Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 08:11:24PM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > > If you build with different tools, you have a different package. "X > > built with gcc" and "X built with icc" are very different things (just > > as "X" and "X with x.patch and x2.patch applied" are different things). > >

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:59:36 +0200, Wesley W Terpstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 01:33:07PM -0500, John Hasler wrote: >> Josselin Mouette writes: >> > Main must be built with only packages from main. >> >> Packages in main must be _buildable_ with only packages from main

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 18:28:01 -0700, John H Robinson, IV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > I am not subscribed to debian-legal. > Steve Langasek wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 02:04:42AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: >> > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:02:19PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: >> > > it says

Re: Maintenance of User-Mode Linux packages

also sprach Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.10.19.0351 +0200]: > Is anyone (other than martin f krafft) interested in > co-maintaining some or all of the UML-oriented packages in Debian? Does this mean I don't qualify or that you would prefer to have a bunch of people cooperate? I would

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

I am not subscribed to debian-legal. Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 06:28:01PM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > > Note the exact words (I am assuming that Glenn copied them verbatim): > > the package in main must be buildable with tools in main > > Exact words are: > > I

Re: RFC: common database policy/infrastracture

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 09:19:28AM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > [That should be http://people.debian.org/~seanius/policy/dbapp-policy.html, > BTW] oops! > I'm missing some "Best practice" on how to setup the database itself. That > is, how to setup the tables (indexes, whateve

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 00:37:45 +0200, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:51:00PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: >> Le lundi 18 octobre 2004 à 19:22 +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra a écrit >> : >> > So, when it comes time to release this and include it in a .deb, >> > I

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 02:49:09AM +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote: > I suggest you try: > dd if=/dev/urandom of=testing bs=16 count=1048576 > split -a 3 -b 1024 testing testing.part. > find -name testing.part.\* -print0 | xargs -0 parchive a -n 16384 testing.par You're splitting into parts which

Bug#277193: ITP: tagtool -- tool to tag and rename MP3 and Ogg Vorbis files

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: tagtool Version : 0.10 Upstream Author : Pedro Lopes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://pwp.netcabo.pt/paol/tagtool/ * License : GPL Description : tool to tag and rename MP3 and Ogg Vorbis files Audio Tag T

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 06:28:01PM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > Note the exact words (I am assuming that Glenn copied them verbatim): > the package in main must be buildable with tools in main Exact words are: In addition, the packages in _main_ * must not require a package o

Virus incident

Title: Virus incident Panda Antivirus has found the following viruses in the message:     Server :    HERMES     Sent by :   debian-devel@lists.debian.org     Address :   debian-devel@lists.debian.org     To :    [EMAIL PROTECTED]     Subject :   Mail Deli

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 02:49:09AM +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote: > find -name testing.part.\* -print0 | xargs -0 parchive a -n 16384 testing.par After taking a look in the source code for par, I found this in rs.c: |*| Calculations over a Galois Field, GF(8) What does that mean? It means ther

Maintenance of User-Mode Linux packages

Is anyone (other than martin f krafft) interested in co-maintaining some or all of the UML-oriented packages in Debian? This includes the following source packages which I currently maintain: - user-mode-linux - kernel-patch-uml - uml-utilities Things are a bit chaotic upstream at the moment, an

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 02:49:09AM +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote: > I would wager that par is using the Berklekamp-Masey algorithm for decoding; That would be Berlekamp-Massey. Appologies to both. I should add their names to my spell checker. =) -- Wesley W. Terpstra

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

I am not subscribed to debian-legal. Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 02:04:42AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:02:19PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > > > it says "the package in main must be buildable with tools in main". > > > That is still the case.

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:45:39PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 12:59:42AM +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote: > > To which, I say, wtf! > You're using it wrong. Well thank goodness, b/c otherwise that would be really awful. :) This gives me a great source to compare my algor

Re: Xsession doesn't use umask setting from /etc/login.defs

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Steve Langasek wrote: | On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 02:06:16AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: |> On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 12:06:36PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: |>> environment variables, at least, are trivial to accomplish |>> using the pam_env module. Pr

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 02:04:42AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:02:19PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > > You can't take the source, compile it with a proprietary compiler and > > upload the result to main, because in order to create that package, > > you need a non-free

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 02:04:42AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:02:19PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > > You can't take the source, compile it with a proprietary compiler and > > upload the result to main, because in order to create that package, > > you need a non-free

Re: USB wireless

On Monday 18 October 2004 19:27, Tom Kuiper wrote: *Supposedly* http://www.softwareandstuff.com/NET10278.html > Does anyone know of a USB wireless device that can be used under Linux > without too much effort? > > Thanks > > Tom > -- > Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (137.79.89.31) > SnailMail:

New ClamAV version uploaded, testers wanted

Hello all, I have uploaded 0.80 to experimental temporarily for testing purposes (it is also on p.d.o/~sgran). The two main concerns I have with releasing it into the wild at this point are false positives in the jpeg scanning code (appears to be largely the result of a bad signature, not the eng

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:02:19PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > You can't take the source, compile it with a proprietary compiler and > upload the result to main, because in order to create that package, > you need a non-free compiler. The fact that you can also compile the > sources with a free

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 12:59:42AM +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote: > To which, I say, wtf! You're using it wrong. > ... and yet par2 tells me I need 1909 more (I have 101). > That means I would need 18* more information in order to recover foo.pdf! > I have to admit, I am surprised by this. I wo

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 08:14:25AM +1000, Brian May wrote: > > "Wouter" == Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> How about merging those bugs with the bug reported against the correct > >> package? > > Wouter> That's not possible. You can only merge bugs if /all/ > W

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 08:16:02AM +1000, Brian May wrote: > > "Martin" == Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Martin> * Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-10-18 13:32]: > >> That's not possible. You can only merge bugs if /all/ properties (tags, > >> severity, pac

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 12:37:45AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:51:00PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > Le lundi 18 octobre 2004 à 19:22 +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra a écrit : > > > So, when it comes time to release this and include it in a .deb, I ask > > > myself: wh

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 05:15:20PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > Isn't this just what PAR and PAR2 do (in conjunction with a file splitter)? Thanks for the pointer to this project; I didn't know about it. However, to answer your question: no. PAR2 uses Reed-Solomon codes, my project also uses a v

Re: Some file-in-etc-not-marked-as-conffile RC bugs

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 01:02:50AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > I stomped across > > It seems several packages fail to declare conffiles as such, which is > a serious policy violation given that user change will not be

Some file-in-etc-not-marked-as-conffile RC bugs

Hello developers, I stomped across It seems several packages fail to declare conffiles as such, which is a serious policy violation given that user change will not be preserved across upgrades. Someone with more time t

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

I wrote: > Packages in main must be _buildable_ with only packages from main. Wesley W. Terpstra writes: > This slight difference in wording sounds to me like I would indeed be > able to include prebuilt object files, so long as the package could be > built without them. Is that correct? I wouldn

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 08:14:25AM +1000, Brian May wrote: > > "Wouter" == Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Wouter> That's not possible. You can only merge bugs if /all/ > Wouter> properties (tags, severity, package reported against, ...) > Wouter> are the same. > > Wh

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

> "Adrian" == Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > writes: >> I have a number of bugs reported against my packages which are >> actually (already reported) bugs in other packages. Adrian> Reading the rest of the thread, I conclude that adding an Adri

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

> "Adeodato" == Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Adeodato> * Bernd Eckenfels [Mon, 18 Oct 2004 12:01:32 +0200]: >> Perhaps we need a "read this before submitting bugs against my package" >> function in reportbugs :) Adeodato> such functionality exists, via the Ade

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

> "Bernd" == Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Bernd> On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 05:54:44PM +1000, Brian May wrote: >> I could just close the bug against my package, but this means other >> people will encounter the same problem and report the bug against my >> package a

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

> "Martin" == Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Martin> * Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-10-18 13:32]: >> That's not possible. You can only merge bugs if /all/ properties (tags, >> severity, package reported against, ...) are the same. Martin> Just for th

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

> "Wouter" == Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Wouter> On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 10:19:18AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: >> > I could just close the bug against my package, but this means other >> > people will encounter the same problem and report the bug against my >>

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:51:00PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le lundi 18 octobre 2004 à 19:22 +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra a écrit : > > So, when it comes time to release this and include it in a .deb, I ask > > myself: what would happen if I included (with the C source and ocaml > > compiler)

Re: Xsession doesn't use umask setting from /etc/login.defs

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 02:06:16AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 12:06:36PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > environment variables, at least, are trivial to accomplish using the > > pam_env module. Properly setting a umask would call for something else > > yet. > Would

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 11:49:56AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > Wesley W. Terpstra wrote: > > I am developing a very CPU-intensive, open-source error-correcting code. > > > > The intention of this code is that you can split a large (> 5GB) > > file across multiple packets. Whenever you receive en

Re: Xsession doesn't use umask setting from /etc/login.defs

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Branden Robinson wrote: | On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 12:06:36PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: | |> environment variables, at least, are trivial to accomplish |> using the pam_env module. Properly setting a umask would call |> for something else yet. | | Wo

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 07:51:00PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le lundi 18 octobre 2004 à 19:22 +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra a écrit : > > So, when it comes time to release this and include it in a .deb, I ask > > myself: what would happen if I included (with the C source and ocaml > > compiler)

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 01:33:07PM -0500, John Hasler wrote: > Josselin Mouette writes: > > Main must be built with only packages from main. > > Packages in main must be _buildable_ with only packages from main. Interesting. This slight difference in wording sounds to me like I would indeed be a

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

Since there's one GPL question left, I am still posting to debian-legal. The legal question is marked ** for those who want to skip the rest. On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 11:49:56AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > Whether your university owns a license or not does not really affect > Debian. icc

Re: Xsession doesn't use umask setting from /etc/login.defs

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Branden, Branden Robinson wrote: | On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 01:28:31PM +0200, Tomas Fasth wrote: | |> What I don't understand is why you think the umask preference |> should be applied differently depending on the type of |> interface the user choo

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

Josselin Mouette writes: > Main must be built with only packages from main. Packages in main must be _buildable_ with only packages from main. -- John Hasler

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

Wesley W. Terpstra wrote: > I am developing a very CPU-intensive, open-source error-correcting code. > > The intention of this code is that you can split a large (> 5GB) > file across multiple packets. Whenever you receive enough packets that > their combined size = the file size, you can decode t

Kernel 2.6.x real time clock hang on Dell

Hi, I'm bitten by a problem, that is already known to some people, but for which I found no solution. On a Dell server, the 2.6.7 kernel (kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686-smp) hangs during boot at the real time clock. It seems, this problem is only known to Debian users :-( Is there a solution or a wor

Re: Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

Le lundi 18 octobre 2004 à 19:22 +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra a écrit : > So, when it comes time to release this and include it in a .deb, I ask > myself: what would happen if I included (with the C source and ocaml > compiler) some precompiled object files for i386? As long as the build > target is i

Reproducible, precompiled .o files: what say policy+gpl?

I am developing a very CPU-intensive, open-source error-correcting code. The intention of this code is that you can split a large (> 5GB) file across multiple packets. Whenever you receive enough packets that their combined size = the file size, you can decode the packets to recover the file, rega

Re: Right Way to make a configuration package

Am Monday 18 October 2004 02:01 schrieb Enrico Zini: > One problem with diversion could also be that the original package's > scripts won't probably edit the diverted conffile, but would probably > edit the file in the traditional place instead. Same would be the case for admins and users, and th

Re: about volatile.d.o/n

Thomas, On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 11:53:03PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > 'stable even for users who are "misusing" the system.' sounds like it > > could turn out to be a tall order, if it is intended to have wider > > application. > > It is a tall or

Re: Testing Large File Support (LFS)

#include * Anand Kumria [Tue, Oct 19 2004, 12:53:45AM]: > I'm just wondering if there is an automated way that we can test programs > and/or packages to determine if they have working large file support? I do not think this can be automated easily. Every program has a different way of working wi

Re: Testing Large File Support (LFS)

Anand Kumria writes: > >I'm just wondering if there is an automated way that we can test programs >and/or packages to determine if they have working large file support? > >I've stumbled onto problems in this area, in the past, with Apache and >Apache2 (fixed upstream but won't be making sarge) and

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

On Monday 18 October 2004 06:01 am, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > Perhaps we need a "read this before submitting bugs against my package" > function in reportbugs :) I've actually seen some packages do this. For instance, try submitting a bug against mozilla-firefox.. Daniel -- /--

Re: Testing Large File Support (LFS)

[Anand Kumria] > I'm hoping there is some automated tool we can use rather than > having to find and then report bugs as we go. Perhaps you can use 'nm binary' and check if it is using the 64-bit version of the libc function calls?

Re: about volatile.d.o/n

On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 11:33:49AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041017 11:20]: > > Andreas Barth wrote: > > > > > > 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. >

Testing Large File Support (LFS)

Hi, I'm just wondering if there is an automated way that we can test programs and/or packages to determine if they have working large file support? I've stumbled onto problems in this area, in the past, with Apache and Apache2 (fixed upstream but won't be making sarge) and with things like wget

Bug#277087: ITP: python-pychm -- Python bindings for CHMLIB

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: python-pychm Version : 0.8.0 Upstream Author : Rubens Ramos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://gnochm.sourceforge.net/pychm.html * License : GPL Description : Python bindings for CHMLIB PyCHM is a package

Bug#277085: ITP: gnochm -- CHM file viewer for GNOME

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: gnochm Version : 0.9.2 Upstream Author : Rubens Ramos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://gnochm.sourceforge.net/ * License : GPL Description : CHM file viewer for GNOME Gnochm is a Compiled HTML Help (CHM)

RFC: Removal of old cyrus-sasl (libsasl7) from sarge and sid

As of this writing, all packages in Debian have transitioned to the newer libsasl2 (cyrus-sasl2). The last user of libsasl7 (sendmail-wide) is being removed from sid at the request of its maintainer. Cyrus-SASL 1.5 (libsasl7) has been deprecated upstream for years. Can we remove cyrus-sasl and l

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

On Monday 18 October 2004 09.54, Brian May wrote: > Hello, > > I have a number of bugs reported against my packages which are > actually (already reported) bugs in other packages. Reading the rest of the thread, I conclude that adding an explanation to the bug and tagging it wontfix is probably t

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > Perhaps we need a "read this before submitting bugs against my > package" function in reportbugs :) That already exists: /usr/share/bug/. "reportbug galeon" provides a reasonable example run.

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

* Bernd Eckenfels [Mon, 18 Oct 2004 12:01:32 +0200]: > Perhaps we need a "read this before submitting bugs against my package" > function in reportbugs :) such functionality exists, via the /usr/share/bug//presubj file. see /usr/share/doc/reportbug/README.developers. -- Adeodato Simó EM

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

* Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-10-18 13:32]: > That's not possible. You can only merge bugs if /all/ properties (tags, > severity, package reported against, ...) are the same. Just for the record, tags are an exception. They are merged when you merge bugs. -- Martin Michlmayr http:/

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 05:54:44PM +1000, Brian May wrote: >> I could just close the bug against my package, but this means other >> people will encounter the same problem and report the bug against my >> package again (as it isn't always obvious that

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 10:19:18AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: > > I could just close the bug against my package, but this means other > > people will encounter the same problem and report the bug against my > > package again (as it isn't always obvious that it isn't the fault of > > my package). >

Re: RFC: common database policy/infrastracture

On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 08:19, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > > I'm missing some "Best practice" on how to setup the database itself. That > is, how to setup the tables (indexes, whatever...) that the application > will use from the database and, maybe, even some initial data in some of

Re: Looking for Michael Brammer (grisu) / DDTP

On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 03:47:29PM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote: > this here in Brasil are unable to continue the work because of technical > problems and is unable to contact grisu. Grisu is currently in the process of moving to a new home. I guess he will be reachable again via email prett

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 05:54:44PM +1000, Brian May wrote: > I could just close the bug against my package, but this means other > people will encounter the same problem and report the bug against my > package again (as it isn't always obvious that it isn't the fault of > my package). So you do no

Re: Xsession doesn't use umask setting from /etc/login.defs

* Branden Robinson | On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 12:06:36PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: | > environment variables, at least, are trivial to accomplish using the | > pam_env module. Properly setting a umask would call for something else | > yet. | | Would pam_umask.so be a worthwhile exercise for s

Re: forwarding bugs to other packages

> I could just close the bug against my package, but this means other > people will encounter the same problem and report the bug against my > package again (as it isn't always obvious that it isn't the fault of > my package). How about merging those bugs with the bug reported against the correct

forwarding bugs to other packages

Hello, I have a number of bugs reported against my packages which are actually (already reported) bugs in other packages. I could just close the bug against my package, but this means other people will encounter the same problem and report the bug against my package again (as it isn't always obvi

Re: RFC: common database policy/infrastracture

On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 03:23, sean finney wrote: ... > > Even if the server is on the local machine, I am opposed to having any > > application package alter the database access policies. This is OK for > > what exactly do you mean by altering access policies? granting > privileges to a new user?

Re: about volatile.d.o/n

On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 11:33:49AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041017 11:20]: > > Andreas Barth wrote: > > > * Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 18:30]: > > > > The goal should be that I, as a user, can add volatile to my > > > > sources.list and pe

Re: Xsession doesn't use umask setting from /etc/login.defs

Branden Robinson writes: When I see complaints like these > And, by the way: > X-No-CC: I subscribe to this list; do not CC me on replies. > > Please get an MUA that respects Mail-Copies-To:. I wonder if filing a bug report against the offending MUA would be more efficient? In this case,

Re: RFC: common database policy/infrastracture

On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 07:26:10PM -0400, sean finney wrote: > applications. i'd greatly appreciate input, especially from the current > maintainers of database-using or database-server applications. the draft > is available at: > > http://people.debian.org/seanius/policy/dbapp-policy.html [Tha

Re: Xsession doesn't use umask setting from /etc/login.defs

On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 01:28:31PM +0200, Tomas Fasth wrote: > However, umask is not an ordinary software configuration property, > it's a process property initially inherited from init which, by the > way, set it to 022 (I just checked the source of sysvinit in unstable). Yes, we know that. [...

Re: Xsession doesn't use umask setting from /etc/login.defs

On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 12:06:36PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > environment variables, at least, are trivial to accomplish using the > pam_env module. Properly setting a umask would call for something else > yet. Would pam_umask.so be a worthwhile exercise for some enterprising person? I someh

Re: about volatile.d.o/n

paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 'stable even for users who are "misusing" the system.' sounds like it > could turn out to be a tall order, if it is intended to have wider > application. It is a tall order. It is also one that Debian has done fairly well, by having very strict policies about

Virus ricevuto -- Virus received

Questo messaggio e` stato automaticamente generato per informarvi che un messaggio da voi inviato (o inviato da un virus che ha falsificato il vostro indirizzo email) e` stato bloccato dall'antivirus installato su questo mail server. Di seguito potete trovare alcuni dettagli relativi al messa

Re: Last call for expat maintainer before NMU

> I'll take care of it this Monday or Tuesday. Thanks a lot for your respond! Please consider to extend the compilerflags with -pthread -D_REENTRANT. This is required for my python-4suite package and all other multi-threaded applications. I'm missing also -fPIC for shared objects, but this is allr