On Thu, 15 May 2003 09:52:06 -0400, Theodore Ts'o <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Um, when we all agreed to be Debian Developers, we agreed to the
> following from the social contract:
> * Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software
> We will be guided by the needs of our users and the
>
On Thu, 15 May 2003 11:08:32 +0200, Denis Barbier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:17:50PM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino
> Peña wrote: [...]
>> >As a package developer I hold veto powers over anything
>> > shipped in my package, since it is my signature that goes wit
On Fri, 16 May 2003 10:40:10 +1000, Anthony Towns
said:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:06:47AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 03:19:02PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 11:59:49PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>> >> Do you honestly think would be a
On Fri, 16 May 2003 01:37:14 +0200, Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 10:22:28PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> has no official support from Debian security team qualifies as not
>> for public consumption in my eyes, but fo course there are braver
>> souls than
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:28:48PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2003 at 10:40:10AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:06:47AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > There's that "we" again. Why not unstable, too?
> > I'd have no problem with that.
> You don'
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-05-16
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: python-sqlobject
Version : 0.3-1
Upstream Author : Ian Bickin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://sqlobject.sourceforge.net/
* License : LGPL
Description : An object-relation
On Fri, 09 May 2003 02:31:43 +0200, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> Bob Hilliard wrote:
> > 1. How can I determine what character encoding is used in a
> > document without manually scanning the entire file?
First off, for the examples you mentioned (foldoc and the jargon file)
the iso-8859-
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 03:57:58PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 10:14:53AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> >I'm sorry, I am on a public terminal, and can't quite remember where I
> >read it - But testing should always be close to a releasable state.
> That assumption is both fa
On Fri, May 16, 2003 at 10:40:10AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:06:47AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > There's that "we" again. Why not unstable, too?
>
> I'd have no problem with that.
You don't seem to have any problem suggesting that other people do more
work.
Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Assuming the mail client pays attention, of course.
>
> I guess using MIME structures like that more would make more people complain
> to devlopers of MUAs that don't handle this properly...
>
> I don't know many MUAs, but perh
>> On Thu, 15 May 2003 10:08:37 -0800
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fielder George Dowding) said as follows:
>I use LaTeX2e and friends (almost daily).
I know that LaTeX-2.09 is obsolete, however I need it to process
ancient TeX sources without modification.
>Perhaps I could lend a hand here if you woul
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-05-15
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libtest-manifest-perl
Version : 0.91
Upstream Author : Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.cpan.org/
* License : GPL, Artistic
Description : Per
Em Tue, 13 May 2003 06:57:45 +0200 (CEST), Fabio Massimo Di Nitto
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> > Now Apache maintainers are telling us that they chose another layout
> > and we are bound to it.
>
> Yes because the official maintainer is responsable for the description of
> a package. Including
以下是翻译稿名表：（可提供稿件以供测评）
中译俄
-单张PS版生产线说明（2000字）
-外国留学生平安保险险种及条例（2500字）
-发电机生产合同（3000字）
-医药合同、委托书、证明书等相关文件（2000字）
-旅游景点专业导游词（7000字）
-铝制酒瓶盖生产厂家介绍（500字）
-货运期刊（4000字）
-影象机用户手册及使用说明书 （3字）
-环境认证 （1000字）
-按摩器原理说明 （2字）
-中医药类产品说明 （5000字）
-石油勘探企业章程 （15000字）
-海尔电视机使用说明书 （1字）
-机电成套产品介绍（4字）
-网站厂家信息
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:40:25AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> An upload to testing-proposed-updates is not the same as an upload to
> testing-security, AFAIK (different upload queue, different machinery).
> But it was my understanding that both were in working order, they just
> aren't used --
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:06:47AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 03:19:02PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 11:59:49PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> >> Do you honestly think would be a good idea to use testing-security this way
> >> on a continual b
I have a neural net program (
http://www.nongnu.org/libann/doc/libann_6.html#SEC26 ) which does something
similar:
Given a text file, it will attempt to guess the natural language in which it was written.
I'm sure it would be fairly simple to modify it to guess the charset. If you point me
to a
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 10:22:28PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> has no official support from Debian security team qualifies as not
> for public consumption in my eyes, but fo course there are braver
> souls than I out there.
So you are saying we should tell people to live with the disease,
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 07:07:16AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
But we don't advertize this, so it is natural that people make the
mistake and use testing instead of unstable.
People say this all the time. Then other people go around telling
everyone to run testing. I'm not sure how to fix misplaced a
Just a brief note to draw people's attention to the following RFAs
I filed a few days ago:
#193116 ap-utils -- Access Point SNMP Utils for Linux
#193117 igal -- online image gallery generator
#193118 tcpflow -- TCP flow recorder
Please see the bugs for more information about the status of each
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 06:53:51PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 17:06, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > It is, IMHO.
>
> IMHO not, because doesn't provide things I mentioned before.
>
> > Who says it doesn't?
>
> Like above.
You can just add field types, if required. It w
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 01:24:58PM +0200, Guus Sliepen wrote:
>> On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 01:56:18PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>>
>> > > Rsh-redone is a reimplementation of the remote shell clients and
>> > > servers. It is written from the ground
On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 01:32:02PM -0400, David Z Maze wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 01:45:30PM -0400, David Z Maze wrote:
> >> (a) Repackaging lm-sensors 2.6.5, which would just have libsensors1
> >> 1:2.6.5-1, which in turn would Conflict: w
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:51:15AM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:37:45AM +0200, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> > Updating fam makes 177 packages uninstallable on alpha: amor, ark,
> > bibletime, dcoppython, eyesapplet, fifteenapplet, galeon-nautilus, ...
> I can't figure out why this
Installed module-init-tools and this took care of the situation.
Thanks to the many who suggested this course of action.
Victor
Hi, Sven Luther wrote:
> Why ? is the migration from testing-proposed-update to testing follow
> the same rule as the unstable to testing migration, nothing is lost.
Well, it if's exactly the same rule, then t-p-u would be the same as
unstable, thus we wouldn't need it in the first place. :-/
-
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:06:21PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes:
> > I dunno, I've always found use of Outlook to be a fairly good predictor
> > of bug-reporting cluelessness (use of reportbug being another :).
>
> What's your objection to reportbug?
None whatsoever -- I use
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:57:27PM +1000, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> No one seems to have responded, or?
yes, i will file a bug report to remove the package from unstable/testing.
esecially since no upstream response was received.
Greetings
Bernd
--
(OO) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
( .. ) [E
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:42:26AM -0700, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> On Thursday 15 May 2003 08:31 am, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > Hi, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > In that case, I invite any maintainer with a security fix for their
> > > package in 'testing' to upload it to testing for
> > > testing-prop
On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 11:31:56AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> just back from vacation I did a "apt-get upgrade" to testing where the
> following packages were update (amongst others but these might be
> guilty)
I just did a dist-upgrade to Sid on my box here at home, which means I
have the same
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 03:40:57PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:25:56PM +0100, Thom May wrote:
> > * Denis Barbier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> > > It has already been told more than once: in French, an itemized list is
> > > preferred over a comma separated list when i
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 12:08:02PM -0400, Victor Torrico wrote:
> I compiled and ran the debian kernel-source-2.5.69 package. It boots OK,
> however, none of he modutil functions work. I keep getting the following
> error message: "QM_MODULES: Function not implemented" whenever I try things
>
On Thursday 15 May 2003 09:51 am, Joe Buck wrote:
> Joe Buck wrote:
> > > However, the output is redundant in many cases.
>
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:37:45AM +0200, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> > Fixed now.
>
> Terrific! I'm impressed at your bug-fixing speed; there's a quick "fixed
> now" to almost
Victor posts :
>> keep getting the following error message: "QM_MODULES: Function not
>> implemented" whenever I try things such as insmod, lsmod, or
>> depmod.
Please do an `apt-get install module-init-tools' and then try booting
into the new 2.5.69 kernel.
Best...
--
ragOO, VU2RGU :
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 12:08:02PM -0400, Victor Torrico wrote:
> I compiled and ran the debian kernel-source-2.5.69 package. It boots OK,
> however, none of he modutil functions work. I keep getting the following
> error message: "QM_MODULES: Function not implemented" whenever I try things
Steve Langasek writes:
> I dunno, I've always found use of Outlook to be a fairly good predictor
> of bug-reporting cluelessness (use of reportbug being another :).
What's your objection to reportbug?
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
On approximately Thu, May 15, 2003 at 12:08:02PM -0400, Victor Torrico wrote:
>
> I compiled and ran the debian kernel-source-2.5.69 package. It boots OK,
> however, none of he modutil functions work. I keep getting the following
> error message: "QM_MODULES: Function not implemented" wheneve
Hi,
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 12:08:02PM -0400, Victor Torrico wrote:
>
> I compiled and ran the debian kernel-source-2.5.69 package. It boots OK,
> however, none of he modutil functions work. I keep getting the following
> error message: "QM_MODULES: Function not implemented" whenever I try t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm in the process of applying to become a debian developer, and am having
a great deal of trouble getting my gpg key signed. I've checked the
keysigning coordination page, registered my request for keysigning, and
finally sent mail to [EMAIL PROTECTE
On Thursday 15 May 2003 08:31 am, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > In that case, I invite any maintainer with a security fix for their
> > package in 'testing' to upload it to testing for
> > testing-proposed-updates. Problem solved. Are you the one who will be
> > responsi
On Thu, May 15, 2003, Victor Torrico wrote:
> I compiled and ran the debian kernel-source-2.5.69 package. It boots OK,
> however, none of he modutil functions work. I keep getting the following
> error message: "QM_MODULES: Function not implemented" whenever I try things
> such as insmod, ls
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 05:48:15PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 11:09:08AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 11:24:14AM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> > > There is currently no consensus whether translated man pages should
> > > be shipped along with ori
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 05:19:17PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:26:35PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >> No, it's sitting there, waiting for someone to use it. After a year's
> >> neglect it might need some metaphorical oil on its hinges
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 17:06, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> It is, IMHO.
IMHO not, because doesn't provide things I mentioned before.
> Who says it doesn't?
Like above.
> No, but lots of applications use it.
Yes, that's true. Nevertheless, it shouldn't be a brake in improving it.
Regar
Joe Buck wrote:
> > However, the output is redundant in many cases.
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:37:45AM +0200, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> Fixed now.
Terrific! I'm impressed at your bug-fixing speed; there's a quick "fixed
now" to almost every issue. This script is a huge contribution.
I have one
Hi, Steve Langasek wrote:
> If none of the people who are in a
> position to approve packages for inclusion in testing or
> testing-security are willing to commit resources to doing so
... or if the process is (or can be) sufficiently automated that the
general case doesn't need any human interve
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:47:34AM -0400, David Z Maze wrote:
> "Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Q: is content-disposition handled properly, especially for
> > messag/rfc822 type attachments? (Or if not, are message attachments
> > displayed inline by defaul
I compiled and ran the debian kernel-source-2.5.69 package. It boots OK,
however, none of he modutil functions work. I keep getting the following
error message: "QM_MODULES: Function not implemented" whenever I try things
such as insmod, lsmod, or depmod. I suspect the source for this was o
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 04:16:39PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > You again forget that debian is not x86 only, or do you expect Matthias
> > to have access to machines of all the supported arches ?
> >
> Right.
>
> Besides, I don't want to do this on my own, I wa
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:08:03AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 05:37:51PM -0700, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> >
> > Sure, every now and then a badly-broken package makes it in for a
> > day or two. This seems to be far less harmful than the massive
> > headache that treating 't
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:47:34AM -0400, David Z Maze wrote:
> "Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > (Yes, I've stopped caring about users of a certain other widespread MUA, as
> > you've probably guessed anyway when you notice me using PGP/MIME to sign
> > messa
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 11:09:08AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 11:24:14AM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> > There is currently no consensus whether translated man pages should
> > be shipped along with original man pages or within manpages-xx packages.
> > Unfortunately this
* Paul Slootman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-05-15 16:44]:
> It's about bugs in mrtg that caused me to look for him.
> It may be necessary to hijack his packages if he is in fact MIA.
mj:
2003-03-21: Contact
2003-03-22: NMU by schepler: wmmatrix
2003-03-23: willfix
I didn't check yet whe
* Matthias Urlichs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > You again forget that debian is not x86 only, or do you expect Matthias
> > to have access to machines of all the supported arches ?
> >
> Right.
Wrong, as I pointed out in my other message.
> Besides, I don't want to do this
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 04:22:30AM -0700, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:03:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:09:48AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:13:19PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:12
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:52:26AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Matthias Urlichs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > Hi, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > >
> > > >> (a) Before I do something like that, I'd need to be accepted as DD.
> > > >
> > > > False state
Hi, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> In that case, I invite any maintainer with a security fix for their package
> in 'testing' to upload it to testing for testing-proposed-updates. Problem
> solved. Are you the one who will be responsible for reviewing the
> packages?
testing, in the absence of a freez
Hi, Sven Luther wrote:
> [...] and gave the impression that testing was more
> stable/secure/preferable/whatever to unstable [...]
That was my first impression too.
> I don't say that what you say is wrong, just that people are not aware
> of it, because we did tell them differently back then.
Hi, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:26:35PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> No, it's sitting there, waiting for someone to use it. After a year's
>> neglect it might need some metaphorical oil on its hinges and some
>> dusting, but it really is there. I'm not just saying this for
>>
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 06:15:07PM +0900, TSUCHIYA Masatoshi wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: latex209
> Version : 25.mar.1992
> Upstream Author : Leslie Lamport
> * URL or Web page :
> ftp://ctan.tug.org/tex-archive/obsolete/macros/latex209/distribs
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 04:53:32PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 16:38, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > What's that supposed to mean? Doing that does have its advantages, too
> > (such as "you don't have to re-integrate everything with the new
> > system").
> >
> > Granted,
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:08:03AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> package to re-install. If you're not a developer, you don't have
> access to archives, so your choice is to either go back to the stable
> or testing version of the package, or try to find a mirror that still
With the pool system t
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:08:03AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 05:37:51PM -0700, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> >
> > Sure, every now and then a badly-broken package makes it in for a
> > day or two. This seems to be far less harmful than the massive
> > headache that treating 't
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:08:03AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 05:37:51PM -0700, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> >
> > Sure, every now and then a badly-broken package makes it in for a
> > day or two. This seems to be far less harmful than the massive
> > headache that treating 't
Hi, Sergio Rua wrote:
>> # partimage
>>
>> Error: volume hedaer size != 512 (520)
>> This version has been compiled with an uncompatible version of
>> gcc.
>
I'll check. Sergio: Which source package from where, please?
--
Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAI
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 10:19:08AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > >If unstable has a fix for the bug, then it is a waste of time to work on
> > >testing because users can just upgrade. If unstable does not have a fix
> > >for the bug, then it is still a waste of time because unstable needs to
>
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 16:38, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> What's that supposed to mean? Doing that does have its advantages, too
> (such as "you don't have to re-integrate everything with the new
> system").
>
> Granted, pushing that to extremes will end you up with an unworkable
> system
"Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Q: is content-disposition handled properly, especially for
> messag/rfc822 type attachments? (Or if not, are message attachments
> displayed inline by default?)
Gnus: yes (since 5.8.0, the first MIME-aware version)
> (Y
On Tue 13 May 2003, James Troup wrote:
> Of the 191 pings were sent out:
> o 34 people's ping bounced[1].
> o 28 people replied asking to be retired.
> o 29 people replied with various different responses.
> o 10 people replied who were active.
> o 90 people didn't reply within the 2 month de
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 04:05:28PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> > Please point me to where I said we should leave things as they are.
> You didn't say that, but you want use *minimal* solution, which aren't
> always good.
>
> PS1. Windows are done this way. MS created took w2k and sticked
> more,more an
Hi,
Sven Luther wrote:
> You again forget that debian is not x86 only, or do you expect Matthias
> to have access to machines of all the supported arches ?
>
Right.
Besides, I don't want to do this on my own, I want to do this as part of
Debian. I don't yet know enough about the setup of testing
On 14 May 2003, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > I would recommend this. When I was in Bordeaux in 2000 without my own
> > Laptop
> > it was much less fun. :-( The educational effect decreases drastically!
> Well, that sould definatly interesting. I just hope I manage to get a
> laptop 'till then. O
Hi all
Currently we have both OpenMosix and Mosix in our main archive.
See http://openmosix.sourceforge.net/ and http://www.mosix.com/
for background information. Both software provide the same
features for clustering (but IMHO OpenMosix is more actively developed
and has more prospectives, e.g.
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 05:37:51PM -0700, Keegan Quinn wrote:
>
> Sure, every now and then a badly-broken package makes it in for a
> day or two. This seems to be far less harmful than the massive
> headache that treating 'testing' as a usable release seems to be
> causing.
Something that would
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 15:42, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> Yes it does. Create a ~/.mailcap with the application of your choice for
> a given MIME-type at the top.
>
> My suggestion of a front-end was to create some application that would
> help $USER to manage ~/.mailcap.
I think it's go
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 05:53:50PM -0400, Don Armstrong wrote:
> Manoj's answer, while witty, is closer to the mark than you may
> realize.
>
> Debian will always be for whoever the people contributing to Debian
> are willing/want it to be for. No more, no less.
Um, when we all agreed to be Debia
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 03:19:02PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 11:59:49PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > Do you honestly think would be a good idea to use testing-security this way
> > on a continual basis?
>
> Yes, I do. I think we should release DSA's for security
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 03:35:33PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 15:23, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > I fail to see why it would be bad. It's not perfect, but that's far from
> > the same thing. Moreover, I think your ideas would make things worse,
> > rather than better.
>
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:25:56PM +0100, Thom May wrote:
> * Denis Barbier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 12:04:14PM +0100, Thom May wrote:
> > > I'm also quite upset to see off hand insults - I've never claimed to "know
> > > what a foreign language should look like", wha
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 11:27:07PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> >> so maybe it was actually only filed in my brain (which has no web
> >> interface) ...
>
> > We need a bug system for developer's brains.
>
> Agreed...
>
> $ mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -s "Misplacement of apostrophes"
> Package: do
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 07:32:55AM +0200, Christian Couder wrote:
> The situation is very different from the situation maintainer face with
> upstream code because in fact apt should be able to install l10n packages
> related to a given program package when it installs the program package.
> S
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 15:23, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> I fail to see why it would be bad. It's not perfect, but that's far from
> the same thing. Moreover, I think your ideas would make things worse,
> rather than better.
It's not perfect. Importand bugs are for me:
* doesn't allow to
On Thu, May 15, 2003, someone calling themselves "LapTop006" wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 11:59:49PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman arranged a set of
> bits into the following:
> > There are no mirrors of security.debian.org, and have not been for as long
> > as I have been aware. See the security te
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:52:26AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Matthias Urlichs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Hi, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >
> > >> (a) Before I do something like that, I'd need to be accepted as DD.
> > >
> > > False statement.
> >
> > So non-DDs can get accounts on Debian ma
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 02:46:34PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 14:30, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > Uh. You can create such a tree in-memory, no? Parsing the file is not
> > *that* hard.
>
> Of course, I can. But I don't understand why don't improve BAD
> mechanism.
I f
Le jeu 15/05/2003 à 14:49, Tollef Fog Heen a écrit :
> The area is covered with WLANs already, but we'll have a few switches
> for people who don't have wireless.
Side question: will there be a few machines for people who can't bring a
laptop ?
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\
:
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 11:09:08AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> I think it is proper to include translated man pages with original man
> pages, and to use apt-localepurge (now) or dpkg exclusions (when they're
> implemented) if people are worried about space. My gut feeling is that
I believe this
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 05:37:51PM -0700, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> Hmm. Funny how myself and every admin I know have only very minor issues
> with
> running unstable. What, pray tell, makes it such an 'obvious' non-option for
> end users? Well-timed unstable snapshots are often more 'stable' th
* Matthias Urlichs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi, Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> >> (a) Before I do something like that, I'd need to be accepted as DD.
> >
> > False statement.
>
> So non-DDs can get accounts on Debian machines to setup something like
> this (install FTP directories, setup autobuild
On Thu, May 15, 2003, Uwe A. P. Wuerdinger wrote:
> I just catched this conversation on the misc OpenBSD mailinglist.
> Does this in any way afflict debian?
This subject has already been discussed forever on debian-legal. The
general consensus is that "without fee" does not mean "you may redis
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:26:35PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 11:13:59AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:03:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:09:48AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:13:1
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 14:30, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> Uh. You can create such a tree in-memory, no? Parsing the file is not
> *that* hard.
Of course, I can. But I don't understand why don't improve BAD
mechanism. If sth is bad and doesn't pass our requests we should change
it. Is upda
* Colin Watson
| (I'm not involved with the organization, though. Tollef, do you know
| if there'll be wireless base stations around or, will we be doing
| ad-hoc mode?)
The area is covered with WLANs already, but we'll have a few switches
for people who don't have wireless.
--
Tollef Fog Heen
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 02:13:32PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> > > It won't work, because the aren't any 'standards'. I don't have idea how
> > > make x/non-x choice from mailcap. I REALLY think alternatives could be
> > > good.
> >
> > It's done in there, all over the place! There's a 'test' option, w
* Denis Barbier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 12:04:14PM +0100, Thom May wrote:
> > I'm also quite upset to see off hand insults - I've never claimed to "know
> > what a foreign language should look like", what we've asked is for a
> > rational explanation as to why when we
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 12:04:14PM +0100, Thom May wrote:
> Ok, I've been trying to stay out of this as much as possible, since I think
> Denis' original post:
> > > So I would like to ask developers not to edit l10n files (templates,
> > > PO files, etc) themselves; if you believe that somethi
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 13:49, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> Alternatives and mailcap are two different worlds. Please keep them
> separated.
OK, so leave alternatives.
> > It won't work, because the aren't any 'standards'. I don't have idea how
> > make x/non-x choice from mailcap. I REALL
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 11:13:59AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:03:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:09:48AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:13:19PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:12:1
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:35:22PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 13:30, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > I really think it would be a bad idea to go the alternatives road here.
>
> But why? Could you give me any reasons? I've said why yes, so you tell
> why not ;]
Alternativ
On Thu, 15 May 2003 12:11:03 +0200, mcINEK wrote:
[...]
> We see a conflict. It doesn't matter how many browser user installed,
> always will be run galeon (it's above so it's first - am I right?).
>
> The best solution, I think, is that galeon (mozilla, etc) shouldn't
> provide a /etc/mailcap rec
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
