On Friday 13 July 2012 13:45:19 Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Per Olofsson [120713 12:18]:
> > 1. Rewrite xdg-utils so that it is robust and always works.
>
> It you want to make xdg-open useable for everything, please also
> add a way to specify the mime type as option. Without that using
> it for
On Friday 29 June 2012 21:18:39 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 07:36:46PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> > Am Freitag, den 29.06.2012, 19:21 +0200 schrieb Mehdi Dogguy:
> > > Package: wnpp
> > > Severity: wishlist
> > > Owner: Mehdi Dogguy
> > >
> > > * Package name: ben
> > >
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
I request assistance with maintaining the libisoburn package.
I currently lack the time to maintain this package alone.
This includes a high-level library along with a versatile app
called xorriso for burning and image production. It has grown
a tremendous amount of
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
I request assistance with maintaining the libisofs package.
I currently lack the time to maintain this package alone.
The major drain of time is following various image specs, following
the upstream VCS, and further discussions. One interesting aspect is
that libiso
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
I request assistance with maintaining the libburn package.
I currently lack the sufficient time, and burning devices to
provide adequate testing of its optical burning capabilities,
although the software is in quite mature state. In this case
the burning applicaiton
On Monday 11 June 2012 16:01:10 Aneurin Price wrote:
> On 10 June 2012 19:31, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > On 06/11/2012 12:06 AM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> >> swap file on / [...] is
> >> really the direction that we should be going
> >
> > NO !
> >
> > Does this need to be explained? :/
Hi,
> Not
On Sunday 03 June 2012 08:46:21 Chow Loong Jin wrote:
Hi,
> On 03/06/2012 11:23, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 10:43:00PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> >> Are you seriously suggesting that DHCP and SSH servers should not listen
> >> on external interfaces by default? The use
On Saturday 02 June 2012 05:36:04 Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 06/02/2012 04:43 AM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > now that I notice the subject change I also notice the original
> > subject...
> >
> > hi Thomas 8-)
>
> LOL !
>
> I'm amazed that it's seems I'm capable of creating huge uncontrollable
> t
On Friday 01 June 2012 20:08:22 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 12-06-01 at 06:06pm, George Danchev wrote:
> > On Thursday 31 May 2012 16:54:13 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
Hi,
> > > > ...hence the Sponsors (who are also a full-fledged DDs) are
>
On Thursday 31 May 2012 16:54:13 Scott Kitterman wrote:
Hi,
> > ...hence the Sponsors (who are also a full-fledged DDs) are responsible.
> > It is that simple.
>
> If it's really that simple, one should never sponsor a package one doesn't
> care to maintain. If this is the case, we should just
On Thursday 31 May 2012 16:15:31 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> [dropping PHP Pear team as cc]
>
> On 12-05-31 at 03:16pm, George Danchev wrote:
> > On Thursday 31 May 2012 11:47:21 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > > You and a lot of others fail to realize that the *SPONSOR*
On Thursday 31 May 2012 14:43:00 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 12-05-31 at 08:02pm, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > On 05/31/2012 04:36 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > Hijacking, in my vocabulary, is when a non-maintainer takes matters
> > > in his/her/their own hands and takes over maintainership witho
On Thursday 31 May 2012 11:47:21 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Hi,
> > You and a lot of others fail to realize that the *SPONSOR* is
> > responsible for the package.
>
> Huh?!?
>
> What does "Maintainer:" mean if not the entity being responsible for,
> well, maintaining?!?
Who is responsible for the
On Friday 25 May 2012 09:46:37 Vincent Danjean wrote:
> If some kind of sync is required by the application, I think this is
> because the application want to ensure the data are really written to
> the disk so that their state remains coherent even in case of crash.
> If the application is ok to
On Friday 11 May 2012 00:01:14 Uoti Urpala wrote:
--cut--
> > You need to at least start reading some man-pages (a good start would be
> > ucf(1), ucfr(1), ucfq(1), debconf-devel(7)) before keep jamming
> > suggestion like "improvements to be able to alert the user about
> > changes". This is alrea
On Thursday 10 May 2012 21:46:41 Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 May 2012, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> > > You're pretty much just saying that dpkg and helpers like ucf have
> > > implemented better functionality than rpm. I don't see how that's
> > > relevant to the discussion.
>
On Thursday 10 May 2012 19:53:18 Uoti Urpala wrote:
> George Danchev wrote:
> > On Thursday 10 May 2012 00:22:11 Uoti Urpala wrote:
> > > Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > > > No, really - please *do* do this. The fact that a lot of the software
> > > > co
On Thursday 10 May 2012 00:22:11 Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > Josh Triplett wrote:
> > >Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > >> The more I think about it, the more I suspect that the correct
> > >> solution would be to just symlink /lib/udev/rules.d/ to
> > >> /etc/udev/rules.d/ and so on.
> >
On Monday 30 April 2012 12:58:18 Carsten Hey wrote:
Hi,
> The rest of this mail is likely not interesting for most of you since it
> only tries to answer the natural follow up question "Why does it need
> a cronjob then?" and explains why I don't think anymore that a switch to
> incron should be
On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 17:11:21 +0300, Uoti Urpala
wrote:
Dmitry Nezhevenko wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 02:44:42PM +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Wrong. Any program behavior change may require changing custom
> configuration, but such changes need not be accompanied by changes
in
> the default co
On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:44:42 +0300, Uoti Urpala
wrote:
Hi,
Dmitry Nezhevenko wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 01:49:57AM +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > - configuration files in /etc/ overriding configuration files in
/lib/,
> > to work around the inferior configuration
On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:05:06 +0300, Andrei POPESCU
wrote:
On Sb, 28 apr 12, 19:12:42, Russ Allbery wrote:
There's nothing particularly wrong with Exim; it works just fine.
It's
been the default in Debian for years, and it's actively maintained
upstream. And it's completely trivial to repla
On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 12:38:35 +, Ian Campbell
wrote:
On Sat, 2011-12-03 at 19:35 +, Philipp Kern wrote:
On 2011-12-03, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 18:58:55 + (UTC), Philipp Kern
> wrote:
>>On 2011-12-02, Marc Haber wrote:
>>> I also support this and think it is a really
On Sunday, July 17, 2011 01:06:55 AM Robert Millan wrote:
Hi,
> This one affects only 22 packages:
>
> argyll cdparanoia checkinstall cyrus-imapd-2.2 cyrus-imapd-2.4
> dvd+rw-tools freeglut icecc k3b k8temp kolab-cyrus-imapd libburn
> libcdio libgtop2 libisoburn libsysactivity mtx oss-libsalsa q
On Saturday 07 May 2011 15:14:59 Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 07 May 2011, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > This works both ways. If a NMUer uploaded my package without a delay
> > and without a good reason[0], I want to be able to yell at him „you
> > are a jerk (according to Developers Referenc
On Saturday 07 May 2011 09:41:34 Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> On Fri, 06 May 2011, George Danchev wrote:
> > * writing a meaningful ITP helps to grab attention, especially if there
> > are multiple alternatives. Prove your point (ref: I'm upstream and I
> >
On Friday 06 May 2011 20:30:32 Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 20:03 +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > On Friday 06 May 2011 19:39:26 Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:24 -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> > > > On 05/06/2011
On Friday 06 May 2011 19:39:26 Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:24 -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> > On 05/06/2011 12:14 PM, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> > > Q: How many content management systems written in php does Debian need?
> > > A: How about zero?
> > >
> > > Not exactl
On Saturday 30 April 2011 17:36:09 Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 04/30/2011 04:24 PM, George Danchev wrote:
> >> - add a new 'frozen' suite, used only during freezes, to prepare
> >> the next stable release
> >
> > So, if I need to fix an RC bug during th
On Friday 29 April 2011 11:46:30 Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 29/04/11 at 10:23 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > 2. In the past there used to be two rather opposites use-cases of
> > testing: some (luckely more than just the release team) see it as a tool
> > to develop stable. Others see it (mostly)
On Sunday 10 April 2011 20:19:42 Toni Mueller wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 25.03.2011 at 14:17:06 +, Steve McIntyre
wrote:
> If we really want to meet the spec, we should be aiming for < 64
> characters, but that affects 98 packages and I'm not *too* bothered
>
> about it since testing shows no is
Jarek Kamiński writes:
> Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
> >> I see only two ways of fixing proprietary Java (apart from fixing it
> >> upstream or ignoring the problem):
> >> * wrap java and java_vm binaries in some scripts setting LD_PRELOAD (in
> >>
> >> Debian package)
> >>
> >>
Quoting "Salvo Tomaselli" :
On Tuesday 13 April 2010 07:46:10 Russ Allbery wrote:
It's not an assumption. It's reality that one has to write code against,
because different platforms do different things. Even if you could remove
the option from the Linux kernel (retroactively, changing time t
Salvo Tomaselli writes:
> On Monday 12 April 2010 20:12:36 Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Marco is not changing the point. What Marco describes has been the
> > objection that several of us have had with bindv6only=0 from the very
> > beginning. He's just more persistant about continuing to repeat the s
Hi,
Hereby I would like to propose usage of common mailing list
(debburn-devel) for all the packages involved in low-level burning and
image manipulation process.
As of now all they have their lists on alioth, which is somewhat
suboptimal in my opinion and there is room to avoid unnecessary
subs
Florian Weimer writes:
> Have you got any suggestions for increasing productivity with proper
> IDE support for medium-sized C and C++ code bases?
>
> I've got a hunch that proper browsing support (searching for
> definitions/references, displaying static call trees) might help me to
> navigate un
Ivan Borzenkov writes:
> This document covers very useful improvement of Debian apt system - the
> package hierarchy system. This system can help end user make it's difficult
> choice which packet he have to install. The main feature is to hide
> unnecessary packages to concentrate user's attention
Tom Feiner writes:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Harry Rickards wrote:
> > 2009/12/20 Tom Feiner :
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> stackoverflow.com, which is a website featuring questions and answers on
> >> a wide range of topics in computer programming, has just offered [1]
> >> free advertising for o
David Paleino writes:
> Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 05:00:35PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> >> However, seems like on IRC we reached kind of a consensus on the fact
> >> that metapackages should use Recommends instead of Depends. I plan to do
> >> a mass- bug filing on this i
Rene Engelhard writes:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 05:00:35PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> > However, seems like on IRC we reached kind of a consensus on the fact
> > that metapackages should use Recommends instead of Depends. I plan to do
> > a mass- bug filing on this issue sooner or later, just n
Eugene V. Lyubimkin writes:
> Hello,
>
> David Paleino wrote:
> > Implementation
>
> [...]
>
> > ### Package managers ###
>
> [...]
>
> > If any dependant package is a meta-package, as defined by this
> > document, it should **NOT** be removed, opposed to what the current
> > implementations d
Quoting "Michal Čihař" :
Hi
Dne Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:10:54 +0600
Mikhail Gusarov napsal(a):
Twas brillig at 03:00:27 21.11.2009 UTC+01 when ni...@debian.org
did gyre and gimble:
>> There are probably more references total than can be sensibly removed,
>> but perhaps it would be worth a
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2009, George Danchev wrote:
> > True. However, it makes no big difference whether people use (or
> > resp. abuse) file extensions to claim the language a program is
> > implemented in, or they do it within the base name. There are plenty
> > of apps
> Ben Finney dijo [Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:40:46PM +1000]:
> > > > On the other hand, Section 10.4 says only "the script name should not
> > > > include an extension". So you can leave the extension for
> > >
> > > What is the intention of this rule anyway?
> >
> > To encourage command names (and
Quoting "Josselin Mouette" :
Le mardi 29 septembre 2009 à 11:43 +0200, Mike Hommey a écrit :
Improving quality only for the sake of it is not necessarily a good
idea. I do agree that if everyone but Debian expects foo to be called
as foo.pl, there is a bug in Debian.
Which is why lintian warn
> George Danchev writes:
>
> >> Autobuild should probably go into Policy. It's used for non-free
> >> packages to indicate that it's legal for the buildds to build the
> >> packages.
> >>
> >> Original-Maintainer is odd -- Ubuntu use
> George Danchev writes:
>
> > Candidates for policy so far:
> > http://people.debian.org/~danchev/survey/sorted/4policy
> > (Multi-Arch field added)
>
> Oh, good, that's less than I thought there would be.
IMO, standardized fields (non-XBSC) are qui
> George Danchev writes:
>
> > Okay, that sounds reasonable, provided all non-user-defined fields are
> > standard, or otherwise illegal. Another standard field (i.e. non-X[BSC]
> > ) I found is `Bugs'; seems they are hinting someone or something like
> > BTS
> George Danchev writes:
>
> > So, the question being: from where to start documenting and sorting
> > these out: policy, dpkg/doc/, devref, wiki, blogs ;-), somewhere else.
>
> Standardized fields should be documented in Policy. Patches and
> contributions ar
> George Danchev wrote:
> > You are correct, I missed these either because dpkg-scanpackages has not
> > been invoked with -tudeb or udebs are not built for the official
> > archive.
>
> They are in the official archive, but in separate sections (with their own
&
> George Danchev wrote:
> > I've recently done a little survey about the fields used in our control
> > files (*_Release files excluded). Currently there are ~80 different
> > fields [1] used in testing and unstable, which basically fall into these
> > groups:
>
Hi,
I've recently done a little survey about the fields used in our control files
(*_Release files excluded). Currently there are ~80 different fields [1] used
in
testing and unstable, which basically fall into these groups:
1) listed in debian policy and accompanied sub-policies (like Python
Quoting "Patrick Matthäi" :
Ivan Borzenkov schrieb:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
--- Please fill out the fields below. ---
Package name: Linux Unified Kernel
Version: 0.2.4-1
Upstream Author: Insigma li...@insigma.com.cn
URL:
--cut--
> > The wiki-page with the latest release of binary compatibility checker
> > is http://ispras.linux-foundation.org/index.php/ABI_compliance_checker
>
> This looks like an extremely useful piece of software (in the past
> I've thought "I wish there were a tool to do this" :)). I'll pack
Quoting "Ron Johnson" :
On 2009-07-26 17:00, Miles Bader wrote:
Chris Lamb writes:
Agreed. IMHO, it is one of those phrases (along with "Our priority is
our users") that actually means extremely little in practice, except for
generating lots of hot air with nobody agreeing.
"Our priority is
Hi,
> I've built a small proof-of-concept library which creates Java-style
> tracebacks for C and C++ programs. In contrast to libc's backtrace()
> function, it uses DWARF debugging information when available, so the
> output is generally quite useful. Debugging information is extracted
> from t
On Monday 02 March 2009 19:59:00 Bill Unruh wrote:
--cut--
> Agreed, both sides have to come to the conclusion that they are operating
> legally. On the plus side, Schilling would like to have his software
> distributed in the distros. He is also strongly of the opinion that there
> is no legal imp
Quoting Josselin Mouette :
Le dimanche 01 mars 2009 à 22:25 -0800, Bill Unruh a écrit :
The issue is one of the users. They do not give a damn if Schilling is a
difficult and arrogant SOB or if the Debian people put principle above all
else. They just want good software, which works, not just o
On Sunday 01 March 2009 23:31:21 Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2009-02-26 12:46:25, schrieb Brett Parker:
> > As someone that uses wodim quite a bit, I've not noticed it to be "full
> > of bugs", so I'd suggest that you're spreading FUD and hoping that no
> > one notices.
>
> I have 35 TEAC CD-Burne
On Sunday 01 March 2009 18:31:36 Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-news-team/2009-February/000413.h
> >tml
>
> I prefer to listen to credible statements.
>
> The only true claim in the quoted text is that Mark Shuttleworth did stop
> his attempt to switch to c
On Friday 27 February 2009 21:29:01 Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Kalle Kivimaa writes:
> > If you feel that the SFLC's opinion is wrong, you are of course free
> > to provide us with competent legal advice countering SFLC's opinion.
>
> opinions can only be proven right or wrong in court. It seems th
On Friday 16 January 2009 15:42:38 Neil Williams wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:21:29 +
>
> Neil Williams wrote:
> > In that case, I'm probably responsible to thousands of 'installations'
>
> OK, that's an exaggeration but it's certainly hundreds since Etch.
This is true, but I imagine that
On Sunday 11 January 2009 20:39:33 Florian Weimer wrote:
> There seems to be some confusion what's the correct way to ignore only
> the .git subdirectory (and not anything else gittish, which might have
> been present in the .diff.gz before).
>
> Has anybody come up with a proper regexp for -i? Wo
On Friday 02 January 2009 05:04:08 Russ Allbery wrote:
> "Paul Wise" writes:
> > On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> Oh! Good catch, thank you. I've started a re-run with the regex
> >> changed. So far, it's already caught new stuff. I'll post updated
> >> details once it ha
On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:55:20 Steve Kemp wrote:
> > > Yes, you are probably right: I don't understand how Nix may be useful
> > > for Debian (and for GNU/Linux also).
> >
> > That's too bad for you. Shallow thinking doesn't get you anywhere.
>
> As promoter/recommender surely the onus is
On Friday 19 December 2008 21:07:09 Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 17.12.2008, 12:03 -0500 schrieb Barry deFreese:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Just in case anyone cares/is interested, here is some work I have been
> > doing on packages using Gtk1.2, Imlib, gnome-libs, or any combination
> > the
On Saturday 06 December 2008 23:15:06 Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> Am Sa den 6. Dez 2008 um 21:38 schrieb Daniel Moerner:
> > xmms is gone:
>
> It is still in stable and there are many installations. More than 7000
> in popcon. And there is still no alternative.
IMHO audacious is a pretty decent alterna
On Wednesday 03 December 2008 22:01:45 Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 03/12/08 at 19:52 +0200, George Danchev wrote:
> > I'm afraid that skipping the 3rd thing `trying to reduce the number of
> > bugs in Debian' [1] would lead to a massive waste of time for
> > autobuil
On Wednesday 03 December 2008 20:35:11 Clint Adams wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 07:52:06PM +0200, George Danchev wrote:
> > I'm afraid that skipping the 3rd thing `trying to reduce the number of
> > bugs in Debian' [1] would lead to a massive waste of time for
> &g
On Wednesday 03 December 2008 19:28:04 Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 03/12/08 at 17:21 +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 06:18:59PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > I'm not advocating that we just stop doing reviews. But IMHO, NEW
> > > processing should be about the legal problem
On Monday 17 November 2008 18:13:55 Daniel Burrows wrote:
--cut--
> > There is one. It uses the HTTP protocol. :) Just do an HTTP POST request
> > and send the three fields like in the upload form.
>
> Err...when I go to upload I get a webform, not a URL to point to? How
> do I generate an "HTTP
On Tuesday 09 September 2008 14:53:16 Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> Ben Finney wrote:
[snip]
> > Only by getting the package and unpacking it (as I'm sure you know,
> > the package can be unpacked and inspected without installing it).
>
> Both these methods require:
> 1) knowledge about where to loo
On Sunday 13 July 2008 17:15:01 RalfGesellensetter wrote:
> Dear list,
Hello,
> especially in educational settings, there is an increasing pool of
> platform independent Java applications (JARs) that can be integrated in
> users' desktops.
>
> While Java JDK is freed nowadays, those JAR files are
On Saturday 24 May 2008, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2008, Luciano Bello wrote:
--cut--
> > Of course at first is not easy. But we should go to an scenario
> > where all the local patches was reported to upstream (to apply them
> > in the next release) or be justified by more than one dev
On Sunday 18 May 2008, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > The diff.gz contains all the changes including the debian dir. It is
> > by no means obvious if there are patches in there or not.
>
> I think reading a debian diff is the every day job of DD and DAs. And
On Sunday 18 May 2008, Bastian Blank wrote:
--cut--
> | $ md5sum dist*
> | 7417436d2d0cbe9322d7503041c2e2df [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | b959d34e40b01303e98a6b85255dd92d dist_3.70.orig.tar.gz
> | $ mkdir 1 2
> | $ tar -C 1 -xzf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | $ tar -C 2 -xzf dist_3.70.orig.tar.gz
> | $ diff -urN
On Sunday 18 May 2008, Russ Allbery wrote:
--cut--
> Isn't this already the case in practice? Do you really see many Debian
> packages that have modified *.orig.tar.gz tarballs? And if so, have you
> filed bugs?
Sorry for the delay, but now I saw that Don Armstrong also asked such a
question,
On Sunday 18 May 2008, Ben Finney wrote:
> George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > You seem to forgot that people will actually work with the source
> > code and actual patches applied to it, not with a bunch of patches
> > floating in Debian BTS with not
On Sunday 18 May 2008, Ben Finney wrote:
> Again, the BTS is not "yet another place"; it's already a place where
> Debian-specific information needs to be about other changes to the
> package. It's a proposal to *consolidate* information into a place
> that already has much similar information for
On Sunday 18 May 2008, Mike Hommey wrote:
--cut--
> > You don't have to check it in revision control, you just have to be able
> > to generate them from revision control.
> >
> > For .diff.gz, we already have tools to handle such files properly
> > (without duplicating their content), it's called q
On Sunday 18 May 2008, Ben Finney wrote:
> Please follow http://www.debian.org/MailingLists#codeofconduct>
> and avoid sending messages individually to someone when the message is
> also sent to the list, unless they ask for it.
>
> Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, May 18, 20
On Sunday 18 May 2008, Ben Finney wrote:
> George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I strongly believe that [...] there is no any urgent need for more
> > infrastrucre enhancements and yet another places to look at (like
> > teaching BTS/PTS of doing additiona
On Sunday 18 May 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> What if we just decide that changes made to upstream sources[1] qualify
> as a bug? A change might be a bug in upstream, or in the debianisation,
> or in Debian for requiring the change. But just call it a bug.
> Everything else follows from that quite natu
On Saturday 17 May 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> George Danchev wrote:
> > Then comes even more, even Ben Laurie (as he writes in
> > his blog) with all his aggression missed to find the debian's pkg-openssl
> > VCS repo [1] unless he has been helped by someone at some poin
On Saturday 17 May 2008, Vincent Untz wrote:
> Le samedi 17 mai 2008, à 15:24 +0200, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
> > On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 12:07:43PM +, Vincent Untz wrote:
> > > [I'm not subscribed to debian-devel, so feel free to cc me if you want
> > > to keep me in the loop]
> >
> > done.
>
On Saturday 17 May 2008, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 00:19:59 +0300, George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > I personally don't think there is any need for new infrastrutures. We
> > only need to follow some simple rules, i.e. orig.tar.gz should
On Saturday 17 May 2008, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 23:27:03 +0300, George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > On Friday 16 May 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> >> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> >> > I totally agree that we need to make our changes more
On Friday 16 May 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le vendredi 16 mai 2008 à 16:04 -0400, Joey Hess a écrit :
> > > You're insinuatiog that a VCS does not allow easily browsing and
> > > examining patches, and I just don't buy it.
> >
> > I can do more than insinuating: a VCS doe
On Friday 16 May 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > I totally agree that we need to make our changes more visible. In the
> > openssl case, the patch in question is inside the .diff.gz and you don't
> > notice it in the unpacked source package. I tend to give a look to what's
> > i
On Monday 24 December 2007, Jean-Christian BEDIER wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Jean-Christian,
> I subscribe on this mailling list a few weeks ago because i wanted to know
> a solution for publish my .deb on real debian mirror.
You need to contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead and try to find a
sponsor (officia
On Friday 14 December 2007, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote:
Hi,
> I needed to test the building of one of my packages with gcc4.3.
> However it turns out that gcc-snapshot from unstable contains the critical
> bug, which makes impossible using it. At the same time the previous
> version of the gcc-snap
On Saturday 18 November 2006 11:33, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> On Friday 17 November 2006 15:22, George Danchev wrote:
> > * `cd-burner' -- could be provided by wodim, cdrskin, (cdrdao ?)
> > * `dvd-burner' -- could be provided by wodim, dvd+rw-tools and
On Friday 17 November 2006 16:44, Loïc Minier wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2006, George Danchev wrote:
> > Using alternatives mechanism -- currently I don't think that using
> > alternatives mechanism would be a benefit as a whole, but I might be
> > blind of course.
&g
Hello,
With the advent of cdrskin [1] for writing CD-R/W in a cdrecord's
command-line-compatible way and already having several dvd burner
applications, I'd like to propose the addition of at least two more virtual
package names to the `Authoritative list of virtual package names' [2] -
On Thursday 02 November 2006 12:36, Mgr. Peter Tuharsky wrote:
> Hi all
Hello,
> Sometimes I spend hours just reading Debian's package repository, and
> everytime I found interesting packages. The Debian is extremely large
> and juicy, but in contrary, it is really difficult sometimes to ju
On Friday 22 September 2006 13:29, César Martínez Izquierdo wrote:
> I could never see a whole film using Totem or VLC (from Debian).
That is interesting assertion. I have very good experience with vlc here.
Did you report your issue to the BTS ?
> I do, with mplayer (from Marillat).
In fact, I'
On Friday 22 September 2006 00:42, alfredo diega wrote:
> On 9/21/06, Thaddeus H. Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I ask you, is that
> > fair?
>
> Well, I guess it isn't fair. Look, have any of you ever sent an email out
> of
> frustration, then wish you could take it back? I am sorry, I h
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 17:43, Ruben wrote:
> On 9/12/06, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sep 12, Ruben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I'm sorry if this is a somewhat inappropriate place to post this, but
> >
> > You should be more sorry about posting without reading the other
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 11:08, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 22:08:02 -0600, Joseph Smidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> wrote:
> > I know I am in for an argument, but I think it is a good
> >question. I'm sure many of you have read Mark's blog:
> >http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archi
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 07:08, Joseph Smidt wrote:
> I know I am in for an argument, but I think it is a good
> question. I'm sure many of you have read Mark's blog:
> http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/56. It says 76% of Debian
> users run unstable and probably a fair fraction o
1 - 100 of 225 matches
Mail list logo
