Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: gmailfs
Version : 0.2
Upstream Author : Richard Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
http://richard.jones.name/google-hacks/gmail-filesystem/gmail-filesystem.html
* License : GPL2
Description : Use your GMail
* Thomas Bushnell:
> John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> The intent implied by publically releasing a work under the GPL is well
>> understood and widely known. I don't believe that they would stand any
>> chance of getting an injunction, let alone damages.
>
> You cannot infer person A'
* Johannes Rohr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> [Cc and reply-to debian-devel]
>
> Am 2004.10.08 06:49 schrieb(en) Mike Hommey:
> >On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 12:24:07AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >> I remarked that mozilla-firefox is built on hppa using gcc-3.2 (I
>
> [...]
>
> Dear all,
>
> due
* Wouter Verhelst ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Recent versions of automake add an option --disable-dependency-tracking
> to the generated configure script. If you don't use that option, the
> generated Makefile will wrap all calls to the compiler in a call to
> 'depcomp', which will genera
Sven Mueller writes:
> Say a new open source network security scanner enters the world, and it
> works well when compiled against Debian stable, we might want to add it
> to v.d.o even though it wasn't available when the last stable
> distribution was released. Or a new version of clamav is releas
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In this case, one would be well advised to obtain an explicit waiver
> on the point, rather than to rely on such.
>
> Regardless, the question is irrelevant to Debian, because we require
> source.
Debian does not require source for non-free. Th
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: mpfr
Version : 2.0.3
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.mpfr.org
* License : LGPL
Description : C library for multiple-precision floating-point
computations with exact rounding
The main
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 09:00:35PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> On Monday 11 October 2004 19:18, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > That is up to the system administrator to arrange. If it provides a
>
> Satifying package's Depends: is in the domain of packaging system handlers.
> Ever seen a debian/co
Henning Makholm [u] wrote on 11/10/2004 20:22:
[volatile.debian.org]
Security fixes should be handled by security.d.o.
Perhaps yes, perhaps no. At least it should follow two rules:
1) If not handled by security.d.o, it should at least be handled
in close cooperation with security.d.o
2) It has t
Henning Makholm [u] wrote on 11/10/2004 19:48:
>> Scripsit Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>
I could however see the possiblity to add a new package "mozilla1.7",
that users can optionally install. However, I also won't like it.
>
>>
>> Me neither. For example, if I was already using s
Frank Küster [u] wrote on 10/10/2004 19:17:
>> Sven Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
==
Draft for a volatile.debian.org packaging and update policy.
>
>> [...]
>
Policy for v.d.o
>
>> [...]
>
- A new versio
Subject says all. Interested people can have a look on it and return
feedback on BTS. I have no intention to release 1.2.10 in sarge at this
time, anyway.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
On Monday 11 October 2004 21:30, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > On Monday 11 October 2004 19:18, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > > The definition of mail-transport-agent is that it provides a
> > > /usr/sbin/sendmail that local software can use to submit email
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: kftpgrabber
Version : 0.4.0
Upstream Author : Jernej Kos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://kftpgrabber.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Description : A KDE FTP client
It supports SSL/TLS connections to se
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 10:47:26AM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> What do you mean by "legally"? Copyright infringement is a tort, and there
> is no way they could win an infringement lawsuit against a distributor for
> failing to redistribute the source for the blobs when they did not supply
> it th
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: mediawiki
Version : 1.3.5
Upstream Author : Mediawiki developers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://wikipedia.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Description : Wikipedia wiki engine
MediaWiki is the wiki engi
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 08:15:47PM +0200, Ramón Rey Vicente wrote:
> Leo "Costela" Antunes wrote:
> | PearPC does not need MacOS X or other non-free operating system to be
> | fully used, it can be used with Debian/PPC for example, so, does it need
> | to stay in contrib?
>
> And, whats about dose
This one time, at band camp, John Hasler said:
> Henning Makholm writes:
>
> > 1. Volatile is a means for *pushing* updates to stable
> > installations, where such updates are necessary for *preserving*
> > the utility of packages due to changes of the outside world.
>
> > 2. "Neces
This one time, at band camp, paddy said:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 12:45:34PM -0400, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > This one time, at band camp, Martin Schulze said:
> > > A while ago there was a discussion in which it was said that such
> > > tools are rather useless (or even dangerous) if they don't get
Andi,
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 09:01:41PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 21:00]:
> > Happily, Andi appears open-minded, but focused on the hard work of
> > doing the 'obviously right' things first.
>
> Well, I'm just waiting for maintainers to say: "Yes, please
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 07:22:15PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 05:06:21PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
>
> > > A backport of a new Mozilla release is something vastly
> > > different from new rules for a spam filter,
>
> > To be
[ I'm not subbed to -devel, this was pulled from the archive -- please Cc me
on replies ]
Thomas Dickey wrote:
> Jeff Teunissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Primitive? heh. And as for the rest, I haven't had trouble -- it's
> > just an infocmp away. In any case, switching the emulation is tr
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The intent implied by publically releasing a work under the GPL is well
> understood and widely known. I don't believe that they would stand any
> chance of getting an injunction, let alone damages.
You cannot infer person A's intent in doing something m
Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 11:37:06PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> Price for Commercial Software:
>> > Adobe Illustrator CS - 90.00
>> > Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Professional - 100.00
>> > McAfee Personal Firewall Plus 2004 v. 5.0 - 20.00
>> > Adobe Photoshop Elements
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas writes:
> > In cases like this one, what has happened is that the copyright holder
> > has simply failed to make legal distribution possible, by saying "you
> > must distribute complete source" and then failing to provide it.
>
> He has provided wh
On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 19:00, George Danchev wrote:
Normally I wouldn't mention it but if you're going to pull people up on
their grammar please at least get it right. :-)
> p.s. s/an MTA/a MTA
Nope. An MTA, an SOS, a UPS. It's dependent on vowel /sounds/ rather
than vowels.
Adam
Carl B. Constantine wrote:
* Carl B. Constantine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I just did an update on my system. it updated my kernel to a newer
version of the same kernel. It also updated all the nvidia packages. But
X no longer works. Even though the nvidia packages are installed, the
drivers do
* paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 21:00]:
> Happily, Andi appears open-minded, but focused on the hard work of
> doing the 'obviously right' things first.
Well, I'm just waiting for maintainers to say: "Yes, please include a
more uptodate version of my package foo."
Cheers,
Andi
--
http
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 01:13:40PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> paddy writes:
> > Whatever the solution is to the mozilla problem, there does at least
> > appear to be consensus that there has been one.
>
> IMO Mozilla belongs in something like backports.debian.org.
It's certainly not in the categ
Scripsit George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Monday 11 October 2004 19:18, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > The definition of mail-transport-agent is that it provides a
> > /usr/sbin/sendmail that local software can use to submit emails for
> > delivery to arbitrary addresses with some reasonable ex
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 08:34:57AM +0200, Jens Schmalzing wrote:
>
X-Debbugs-CC: wouldn't kill people, would it?
For reference, this is #275935.
Regards,
Kyle McMartin.
Scripsit paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 05:06:21PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > A backport of a new Mozilla release is something vastly
> > different from new rules for a spam filter,
> To be fair, the issue is that if were just rules, there wouldn't
> be a need.
Why n
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 09:00:35PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> MTA is a software talking at least one Mail Transfer Protocol (like SMTP,
> UUCP, X.400 ...)
My example, delivering mail via 'ssh mailhub /usr/sbin/sendmail', is
an example of transporting mail.
> These Mail Transfer Agents are re
Nathanael Nerode writes:
> To me, this means that Broadcom didn't know what the hell it was doing.
> I cannot divine Broadcom's actual intentions from that, and Broadcom can
> easily and convincingly claim that it intended something different from
> what you assume.
The intent implied by publicall
On Oct 11, Joerg Sommer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> why ppp provides its own mechanism of telling programs when the interface
> is coming up or down? Many programs register for the ppp mechanism, but
> not for the network mechanism. Where is the difference and why both isn't
Historical reasons? A
paddy writes:
> Whatever the solution is to the mozilla problem, there does at least
> appear to be consensus that there has been one.
IMO Mozilla belongs in something like backports.debian.org.
--
John Hasler
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What do you mean by "legally"? Copyright infringement is a tort, and there
> is no way they could win an infringement lawsuit against a distributor for
> failing to redistribute the source for the blobs when they did not supply
> it themselves and yet asse
Scripsit Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I could however see the possiblity to add a new package "mozilla1.7",
> that users can optionally install. However, I also won't like it.
Me neither. For example, if I was already using somebody else's
backport of mozilla1.7, I wouldn't like it if vola
On Monday 11 October 2004 19:18, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > IMHO a MTA must be capable acts as a client and as a server to transfer
> > messages between machines and is responsible for properly routing
> > messages to their destination, e.g. RFC 974.
Thomas writes:
> In cases like this one, what has happened is that the copyright holder
> has simply failed to make legal distribution possible, by saying "you
> must distribute complete source" and then failing to provide it.
He has provided what he claims is source. If he sues me for redistribu
* John Hasler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 19:55]:
> Andreas Barth writes:
> > I could however see the possiblity to add a new package "mozilla1.7",
> > that users can optionally install. However, I also won't like it.
> I see no reason for new packages to ever go into volatile. Such things
> belo
Eduard Bloch schrieb:
[...]
Dear all,
due to the ever increasing number of mozilla-based packages I wonder if
it would be a good thing to have a separate debian-mozilla mailing
list. Personally I have big difficulties understanding the hacked way
What is wrong with an Alioth project, say "m
Andreas Barth writes:
> I could however see the possiblity to add a new package "mozilla1.7",
> that users can optionally install. However, I also won't like it.
I see no reason for new packages to ever go into volatile. Such things
belong in backports.
--
John Hasler
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> * Nathanael Nerode:
>>> Until they do one of these two things, the firmware is not safe to
>>> distribute.
>>
>> Of course it is safe to distribute. What do you fear? That Broadcom
>> might sue you for distributing something
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 05:06:21PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > >> Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually not applied to
> > >> stable because backports are not available for some reason?
>
> > Mozilla, GnuPG, and maybe even PH
Henning Makholm writes:
> 1. Volatile is a means for *pushing* updates to stable
> installations, where such updates are necessary for *preserving*
> the utility of packages due to changes of the outside world.
> 2. "Necessary for preserving the utility" should be judged under
>
> > SHARED TEMPLATES
> >It's actually possible to have a template and a question that
> >are shared among a set of packages. All the packages have to
> >provide an identical copy of the template in their templates
> ^
> >files. This can be
Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Scripsit sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > they may have released it under the GPL, but there's a strong case for
> > arguing that they're in violation of their own licensing terms for not
> > providing the source code to the firmware blobs.
>
>
Scripsit sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> they may have released it under the GPL, but there's a strong case for
> arguing that they're in violation of their own licensing terms for not
> providing the source code to the firmware blobs.
The copyright holder cannot logically be in violation of hi
* Carl B. Constantine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I just did an update on my system. it updated my kernel to a newer
> version of the same kernel. It also updated all the nvidia packages. But
> X no longer works. Even though the nvidia packages are installed, the
> drivers do not work, the kernel
* Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 18:30]:
> The goal should be that I, as a user, can add volatile to my
> sources.list and periodically do an apt-get upgrade - without risking
> to suddenly have my web browser updated to a new major release where
> it starts behaving differently, all m
Scripsit George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> IMHO a MTA must be capable acts as a client and as a server to transfer
> messages between machines and is responsible for properly routing
> messages to their destination, e.g. RFC 974. msmtp does not do all
> of these, therefor it is not a MTA, and
I just did an update on my system. it updated my kernel to a newer
version of the same kernel. It also updated all the nvidia packages. But
X no longer works. Even though the nvidia packages are installed, the
drivers do not work, the kernel module doesn't load.
So I tried running the nvidia-inst
Scripsit Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually not applied to
> >> stable because backports are not available for some reason?
> Mozilla, GnuPG, and maybe even PHP 4, depending on sarge's lifetime.
> Other complex packages can easily enter
At Mon, 11 Oct 2004 23:29:15 +0900 (JST),
Tatsuya Kinoshita wrote:
> > Package: gawk
> > Version: 1:3.1.4-1
>
> > Executing the following line in a shell:
> >
> >echo -e '--- orig/lisp/ChangeLog\n+++ mod/lisp/ChangeLog' | LANG=ja_JP
> > gawk '/[Cc]hangeLog/ { print }'
> >
> > yields not th
sean writes:
> they may have released it under the GPL, but there's a strong case for
> arguing that they're in violation of their own licensing terms for not
> providing the source code to the firmware blobs. if they were in fact in
> violation of said terms, debian could not legally distribute t
Scripsit Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Price for Commercial Software:
> Cost: several hundreds dollar and vendor lock-in
And even more if one wants legit copies.
> Membership has its privedleges!
Which? No membership is required.
--
Henning Makholm "... and that
On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 09:06 -0400, sean finney wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 11:40:30AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > Of course it is safe to distribute. What do you fear? That Broadcom
> > might sue you for distributing something that they have written and
> > released under the GPL, and
#include
* Johannes Rohr [Fri, Oct 08 2004, 10:20:12AM]:
> >> I remarked that mozilla-firefox is built on hppa using gcc-3.2 (I
>
> [...]
>
> Dear all,
>
> due to the ever increasing number of mozilla-based packages I wonder if
> it would be a good thing to have a separate debian-mozilla mai
Hi,
why ppp provides its own mechanism of telling programs when the interface
is coming up or down? Many programs register for the ppp mechanism, but
not for the network mechanism. Where is the difference and why both isn't
the same?
Bye, Joerg.
--
Real programmers don't comment their code. It
On Monday 11 October 2004 07:46, Sean Harshbarger wrote:
> I already put the libburn package in unstable a couple months back in
> hopes that more people would adopt/help it out. The libburn team has
> been somewhat idle last month or so, and I think this is the type of
> poking they need to contin
On August 18, 2004 at 2:57PM +0900,
miles (at lsi.nec.co.jp) wrote:
> Package: gawk
> Version: 1:3.1.4-1
> Executing the following line in a shell:
>
>echo -e '--- orig/lisp/ChangeLog\n+++ mod/lisp/ChangeLog' | LANG=ja_JP
> gawk '/[Cc]hangeLog/ { print }'
>
> yields not the expected two li
Jesus Climent schrieb:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 10:51:21PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
I think that creating a such list is a very good idea. Currently the
only way to contact mozilla package's maintainers is to do an apt-cache
search mozilla and grep for the email adresses. FYI there is currentl
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 03:37:21PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 15:35]:
> > On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 02:02:47PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > Of course we need to reserve the right to drop packages - but, doing
> > > that would still be bad. Adding a package
* paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 15:35]:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 02:02:47PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Of course we need to reserve the right to drop packages - but, doing
> > that would still be bad. Adding a package to volatile means for me that
> > we are very confident that we can sup
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 02:02:47PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 12:55]:
> > On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > - volatile is not "just another place" for backports, but should only
> > > contain changes to stable programs that
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 11:40:30AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Of course it is safe to distribute. What do you fear? That Broadcom
> might sue you for distributing something that they have written and
> released under the GPL, and actually have a case? They might as well
> sue Debian because
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 01:13:34PM +0200, Tilo Schwarz wrote:
> On Saturday 09 October 2004 15:56, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 12:48:27AM +0200, Tilo Schwarz wrote:
> > > Just one remark: When I was asked to enter a package server I would
> > > have liked to enter my local packa
* NOKUBI Takatsugu:
> At Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:47:25 +0200,
> Hilko Bengen wrote:
>> Does its feature differ from File::MMagic (libfile-mmagic-perl)?
>
> It seems under different license. File::MMagic is The Apache License
The code is under a BSD-style license with a documentation requirement
which
At Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:47:25 +0200,
Hilko Bengen wrote:
> Does its feature differ from File::MMagic (libfile-mmagic-perl)?
It seems under different license. File::MMagic is The Apache License
because it contains mime.magic database based on mod_mime_magic.
--
NOKUBI Takatsugu
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTE
* paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 12:55]:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > - volatile is not "just another place" for backports, but should only
> > contain changes to stable programs that are necessary to keep them
> > functional;
> I would like 'must' ke
Andi,
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> - It should allow any administrator to "just use" volatile, as they "just
> use" security.d.o, and they should be confident that nothing is broken by
> that;
It would be great to get some clarification of this.
Regards,
P
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 11:42:57AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 10:42:58AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >> I think those are arguments for making releases more quickly, rather
> >> than anything else.
> >
> > I'm not sure about th
Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Re: Henning Makholm in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Should volatile include updates of packages such as debian-keyring?
>>> debian-policy and developers-reference?
>>
>> Those who need these packages will run S
On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 12:45:34PM -0400, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Martin Schulze said:
> > A while ago there was a discussion in which it was said that such
> > tools are rather useless (or even dangerous) if they don't get their
> > database updated in accordance with ne
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 02:50:35PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:59:39 +0100, paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 09:37:57AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> >> It will also happily write to /usr which is IMO a no-no for user
> >> binaries.
> >
> >Where should i
* Hilko Bengen:
> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> File::Type uses magic numbers (typically at the start of a file) to
>> determine the MIME type of that file.
>>
>> File::Type can use either a filename, or file contents, to determine the
>> type of a file.
>>
>> (Another svk depen
paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 10:42:58AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> I think those are arguments for making releases more quickly, rather
>> than anything else.
>
> I'm not sure about that, graphics hardware, for example, is far faster moving
> than stable. And
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> we had some discussion about volatile, and I'm more and more considering to
> pick this task up. I think some issues are quite obvious:
>
> - packages should only go in in cooperation with the maintainers;
>
> - volatil
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 07:36:40AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> SHARED TEMPLATES
>It's actually possible to have a template and a question that
>are shared among a set of packages. All the packages have to
>provide an identical copy of the template in their templates
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> File::Type uses magic numbers (typically at the start of a file) to
> determine the MIME type of that file.
>
> File::Type can use either a filename, or file contents, to determine the
> type of a file.
>
> (Another svk dependency.)
Does its feature d
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 10:42:58AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I generally have to resort to backports or unstable when installing Debia=
> > n=20
> > on recent hardware, because we don't update hardware drivers in stable. =20
> > Would the ker
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Nathanael Nerode:
>> Until they do one of these two things, the firmware is not safe to
>> distribute.
>
> Of course it is safe to distribute. What do you fear? That Broadcom
> might sue you for distributing something that they have written and
> rel
Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I generally have to resort to backports or unstable when installing Debia=
> n=20
> on recent hardware, because we don't update hardware drivers in stable. =20
> Would the kernel and X be candidates for volatile?
I think those are arguments for making
Martin Zobel-Helas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i would like to see some "policy", what, when and under which
> circumstances gets included to volatile.d.n.
The most sensible policy would be a case by case consideration. Some
packages can sanely have the desired features backported [1], and some
* Andreas Barth:
>> Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually not applied to
>> stable because backports are not available for some reason?
>
> Are you speaking about mozilla? ;)
Mozilla, GnuPG, and maybe even PHP 4, depending on sarge's lifetime.
Other complex packages can easily e
* Nathanael Nerode:
>> Unless of course the firmware itself is GPL'd, and therefore no one
>> can legally give it out without offering the source as well.
>
> It is GPLed. This is why it hasn't been put in non-free. :-P
> Until they do one of these two things, the firmware is not safe to
> dist
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 11:37:06PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, wrote:
> > McAfee Personal Firewall Plus 2004 v. 5.0 - 20.00
> Why?
If you really care there's clamav, also for 0.00.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Re: Henning Makholm in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Should volatile include updates of packages such as debian-keyring?
>> debian-policy and developers-reference?
>
> Those who need these packages will run Sid anyway.
I'd sincerely hope not. The fact that few
On Sunday 10 October 2004 14:58, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 01:21:44PM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote:
> > Il sab, 2004-10-09 alle 17:48, martin f krafft ha scritto:
> > > > I think it's not a right comparison, nullmail is an MTA. and
> > > > AFAIK, msmtp is not an MTA:
>
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Is there any other reason why we would still need to use automake's
> dependency tracking anyway?
I don't think so. You may want to use it while working on the package,
but it seems like a fine idea to turn it off when finalizing the
package.
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 08:02:22AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Oct 2004, Stefan Hornburg wrote:
>
> >First of all documentation.
> Definitely!
I was about to write some, to at least have an overview of what commands
are available. Unfortunately, I haven't found the time yet.
Uwe
--
* Florian Weimer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041010 16:40]:
> * Andreas Barth:
> > - volatile is not "just another place" for backports, but should only
> > contain changes to stable programs that are necessary to keep them
> > functional;
> Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually no
Sven Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ==
>
> Draft for a volatile.debian.org packaging and update policy.
>
[...]
> Policy for v.d.o
>
[...]
> - A new version uploaded to v.d.o should restrict itself to new code
>which is
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> also sprach Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.10.08.2029 +0200]:
>> Is looking up .org domains in the wrong whois server enough to be
>> considered "useless"?
>
> I found it rather useless in woody when the .org registrar changed.
I'd say it is
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
Hi,
I intend to orphan the PowerPC bootloader quik. I haven't used it
myself for a long time, and don't feel like spending the time and
effort needed for getting it in shape again. Apart from the two
important bugs already in the bts, quik lacks the capability of
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 10:51:21PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>
> I think that creating a such list is a very good idea. Currently the
> only way to contact mozilla package's maintainers is to do an apt-cache
> search mozilla and grep for the email adresses. FYI there is currently
Or send a
Quoting Marc Haber ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Do we have infrastructure to handle different answers for the same
> question? Maybe I'd like to have a different dbadmin password on my
> postgresql database than on mysql?
Yes, we have it through the REGISTER command in the debconf protocol
(see man de
Original Message
Subject: Re: J?rg Schilling is damage; the community should route around him
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 01:45:22 -0400
From: Sean Harshbarger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Steve Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 11:37:06PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
Price for Commercial Software:
> > Adobe Illustrator CS - 90.00
> > Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Professional - 100.00
> > McAfee Personal Firewall Plus 2004 v. 5.0 - 20.00
> > Adobe Photoshop Elements 2
100 matches
Mail list logo
