system users such as bin, sys, and nobody have /bin/sh
> as a shell instead of a noshell program or /bin/false.
[snip]
Possibly because otherwise, you cannot run any shell scripts as that user.
(This may also app
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, James Hamilton wrote:
> I'm curious why system users such as bin, sys, and nobody have /bin/sh
> as a shell instead of a noshell program or /bin/false.
Because a lot of people can't grasp the concept of always using su -s to
select a shell, I think :-)
--
"One disk to
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:53:10PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> That assumes that the runtime dependencies are a subset of the build
> dependencies and their recursive dependencies.
>
> Imagine a program that displays its output with gv: it doesn't need gv
> to build, but it needs it at run
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 12:56:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:56:46AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > Why does the "GR-opposition party" need to stand "for" anything, other than
> > preserving the status quo?
>
> Thanks for clarifying that.
Your wit is razor sharp
I'm curious why system users such as bin, sys, and nobody have /bin/sh
as a shell instead of a noshell program or /bin/false.
--
James Hamilton
> Why is a Unix program using UTF16BE (or UCS2BE) for its internal
> representation of localization data?
As per the upstream author :
UTF16LE or UTF16BE tells that it's unicode (Gammu support
both). I use
Unicode in localisation data to avoid such problem: in the
OS of
somebody, who will make lo
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:40:48PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:03:56PM -0500, Don Armstrong wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Jon Kent wrote:
> > > with Gentoo I do, I disable KDE support using the USE variable. Very
> > > easy to do.
>
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:34:58PM -0500, Bruno Diniz de Paula wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I sent this question both to debian-user and debian-gtk-gnome, but had
> no answers. Hopefully you can shed a light on it. I am trying to run galeon
> and after several error messages like the one below...
>
> ** CR
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:56:57PM +0100, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> > It must said that comparing Gentoo with Debian in this
> > regard is unfair as they are not like for like, being
> > source against binary package. That said some things
> > (X 4.2 springs to mind) take far too long to ma
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:03:56PM -0500, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Jon Kent wrote:
> > with Gentoo I do, I disable KDE support using the USE variable. Very
> > easy to do.
>
> And does this USE variable deal correctly with dependencies and realizing
> that this package may or m
Hi,
I sent this question both to debian-user and debian-gtk-gnome, but had
no answers. Hopefully you can shed a light on it. I am trying to run galeon
and after several error messages like the one below...
** CRITICAL **: file
/home/erich/debian/galeon/galeon-1.2.6/src/mozilla/mozilla.cpp: line
Since we were involved in this case, I thought I'd note that the
Supreme Court of California has ruled in the case of "Pavlovich
v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County":
"Not surprisingly, the so-called Internet revolution has spawned a
host of new legal issues as courts have struggled to apply
#include
* Jim Lynch [Mon, Nov 25 2002, 09:54:10AM]:
> > What we need to accept is there is a (percieved??)
> > problem, or problems, with Debian as it stands today,
> > these being (mainly)
> >
> > Hard to install (rubbish obviously)
>
> Nono, this is true, and primarily due to boot-floppies.
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Jon Kent wrote:
> As an example, I don't want or use KDE so I do not want KDE libs
> installed just because some package maintainer decided to enable the
> KDE support option on app xyz. With Debian I have not choice
Not true. You can always rebuild the debian package to not
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:12:16AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 09:34:44AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 02:09:59PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> > > But I do not use contrib or non-free. Nobody had ask for non-free
> > > and contrib if I bur
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 09:13:14AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Releases tend to be out of date. But that's a
> > feature: releases need to be composed of well tested
> stable packages.
> > testing and unstable
> > have pretty up to date packages. So Debian is as up
> > to date as you
> >
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:56:46AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> Why does the "GR-opposition party" need to stand "for" anything, other than
> preserving the status quo?
Thanks for clarifying that.
--
G. Branden Robinson| Reality is what refuses to go away
Debian GNU/Linux
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:54:28AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On 22 Nov 2002, Milan Zamazal wrote:
>
> > packages from testing/unstable and several non-Debian packages
> > (i.e. packages not worth to be included in Debian in the given moment).
> I seriousely fail to see a reason why any free so
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 08:22:23 -0800 (PST)
Jon Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chaps,
>
> Another thing I must say is that I object in the
> highest order some the mail sent out regarding this
> topic which basically say good riddance to the users
> who have switch to Gentoo as they caused loads
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:29:43PM +0530, Krishna Dagli wrote:
> As per maint-guide I did everything and finally when I try
> to run dpkg-buildpackage I'm getting following errors. What
> am I doing wrong?
> The package is at http://www.mwiacek.com/
> I have attached the files which gives me th
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:29:43PM +0530, Krishna Dagli wrote:
> As per maint-guide I did everything and finally when I try
> to run dpkg-buildpackage I'm getting following errors. What
> am I doing wrong?
> The package is at http://www.mwiacek.com/
> I have attached the files which gives me the
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 08:22:23AM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
[SNIP]
> The reasons I see people switch to Gentoo are :
>
> Its more fun
> Alot more up to date
> Easier to customise, down to which libraries you want
> to support
>
> I'm tempted to say that Debian has gotten too big, has
> too m
Le Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 09:32:46AM +0100, Turbo Fredriksson écrivait:
> > make[1]: Entering directory
> > `/tmp/Krd-DONOT-DELETE/DOWNLOADS/gammu-0.62'
> > gcc -O2 -Wall -c -o common/misc/misc.o
> > common/misc/misc.c
>
> For some reason 'distclean' is compiling stuff! I've seen it happen
> a f
Hi,
> Releases tend to be out of date. But that's a
> feature: releases need to be composed of well tested
stable packages.
> testing and unstable
> have pretty up to date packages. So Debian is as up
> to date as you
> want; the caveat being that for newer software,
> you'll need to put up
> w
Jon Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> What we need to accept is there is a (percieved??)
> problem, or problems, with Debian as it stands today,
> these being (mainly)
>
> Hard to install (rubbish obviously)
> Out of date (this _is_ true)
> Slow to update (this _is_ true)
> Hard to configu
Moin Jens!
Jens Heisterkamp schrieb am Monday, den 25. November 2002:
> Guten Tag,
First - this is an english speaking list - I suggest you read the
subscription webpage before next time.
> Ich wolte einen Debian 3.0 ( woody ) aufsetzen mit einen 3ware Raid
> Controller und wolte mal nachfragen
Chaps,
Another thing I must say is that I object in the
highest order some the mail sent out regarding this
topic which basically say good riddance to the users
who have switch to Gentoo as they caused loads
problems etc etc. This is short sighted and I hope
the people (idiots??) who said this ha
But what are you actually going to -do-? If I recall correctly, you've
said on IRC that you aren't or don't want to be a coder (correct me if
I'm wrong), and a previous attempt on your part to become a developer
left NM with the question of what you intended to do crossed with what
you had the ski
OK, I think I can add something to this little chain
mail as I use both Debian and Gentoo.
Why do I do that? Well, Debian is great and all and I
use it on servers etc, but on my workstation I want
alot more control that Debian can, or probably ever
can, give me. As an example, I don't want or us
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 03:25:26AM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote:
> Other comments in that thread include comments like "Hey, here's my
> CFLAGS, ..." "... why won't half my apps work now (including even
> gcc now)?" "... it might help you, george" (and george says "no, I
> have a m68k and your CFLAGS ha
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
