Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> ia64 turns out to be confusing too; it's Itanium but the main 64-bit
> architecture on PCs is now amd64. Intel calls this EM64T. The
> debian-amd64 list gets occasional queries about trying to install the
> ia64 distribution on amd64 machines.
Can you complete the line of r
I demand that Brian May may or may not have written...
[snip]
>
> Without apt-proxy, I can't build packages with pbuilder, because it can't
> download the required files, which means I can't rebuild my package for
> sarge in order to see if it fixes a bug I encountered while testing another
> pie
Hello,
Simple question: is apt-proxy still being maintained?
Based on the growing list of bugs, I suspect not.
A quick glance of some of the reports shows no sign of response from
the maintainer.
Some users in fact have completely given up.
A recent bug I have discovered makes it unusable.
Ho
Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 10:01:26AM +1100, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> >Package: ncpfs
> >Severity: serious
> >Version: 2.2.6-2
> >Tags: sid
> >Justification: fails to build from source
> >
> >There was an error while trying to autobuild your package:
> >
> >Aut
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 10:35:51AM +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote:
> I think we should at least consider to rename, since the current i386 seems
> to cause a lot of confusion. When even DDs confuse the meaning how can we
> expect the user to understand?
Who is confused?
> Most people know instanta
Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Roland Stigge [Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:41:21 +0100]:
>
>> when feeding the data from the Sources file into a script that
>> implicitly checks for UTF-8 consistency (a Python lib), the following
>> packages happen to include byte sequences that are no valid
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 10:01:26AM +1100, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
>Package: ncpfs
>Severity: serious
>Version: 2.2.6-2
>Tags: sid
>Justification: fails to build from source
>
>There was an error while trying to autobuild your package:
>
>Automatic build of ncpfs_2.2.6-2 on rem by sbuild/mips
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 11:41:21PM +0100, Roland Stigge wrote:
>
> Time for reviewing
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/12/msg00521.html and a
> statement in Policy about that (for consistency with changelogs that are
> already handled that way)?
UTF-8 is only recommended in the changel
* Roland Stigge [Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:41:21 +0100]:
> Hi,
> when feeding the data from the Sources file into a script that
> implicitly checks for UTF-8 consistency (a Python lib), the following
> packages happen to include byte sequences that are no valid UTF-8:
> cadubi
> fcmp
> glade-perl
> my
Hi,
when feeding the data from the Sources file into a script that
implicitly checks for UTF-8 consistency (a Python lib), the following
packages happen to include byte sequences that are no valid UTF-8:
cadubi
fcmp
glade-perl
myspell-sv
rat
all of them have another encoding in the Maintainer fi
Hi,
In #276419, the bug submitter complained that when a command and some
arguments were passed to su, all these arguments were concatenated, and
provided to the shell -c option.
This behavior differs from su on other systems [0].
This also forbid to pass arguments to the shell [1].
As these beh
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Decklin Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: pygmy
Version : 0.45+svn60
Upstream Author : Andrew Conkling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://pygmy.berlios.de/
* License : GPL
Description : PyGTK client for the
Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Bastian Venthur:
>
>>> We know what steps it takes ot resupport i386. What kind of work would
>>> be needed to rename i386 to x86 or ia32?
>>
>> I think we should at least consider to rename,
>
> Oh, come on, it's just a name which is mostly used by Debian's
> infrastru
* Bastian Venthur:
>> We know what steps it takes ot resupport i386. What kind of work would
>> be needed to rename i386 to x86 or ia32?
>
> I think we should at least consider to rename,
Oh, come on, it's just a name which is mostly used by Debian's
infrastructure, and not by end users. Changin
* Kurt Roeckx:
>> Companies *do* make them, though. They are *tiny*, low-power &
>> *cheap*. The 386SX is perfect for the embedded market.
>
> Intel still sells 386 DX, SX and others:
> http://www.intel.com/design/intarch/intel386/index.htm
Still doesn't warrant supporting them, though. 8-)
-
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Wolfgang Baer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libjogl-java
Version : 1.1
Upstream Author : various
* URL : https://jogl.dev.java.net/
* License : BSD
Description : Java bindings for OpenGL
JOGL provides full ac
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Nov 06, Ken Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>So I'll ask again. What would be the process for rename i386 to x86 or ia32?
>
> Complex enough that it will never happen, so please do not waste more
> time over this.
Thanks for the answer. Now everyone else can drop
On Nov 06, Ken Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I'll ask again. What would be the process for rename i386 to x86 or ia32?
Complex enough that it will never happen, so please do not waste more
time over this.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bastian Venthur wrote:
> Ken Bloom wrote:
>
>
>>Bastian Venthur wrote:
>>
>>>Nick Jacobs wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
In-Reply-To=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You mean, it's seriously been proposed that a
significant amount of work should be done to restore
support for a processor that has not
Hi,
It's been a long time since you asked for help, and apparently not many
people showed up.
Although I don't have any hardware synthesizer, I might help for
packaging speakup and the debian installer.
BTW, The current status of kernel-image-speakup-i386 is not good: it isn't
in etch because of
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 12:29:33PM +0100, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
> Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Schulze):
>
> > oldstable (woody) stable (sarge) unstable (sid)
> > openssl 0.9.6c-2.woody.8 0.9.7e-3sarge1 0.9.8-3
> > openssl 094 0.9.4-6.woody
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 12:10:05PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> I am a little bit confused. Does Via/C3 need strict 386-instructions
> or does it play nicely with the current status, i.e. 486 instruction
> set?
A standard sarge install works perfectly on my brand-new VIA C3.
Cheers, WB
--
T
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 12:10:05PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Andrew M.A. Cater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
> > Up until the change in GCC which effectively
> > changed Debian compatibility to 486 processors and above, Debian
> > supported the 386 processor. There was a lot of talking o
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Schulze):
> --
> Debian Security Advisory DSA 881-1 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.debian.org/security/ Martin Schulze
> November 4th, 2005
Andrew M.A. Cater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Up until the change in GCC which effectively
> changed Debian compatibility to 486 processors and above, Debian
> supported the 386 processor. There was a lot of talking on the lists
> at the time and it was agreed that this was a bad situation a
Hi Ryan,
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 12:38:43PM -0800, Ryan Murray wrote:
> Also, I've investigated the mail backlog on master and found the main
> problem. The mail queue is currently full of email that will never be
> able to be delivered, all for one particular user.
Why would that be?
Could y
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 10:35:51AM +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote:
>
> I think we should at least consider to rename, since the current i386 seems
> to cause a lot of confusion. When even DDs confuse the meaning how can we
> expect the user to understand?
>
> Most people know instantanously what
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 10:13:25AM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 04:20:45AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Second, thanks to some enhancements Ryan Murray has recently made to
> > buildd/wanna-build, it is now possible for the release team to
> > request automated bu
Ken Bloom wrote:
> Bastian Venthur wrote:
>> Nick Jacobs wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In-Reply-To=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>>You mean, it's seriously been proposed that a
>>>significant amount of work should be done to restore
>>>support for a processor that has not been manufactured
>>>for 10 years? While s
29 matches
Mail list logo
