At Tue, 18 Jan 2005 22:09:03 -0600,
Marcelo E. Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 05:52:04PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
>
> > > > > Yes, and if ev67 is instruction upper compatible with ev56 (I
> > > > > guess so), I think it's acceptable to add a symlink "ln -sf
> >
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 05:52:04PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > > > Yes, and if ev67 is instruction upper compatible with ev56 (I
> > > > guess so), I think it's acceptable to add a symlink "ln -sf
> > > > lib/ev67/libfoo.so lib/ev56/libfoo.so".
> > >
> > > Ugh... that pushes the burden o
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 12:50:55AM +, Simon Huggins wrote:
> > There are currently 11 orphaned xfce4-* packages in unstable, including
> > three that have just been removed from testing due to RC bugs that went
> > virtually unnoticed since the last upload in May.
>
> I know the -goodies packa
Hey!
Em Ter, 2005-01-18 Ãs 22:34 +0100, Osamu Aoki escreveu:
> First add these extra long options to "struct option long_opts[] = { ..."
>
> Then right before calling "gtk_init (&newargc, &newargv);" you source
I see your point (even more after reading your other post), but I think
messing up wi
Alex Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Some of us have woody running on LVM1... well I have this with 2.4 Debian
> kernel and LVM1. For LVM1 to work with a kernel that has devfs compiled in
> (debian kernels for woody do) then /dev/ has to be a mounted devfs.
>
> For people such as myself sarge a
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> so unless Debian wants to stay with stoneage kernels you're better of
> starting to fix D-I.
We're not going to destabalise d-i by beginning to make large changes to
it, like not using devfs, until sarge is released.
FWIW, the main current d-i release blocker is a lack
I don't read the Debian Devel list all that often, as it's traffic rate
is far too much for me to keep up with. ;-) In any case, I was referred
to your post by the Debian Weekly News article on it (you're pretty
popular right now). I would have to agree with posters that suggested
you follow the
Hi,
(Disclaimer: I never coded C seriously for any useful commands.)
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 11:24:05PM -0200, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> Em Qui, 2005-01-13 às 19:12 +0100, Osamu Aoki escreveu:
> > * Parsing of GNU long-option and /etc/gksu.conf may share codes.
>
> I don't know what you me
Some of us have woody running on LVM1... well I have this with 2.4 Debian
kernel and LVM1. For LVM1 to work with a kernel that has devfs compiled in
(debian kernels for woody do) then /dev/ has to be a mounted devfs.
For people such as myself sarge as it stands will provide a 2.4.27 kernel
with de
[Otto Wyss]
> I've set the s attrtibute of halt since on my desktop any user may
> stop the system. But about each second month or so it's set back to
> it's original rights probably by a package upgrade. Is there a way to
> keep the access rights or any better way to handle these kind of
> proble
I've set the s attrtibute of halt since on my desktop any user may stop
the system. But about each second month or so it's set back to it's
original rights probably by a package upgrade. Is there a way to keep
the access rights or any better way to handle these kind of problems.
O. Wyss
--
Devel
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 17:11:50 +, Tim Cutts wrote:
>
> On 18 Jan 2005, at 4:06 pm, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 03:46:18PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
>>>
>>> On 17 Jan 2005, at 5:42 pm, Bastian Blank wrote:
>>>
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:28:56AM +, Patrick Caulfi
On 18 Jan 2005, at 4:06 pm, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 03:46:18PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
On 17 Jan 2005, at 5:42 pm, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:28:56AM +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
lvm2 - in active development, upstream helpful but often
busy.
* Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-01-15 11:51]:
> I have tried to unload this onto Rafael for a few years now, but he can't
> take Octave either. This may be best served by a maintainer group via
> alioth, and I could be persuaded to help. But I can't set up such a group
> or lead it,
[Brian May]
> Whatever happened to the idea of even numbered kernels being
> "stable"?
You didn't get the memo? That's an obsolete standard - the 2.6.x line
of development has been much more aggressive than past stable series,
as far as allowed tree changes, and last July or so (I think it was),
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 03:46:18PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
>
> On 17 Jan 2005, at 5:42 pm, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:28:56AM +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> >>lvm2- in active development, upstream helpful but often
> >>busy.
> >>device-mapper - larg
On 17 Jan 2005, at 5:42 pm, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:28:56AM +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
lvm2 - in active development, upstream helpful but often busy.
device-mapper - largely stable. occasional releases.
lvm10 - stable. no more upstream development at a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: cupid
Version : 0.0.1
Upstream Author : Ronald Bultje <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://ronald.bitfreak.net/me/cupid.php
* License : GPL
Description : GStreamer based video/audio recorder
*** DRAFT (will r
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: pitivi
Version : 0.1.1
Upstream Author : European Institute of Technology
* URL : http://www.pitivi.org/
* License : GPL
Description : GStreamer based non-linear audio/video editing software
*** DRAFT (i.e.
On Tuesday 18 January 2005 13:04, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Count the number of entries in the Packages / Sources file?
>
> You should realy count source packages I think as that better reflects
> the amount of software than all the multi deb packages.
>
> MfG
> Goswin
Quick test:
[EM
Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi DDs,
> I was just wondering about the number of packages that go through the
> debian flavors per release.
> X packages went in stable, Y packages went in testing, Z
> packages went in unstable,
> where X < Y << Z
> for potato, woody and sarge(so far).
Hi DDs,
I was just wondering about the number of packages that go through the
debian flavors per release.
X packages went in stable, Y packages went in testing, Z
packages went in unstable,
where X < Y << Z
for potato, woody and sarge(so far).
IE. woody(x)=8000 and sarge(x)=15000
Any pointers to w
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 10:22:14AM +0100, Emanuele Rocca wrote:
> * [ 17-01-05 - 01:50 ] Simon Huggins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There were some packages that made it to mentors.debian.net - and there
> > is still some work up there.
> > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/
> WNPP
* [ 17-01-05 - 01:50 ] Simon Huggins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 02:57:57PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > There are currently 11 orphaned xfce4-* packages in unstable, including
> > three that have just been removed from testing due to RC bugs that went
> > virtuall
24 matches
Mail list logo
