On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 01:34:32AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> However, pulling that message from the list archives may be a good idea.
> It's what Ava Driscoll asked for, and the big HTML links sure don't look
> good on the Debian pages.
Debian is not in the habit of editing its history (mailin
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 07:07:03PM -0700, Matt Chorman wrote:
> I've taken a look at the files and I understand the source configuration
> process better. What I think this adds up to is, basically, is that my script
> is going to have to hack debian/rules on each package? There is no other way
On Friday 05 September 2003 23:34, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 05:12:35PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> > > On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Ava Driscoll wrote:
> > > > I do not appreciate the following showing up:
> > > > http://lists.debian.org/d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 05 September 2003 06:04 pm, Neil Roeth wrote:
> You need to look in the package itself for the call to configure, not in
> the apt source. Suppose you are attempting to download and compile
> foo_1.2.3-4.
>
> apt-get source foo# no "--co
On Sep 4, Matt Chorman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I am currently trying to use apt-get source to compile a few source
> packages.
> I would like to pass some custom configure flags to the configure process -
> i.e. something like conifgure --with-mysql. The dependancies are met, I just
On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Richard Braakman wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 05:12:35PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Ava Driscoll wrote:
> > > I do not appreciate the following showing up:
> > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200306/msg01662.html
> >
> > That
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 05:12:35PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Ava Driscoll wrote:
> > I do not appreciate the following showing up:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200306/msg01662.html
>
> That email was sent by a virus. This virus is really nasty.
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 03:56:16PM -0500, david nicol wrote:
> > For challenge response to work it has to be annoying to lots of people.
> > Anything that stops it being annoying will stop it working. That's why
> > it is broken.
>
> Challenge-response, BY ITSELF ONLY, suffers from that problem
I’m sure your not the only Ava
Driscoll in the world. Why don’t you track the person down who’s
sending out the spam and ask him/her to cease desist using his/her name since
he/she is the one sending the spam and not Debian. You have heard of
Spam?
-Original
Message-
Fr
Recipient of the attachment: SEXCHANGE, RADIANT\RII, StellaHsieh(謝立欣)/收件匣
Subject of the message: Re: That movie
No action was taken on the attachment.
Attachment document_9446.pif was Logged Only for the following reasons:
Scan Engine Failure (0x80004005)
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Ava Driscoll wrote:
>
>
> Original Message
> Subject: False Representation at Google.com
> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 14:20:27 -0700
> From: Ava Driscoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> I
Original Message
Subject:
False Representation at Google.com
Date:
Fri, 05 Sep 2003 14:20:27 -0700
From:
Ava Driscoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 08:16:38AM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> I have a question for you. I'm the maintainer of horde and imp.
> These two packages have been superseeded by horde2, imp3 and turba.
> What I want your opinion on is if I should still keep this old
> (and buggy and unsupported upst
I forgot to fill all the fields in the ITP. Here is the complete
information:
* Package name: inti-sourceview
Version : 0.6
Upstream Author : Jeff Franks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://inti.sourceforge.net/
* License : LGPL
Description : gtksourceview
On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 00:16, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 18:32, david nicol wrote:
> > I've been trying to popularize a centralized challenge-response
> > database since last fall. It seems to me that becoming a debian
> > package maintainer for the software to use it would make sens
Is the mcrypt maintainer MIA?
The last mcrypt package was released the last year (November) and
there are newer mcrypt and libmcrypt upstream releases.
--
Andres Roldan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://people.fluidsignal.com/~aroldan
CSO, Fluidsignal Group
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-09-05
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: inti-sourceview
Version : x.y.z
Upstream Author : Name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.example.org/
* License : (GPL, LGPL, BSD, MIT/X, etc.)
Description : gt
This message is being sent to you automatically in response to an email
that you sent to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
If you did not send such an email, please ignore this message.
This remailer is a free service that allows individuals including crime
victims, domestic violence victims, persons in recove
Ç×°®µÄÅóÓÑ£¬ÄãµÄÐÅÎÒÊÕµ½ÁË¡£
Õâ¸öÊÇ×Ô¶¯µÄ»Ø¸´¡£
ÎÒÏë¶ÔÄã˵µÄ»°Çë¼û±ðµÄÐżþ¡£
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 12:49:45PM -0300, Luiz Rafael Culik Guimaraes wrote:
> yes, is shell script and rpm.spec allow this inside, so debian/rules allow
> this. i can post my debian/rules file here if need
You seem to be programming for RPM in a very different way to the idioms
that have evolved
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 12:49:45PM -0300, Luiz Rafael Culik Guimaraes wrote:
> yes, is shell script and rpm.spec allow this inside, so debian/rules allow
> this.
Well... To be precise: debian/rules does NOT allow shell scripts inside. It
only allows shell commands. To catch a difference create Make
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 11:05:06AM -0300, Luiz Rafael Culik Guimaraes wrote:
> I´ve readed the debian pages on how to create an debian package, i manage
> sucessfully,
>
> But i has one doubt
>
> since i´m comming from rpm spec files, i´d like to know if the follow lines
> can be added to
> debia
Sorry folks, I CC'd: -devel instead of -legal. God I hate Reply-To:s :)
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003 12:03:59 -0400
David B Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:55:07 -0400
> Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This clause has a direct effect on all users,
> > restr
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 12:23:13PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> I believe supporting upgrades which skip one release (for example,
> from oldstable to testing) should be a must, but unfortunately this is
> not written anywhere.
Not to mention that it hasn't really worked for several releases now.
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:55:07 -0400
Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This clause has a direct effect on all users,
> restricting the use of e.g. encrypted filesystems.
>
> That's a new one on me. I don't think the GFDL restricts
> the use of encrypted filesystems.
I have ment
Hi
Gaetan Ryckeboer
yes, is shell script and rpm.spec allow this inside, so debian/rules allow
this. i can post my debian/rules file here if need
Regards
Luiz
Le Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 11:05:06AM -0300, Luiz Rafael Culik Guimaraes a écrit :
>
> since i?m comming from rpm spec files, i?d like to know if the follow lines
> can be added to
> debian/rules and to what section i should add on the file, please note that
> macros like %{name} %{version} is alread
Dear Client:
This auto-response is our acknowledgement of receipt of
your e-mail.
Over the next TWENTY-FOUR HOURS we will EITHER contact you
by phone, by fax OR send you specific answers/comments (if
required) to the actual correspondence sent by you.
Sincerely
MoHILL Accounting Services
("A
Dear Friends
I´ve readed the debian pages on how to create an debian package, i manage
sucessfully,
But i has one doubt
since i´m comming from rpm spec files, i´d like to know if the follow lines
can be added to
debian/rules and to what section i should add on the file, please note that
macros l
See debian/rules. You might also want to look at
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html, especially
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-debianrules .
[there should be better documentation, but I'm not sure what it would be]
Daniel
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-09-05
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: sage
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Simon Goodall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.worldforge.org/
* License : LGPL 2.1
Description : Supports OpenGL in SDL a
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Another question: tempfile(1) says:
> | Debian packages using tempfile in maintainer scripts must depend on
> | debianutils >= 1.6.
>
> tempfile 1.6 was released april 1997, i.e. it was probably included in
> Bo, or it for sure in Hamm. Shouldn't this s
* eManager Notification **
BP Security Policy restricts the transmission of certain attachment types. If
you are sending a legitimate file please resend this in a ZIP file.
Source mailbox: "debian-devel@lists.debian.org"
Destination mailbox(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Policy:
Op vr 05-09-2003, om 09:16 schreef Martin Quinson:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:44:08PM -0700, Joshua Kwan wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 07:15:57AM +0200, Martin Godisch wrote:
> > > Are these actually used somewhere? If I switch my browser language I see
> > > packages.d.o still in English, i
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 04:46:47PM -0600, Wojtek Baszczyk wrote:
> To whom it may concern:
>
> My name is Wojtek Baszczyk I am a Polish-English-Polish
>Translator. Currently I'm on the contract with TermSeek Inc. for which
>I've been doing Business and General Purpose translations. I've
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jakob Lell wrote:
>> many shell scripts use tempfiles like /tmp/tempfile.$$. This creates
>> insecure tempfile vulnerabilities. One commonly used fix for this problem
>> is to use set -e or/and set -C in the shell script. [...]
> Debian already has a gene
i wrote:
> * Package name: xmms-rplay
> Version : 1.0.2
> Upstream Author : lantz moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/rplay/
> * License : (GPL, LGPL, BSD, MIT/X, etc.)
DOH, i forgot to define the license. xmms-rplay is GPL.
tha
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:44:08PM -0700, Joshua Kwan wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 07:15:57AM +0200, Martin Godisch wrote:
> > Are these actually used somewhere? If I switch my browser language I see
> > packages.d.o still in English, if I switch my environment, dselect and
> > apt-cache show p
Hi
I have a question for you. I'm the maintainer of horde and imp.
These two packages have been superseeded by horde2, imp3 and turba.
What I want your opinion on is if I should still keep this old
(and buggy and unsupported upstream) horde and imp software inside
Debian? The later versions is a
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 07:15:57AM +0200, Martin Godisch wrote:
> Are these actually used somewhere? If I switch my browser language I see
> packages.d.o still in English, if I switch my environment, dselect and
> apt-cache show package descriptions still in English... What are these
> translations
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 18:32, david nicol wrote:
> I've been trying to popularize a centralized challenge-response
> database since last fall. It seems to me that becoming a debian
> package maintainer for the software to use it would make sense.
>
> Unlike TMDA's distributed profusion of extended add
42 matches
Mail list logo
