Horms wrote:
Debian isn't lowering priority on Linux 2.4 work but individual people
are.
I am one of the people who do work on 2.4 for debian,
I won't raise the hands of others.
Personally my focus is 2.4.27, because that is what will go
into sarge and right now I don't have the time to do
2.4.2
All:
Some of you have probably seen my gripes about ndiswrapper-source.
I moved on past all that -- but upstream is debianizing it and
it's better in many ways.
The alternate location is:
http://ndiswrapper.sourceforge.net/debian/
It contains:
ndiswrapper-source_0.12-1_i386.deb
dated 25-Nov-2004.
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 10:47:50AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Jan 2005, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > unstable is described as suited for "...laptops and desktops on
> > non-critical
> > systems..."
> > testing is described as "... can be used for desktop systems that need
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 04:53:25PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> I think it's enough to add an additional notice stating that the named
> >> section is reproduced in the gfdl(7) manpage, incorporated by
> >> reference.
> >
> > I doubt that this would satisfy clause 4.H. of the G"F"DL:
> >
> >
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 04:17:14PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> I found RMS to be extremely rude and dismissive in the GFDL
> discussions. (His outright refusal to comminicate with Branden
> Robinson comes to mind.)
Perhaps they were both rude, in different ways. Or perhaps it was a
sort of mis
>Firmware files are not the sort of thing people can create their own
>versions of. In most cases the format is not documented and there
>are no free or even publicly available tools for this, and even in
>cases where it *is* documented, this is not by any stretch of the
>imagi
On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 07:58:46AM +1100, Sam Watkins wrote:
> We could even go a little further and try to avoid rudeness on the
> mailing lists. I recently reviewed some of the conversations with RMS
> on debian-legal regarding the GFDL. Several people were rude and
> uncivil to RMS, even sarca
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 04:08:36PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >* New upstream release (closes: #270944, #277543). It's less than two
> > weeks since this was released; may you contract an interesting
> > venereal disease.
>
> Is this really called for in chang
Joerg Jaspert writes:
>
>Package: wnpp
>Severity: normal
>
>Hi
>
>Unfortunately we dont have the time the package needs, so help is
>needed. Ideally you should know a bit of C and of Debian Packaging. You
>should also know cdrecord/mkisofs and its friends and of course have a
>cd burner at home to
Quoting "Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> * Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050109 16:49]:
> > On 10164 March 1977, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> >
> > >> Instead of doing all this by hand I can recommend my own package
> > >> debarchiver. The latest versions of it do this pretty good in
>
Quoting Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 10164 March 1977, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
>
> >> Instead of doing all this by hand I can recommend my own package
> >> debarchiver. The latest versions of it do this pretty good in
> >> an automatic way.
> > Thanks. I'll add some information about i
Quoting "Simon Raven / Eric S. Côté" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Le dim 2005-01-09 a 10:18:30 -0500, Ola Lundqvist a dit:
> > Hello
> >
> > >
> > > http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr/?page=debrepository
> >
>
> found a typo on the page:
>
> "...if I have pakcages ..." near the top.
>
> eric c./
#include
* Bernhard R. Link [Sun, Jan 09 2005, 02:26:51PM]:
> Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> nvtv: nvtvd.8.gz
Oh, sorry, was not a deliberate act. (Must have been from the time when
dh_make sugested this crappy license per default).
Maintainer: Please relicense under the
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 01:20:15PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > Looking into sarge I found a number of manpages, that do not look
> > redistributeable as they are licensed under the G"F"DL but do not
> > include the full licence text needed to be distributeable. Especially
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: gromit
Version : 20041213
Upstream Author : Simon Budig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/gromit/
* License : GPL
Description : GTK based tool to make annotations on screen
Gr
Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> Looking into sarge I found a number of manpages, that do not look
> redistributeable as they are licensed under the G"F"DL but do not
> include the full licence text needed to be distributeable. Especially
> Debian-specific ones seem to be affected due to some templates d
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 04:52:40PM +0100, Miguel Gea Milvaques wrote:
> Hello,
> I don't undestand why software loading files (as we are talking) must be
> in contrib. An example: xpdf, if you have not a pdf file you could not
> use it, only it gave us a blank page. You could read a lot of differen
El dg 09 de 01 del 2005 a les 10:39 -0600, en/na Peter Samuelson va
escriure:
> [Miguel Gea Milvaques]
> > I don't undestand why software loading files (as we are talking) must
> > be in contrib. An example: xpdf, if you have not a pdf file you could
> > not use it, only it gave us a blank page. Yo
[Miguel Gea Milvaques]
> I don't undestand why software loading files (as we are talking) must
> be in contrib. An example: xpdf, if you have not a pdf file you could
> not use it, only it gave us a blank page. You could read a lot of
> different files, a free pdf files or a non-free pdf files, an
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
I decided to orphan the systrace packages (systrace, xsystrace,
kernel-patch-systrace).
I don't use anymore, and I have not enough time to give it any attention.
If nobody picks the packages I request the removal from the archive.
Package: systrace
Description: E
su, 2005-01-09 kello 16:52 +0100, Miguel Gea Milvaques kirjoitti:
> Then if software as xpdf could be in main, software loading firmware
> must be in main.
Without commenting on the issue otherwise: This is not a working
analogy. xpdf can load any PDF file. Device drivers can, typically, only
load
* Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050109 16:49]:
> On 10164 March 1977, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
>
> >> Instead of doing all this by hand I can recommend my own package
> >> debarchiver. The latest versions of it do this pretty good in
> >> an automatic way.
> > Thanks. I'll add some information
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 16:53:25 +0100 Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Francesco Poli:
>
> > On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:39:47 +0100 Florian Weimer wrote:
> >
> >> I think it's enough to add an additional notice stating that the
> >> named section is reproduced in the gfdl(7) manpage, incorporated by
> >> refer
Your message dated Sun, 9 Jan 2005 15:36:46 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Mail delivery failed: returning message to
sender]
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
* Francesco Poli:
> On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:39:47 +0100 Florian Weimer wrote:
>
>> I think it's enough to add an additional notice stating that the named
>> section is reproduced in the gfdl(7) manpage, incorporated by
>> reference.
>
> I doubt that this would satisfy clause 4.H. of the G"F"DL:
>
>
Hello,
I don't undestand why software loading files (as we are talking) must be
in contrib. An example: xpdf, if you have not a pdf file you could not
use it, only it gave us a blank page. You could read a lot of different
files, a free pdf files or a non-free pdf files, and xpdf we never thing
to
Le dim 2005-01-09 a 10:18:30 -0500, Ola Lundqvist a dit:
> Hello
>
> >
> > http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr/?page=debrepository
>
found a typo on the page:
"...if I have pakcages ..." near the top.
eric c./
--
Microsoft is to operating systems & security
On 10164 March 1977, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
>> Instead of doing all this by hand I can recommend my own package
>> debarchiver. The latest versions of it do this pretty good in
>> an automatic way.
> Thanks. I'll add some information about it.
Maybe you want to add a link to the "dak" suite too.
Le dim 2005-01-09 a 04:12:39 -0500, Marc Haber a dit:
> Hi,
>
> exim4 4.43-2 has been uploaded to experimental. The exim4 maintainers
> consider to upload this package for sid and sarge. For this to happen,
> we need testing.
>
> I would like to invite all readers to test exim4 4.43, which can be
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:39:47 +0100 Florian Weimer wrote:
> I think it's enough to add an additional notice stating that the named
> section is reproduced in the gfdl(7) manpage, incorporated by
> reference.
I doubt that this would satisfy clause 4.H. of the G"F"DL:
H. Include an unalt
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 289504 general
Bug#289504: bugs.debian.org: alt-gr key NOT WORKING !
Bug reassigned from package `bugs.debian.org' to `general'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administ
Hello
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 09:44:26AM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> Quoting Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Hello
> >
> > Instead of doing all this by hand I can recommend my own package
> > debarchiver. The latest versions of it do this pretty good in
> > an automatic way.
> >
>
Quoting Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hello
>
> Instead of doing all this by hand I can recommend my own package
> debarchiver. The latest versions of it do this pretty good in
> an automatic way.
>
> Just wanted to let you know.
>
> Regards,
>
> // Ola
>
I just added an "Alternatives"
* Bernhard R. Link:
> Looking into sarge I found a number of manpages, that do not look
> redistributeable as they are licensed under the G"F"DL but do not
> include the full licence text needed to be distributeable.
I think it's enough to add an additional notice stating that the named
section i
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 02:26:51PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> Mark Brown: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> x86info: x86info.1.gz
This isn't Debian-specific since I contributed it back upstream. I've
contacted upstream about relicensing it under the GPL like the rest of
the package
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 12:05:16AM -0300, Fred Ulisses Maranhao wrote:
> The project is alive. But there are big problems.
>
> The server is not replying the e-mails with translations or reviews.
> That means that volunteers are working without feedback.
>
> > > > PS. please CC me as I'm not subs
Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Hello
Instead of doing all this by hand I can recommend my own package
debarchiver. The latest versions of it do this pretty good in
an automatic way.
Just wanted to let you know.
Regards,
// Ola
Thanks. I'll add some information about it.
-Roberto
Looking into sarge I found a number of manpages, that do not look
redistributeable as they are licensed under the G"F"DL but do not
include the full licence text needed to be distributeable. Especially
Debian-specific ones seem to be affected due to some templates debhelper
contained in the past.
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Jan 2005, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > unstable is described as suited for "...laptops and desktops on
> > non-critical
> > systems..."
> > testing is described as "... can be used for desktop systems that need more
> > stability.
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jan 08, Josh Triplett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > atmel-firmware . Would you argue that at76c503a-source should neither
> > Depends: nor Recommends: atmel-firmware ? If so, why? If you changed
> Yes. Read the debian-legal@ archive if you care abou
Hi,
On Saturday 08 January 2005 07:45, Christian Perrier wrote:
> So, if we imagine we release sarge at February 1st (ahah), just
> immediately announce that etch will enter the first freeze stages
> (base packages frozen, testing-security checked, d-i frozen) on August
> 1st.
>
> This will give a
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005, Holger Levsen wrote:
> unstable is described as suited for "...laptops and desktops on non-critical
> systems..."
> testing is described as "... can be used for desktop systems that need more
> stability..."
>
> I think this both is wrong. Unstable and testing should not be
Hi,
first I'd like to thank Kevin for his nice diagram!
On Wednesday 05 January 2005 20:38, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Very nice! I expect to use it at some conferences (BTW: Looks like a
> nice addition to Debian Eyecatcher[1], I'll add it :) )
but then I also got one concern, especially if this diag
Hello
Instead of doing all this by hand I can recommend my own package
debarchiver. The latest versions of it do this pretty good in
an automatic way.
Just wanted to let you know.
Regards,
// Ola
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 02:52:29AM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> I know that there are several A
On Jan 08, Josh Triplett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> atmel-firmware . Would you argue that at76c503a-source should neither
> Depends: nor Recommends: atmel-firmware ? If so, why? If you changed
Yes. Read the debian-legal@ archive if you care about the details.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Hi,
exim4 4.43-2 has been uploaded to experimental. The exim4 maintainers
consider to upload this package for sid and sarge. For this to happen,
we need testing.
I would like to invite all readers to test exim4 4.43, which can be
downloaded from the experimental distribution. My machines are runn
I know that there are several APT repository HOWTOs floating around out there.
However, none were particularly useful to me when I set out to make my own
repository. Pretty much everyone out there focuses on the trivial repository
format. I wanted to do it right and have a well-structured automat
reassign 289416 coreutils
tags 289416 l10n
thanks
Quoting Rene van Valkenburg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Package: general
> Severity: minor
>
>
> Running: su -c "apt-get --purge remove hello"
> Pakketlijsten worden ingelezen... Klaar
> Boom van vereisten wordt opgebouwd... Klaar
> De volgende pakket
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 289416 coreutils
Bug#289416: general: Typo's in dutch messages for dpkg and cat(libc?)
Bug reassigned from package `general' to `coreutils'.
> tags 289416 l10n
Bug#289416: general: Typo's in dutch messages for dpkg and cat(libc?)
There were no
49 matches
Mail list logo
