On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 08:15:14AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 19:24 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 11:29:07AM -0600, Nathan Poznick wrote:
> > > Thus spake Roger Leigh:
> > > > What is the problem this is trying to solve?
> > > >
> > > > If the part
hi
my name is Daniel Knabl, i am from Austria, so please excuse my poor
English ;)
first of all i have to say "thank you" for your great work.
there is a nice little application called vexim [1], it is used for
managing a virtual mailing system based on exim4 and mysql, and it is
fully compatibl
On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 12:51:55AM +0100, Jiří Paleček wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 19:50:14 +0100, Linas Zvirblis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Jiri Palecek wrote:
> >>How does aptitude decide which one to choose? Shouldn't it
> >>prefer to do something that won't break other packages? Or shoul
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Timo Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: cereal
Version : 0.9.35
Upstream Author : Miloslav Trmac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://carolina.mff.cuni.cz/~trmac/blog/cereal/
* License : GPL
Description : a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jonas Genannt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libfile-flat-perl
Version : 0.95
Upstream Author : Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/~adamk/
* License : GPL
Description : Implements a
Steve Langasek wrote:
> That's fine; I'm just saying that there's not much point in telling people
> to *not* ship /var/run (or subdirectories thereof) in their package.
Well, there is the slight point that if you ship /var/run/foo in your
package, you (a) probably use /var/run/foo just assuming
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 19:50:14 +0100, Linas Zvirblis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Jiri Palecek wrote:
How does aptitude decide which one to choose? Shouldn't it
prefer to do something that won't break other packages? Or should
it ask the user for help?
As for your problem, you must provide way
"Alejandro Bonilla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> /usr/lib/libgconf2-4/gconf-sanity-check-2: error while loading shared
> libraries: libpangocairo-1.0.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such
> file or dir
> gconf-sanity-check-2 did not pass, logging back out
Fun! :-/
> Which package gets t
Gated from my blog.
(#104) How the kernel firmware loader works
fEnIo[0] learnt an important lesson about the kernel firmware loader:
it (usually) does not work as expected for non-modular drivers.
The reason is that the request_firmware()[1] interface is synchronous.
Since it's usually called
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 08:23:13PM +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 03:19:42PM -0500, Frans Jessop wrote:
> > Ubuntu's launchpad is amazing. Do you think it would be helpful if all
> > DD's worked through it on their projects? Wouldn't that keep things more
> > organized an
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 03:19:42PM -0500, Frans Jessop wrote:
> Ubuntu's launchpad is amazing. Do you think it would be helpful if all
> DD's worked through it on their projects? Wouldn't that keep things more
> organized and efficient? Or perhaps Debian could build its own version of
> launc
Hi,
I just upgraded Sid and rebooted, after that, logging into Gnome told me if I
wanted to migrate to a Single file that will give me better performance, so of
course I said yes. It logged me off and everytime that I need to log back in,
it kicks me out.
I don't have any special scripts, I just
Hello,
My name is Marcus Gillings. There was an email sent from me on your website. Can you please delete it and the contents in
it, please.
Thank
you,
* Frans Jessop ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Ubuntu's launchpad is amazing. Do you think it would be helpful if all
> DD's worked through it on their projects? Wouldn't that keep things more
> organized and efficient? Or perhaps Debian could build its own version of
> launchpad which is better
Frans Jessop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ubuntu's launchpad is amazing. Do you think it would be helpful if all DD's
> worked through it on their projects? Wouldn't that keep things more
> organized and efficient? Or perhaps Debian could build its own version of
> launchpad which is better.
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 03:19:42PM -0500, Frans Jessop wrote:
> Ubuntu's launchpad is amazing. Do you think it would be helpful if all
> DD's worked through it on their projects? Wouldn't that keep things more
> organized and efficient? Or perhaps Debian could build its own version of
> launc
Ubuntu's launchpad is amazing. Do you think it would be helpful if all DD's
worked through it on their projects? Wouldn't that keep things more
organized and efficient? Or perhaps Debian could build its own version of
launchpad which is better. Again, I think it would do a good job keeping
[Thomas Hood]
> Would it be useful if the initscript that clears /var/run also
> created a directory hierarchy under /var/run?
I cannot fathom how telling someone else to do a particular 'mkdir -p'
and 'chown' could possibly be simpler than putting the 'mkdir -p' and
'chown' into your init script
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 09:21:32AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Maurits van Rees wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 08:21:14AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > BTW, has anyone thought about what will happen when we have a stable
> > > release that has the 200n key in it and 200n+1 rolls around[1]?
> >
Anthony Towns writes:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 12:12:50AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Anthony Towns writes:
>> > No, a key is only as good as (a) how hard it is to break; and (b) how
>> > easy it is to trust. Key rotation helps make it harder to break (since
>> > the 2004 key won't do
On 1/6/06, Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So I think you can tell pretty clearly that Bernd has no objection at all
> > to NMU's.
>
> yes, but please not for wishlist bugs. Again: there are bugs open for
> net-tools where help is requeste
pe, 2006-01-06 kello 18:38 +0100, Christian Perrier kirjoitti:
> From: Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> There are several things in the package that one might
> want to run from one of the maintainer scripts from
> debconf, like useradd, groupadd, userdel, ...
Is there a problem with packages
Hello All,
I apologize if this is the incorrect list to use for this purpose,
however a few months back I posted an ITP as I thought I would
actually have time to package up Ampache (http://www.ampache.org)
However that hasn't happened. Before I orphan it I was wondering if
there is anyone who i
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 06:38:47PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> I tend to agree with Kurt opinions below and thus, I'm tempted to make
> passwd "Essential: yes". The opinions in the shadow package
> maintenance team slightly vary.
> However, given that this is an important decision, I think i
Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you need to pay 450.000 DHs (42.000 ¤) for an E3 of 34 MBit
> which give you maximum 20-24 MBit because the Infrastructure is
> to bad in Morocco then it IS expensive.
No. Based on what you've said, the price is the same regardless of
whether you d
Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I think you can tell pretty clearly that Bernd has no objection at all
> to NMU's.
yes, but please not for wishlist bugs. Again: there are bugs open for
net-tools where help is requested, I would love to have patches for those.
Generally I am not awa
Am 2005-12-27 16:04:42, schrieb Florian Weimer:
> * Michelle Konzack:
>
> > Because we do not get 34 MBit and we have not a netload
> > of 100% 24/7 the price per GByte is around 50 US$/GByte.
>
> This means you still have plenty capacity you've already paid for,
> supporting Steinar's claim that
Am 2005-12-27 16:25:10, schrieb Bernd Eckenfels:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >apt-get update && apt-get --download-only upgrade
>
> It would make more sense to send out the DIFFs to the packages.gz, so you
> dont actually need to download the packages file every five minutes
Would it be useful if the initscript that clears /var/run also created
a directory hierarchy under /var/run?
(There are different ways of implementing thus, but we can talk about
details if this feature is deemed worthwhile.)
--
Thomas Hood
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
I tend to agree with Kurt opinions below and thus, I'm tempted to make
passwd "Essential: yes". The opinions in the shadow package
maintenance team slightly vary.
However, given that this is an important decision, I think it is a
good idea to get the advice of fellow developers. So, please
comment
Sto ck Al ert for Friday JAn 6th
iPackets International, Inc.
Global Developer and Provider of a Wide Range of Wireless and Communications
Solutions for Selected Enterprises Including Mine-Safety (Source: News 1/3/06)
OTC: IPKL
Price: .36
Huge PR For Friday is Underway on IPKL..Radar it Rite N
On Fri, January 6, 2006 18:25, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
>> If you look at Bernd's packages overview
>> (http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=ecki) you can see that many of
>
> Which column shows that?
It isn't one specific column, but from the overview and with some clicking
around I can make
On 1/6/06, Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, January 6, 2006 17:03, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > Hi Bernd,
> >
> > Could you please respond to this issue?
>
> Hello Olaf,
>
> Could you please stop this? You've been asking about this for many times
I'd prefer to, but that doesn't
On Fri, January 6, 2006 17:03, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> Hi Bernd,
>
> Could you please respond to this issue?
Hello Olaf,
Could you please stop this? You've been asking about this for many times
now and appearently with no result, so it should occur to you that this
stragegy does not work.
If
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 09:26:33AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Hello! This is one of 5 RC bugs, apparently with no maintainer response.
> Apparently the list which is listed as the maintainer is rejecting messages
> (336752), which probably contributes to the problem. Hence the Cc: to
>
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 05:03:39PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On 12/30/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 12/22/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 12/16/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On 12/16/05, Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL P
Joey Hess wrote:
> BTW, has anyone thought about what will happen when we have a stable
> release that has the 200n key in it and 200n+1 rolls around[1]? Will stable
> even be installable anymore? How will the updated key be pushed out to
> stable quickly enough? Will we have to rebuild CDs and obs
On 1/6/06, Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 05:03:39PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > On 12/30/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 12/22/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On 12/16/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PRO
On 12/30/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/22/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 12/16/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 12/16/05, Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 08:03:47PM +0100, Olaf va
On 06-Jan-06, 08:28 (CST), paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 07:43:07AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > Then the whole update-alternatives priority system is made pointless.
>
> s/pointless/better/
How? If you provide the ability to determine alternative selection base
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yes, but it breaks a long term usage like web of trust.
>
> The Debian archive key does not take part in the web of trust.
> Anybody who has passed the OpenPGP NM checks should not sign that key.
Thats right, I was not refering to the usage as archive
Hi all,
1.
The installation of bbdb fails due to a bug in
/usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/bbdb/lisp/Makefile
The single quotes make the ending backslashes show up in the lisp code passed
to emacs.
2.
The real problem is, that the install continues after throwing an error.
fix for 1.
debian:/usr/shar
[ Please CC me: I have problems keeping up with debian-devel's traffic ]
On 05/01/06 at 17:29 +0100, Nicolas François wrote:
> Is there a command that can display the list of packages I'm using with a
> version on experimental higher than the current version on unstable?
You can use MultiDistroTo
Hello! This is one of 5 RC bugs, apparently with no maintainer response.
Apparently the list which is listed as the maintainer is rejecting messages
(336752), which probably contributes to the problem. Hence the Cc: to
debian-devel.
This bug is trivial to fix, and because it prevents mesa fr
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 07:43:07AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 05-Jan-06, 14:20 (CST), paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe I have the wrong end of the stick.
> >
> > I was thinking that if you wanted another possible behaviour:
> > say that optional packages don't overide impor
Kai Geek wrote:
> hello,
> what is database searching apt package ?
> #apt-cache search packet
Judging by the output of "strace apt-cache search packet", one or more
of the following:
/var/cache/apt/pkgcache.bin
/var/lib/apt/lists/*
/var/lib/dpkg/status
regards,
--
Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PR
Maurits van Rees wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 08:21:14AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> > BTW, has anyone thought about what will happen when we have a stable
> > release that has the 200n key in it and 200n+1 rolls around[1]?
>
> On January 1 (or whenever a new key is issued) do a security update
Amazing! ghc6 is now the top blocker for packages entering testing, and it's
only keeping 15 packages out of testing!
Hooray!
Now to fix those ~= 400 RC bugs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 19:24 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 11:29:07AM -0600, Nathan Poznick wrote:
> > Thus spake Roger Leigh:
> > > What is the problem this is trying to solve?
> > >
> > > If the partition table is being changed, the tool that changed it
> > > should issue
On 05-Jan-06, 14:20 (CST), paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Maybe I have the wrong end of the stick.
>
> I was thinking that if you wanted another possible behaviour:
> say that optional packages don't overide important ones unless explicitly
> set that way, then you could set that policy gl
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: ussp-push
Version : 0.5
Upstream Author : Davide Libenzi
* URL : http://www.xmailserver.org/ussp-push.html
* License : GPL
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 08:21:14AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> BTW, has anyone thought about what will happen when we have a stable
> release that has the 200n key in it and 200n+1 rolls around[1]?
On January 1 (or whenever a new key is issued) do a security update
for stable on the package that ha
On Fri, 06 Jan 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Yes, that's also reasonable, although the downside is a lack of good
> distribution channel for such a signed statement -- key signatures you can
> throw at any keyserver and they'll stick. :)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is a proper channel for such announcements
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 10:59:45AM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 02:40:45PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 14:25:17 +0100, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
> >>Unstable means dependencies can be broken, not that packages themselves
> >>can alwa
Anthony Towns wrote:
> Oh, the explanation for current practice is that if the key doesn't
> change in practice, apps that look at the keys won't cope well with the
> key changing, and when that becomes important, such as in the event of
> a compromise, we'll have major difficulties in coping.
In
Hello,
Mary Helen schrieb:
> Please remove me from Call Wave. I now have a cable connection and no
> longer require the service.
You have reached the Debian project, which is in no way in the business
of selling Internet services.
I presume you reached us because you searched for the words "ca
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 02:04:49PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Steve Langasek:
> > I would encourage you to log into merkel and verify, directly and
> > securely, the key at /org/ftp.debian.org/web/ziyi_key_2006.asc; sign it; and
> > upload your signature to the public keyservers as well, if
* Steve Langasek:
> I would encourage you to log into merkel and verify, directly and
> securely, the key at /org/ftp.debian.org/web/ziyi_key_2006.asc; sign it; and
> upload your signature to the public keyservers as well, if you are satisfied
> that this is the key that is being used on ftp-maste
[Steve Langasek]
> That's fine; I'm just saying that there's not much point in telling
> people to *not* ship /var/run (or subdirectories thereof) in their
> package.
Hmm, it should be noted that if you do remove /var/run/foo from your
package, you need to make sure the postrm deletes the directo
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 09:44:35AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Jan 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > > > BUT, if you do, don't ship /var/run inside the deb.
> > > > Why?
> > > Because:
> > > 1. It will go away on reboot and if your service isn't enabled, it won't
> > >
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 11:15:08PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> >> If the key is compromised, which is the only way the non-expiring key
> >> method can be broken, then the expiring key doesn't seem to be
> >> offering all that much additional security.
> > Indeed it doesn't. Ideally, i
On Fri, 06 Jan 2006, sean finney wrote:
> fail with a non-zero value (lsb-compliant packages, i believe), sometimes
> it will exit normally without performing any action (apache 1.x for
> example), and in other cases it will start the inactive service (apache 2.x,
> for example).
Please file bugs,
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > > BUT, if you do, don't ship /var/run inside the deb.
> > > Why?
>
> > Because:
>
> > 1. It will go away on reboot and if your service isn't enabled, it won't
> > be re-created. dpkg will still think it should be there, however.
>
> And what
* Steve Langasek:
> For a user with a compromised local network, the only safe solution is to
> validate the new key via some web of trust.
No, the web of trust doesn't solve the problem. I'm pretty sure most
DDs don't even know who is authorized to issue a new archive key. A
user has no way to
* Bernd Eckenfels:
>> IOW using the old key to sign the new key only requires that the old
>> key be "good" at one point during the new year, whereas continuing to
>> use the old key requires that it be "good" all year.
>
> Yes, but it breaks a long term usage like web of trust.
The Debian archiv
* Michael Vogt:
> Sorry for the delay. I'm preparing a new upload that adds the 2006
> archive key to the default keyring.
Please try to get a new self-signature without an expiration data
first.
If they key is compromised, it has to be (manually) revoked anyway.
Rotating it once per year doesn
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:11:55AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 02:03:37PM +, Simon Huggins wrote:
> > Is there any better way I can get snapshots/betas tested by the
> > majority of users? Do people think that this is the sort of thing
> > that should just be uploaded
Maurits van Rees wrote:
> I'm wondering what the best place is to put a local Debian package
> repository. Directories that spring to mind are:
>
> - /var/www/debian
>
> This eases access via e.g. Apache (though a soft link here to
> another dir would work fine as well of course)
>
> - /srv
hello,
what is database searching apt package ?
#apt-cache search packet
+-+-+-+ BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE +-+-+-+
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
.-. .-._
: : : : :_;
.-' : .--. : `-. .-. .--. ,-.,-.
' .; :' '_.'' .; :: :' .; ; : ,. :
`.__.'`.__.'`._
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 03:19:58AM -0500, sean finney wrote:
> a while back, i noticed that there seems to be some rather inconsistent
> behaviour wrt doing "/etc/init.d/foo reload".
>
> typically this results in a HUP or something similar sent to the daemon in
> question, causing it to reload con
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 12:12:50AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > No, a key is only as good as (a) how hard it is to break; and (b) how
> > easy it is to trust. Key rotation helps make it harder to break (since
> > the 2004 key won't do you much good now); and also f
On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 11:29:07AM -0600, Nathan Poznick wrote:
> Thus spake Roger Leigh:
> > What is the problem this is trying to solve?
> >
> > If the partition table is being changed, the tool that changed it
> > should issue a BLKRRPART ioctl, like fdisk does for example (see
> > ).
>
> I ha
heyo,
a while back, i noticed that there seems to be some rather inconsistent
behaviour wrt doing "/etc/init.d/foo reload".
typically this results in a HUP or something similar sent to the daemon in
question, causing it to reload configuration, but in some cases the
init script's actions are iden
Anthony Towns writes:
> No, a key is only as good as (a) how hard it is to break; and (b) how
> easy it is to trust. Key rotation helps make it harder to break (since
> the 2004 key won't do you much good now); and also forces us to consider
> how to make new keys easy to trust, which we otherwis
Anthony Towns writes:
> Oh, the explanation for current practice is that if the key doesn't
> change in practice, apps that look at the keys won't cope well with the
> key changing, and when that becomes important, such as in the event of
> a compromise, we'll have major difficulties in coping.
75 matches
Mail list logo
