At 21 Jun 2003 00:27:18 +0200,
Mathieu Roy wrote:
> RedHat provide glibc for i386, i586 and i686. Why doesn't Debian
> provide several packages for i*86 when the package can be optimized a
> lot depending on the CPU type?
We're planning. i686 optimized binary does not work on my machine, so
it's
At Sat, 21 Jun 2003 12:11:36 +0200,
Erwan MAS wrote:
> Please keep , a i386 or i586 architecture , for the via C3 processor .
> i686 architecture is not compatible with C3 .
>
> This processor is very used in the Via EPIA motherboard :
>
> See :
> http://www.viavpsd.com/product/epia_mini_itx_spe
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:12:04 +1000 (EST)
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Capable of handling, yes, but then, so is cat.Once delivered, though,
> there's no way of getting it back out again unless you're running something
> like courier or similar.
Or Mutt, or a halfdozen other MUAs
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 01:12:04PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, David B Harris wrote:
>
> > Exim is capable of handling Maildir mailboxes. It's Priority: important.
> > I don't know if that counts as "shipping it by default" or not, but I
> > would certainly say that it's th
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:27:48 -0300
Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As for my own suggestion, I would say - fix the package. The diff.gz
> > exists for a reason. If you're incapable of fixing it, find somebody who
> > can (and hopefully get them to show you how they did it).
>
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, David B Harris wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 11:46:48 +1000 (EST)
> Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > Now I'm wondering about it even more. IMHO `maildirmake' is _very_
> > > necessary for any mail and as it s
Thanks Matthew and David.
I think, it is a _strange_ discussion to use mbox or maildir and doesn't
lead to an one-and-only solution.
> Could you elaborate on your usage of maildirmake in this courier-less
situation?
I'm using getmail, which is able to deliver directly in maildir and mutt,
which c
Em Mon, 23 Jun 2003 21:53:18 -0400, David B Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:02:39 +0200
> Vincent Zweije <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Dodging with symlinks is not really a solution, as all the files will
> > actually still be in the wrong places.
>
> I believe he m
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 04:15:25PM -0700, Farideh Sherbaf wrote:
> Dear Linux Developer and Distributor,
>
> Please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Farideh Sherbaf and I am
> your contact for EPSON Worldwide Developer Relations for scanners and
> All-In-One (Multifunction) products.
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 11:46:48 +1000 (EST)
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Now I'm wondering about it even more. IMHO `maildirmake' is _very_
> > necessary for any mail and as it seems to be only a 2-line-shell-script
> > why it isn't i
"Martin v. L?wis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> __asm__ __volatile__ ("lock; xaddl %0,%2"
> : "=r" (__result)
> : "0" (__val), "m" (*__mem)
> : "memory");
> In particular, the lock prefix is not available on i386. Since this
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 07:56:42AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Fellas, looking in the Packages files, some big packages have little
> descriptions, some little packages have big descriptions,
and this package description went wee wee wee, all the way home.
Why does this belong on debian-devel i
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: r-noncran-design
Version : 1.1.6
Upstream Author : Frank Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://hesweb1.med.virginia.edu/biostat/rms
* License : GPL
Description : Regression modeling strategies
Design
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: r-noncran-hmisc
Version : 1.6.1-1
Upstream Author : Frank Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://hesweb1.med.virginia.edu/biostat/s/Hmisc.html
* License : GPL
Description : R functions by Frank Harrell
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:02:39 +0200
Vincent Zweije <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dodging with symlinks is not really a solution, as all the files will
> actually still be in the wrong places.
I believe he meant installing them to the proper locations, and then
making symlinks from there to the "big
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Fellas, looking in the Packages files, some big packages have little
> descriptions, some little packages have big descriptions, but on the average,
> 11938 packages
> avg size 510963
> avg description 7.70431 lines
> avg. bytes per description lines 6632
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now I'm wondering about it even more. IMHO `maildirmake' is _very_
> necessary for any mail and as it seems to be only a 2-line-shell-script
> why it isn't included anywhere and anyway in the base-system?
As I recall, maildirmake is only needed if y
* Dan Jacobson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> For instance, the prestigious emacs21 needs only one line, as
> everybody who is anybody is supposed to know what it is all about.
Yup. Don't see any problem with that either. Have a day.
Stephen
pgpQddrICotFS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 07:00:21PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> >
> > static inline _Atomic_word
> > __attribute__ ((__unused__))
> > __exchange_and_add (volatile _Atomic_word *__mem, int __val)
> > {
> >register _Atomic_word __result;
> >__asm_
Hello Debian-Developers,
first, many thanks all of you for your great work. As I am not a pro, I am
very glad that most of Debian works out-of-the-box.
But, I was looking around and wondering about that I couldn't find any
`maildirmake' for Debian, excluding qmail-src, courier and maildrop, whic
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 June 2003 02:00, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> > In g++ 3.2, this code was distributed as "i386", and nobody noticed that
> > it doesn't work on i386 for quite some time. In gcc 3.3, an
> > implementa
Fellas, looking in the Packages files, some big packages have little
descriptions, some little packages have big descriptions, but on the average,
11938 packages
avg size 510963
avg description 7.70431 lines
avg. bytes per description lines 66321.8
For instance, the prestigious emacs21 needs only
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> John Goerzen wrote:
>
> > Nobody has even explained WHY we have this issue. The summary posted on the
> > bug report just said that there is a problem with atomicity.h, not what the
> > problem is or why it exists.
>
> Just look at the file for your
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-06-23
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: lcdf-typetools
Version : 0.7
Upstream Author : Eddie Kohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.lcdf.org/~eddietwo/type/
* License : GPL
Description : Programs to
Dear Linux Developer and
Distributor,
Please allow me to introduce myself. My name is
Farideh Sherbaf and I am your contact for EPSON Worldwide Developer
Relations for scanners and All-In-One (Multifunction)
products.
The EPSON Developer Relations Group would like
to obtain your feedb
John Goerzen wrote:
Nobody has even explained WHY we have this issue. The summary posted on the
bug report just said that there is a problem with atomicity.h, not what the
problem is or why it exists.
Just look at the file for yourself. It is easy enough to see: it uses
inline assembly that is on
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 01:54:43PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 12:41:48PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 08:00:07PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > > John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Talk is cheap. If you can come up with a solution to the C
Hallo David,
* David Goodenough wrote:
>> I'm mainly going to be writing C++ with a JNI layer to allow access from my
>> Java code.
eclipses C(++)DevTools aren't that good as the JavaDT, so I don't
know if thats enough for you. For java, eclipse is great.
>KDevelop comes as part of KDE, Eclipse
On Monday 23 June 2003 19:41, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 08:00:07PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Talk is cheap. If you can come up with a solution to the C++ problem
> > that ignited this debate then i386 would be safe.
>
> Nobody has
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Neil Spring wrote:
> > However I've found a number of packages which use a long
> > description which is more or less the _same_ as the short
> > description.
>
> This is just a thought, but perhaps the control file could
> incorporate a mechanism for common description of pac
> However I've found a number of packages which use a long
> description which is more or less the _same_ as the short
> description.
This is just a thought, but perhaps the control file could
incorporate a mechanism for common description of packages
from the same source. For example, NetCDF has
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:32:47AM -0400, code wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm new to the Linux world crossing over from Windows to do a work project
> and was wondering if someone could recommend a good IDE for Java and C++. I'm
> mainly going to be writing C++ with a JNI layer to allow access from my Java
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 12:41:48PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 08:00:07PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Talk is cheap. If you can come up with a solution to the C++ problem that
> > ignited this debate then i386 would be safe.
>
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 12:32:36PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> so random Python code is fairly likely to work with it :)
You are thinking about Perl. Random Python code is likely to fail to
compile.
;-)
-m.
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I noticed a few transitional and dummy packages on my system, but there was
> no common way to identify them. I think the following packages exist:
>
> a) dummy packages which depend on the new name of a package for
>1 - automatic update
On Sunday 22 June 2003 12:48 am, Mohammed Sameer wrote:
> i was thinking about splitting duali itself into 2 packages:
> 1- duali "the main dictionary"
> 2- duali-dev "contain the script"
> duali-data build-depends on duali-dev while duali itself depend only on
> duali-data
>
> I really don't know
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 08:00:07PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Talk is cheap. If you can come up with a solution to the C++ problem that
> ignited this debate then i386 would be safe.
Nobody has even explained WHY we have this issue. The summary posted on
On Monday 23 June 2003 16:32, code wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm new to the Linux world crossing over from Windows to do a work project
> and was wondering if someone could recommend a good IDE for Java and C++.
> I'm mainly going to be writing C++ with a JNI layer to allow access from my
> Java code.
>
> Th
try eclipse
www.eclipse.org
Em Seg, 2003-06-23 às 12:32, code escreveu:
> Hi,
> I'm new to the Linux world crossing over from Windows to do a work project
> and was wondering if someone could recommend a good IDE for Java and C++. I'm
> mainly going to be writing C++ with a JNI layer to allow ac
On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:38, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:07:05PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> > Right, but that approach definitely has some disadvantages, namely
> > fragility and the fact that we're kind of subverting the whole idea of
> > binary packages.
>
>
"Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It kind of depends on what "Haskell library" means. Is it more like a
> C library (potentially complex build system, dependencies, etc) or is
> it more like a Perl module?
As David Roundy sorta indicated, it could be either one. Building
Ha
Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there a way I can get a list of those "you can remove it safely after
> upgrade (if no others depend on it)" packages?
deborphan --guess-dummy --guess-only
tries to do this, and automatically filters out packages that you
can't yet remove.
Hi,
I'm new to the Linux world crossing over from Windows to do a work project and
was wondering if someone could recommend a good IDE for Java and C++. I'm
mainly going to be writing C++ with a JNI layer to allow access from my Java
code.
Thanks McGiv
Colin Watson wrote:
> I don't see that this would particularly benefit anyone. In this
> particular case, removing the packages from testing won't help them get
> in any quicker, so people running testing will still be without them.
> Keeping them in gives us a useful marker of what work needs to b
Your message dated Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:39:41 +1000
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#198479: general: package coming to sarge before their
dependencies : breaks them.
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has bee
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:28:04AM -0300, Guilherme de S. Pastore wrote:
|| I became a maintainer recently, when I took the prozilla package from
|| Gustavo Noronha Silva (kov), a few days ago. I am now trying to finish my
|| second Debian Package: cgiirc.
||
|| Unfortunately, the program puts
Hello people! =)
I became a maintainer recently, when I took the prozilla package from Gustavo
Noronha Silva (kov), a few days ago. I am now trying to finish my second Debian
Package: cgiirc.
Unfortunately, the program puts all its files in the same directory, causing
problems with the FHS. I
Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
>
> > IMO it's a good moment to drop all the following i386-specific packages
> > which are libc5 related:
> >
>
> [SNIP]
>
> >
> > and others, partially.
> >
> > This could impact potentially very old (commercial
Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 08:29:14PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > He wants to know when a particular package was last updated, without
> > having to download it and examine the gzip time stamp and/or changelog.
>
> It is unfortunate, that there is no easy access to the change
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 01:50:49PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 02:25:41PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:14:05AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > html2ps is broken due to perlmagick, which is still at a perl 5.6
> > > version in testing. This was t
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 02:25:41PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:14:05AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > html2ps is broken due to perlmagick, which is still at a perl 5.6
> > version in testing. This was temporarily necessary because getting perl
> > 5.8 was more important t
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:14:05AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:03:42AM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> > Le Mon 23/06/2003, Colin Watson disait
> > > On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:36:27AM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> > > > Several packages like html2ps or apt-file are broken in
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 12:45:21AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 04:58:09PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Marco d'Itri ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030622 16:35]:
> > > On Jun 22, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >There is no technical reason why we can't support libc
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:38:40AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:07:05PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> > Right, but that approach definitely has some disadvantages, namely
> > fragility and the fact that we're kind of subverting the whole idea of
> > binary packa
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:21:18AM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> Le Mon 23/06/2003, Colin Watson disait
> > New versions of perl and python and a number of other things were pushed
> > into testing a number of weeks back. This allowed substantial
> > improvements in many packages and unblocked a lot
John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is a disturbing trend. You can't claim that Debian is usable on a
> machine if it requires another machine or Internet access to work basically.
>
> And no, there are not necessarily other machines reachable with scp, since
> some of these machine
Le Mon 23/06/2003, Colin Watson disait
> I haven't looked at them in detail. But:
>
> html2ps is broken due to perlmagick, which is still at a perl 5.6
> version in testing. This was temporarily necessary because getting perl
> 5.8 was more important than waiting for all of perlmagick's
> depende
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:03:42AM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> Le Mon 23/06/2003, Colin Watson disait
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:36:27AM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> > > Several packages like html2ps or apt-file are broken in sarge because
> > > they were put from sid before their dependencies.
Le Mon 23/06/2003, Colin Watson disait
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:36:27AM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> > Package: general
> > Version: unavailable; reported 2003-06-23
> > Severity: normal
> > Tags: sarge
> >
> > Several packages like html2ps or apt-file are broken in sarge because
> > they were
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:36:27AM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> Package: general
> Version: unavailable; reported 2003-06-23
> Severity: normal
> Tags: sarge
>
> Several packages like html2ps or apt-file are broken in sarge because
> they were put from sid before their dependencies. The coming to s
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:07:05PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> Right, but that approach definitely has some disadvantages, namely
> fragility and the fact that we're kind of subverting the whole idea of
> binary packages.
It kind of depends on what "Haskell library" means. Is it more like
Package: general
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-06-23
Severity: normal
Tags: sarge
Several packages like html2ps or apt-file are broken in sarge because
they were put from sid before their dependencies. The coming to sarge
of a package should not be done if it makes it uninstallable.
-- Syst
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 03:14:51PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 10:23:01AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Many video cards require XFree 4.3.x or above. They require agpgart in
> > > the
> > > kernel. They require iwconfig and other wireless tools. There are a
> > > wh
> On Sat, Jun 21, 2003 at 09:52:35AM +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > Here is a script that finds different versions of installed binary
> > packages with the same source package name.
>
> it does not take into account removed (deinstalled) packages, where only
> the outdated config files a
* John Goerzen
| Since providing this capability requires only free software on
| Debian's part, where exactly is the problem?
Manpower.
--
Tollef Fog Heen,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' :
65 matches
Mail list logo
