As I currently run a jabber server and have had to manually compile
the transports myself I'll take a look at the packaging and get back
privately... If someone else has already offered to work with you then
it doesn't hurt to have another set of eyes look over it atleast...
Regard
Marcus Frings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aaron M. Ucko) wrote:
> > Incidentally, you might also be interested in debbugs-el, which
> > provides a nice report-debian-bug command.
>
> Thanks for the hint. I'll give it a try!
That would be `M-x debian-bug'. :-)
You might al
#include
* Josselin Mouette [Wed, Jul 23 2003, 06:06:18PM]:
> Le mer 23/07/2003 ? 17:57, Martin Pitt a ?crit :
> > Besides, what's so bad with the current boot-floppies that they could
> > not be used for another release? Most people will do a mere
> > dist-upgrade anyway, and b-f are thoroughly t
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003, Andrea Mennucc wrote:
> we asked for someone on debian-legal to scrutinize it and say if the
> work we did is enough to let this package in Debian
The MPlayer tree contains an almost verbatim copy of libdvdcss
("statically linked for performance reasons", rotfl) and a co
hey Christoph,
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:27:47PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:18:02AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > libacl1 and libattr1 to base and required status. (Or demote coreutils
>
> Oh and btw, the depency on libattr1 is probably a bug. Since glibc 2.3
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:18:02AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> (Please CC: me, I no longer track debian-devel)
>
> I am contemplating the upload of a version of coreutils that will have
> support for file acls. (I.e., mv & cp -p will preserve acls, and ls -l
> will indicate whether a file has an
I'm hoping that one (or more) of the DDs here might be willing to
sponsor one (or more) of the following packages. All of these have
either an RFP or ITP filed for them. I have updated the ITP entries
that where not filed by me and asked to assume the ITP, Evan (the
original ITP filer in both cas
Martin Pool wrote:
> At the least I would like to see Debian prompt for this at
> installation much as it does for shadow passwords. Ideally it would
> be on by default.
I'm all for this idea. Since I use static per-user in home tmp
directories I have not looked at libpam-tmpdir though. I suppose
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 11:58:33AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 09:43:17AM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> >How about selinux support?
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=193328
SE-Linux support would be good.
In answer to your question in the bug report, cu
On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 04:50:06AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> For example, I tend to buy cheap hardware wherever possible, especially
> for running desktop Linux since they're generally much faster than I
> need anyway; but this means I tend to get built-in graphics, networking
> and so forth.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 09:31:51AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > It's true that if you've got hardware and software that don't work
> > together, you're not buying one or the other from the right vendor. It's
> > probably a lot easier for us to have supported the hardware, than for the
> > hardw
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:18:02AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> I am contemplating the upload of a version of coreutils that will have
> support for file acls. (I.e., mv & cp -p will preserve acls, and ls -l
I think this would be a good thing.
> will indicate whether a file has an acl.) Doing th
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 12:36:35PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> While I have my gripes with the DAM process, I don't blame the holder(s)
> of that position for some developers in the past having proven
> untrustworthy. The DAM should not be embarrassed by having let in
> someone who also foole
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:23:45PM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
wrote:
> I went through some of the older bug reports of gnupg - I'd like some input
> whether I should act as suggested, or rather not. All of those bugs are more
> than 1 year old.
Please send these individual piec
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 09:15:51PM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> Well based on the other points on the same file you might notice a bit
> of sarcasm. It was easier to notice in the real talk ;)
Well, poor Joey Hess didn't notice it, and he's a native speaker. ;-)
I picked up on it, I think, beca
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 06:47:33PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >
> > The package (1) does not deal with the logcheck mess that I am trying to
> > solve.
>
> This problem [1] was reported a week ago isn't even fixed in unstable.
>
> Get it fixed in unstable and the fix will go into the backport.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 02:19:15PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
>
> > I'd like to close bugs #38584, #181130. I just want to know how to call
> > update-alternatives in maintainer's scripts. Should be only with 'configure'
> > state for postinst and
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 06:48:58PM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 05:24:19PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > >
> > > So you agree on having a bounce of personal archives on p.d.o rather than
> > > a
> > > way of getting them in stable trough oficial channels?
> >
> > If you
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 10:19:20PM +0300, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
>> I would much prefer the current system where the elected
>> DPL has the absolute power over the delegates.
> (In fact, even in theory your statement is incorrect, as a review of the
> Co
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 05:03:08PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 12:22:35PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > Where did this "full speed" expectation come from? Yes, it slows down the
> > process a bit, but in general this is not a big problem.
>
> It comes from the people wh
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 07:30:39PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> But I want to emphasize that getting nearer a new stable release would
> be much better than discussion how to allow users to use updated
> applications in stable.
Did I mention that I agree? Didn't I? No, I didn't. Well, I agree.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 07:48:33PM -0400, Morgon Kanter wrote:
> > I am wondering if anyone else is having the same problems I am with debian
> > keeping the vmlinuz symlink in /.
> >
> > I have several systems where /boot is the only filesystem accessable by the
> > boot loader because of softwar
On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 13:53, Matijs van Zuijlen wrote:
> I'm sorry to hear that. Will you still provide packages at
> http://userpages.umbc.edu/~fu1/debian?
I will leave them there for the time being, but I don't plan on making
any new changes.
On a up note, Benoit Mortier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> has
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 11:15:57AM -0400, Michael Furr wrote:
> Since several developers(and many users) have expressed interest in the
> video-editing program, cinelerra, I thought I would post here that I
> plan to close my ITP of it.
I'm sorry to hear that. Will you still provide packages at
ht
* Jesus Climent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030723 18:50]:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:45:54PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > That applies to data-files (or very similar things) like spamassasin.
> > There should be in the README.Debian given a location for the backport
> > by the maintainer.
> Spamass
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 10:19:20PM +0300, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> I would much prefer the current system where the elected
> DPL has the absolute power over the delegates.
Oh, is *that* what the current system is? I thought it was in actual
fact quite different. ;-)
(In fact, even in theory your
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 11:14:46AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> er, we have a leader, and he has a delegate, the DAM. The DPL and the
> DAM are those who can change who the DAM is, through normal
> functions.
Well, that's the theory, anyway...
--
G. Branden Robinson| Exer
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 03:21:59PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> But he /does/ do the job - people who are trusted to be Debian
> developers end up in that state and as yet, nobody who plainly shouldn't
> have been in Debian seems to have got in, which is a good sign.
Well, what about the people
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 09:23:23AM -0500, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 12:35:15AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> > Except for OS types or versions that don't support that, or people who
> > actually want /tmp when they explicitly request it, even if
> > TMPDIR=~/tmp is fine most of th
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aaron M. Ucko) wrote:
> Marcus Frings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> | Symbol's function definition is void: gnus-agent-possibly-save-gcc
> Confirmed; FWIW, I have reportbug 2.20, emacs21 21.3-1, and gnus 5.10.2-3.
Almost the same here, except for the fact that I use Manoj's
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 05:24:19PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >
> > So you agree on having a bounce of personal archives on p.d.o rather than a
> > way of getting them in stable trough oficial channels?
>
> If you use only stable you get the well-known stability of Debian.
Which might be where
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 06:27:59PM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:02:59PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 02:17:29PM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote:
> >
> > Why should you redo this work?
> > http://www.fs.tum.de/~bunk/packages/
>
> The package (1)
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:45:54PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> That applies to data-files (or very similar things) like spamassasin.
> There should be in the README.Debian given a location for the backport
> by the maintainer.
Spamassassin needs more than data files, since the rules relay on
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 12:27:59PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 06:13:39PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>
> > Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I'm not convinced that establishing release goals will and deadlines
> > > speed the release process. For exampl
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 06:13:39PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm not convinced that establishing release goals will and deadlines
> > speed the release process. For example, a prominent release goal for
> > sarge will be debian-installer, since
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:02:59PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 02:17:29PM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote:
>
> Why should you redo this work?
> http://www.fs.tum.de/~bunk/packages/
The package (1) does not deal with the logcheck mess that I am trying to solve.
data
(1) s
Le mer 23/07/2003 à 17:57, Martin Pitt a écrit :
> Besides, what's so bad with the current boot-floppies that they could
> not be used for another release? Most people will do a mere
> dist-upgrade anyway, and b-f are thoroughly tested. But this certainly
> is another issue...
Are you willing to m
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:51:44PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 10:26:24AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>>> And as I stated above, I think at least half the problem is
>>> determining what needs to be done. Have you any suggestion
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 09:43:17AM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
How about selinux support?
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=193328
Mike Stone
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 05:57:10PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Besides, what's so bad with the current boot-floppies that they could
> not be used for another release? Most people will do a mere
> dist-upgrade anyway, and b-f are thoroughly tested. But this certainly
> is another issue...
Ask a d
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 11:15:57AM -0400, Michael Furr wrote:
> This isn't to say that it can _never_ enter debian, just that a
> significant amount of code hacking would have to take place as well as a
> general audit. Needless to say, I do not have time(nor the hardware) to
> make these modifica
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:05:34PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
What'd be the problem with a package "coreutils-acl" that just Conflicts:
and Provides: coreutils?
I'd worry about the fragility of such a system in the face of upgrades,
the inability for a coreutils-acl to do a versioned provides:
Hi!
Am 2003-07-23 11:25 -0400 schrieb Matt Zimmerman:
> I'm not convinced that establishing release goals will and deadlines speed
> the release process. For example, a prominent release goal for sarge will
> be debian-installer, since we cannot release without it. Will telling the
> d-i develop
Matt Zimmerman (2003-07-23 11:25:27 -0400) :
> I'm not convinced that establishing release goals will and deadlines
> speed the release process. For example, a prominent release goal
> for sarge will be debian-installer, since we cannot release without
> it. Will telling the d-i developers "you
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:51:44PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 10:26:24AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > And as I stated above, I think at least half the problem is determining what
> > needs to be done. Have you any suggestions?
>
> If I were release manager, I'd do th
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 10:17:35AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:35:04PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > If you _really_ need or want a more recent version of a package there's
> > always the possibility to use a backport.
>
> So you agree on having a bou
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:35:04PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> If you _really_ need or want a more recent version of a package there's
> always the possibility to use a backport.
So you agree on having a bounce of personal archives on p.d.o rather than a
way of getting them in stable trough ofici
Since several developers(and many users) have expressed interest in the
video-editing program, cinelerra, I thought I would post here that I
plan to close my ITP of it. Although several packages have been made
fixing various build-environment problems, cinelerra is plagued by
legally uncertain com
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 09:03:26AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
>...
> Wait, tcl seems to be in the same state, both 8.3 and 8.4 installed,
> whats worse, many packages e.g. depend on tcl8.3 (>= 8.3.0), and not
> tcl (>= 8.3.0). But a developer couldn't specify the latter because the
> version numbe
* Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030723 16:35]:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:54:32PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > If there was a stable release of Debian once a year Debian 3.1 was
> > already released.
> hehe, i knew you would have came to that suggestion sooner or later :)
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:37:58PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:24:18PM +0200, Mattia Dongili wrote:
> >
> > what about splitting those packages in such a way that there's
> > 1. a base package and
> > 2. a plugin/data/whatever package
> >
> > 2 must be explicitly appro
* Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030723 14:35]:
> ... said that your points are good, it may be useful to define a forum for the
> discussion of cases like phpgroupware or snort. In the end i whould say that
> there must be a general behaviour, but we should leave space for dis
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 10:26:24AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 10:58:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 03:51:51PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > I don't think you'll find much argument with those points. It is a matter
> > > of determining
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 12:35:15AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> Except for OS types or versions that don't support that, or people who
> actually want /tmp when they explicitly request it, even if
> TMPDIR=~/tmp is fine most of the time.
For example, when your home directory is actually on an NFS mo
On Jul 23, Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am contemplating the upload of a version of coreutils that will have
>support for file acls. (I.e., mv & cp -p will preserve acls, and ls -l
Please do.
--
ciao, |
Marco | [963 dih6i3GB682fA]
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:24:18PM +0200, Mattia Dongili wrote:
>
> what about splitting those packages in such a way that there's
> 1. a base package and
> 2. a plugin/data/whatever package
>
> 2 must be explicitly approved to be an updatable stable package. This
> must obviously only apply to
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:18:02AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> A demo package is available at people.d.o/~mstone/
Out of curiosity, is there a particular reason why acl support is not
integrated upstream?
--
- mdz
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 09:17:14AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:54:32PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > If there was a stable release of Debian once a year Debian 3.1 was
> > already released.
>
> hehe, i knew you would have came to that suggestion soone
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:17:57PM +0200, Frank Lenaerts wrote:
>...
> > > The not base part could be split further into parts. These parts could
> > > be things related to mailservers, things related to webservers,
> > > database servers, IDS, end-user workstations, ... Because each of
> > > these
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:41:50AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:05:23PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Do not even start thinking about something like this.
>
> To late: if i wrote it, i thought it :)
>
> > If you start asking you will likely find more
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 10:58:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 03:51:51PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > I don't think you'll find much argument with those points. It is a matter
> > of determining what needs to be done in order to achieve this goal, and
> > doing it.
>
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:05:30PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:08:30PM +0200, Frank Lenaerts wrote:
> >...
> > As base is quite small, it could be released more frequently. The not
> > base part could evolve independent from the base part.
>
> Consider e.g. a g++ transit
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:54:32PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> If there was a stable release of Debian once a year Debian 3.1 was
> already released.
hehe, i knew you would have came to that suggestion sooner or later :)
But there are softwares for which it could make sense to update more than on
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 02:30:28PM +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If you start asking you will likely find more than thousand packages
> > where someone will have a good reason for an update of the package
> > in Debian 3.0. If only every 10th of thes
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:58:55AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> Things are clearer now. You're right: i should have done a new package by
> time, but you probably ignore that, due to lack of time, i've filed an RFA on
> phpgroupware which resulted in many mails and no real effort
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:08:30PM +0200, Frank Lenaerts wrote:
>...
> As base is quite small, it could be released more frequently. The not
> base part could evolve independent from the base part.
Consider e.g. a g++ transition or a transition to a new version of perl:
There is no simple way to
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 09:10:01AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> This is already in the security team FAQ, and in the developers reference in
> section "5.8.5.3 Preparing packages to address security issues", but
> apparently it requires further explanation, because this issue comes up from
> time
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:05:35PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Michael Stone wrote:
> > Another possibility would be an optional coreutils-acl package or
> > somesuch, but I don't particularly like the idea of diversions or
> > alternatives or complex dependency structures for ls et al.
>
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:41:50AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
>...
> I accept your observation on my proposal, but i would more appreciate other
> ideas and/or solutions.
If there was a stable release of Debian once a year Debian 3.1 was
already released.
> ciao,
cu
Adrian
--
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you start asking you will likely find more than thousand packages
> where someone will have a good reason for an update of the package
> in Debian 3.0. If only every 10th of these updates introduces a new
> bug (IMHO a conservative estimation) these pack
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:18:02AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> (Please CC: me, I no longer track debian-devel)
You should move debian-devel from "subscribe" to "lists" to automatize
this.
> I am contemplating the upload of a version of coreutils that will have
> support for file acls. (I.e., mv
> (Please CC: me, I no longer track debian-devel)
Your M-F-T is broken.
> I am contemplating the upload of a version of coreutils that will have
> support for file acls. (I.e., mv & cp -p will preserve acls, and ls -l
How about selinux support?
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:05:23PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Do not even start thinking about something like this.
To late: if i wrote it, i thought it :)
> If you start asking you will likely find more than thousand packages
> where someone will have a good reason for an update of the package
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:18:02AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> libacl1 and libattr1 to base and required status. (Or demote coreutils
Oh and btw, the depency on libattr1 is probably a bug. Since glibc 2.3
we have the xattr syscalls in libc (see /usr/include/sys/xattr.h)
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Michael Stone wrote:
> (Please CC: me, I no longer track debian-devel)
>
> I am contemplating the upload of a version of coreutils that will have
> support for file acls. (I.e., mv & cp -p will preserve acls, and ls -l
Yay! Please do so!
> Another possibility would be an opt
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:18:02AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> I don't know whether kernels other than linux support acl's, so this may
> not affect the freebsd or hurd ports.
FreeBSD supports ACLs but they don't have a libacl - their support
for Posix1003.1e is in libc.
Hi, Nick Phillips wrote:
> I believe that when a package is so badly outdated or broken that the
> version in stable should not or can not be used, it should at least be
> considered for update, new bugs or no.
FWIW, I agree.
--
Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAIL PRO
Hi, Michael Stone wrote:
> Another possibility would be an optional coreutils-acl package or
> somesuch, but I don't particularly like the idea of diversions or
> alternatives or complex dependency structures for ls et al.
What'd be the problem with a package "coreutils-acl" that just Conflicts:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 02:17:29PM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 07:09:01AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote
[...]
> And another one: Who would ever use a SpamAssassin tool which cannot
> catch any of the spam out there nowadays? 2.20-1woody is so old and
> timely
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:18:02AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> I am contemplating the upload of a version of coreutils that will have
> support for file acls. (I.e., mv & cp -p will preserve acls, and ls -l
> will indicate whether a file has an acl.) Doing this would promote
> libacl1 and libatt
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:15:55AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 06:36:06PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > I've some questions for you, first. Would you mind, please, to
> > > explain to me why back-porting a patch for a buggy package in stable
> > > w
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 07:09:01AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:19:25PM +0200, Sander Smeenk wrote:
> > The same happened with one of my packages: snort. There was a /really/
> > old release in stable, because new uploads didn't make it in time. There
>
* Michael Stone ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> to optional, but that would probably break something.) Thus, I am
> soliciting input about whether this is something people would like to
> see. The advantage is better support for acl's in debian (which will be
I'd definitely like to see it. I think t
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 07:24:09AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
>...
> ... said that your points are good, it may be useful to define a forum for the
> discussion of cases like phpgroupware or snort. In the end i whould say that
> there must be a general behaviour, but we should lea
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:31:52PM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> Because you can never be sure that it will not change the package
> behaviour in all its small details and that will not introduce new bugs.
I believe that when a package is so badly outdated or broken that the version
in s
(Please CC: me, I no longer track debian-devel)
I am contemplating the upload of a version of coreutils that will have
support for file acls. (I.e., mv & cp -p will preserve acls, and ls -l
will indicate whether a file has an acl.) Doing this would promote
libacl1 and libattr1 to base and required
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:31:52PM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> Because you can never be sure that it will not change the package
> behaviour in all its small details and that will not introduce new bugs.
...And that is a rock solid concept if applied in general.
> Probably in the speci
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 07:09:01AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:19:25PM +0200, Sander Smeenk wrote:
> > The same happened with one of my packages: snort. There was a /really/
> > old release in stable, because new uploads didn't make it in time. There
>
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:19:25PM +0200, Sander Smeenk wrote:
> The same happened with one of my packages: snort. There was a /really/
> old release in stable, because new uploads didn't make it in time. There
> were a couple of reasons why it would be good to have a new upstream
> version of the
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 11:57:54AM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> >
> > http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-bug-security
> >
> > in particular "5.8.5.3 Preparing packages to address security issues"
>
Quoting Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> My point is: i understand what said in that paragraph, but what if new version
> is a bugfix release that does not address only a secutiry issue? I'm not sure
> that system administrators would like to have a buggy package on their host
Yo all!
I went through some of the older bug reports of gnupg - I'd like some input
whether I should act as suggested, or rather not. All of those bugs are more
than 1 year old.
Greetings
-- vbi
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=101502
"gnupg: gnupg uses wrong key"
(Please don't cc me replies, see Mail-Followup-To)
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:09:04PM +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 11:42, Federico Sevilla III wrote:
> > Seeing as it didn't seem like Debian-Devel as a whole wanted to be
> > included in the lone mailing list of strategicnetwo
On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 13:09, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 11:42, Federico Sevilla III wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:27:07AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Welcome to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list!
> > [...]
> > > General information about the mailing list is at:
>
On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 11:42, Federico Sevilla III wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 04:27:07AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Welcome to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list!
> [...]
> > General information about the mailing list is at:
> >
> > http://strategicnetworks.com/mailman/listinfo/cc_
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 11:57:54AM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-bug-security
>
> in particular "5.8.5.3 Preparing packages to address security issues"
It doesn't answare my question. I should explain my self in a differ
http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-bug-security
in particular "5.8.5.3 Preparing packages to address security issues"
will answer your question
Fabio
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 06:36:06PM -0400, Matt Zimme
Mailing list removal confirmation notice for mailing list Cc
We have received a request for the removal of your email address,
"debian-devel@lists.debian.org" from the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailing list. To confirm that you want to be removed from this
mailing list, simply reply to this message, keep
well, I changed my mind
a packaging of mplayer 0.90 is available at
deb http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/ ./
we asked for someone on debian-legal to scrutinize it and say if the
work we did is enough to let this package in Debian
it has also been uploaded to the queue (in case an ftp-installer
Joshua Kwan writes:
> However, python2.3 is not the default yet. If you need profusely
> bleeding edge stuff all the time, please don't use Debian, or do the
> work yourself and keep an eye on experimental. Debian is about being
> moderately stable at all times.
simply install python2.3 and contin
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
