Hi,
> Adeodato> Depends: foo (>= 0.8), foo (<< 0.9~)
>
> Can I assume that the first one will accept version 0.9~rc1, but the
> second one wont?
You're right. The empty string at the end of '0.9~' counts as zero in
lexical comparison. Thus 0.8 < 0.9~ < 0.9~rc1.
Cheers,
Sebastian
--
Seba
Margarita Manterola wrote:
> One of the us mirrors is not working properly. It's been faulty for
> at least a week.
>
> The mirror is: 204.152.191.7 (mirrors1.kernel.org)
>
> To whoever might be in charge of this, it should be removed from the
> rotation of both http.us.debian.org and ftp.us.d
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Stig Sandbeck Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: varnish
Version : 0.9
Upstream Author : Varnish Project <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://varnish.projects.linpro.no/
* License : Two-clause BSD license
Descrip
> "Steve" == Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> libnss-ldap has a new, retarded upstream default where it
Steve> polls the server several times in the case of a connection
Steve> refused error instead of just returning a notfound to the
Steve> caller.
Ar
> "Lars" == Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> While I wait to have time to do something better and more
Lars> easily usable, the following page lists the logs of failed
Lars> piuparts files that have not yet been processed:
Lars> http://piuparts.cs.helsinki.fi/f
> "Adeodato" == Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Adeodato> Package: foo-plugin Depends: foo (>= 0.8), foo (<<
Adeodato> 0.9)
Adeodato> Will probably want to move to:
Adeodato> Depends: foo (>= 0.8), foo (<< 0.9~)
Can I assume that the first one will accept versi
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 08:47:14PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 10:42:53AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> >
> > I'd imagine you'd be hard pressed to find a mathematician who knows what to
> > do with a number that reads 0.0.9, either. That's why we're software
> > de
Hi people,
I'm a devel on Art Team in Debian-BR-CDD [1] project in Brazil and
maintainer of some icon packages in Debian.
The Debian-BR-CDD is a cdd focused in desktop applications for
brazilians users in Portuguese, with some themes customized for GNOME,
GDM, Splashy, Grub, Icons, website. Any sc
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 10:42:53AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
>
> I'd imagine you'd be hard pressed to find a mathematician who knows what to
> do with a number that reads 0.0.9, either. That's why we're software
> developers, not mathematicians.
>
> Or, to put it another way: your numbers are
On Thu August 10 2006 16:20, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.2237 +0100]:
> > No point setting oneself up for bugs if it is not necessary.
> >
> > The script wouldn't determine anything, it would simply append
> > paths to the package's list of paths.
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 08:37:47PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 02:21:04AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > * Roberto C. Sanchez [Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:47:36 -0400]:
> >
> > > Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to the
> > > right of the decimal,
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 07:47:36PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:29:40AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > * Michael Biebl [Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200]:
> >
> > > that "dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9'" yields true, which I
> > > think is rather odd, beca
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 02:21:04AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Roberto C. Sanchez [Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:47:36 -0400]:
>
> > Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to the
> > right of the decimal, making the zero significant.
>
> Er, read Policy 5.6.12.
>
I have read it.
Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have to admit that when choosing 0.09+0.1 as version number I
> didn't check with dpkg --compare-versions because then I would have
> discovered that "dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9'" yields
> true, which I think is rather odd, because it mean
This one time, at band camp, Michael Banck said:
> Hi fellow Debian people,
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 11:25:11PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Let me make a proposal that makes sense for now and the future:
>
> Whoever answers to this proposal will be mocked publically.
Even if we mock the
* Roberto C. Sanchez [Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:47:36 -0400]:
> Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to the
> right of the decimal, making the zero significant.
Er, read Policy 5.6.12.
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Develope
On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:44:57 +0200
Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stuff deleted for brevity
>
> > All of this, without even taking into account your brain-dead
> > licensing mix between CDDL and GPL - which are intentionally
> > incompatible licenses, according to Sun guys.
>
> If yo
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:12:59AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I have to admit that when choosing 0.09+0.1 as version number I didn't
> check with dpkg --compare-versions because then I would have discovered
> that "dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9'" yields true, which I
> think is rather
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:34:39AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 11, Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why, for the love of Cthulhu, does netbase depend on inetd in the first
> > place? Let's see:
> Historical reasons.
>
> > Now, let's see what depends on *-inetd:
> Under the cur
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:29:40AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Michael Biebl [Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200]:
>
> > that "dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9'" yields true, which I
> > think is rather odd, because it means that now all version numbers up to
> > 0.9 will be considered < 0
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200, Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> If it's not a bug in dpkg, could someone please elaborate on the
> reasoning of this behaviour. I'd be grateful for any comments and
> replies.
It's documented in Policy 5.6.12 [1]. Substrings composed of digits
On Aug 11, Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I call them "broken". I believe that administrators do not expect that
> > services are exposed to IPv6 connections unless they are configured this
> > way in inetd.conf.
> A service can listen:
Does not matter. The behaviour of inetd has alw
* Michael Biebl [Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200]:
> that "dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9'" yields true, which I
> think is rather odd, because it means that now all version numbers up to
> 0.9 will be considered < 0.09+0.1.
0.09 = 0.9 means:
0 == 0
and
. == .
and
Florian Weimer wrote:
> * martin f. krafft:
>
>> Thanks to the work of our DPL Anthony "aj" Towns (and all the other
>> people who have worked on this without my knowledge), I am happy to
>> announce that dak, our archive management software, finally supports
>> the use of the tilde ('~') in versi
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:29:48AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 10, Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > - Some inetds automatically listen on v6, whereas others need it
> I call them "broken". I believe that administrators do not expect that
> services are exposed to IPv6 connection
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 06:35:03PM -0400, peek wrote:
> place. It just seems a little cleaner: you could query dpkg for what
> package *every* file came from -- no files left out; and you don't
what about rotated log files? pid files? lock files? misc stuff
in /var/cache?
that's not to bash th
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 10:56:01PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> The inetd daemon installed by default:
> etch: openbsd-inetd | netkit-inetd
> sarge: netkit-inetd
> woody: netkit-inetd (netkit-base, split from netbase)
> potato: (in netbase)
> slink: (in netbase)
> Users
Bruce Sass wrote:
An "update-package" command, run at install time by the maintainer's
scripts right after file generation succeeds, would head off potential
problems with synchronization that are outside of the Maintainer's
control (e.g., DEBIAN/dynfiles containing incorrectly generated paths
sean finney wrote:
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 11:01:30AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
No, at least not for /etc. You could install the file, the overwrite
it, but files installed to /etc by dpkg are conffiles and those must
not be touched programmatically, according to policy.
i think a
On Aug 10, Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * There is no inetd virtual package, so multiple daemons may be
There is no virtual package because aj (who is still the netbase
maintainer, even if he did not touch it in almost five years) mandated
that it should be introduced after the mitical
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 10:56:01PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
> Outstanding issues
> --
>
> * There is no inetd virtual package, so multiple daemons may be
> installed, all using the same configuration file. Is this a use
> case we really want to support? Are there really s
also sprach Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.2237 +0100]:
> No point setting oneself up for bugs if it is not necessary.
>
> The script wouldn't determine anything, it would simply append paths to
> the package's list of paths. The Maintainer would need to call the
> script "right afte
Hi fellow Debian people,
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 11:25:11PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Let me make a proposal that makes sense for now and the future:
Whoever answers to this proposal will be mocked publically.
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "uns
This post is about some issues with the various inetd packages in etch
(and unstable). This is a case where I think some coordination
between all the packages or some inetd package policy would make them
all generally more usable.
The currently available inetd packages, and a summary of their sta
Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, how about the following (and please read it completly before you
> answer, it contains multiple options):
I am sorry, but I cannot believe that you like to make serious proposal
with the text you wrote.
Let me make a proposal that makes sense for no
On Thu August 10 2006 15:10, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.2124 +0100]:
> > An "update-package" command, run at install time by the
> > maintainer's scripts right after file generation succeeds, would
> > head off potential problems with synchroniza
Hi Kevin,
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 04:38:20PM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote:
> Hi Aurélien G, (sorry for the bad conversion by mutt)
No problem, I am still not an UTF-8 guy, so my local ISO-8859-15
encoding is the culprit for you. ;)
> So there is ONE w-b for {i386,ppc,...) and there is one buildd for
also sprach Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.2124 +0100]:
> An "update-package" command, run at install time by the maintainer's
> scripts right after file generation succeeds, would head off potential
> problems with synchronization that are outside of the Maintainer's
> control (e.g.
On Thu August 10 2006 13:13, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.1959 +0100]:
> > Such a utility would need to be shipped with dpkg, a 3rd party or
> > random DD implementing it would be silly for anything but local
> > consumption.
> >
> > Is that the on
On 10742 March 1977, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Both forbid to damage the reputation of the original author.
> Free software gives you the right to change software but free software
> definitely does _not_ give you the right to use the originam _name_ of the
> software in case you apply incompati
also sprach Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.1959 +0100]:
> Such a utility would need to be shipped with dpkg, a 3rd party or random
> DD implementing it would be silly for anything but local consumption.
>
> Is that the only problem?
If dpkg knew how to track files it did not directly
On Thu August 10 2006 12:40, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.1925 +0100]:
> > Would updating /var/lib/dpkg/info/*.list files without touching the
> > appropriate Installed-Size: field be OK?
>
> Definitely not. /var/lib/dpkg is the domain of dpkg. Do
also sprach Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.1925 +0100]:
> Would updating /var/lib/dpkg/info/*.list files without touching the
> appropriate Installed-Size: field be OK?
Definitely not. /var/lib/dpkg is the domain of dpkg. Do not go
there. You must not even assume that /var/lib/dpkg/in
On Thu August 10 2006 10:16, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Goswin von Brederlow
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.1647 +0100]:
> > How about allowing conffiles to list files that are generated at
> > install time and are not included in the deb?
>
> You can, but then you run up against policy
Hi all! =)
I'm requesting for a sponsor for my `libdevice-serialport-perl'
package for the Perl module Device::SerialPort version 1.002 . This
package is supposed to be under the care of Michael D. Mattice
(mattice on db, LoRez on IRC,) but it hasn't been touched by him in
exactly 2 years (the
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006, George Danchev wrote:
> > (I mailed [EMAIL PROTECTED], but didn't receive any reply.)
> both from d-o-m ;-)
I should have requested to be Cc:ed, but forgot to do so, thanks!
--
Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
also sprach Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.1647 +0100]:
> How about allowing conffiles to list files that are generated at
> install time and are not included in the deb?
You can, but then you run up against policy. You are not allowed to
touch a conffile with a script.
--
Joerg Schilling dijo [Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 02:49:36PM +0200]:
> As I _did_ already receive coplaints against cdrecord that have been e.g.
> based
> on the fact that Linux distributoions change the name for the file
> /etc/default/cdrercord and the fact that the basterdized behavior is
> incompat
sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 11:01:30AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
>> No, at least not for /etc. You could install the file, the overwrite
>> it, but files installed to /etc by dpkg are conffiles and those must
>> not be touched programmatically, according t
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 11:01:30AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> No, at least not for /etc. You could install the file, the overwrite
> it, but files installed to /etc by dpkg are conffiles and those must
> not be touched programmatically, according to policy.
i think a better solution (and one
Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > If you don't know that you just need to use a clearly _different_ _name_
>> > for such a fork, I can't help you. Read the preamble from the GPL
>> > to understand your fault.
>>
>> So all we need
On Thursday 10 August 2006 17:30, Loïc Minier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Inclusion of the OCaml syntax highlighting file in GtkTextView is
> blocked until FreeDesktop includes the MIME type in its
> shared-mime-info database, but I don't know the MIME type of OCaml
> source files.
>
> Would some
And note: the CDDL is one of 9 preferred licenses:
http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:11636:200607:nknhhdligldemhkfbhpd
One of the preferred licenses *by the OSI*. Debian has nothing to do
with the OSI and doesn't not rely on the OSI to be told what is free
or not. Can't you even und
Hi,
Inclusion of the OCaml syntax highlighting file in GtkTextView is
blocked until FreeDesktop includes the MIME type in its
shared-mime-info database, but I don't know the MIME type of OCaml
source files.
Would someone happen to know what the MIME type of OCaml files is? I
couldn
Package: wnpp
Owner: Steffen Joeris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: dc-qt
Version : 0.2.0-alpha
Upstream Author : Arsenij Vodjanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://dc-qt.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
* License : GPL
Programm
Hi Joerg,
Le 09.08.2006 15:33, Joerg Schilling a écrit :
If you don't know that you just need to use a clearly _different_ _name_
for such a fork, I can't help you. Read the preamble from the GPL
to understand your fault.
Beside the licensing issues, why do you care so much patched version
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If you don't know that you just need to use a clearly _different_ _name_
> > for such a fork, I can't help you. Read the preamble from the GPL
> > to understand your fault.
>
> So all we need to do to apeace you is to call is "debianrecord"?
>
>
Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>> The Debian project accepted the clauses in cdrecord ~ 4 years ago.
>> That doesn't mean the project still considers them acceptable *NOW*.
> So you like to tell me that Debian is not trustworthy?
The requirements of the project changed. That is called progress.
--
To
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> GR stated that invariant sections aren't acceptable for the specific
> >> GFDL case, and there is no reason why they would be acceptable for
> >
> >
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le mercredi 09 août 2006 à 15:44 +0200, Joerg Schilling a écrit :
> > You are again trying to intentionally tell us untrue things about my
> > software!
> >
> > The Debian project accepted the clauses in cdrecord ~ 4 years ago.
>
> That doesn't mean
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 03:44:57PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > > Indeed, you are not free to add whatever piece of crap to the Debian
> > > archive regardless of the license. Call it a non-free project if you
> > > want, but this would only look l
* Kevin B. McCarty [Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:42:10 -0700]:
> Hi all,
Hi Kevin,
> In splitting up the cernlib source package, I just uploaded three sets
> of .debs for new source packages "paw", "mclibs" and "geant321". All of
> these new source packages produce binary .debs that previously were
> cr
ke, 2006-08-09 kello 11:45 -0700, Kevin B. McCarty kirjoitti:
> I was looking through these, and at least the following errors appear to
> be false positives for the given packages, caused only by some
> combination of x11-common, xcursor-themes, xutils (which leaves behind
> junk in /etc/X11/rstar
also sprach Michael S. Peek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.09.1322 +0100]:
> It seems that Debian doesn't care about keeping up with files
> created dynamically via install scripts. For instance, I can type
> 'dpkg -S /etc/papersize', and I get back 'dpkg: /etc/papersize not
> found.'
Yes, /etc/pap
Dear friends,
Olivia Translations provides excellent Russian and Ukrainian
translation/localization services with the best rates.
If you are interested, welcome to http://www.olivia-translations.org for more
information.
---
We discovered your address while looking throu
65 matches
Mail list logo
