Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Policy can make it so that packages are not accepted into
> Debian unless you hop through certain hoops. Like making sure the
> upload has a signature. Or that it has an entry in the override
> file.
No, those have nothing to do with policy and are implemented so
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 22:30:52 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> I note that later discussion tried to paint this whole process as
>> getting people involved in auditing code, and not a mandatory
>> requirement (ie, if you do not get a consensus then your packag
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I note that later discussion tried to paint this whole process
> as getting people involved in auditing code, and not a mandatory
> requirement (ie, if you do not get a consensus then your package is
> buggy) that was in the original proposal.
Fundamentally you m
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 18:53:34 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> I would be enthusiastically for a list like -legal, where people
>> can go and ask for help to have packages audited, but not for
>> people rolling up policy to beat people on the head to make it s
Way back when Russel Coker reported a problem with run-parts in woody
(message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 3 Jan 2003). We've
been experiencing this problem quite regularly such that I've created a cron
job to automatically kick them along.
In any case, the above thread suggested the problem was fixed
On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 01:37:43AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Chris Cheney wrote:
> ...
> > for example libexif8 was removed by Christophe Barbe and replaced by
> > libexif9. Guess what that does... any package which depends on libexif8
> ...
> > not be removed from the archive until no other
Chris Cheney wrote:
...
> for example libexif8 was removed by Christophe Barbe and replaced by
> libexif9. Guess what that does... any package which depends on libexif8
...
> not be removed from the archive until no other packages still depend on
> it.
Well, if it's uninstallable for a couple of
Martin Godisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: N/A; reported 2003-07-31
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: autoconf-archive
> Version : 20030521
> Upstream Author :
> * URL : http://www.gnu.org/software/ac-archive/
> * License : GPL
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 08:25, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 03-Aug-03, 11:37 (CDT), Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > (As a user, what I really want is a .crontab file in my home directory,
> > so I can put it under revision control.)
>
> One potential problem (or issue) I see with this is automou
Ok, sorry for being rude in my previous mail.
I understand the general problem that you are facing with KDE and
will try in the future to announce upcomming soname changes.
Concerning the removal, I don't really see the point of not removing
older libraries from unstable. Most of the time, rebui
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I would be enthusiastically for a list like -legal, where
> people can go and ask for help to have packages audited, but not for
> people rolling up policy to beat people on the head to make it so.
Perhaps your confusion stems from me using a non-normative "should
On 03-Aug-03, 11:37 (CDT), Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (As a user, what I really want is a .crontab file in my home directory,
> so I can put it under revision control.)
One potential problem (or issue) I see with this is automounted home
directories. A file that was there while the us
On 03-Aug-03, 11:37 (CDT), Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> One possible gotcha is that if crontab(1) does any sanity checks of the
> crontab files, cron could expect them to be pre-sanitised, and might
> behave badly if an unsanitised file is put into place by a user.
Crontab and cron c
On Sun, 2003-08-03 at 01:44, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 02:51:53AM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> > For the vast majority of situations, it's incredibly easier to configure,
> > and usually more reliable about output, than lprng.
>
> Implying that there are circumstances where CUP
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 05:31:37PM -0400, christophe barbe wrote:
> You are kidding right?
>
> I have not removed an old library, I have uploaded a newer upstream with
> a different soname. That's the way it works, a new library is uploaded,
> then packages using it are rebuilt and when they are a
You are kidding right?
I have not removed an old library, I have uploaded a newer upstream with
a different soname. That's the way it works, a new library is uploaded,
then packages using it are rebuilt and when they are all ready they
migrate in testing.
As the gphoto2 maintainer, I don't remem
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 03:55:41PM -0400, David Z Maze wrote:
> Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > IMHO we need to make an addition to policy stating that an old lib can
> > not be removed from the archive until no other packages still depend on
> > it.
>
> So say I maintain foo. The
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Kevin Kreamer
> [...]
>
> | [1] My solution as to how to get the path from libpam-tmpdir to
> | pam-tmpdir-helper was to pass it on the command line. But, since
> | anyone can run pam-tmpdir-helper, anyone can create any tmpdir they
> | like anywher
* Joey Hess
| (As a user, what I really want is a .crontab file in my home directory,
| so I can put it under revision control.)
have a .crontab in your ~ with a line similar to
@daily crontab $HOME/.crontab
?
(Naturally, you'd have to get that crontab initially installed,
though.)
--
Tolle
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 13:24:13 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Not without a transition plan in the general case. And my point,
>> which you have not addressed, was that most of your examples were
>> not ones that mandated significant changes to the source or
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 12:37:46 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> (As a user, what I really want is a .crontab file in my home
> directory, so I can put it under revision control.)
Umm, as a work around, I have ~/etc/crontab, and at one time
had a cron job that tested the output
Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IMHO we need to make an addition to policy stating that an old lib can
> not be removed from the archive until no other packages still depend on
> it.
So say I maintain foo. The source package produces two binary
packages, foo and libfoo1. Now, there's
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 08:55:48AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * LapTop006 [Sun, Aug 03 2003, 03:13:57PM]:
>
> > > IMHO we need to make an addition to policy stating that an old lib can
> > > not be removed from the archive until no other packages still depend on
> > > it.
> > How abo
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I haven't objected to code reviews of packages; I objected to
> gathering consensus through discussion; and making admission of new
> packages incumbent on such consensus.
Again, how is this different from the debian-legal mailing list?
--
see shy jo, amazed at
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Not without a transition plan in the general case. And my
> point, which you have not addressed, was that most of your examples
> were not ones that mandated significant changes to the source or
> behavior of programs.
> First, most of these alloowed people
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 00:16:59 -0400, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 10:57:51AM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
>> I don't care if you mandate a prior peer view _request_ (not prior
>> approval)
> This is what was proposed, except that it was recommended rather
> than
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 11:59:03 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> In certian cultures, including mine, gratutious repitions of ones
> point is considered childish and rude and something most of us
> outgrow by age 6.
I would much rather you restricted your responses to the
substa
On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 22:17:16 -0400, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 08:14:15PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Heh. You should look at what is in the current version:
> Is that what you would say to the users who have angband installed
> on Woody? I do not th
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 03:14:23 -0400, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 08:58:00PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> This bug and others existed in your package for over four years (and
> still exist in stable today). We might still not know about it if
> you had no
* Kevin Kreamer
| Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > ATM, TMPDIR is defined using #define in libpam-tmpdir's source.
| > Patches for having that as a run-time configuration are accepted.
|
| I recently posted to debian-devel a patch to do this (not sure
| whether you saw it or not).
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 08:05:01AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Joel Baker wrote:
>
> > Diesel locomotives are a giant diesel generator hooked up to electric
> > traction motors, running through the switchbox at something like 600v
> > (I haven't read the specs in a while, this might be of
Steve Greenland wrote:
> Apropos of the recent setuid/setgid thread, and also being prodded by
> Stephen Frost, I've changed crontab to be setgid 'cron' rather than
> setuid 'root'. Beyond the coding (which is mostly removing setuid()
> calls), this involves the following changes:
>
> add system g
Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> There are other solutions, including group membership, but it doesn't
> matter, because that is not what I am talking about. The fact is, many
> programs run with privileges that they do NOT require in order to function
> acceptably, or even fully, and I want to promote dis
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Packaging informatoin, not program behaviour affected by
> this. Packaging details are determined by developers, and can be
> easily changed.
>
> Packaging informatoin, not program behaviour affected by
> this. Packaging details are determined by developer
On 02-Aug-03, 23:36 (CDT), Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So: open, fstat, stat, compare fstat.st_ino to stat.st_ino, check
> fstat.st_uid. O_EXCL should also be used when writing to the directory.
That introduces a (possibly minor) race condition: if the user runs
crontab to replac
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 03:14:23AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> Surely two people would be an improvement over the current situation, where
> there is no review at all. Our demonstration has shown how one person can
> discover some common flaws with a relatively brief review.
*Exactly*. Wel
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 08:58:00PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> Given the last review of a setgid program, I wonder if two
> people are enough. The mistake was simple, human, and undesrtandable,
> but the review does not in fact talk about any flaws in the current
> version of angba
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoting Riku Voipio ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>> Trains (atleast the newer ones in finland) have electric sockets,
>
> This is still quite rare. For instance, in french trains (TGV and
> "Teoz", formerly known as "Corail"ie Intercity trains), electri
* Matthias Urlichs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030803 08:35]:
> A few years ago in Germany there was a huge stink raised by the
> environmentalists (rightly so, IMHO) because the mid-range trains running
> on nonelectrified trains sometimes ran with two Diesel locomotives so that
> the coffee machines in
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 04:37:53AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> - eventually packaging the mutt CVS tree, as the author has not made any
> new snapshots in the last months
He doesn't seem to be committing much, either. A patch I sent was
repeatedly ignored.
#include
* LapTop006 [Sun, Aug 03 2003, 03:13:57PM]:
> > IMHO we need to make an addition to policy stating that an old lib can
> > not be removed from the archive until no other packages still depend on
> > it.
> How about old libraries can not be removed until either no packages
> depend on it
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 08:58:00PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Given the last review of a setgid program, I wonder if two
> people are enough.
Surely two people would be an improvement over the current situation, where
there is no review at all. Our demonstration has shown how one pe
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 02:51:53AM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> For the vast majority of situations, it's incredibly easier to configure,
> and usually more reliable about output, than lprng.
Implying that there are circumstances where CUPS will produce valid output,
and lprng will not? I'm inte
Hi, Joel Baker wrote:
> Diesel locomotives are a giant diesel generator hooked up to electric
> traction motors, running through the switchbox at something like 600v
> (I haven't read the specs in a while, this might be off - but it's high
> enough to warrant being really careful around). Don't ev
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 09:32:37PM -0500, Chris Cheney arranged a set of bits
into the following:
> Today I was reminded of something that causes apps not to migrate into
> sarge. When maintainers remove old libraries from the archive! Today
> for example libexif8 was removed by Christophe Barbe
On Sat, 2003-08-02 at 21:31, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > You are aware that due to the high heat we had in france this early
> > summer, lot of train going to the south of france did blew a fuse or
> > something because of the climatisation or something such, and thus where
> >
46 matches
Mail list logo
