On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 08:59:21AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>> accessible mail server. The point is that I only experience this
>> problem with Alioth and SourceForge lists, where they use braindead call
>> back mechanism to try and reach the
On Sun, Aug 27, 2006 at 05:37:00PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Is the mailing list software on Alioth broken or misconfigured? If I
> send from any host on my network other than the one which happens to be
> the mail server, I get this error when I send to an Alioth list:
> Aug 27 17:26:48
Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe the debian website would deserve a section in which Debian
> communicates on those issues. After all, I think that they are similar
> in concept (but not in gravity) to recalls seen in the industry: a
> broken material was released, so special commu
Le Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 10:00:08PM +0200, Michelle Konzack a écrit :
> Am 2006-08-25 11:46:20, schrieb Mgr. Peter Tuharsky:
> > 1b, If things don't work, it's sometimes hard to get them working
> > either. Example: Bug 372719. The OOo 2.0 keeps crashing for 2 months
> > thank to KNOWN bug in secu
Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 02:01:21AM -0400, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
>
>> Michelle Konzack wrote:
>>
>>> Since I have no valid ID-Card (problens with France, since I am origin
>>> iranish/turkish witeh illegal german adoptivp arents) I can not enter
>>> the NM... nobo
Magnus Holmgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually they can, but it's recommended that a real package be given as
> well. From /usr/share/lintian/checks/fields.desc:
> Tag: virtual-package-depends-without-real-package-depends
> Type: warning
> Ref: policy 7.4
> Info: The package declares a de
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 01:17:42PM +0200, Mgr. Peter Tuharsky wrote:
> At the beginning of my comments, there has been a statement from Rudy:
> "We have no easy-way-to-get-it to tell people why they would want to
> use Debian. Ubuntu, on the other hand, has achieved to do so, and what
> they tell
PLEASE UNINSTALL ME FROM CALLWAVE. MY TELEPHONE NUMBER IS 405-379-2219.
-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
6c557439-9c21-4eec-ad6c-e6384fab56a8
[ 1 ] Choice 1: Release etch on time
[ 3 ] Choice 2: Do not ship sourceless firmware in main
[ 2 ] Choice 3: Support hardware that requires sourceless firmware
[ ] Choice 4: None of the abo
On Monday 28 August 2006 20:35, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Hello, world!
>
> As a project, Debian is heavily committed to the ideals of free software.
> That's not news to anyone reading this, I'm sure, as it's something
> we've constantly worked to improve, whether that be by establishing our
> Social
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:01:57PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> Making mail-transport-agent the empty package, and having it depend only on
> exim4 (the default), should work. Of course, exim4 can't conflict with it
> (but it's enough that all the others do),
No, that's not enough. The exim
On Monday 28 August 2006 18:48, Aurelien Jarno took the opportunity to say:
> Roger Leigh wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Following some discussion with Marco d'Itri about inetd, I'd like to
> > put forward some more general thoughts on virtual package handling for
> > some comments.
> >
> > Currently
Roger Leigh wrote:
Hi folks,
Following some discussion with Marco d'Itri about inetd, I'd like to
put forward some more general thoughts on virtual package handling for
some comments.
Currently, virtual packages (such as mail-transport-agent) cannot be
specified by themselves. They can only be
On Monday 28 August 2006 18:09, Jonas Meurer took the opportunity to say:
> On 28/08/2006 Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> > Making mail-transport-agent the empty package, and having it depend only
> > on exim4 (the default), should work. Of course, exim4 can't conflict with
> > it (but it's enough that al
On 28/08/2006 Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> Making mail-transport-agent the empty package, and having it depend only on
> exim4 (the default), should work. Of course, exim4 can't conflict with it
> (but it's enough that all the others do), so if the default is changed then
> the old default, the new
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 05:09:54PM +0200, Joey Schulze wrote:
> ciol wrote:
> > The problem is that Debian doesn't speak a lot about nice features like
> > volatile and backports, for instance in the official web site, where it's
> > difficult to see the links.
>
> The... err... issue is that thes
ciol wrote:
> > Clamav is in volatile, php5 in backports, haven't checked squid3.
... squid3 is in *gosh* testing.
> The problem is that Debian doesn't speak a lot about nice features like
> volatile and backports, for instance in the official web site, where it's
> difficult to see the links.
T
Am 2006-08-25 11:46:20, schrieb Mgr. Peter Tuharsky:
> 1b, If things don't work, it's sometimes hard to get them working
> either. Example: Bug 372719. The OOo 2.0 keeps crashing for 2 months
> thank to KNOWN bug in security upgrade. Now tell somebody, that Debian
But OOo 2.0 is not in Stable!
Am 2006-08-24 17:51:55, schrieb Rudy Godoy:
> I do believe it's more a matter of relations with press and media than
> budget. We have no easy-way-to-get-it to tell people why they would want to
> use Debian. Ubuntu, on the other hand, has achieved to do so, and what they
> tell that we can't? not
On Monday 28 August 2006 14:59, Roger Leigh took the opportunity to say:
> For the case of mail-transport-agent, this could be simply solved by
> the creation of a mail-transport-agent-default package. This would
> be an empty package, doing nothing but providing this dependency:
>
> Depends: ex
Hi folks,
Following some discussion with Marco d'Itri about inetd, I'd like to
put forward some more general thoughts on virtual package handling for
some comments.
Currently, virtual packages (such as mail-transport-agent) cannot be
specified by themselves. They can only be used in combination
On Aug 28, Martin Wuertele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You don't run a lot of servers either if you never need versions of many
> > different packages more recent than a couple of years.
> That's when backports and chroots comes in.
Backports have dubious quality and do not get real security su
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 06:48:31AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Out of curiousity, if this is such a good thing why are Alioth and
> SourceForge the only two services (of the dozens of mailing lists from
> half dozen or more services) which use this setup? Also, why is the
> error message r
Wouter, it seems You don't understand my point of view.
I don't question development results in Debian. I, too, couldn't,
because so far I haven't met any Etch installation.
I read Weekly news and watch the progress. I see there's quite a
development inside of Debian. As of release cycle being
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:33:00 +0200, Mgr. Peter Tuharsky wrote:
>> Mplayer can be installed easily by adding the right line to your
>> sources.list. It's all over the internet. Same goes for codecs.
>
> Yes, I'll try to replicate that sentence to my aunt or cousin. It will
> be of great help for s
Hi all,
[sent to debian-devel since I'm not yet a DD]
I'll be away from the Internet for 3 months. I'll be on a research
vessel[1,2] sailing from Cairns, Australia. We will be stopping in
Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia and I'll be getting off in Phuket,
Thailand (or maybe Singapore) in December.
At the beginning of my comments, there has been a statement from Rudy:
"We have no easy-way-to-get-it to tell people why they would want to
use Debian. Ubuntu, on the other hand, has achieved to do so, and what
they tell that we can't? nothing." and as his message continues
(25.08.2006 00:51)
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 11:33:00AM +0200, Mgr. Peter Tuharsky wrote:
> Wouter:
> >>I don't tell the ideology is not valid; I just tell that often this is
> >>in the state "Users, wait until we solve this ideologically, it may
> >>take some years". Well, user dosen't have the years and need things
>
* Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-08-28 12:35]:
> You don't run a lot of servers either if you never need versions of many
> different packages more recent than a couple of years.
That's when backports and chroots comes in.
yours Martin
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian GNU/Linux - The
Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> That would be good to be add in cdbs. I think we might want to have it
>> more flexible to allow it to work for CDDs too but I liked it very
>> much :-D
>
> It does not look right to me, though.. what about buildds? And what
> about people forge
On 8/28/06, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No offense, but that is completely non-scalable. That only works for a
small number of users which does not change frequently. Anyhow, thanks
to 'Dato, I seem to have been able to convince mutt to play nicer with
your mail server.
Yeah
On Aug 28, Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) Split out update-inetd from netbase into a new "inetd" package.
No, because e.g. xinetd needs a totally different update-inetd program.
It's simpler if each inetd package will ship its own update-inetd.
> 3) All update-inetd users need to dep
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 28, Martin Wuertele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
>> You don't run a lot of servers if you want to update them more
>> frequently.
> You don't run a lot of servers either if you never need versions of many
> different p
Martin Wuertele wrote:
> Clamav is in volatile, php5 in backports, haven't checked squid3.
The problem is that Debian doesn't speak a lot about nice features like
volatile and backports, for instance in the official web site, where it's
difficult to see the links.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email t
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 08:59:21AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > accessible mail server. The point is that I only experience this
> > problem with Alioth and SourceForge lists, where they use braindead call
> > back mechanism to try and reach th
Hi folks,
Following the last thread on the subject, several things have
happened:
1) All packages depending on netkit-inetd have had their dependencies
replaced with a netkit dependency.
2) netkit now only depends upon openbsd-inetd, so netkit-inetd is now
no longer used by either new insta
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 10:31:02 +0200
"Mgr. Peter Tuharsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Howabout some form -user could be navigated to some basic webpage
> where he could answer some simple questions? Not too many questions
> (optimally 5-8?), preferably pre-answered (by some selection box), of
>
On Aug 28, Martin Wuertele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whoo no way! I don't want to updated my servers more than once 18-24
> months. I don't need php5, specs says php4 and php5, squid does it's job
> very good and clamav from volatile rounds the package up.
Then don't.
The problem for people li
On Aug 28, Guillem Jover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just yesterday night dato raised the issue on #d-release, and I was
> telling about the virtual package, and that we could move to it now,
> and worry later about a possible transition to that new update-inetd
> (if it happens to exist some day
* Mgr. Peter Tuharsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-08-28 12:05]:
> To make the picture more complete, not only desktop needs current
> software. The Debian on server lacks sometimes too.
>
> Few examples: PHP5, bunch of Clamav-related packages for proxy and mail
> interaction, Squid3. They're in E
On 8/28/06, Mgr. Peter Tuharsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We're speaking about distributions that are intended for daily use, not
for experiments. To make it clear, Debian 3.1 Sarge and Ubuntu 6.06. If
the Etch has it, that's great. However that dosen't matter answering the
"Debian is at least a
To make the picture more complete, not only desktop needs current
software. The Debian on server lacks sometimes too.
Few examples: PHP5, bunch of Clamav-related packages for proxy and mail
interaction, Squid3. They're in Etch, however if released as official
update of Debian, should do.
If
Wouter:
1, Ubuntu places the care about the average-Joe-user at first place at
worst. Debian dosen't.
That's true, but this is improving.
Hope I could see it soon. Really.
I don't tell the ideology is not valid; I just tell that often this is
in the state "Users, wait until we solve this i
This has emerged from "Why does Ubuntu have all the ideas" thread.
Rudy:
> I think the issues you point out is the feeback what we need, and
> discuss about them. I encourage you to also post to the mailing list.
>
> I'm trying to figure out how we can "listen" more our users needs, and
> then ma
Rudy:
There is so much to say about that, that I hardly
can remember the very concrete cases, so please don't attack me on that
basis.
I wasn't attacking you, If you had that impression I'm sorry.
No, I really hadn't. I mentioned that just preventively, not targeted at
You -because I feel
Bruce,
> Uhm, Debian's target audience is not Joe User, never has been AFAICT.
> Joe isn't usually capable of determining which MTA, web server, proxy
server, etc., specific implementation is best for them, assuming they
are even aware of the architecture underlying the UI they see... Debian
Le dimanche 27 août 2006 à 19:12 +0200, Adeodato Simó a écrit :
> bzrtools > 0.9 does not put files under /usr/lib/python2.4, since it
> uses python-support; and its maintainer scripts for < 0.9 did not
> bytecompile the modules, so the most plausible explanation for .pyc
> files in /usr/lib/python
On Aug 28, Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm an Alioth administrator. If you expect help from us, you'd better not
> say that our configuration is "braindead". This is the most basic thing
> that we can do to avoid spam.
It is not "braindead", but "antisocial".
"sender verification"
[sorry for the duplicate, but I want to fix the threading]
On Sun August 27 2006 18:55, David Nusinow wrote:
> Deferring to Ubuntu for this work is the worst sort of defeatist
> nonsense and I will not to bow to it. I like collaborating with the
> Ubuntu people, but I refuse to compromise my own w
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> accessible mail server. The point is that I only experience this
> problem with Alioth and SourceForge lists, where they use braindead call
> back mechanism to try and reach the host that originated the message.
I'm an Alioth administrator. If you
50 matches
Mail list logo
