On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 10:13:22AM -0200, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> Em Wed, 27 Nov 2002 02:21:47 -0600, Chris Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> escreveu:
>
> > Yes, some sort of "su to root" prompt is probably a good idea; dunno
> > if I can reuse the existing code or what. If not, something si
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 01:56:39PM +0100, Anton Feldmann wrote:
> Sehr geehrte Programm bereitsteller,
>
> mein Name ist Anton Feldmann. Ich hätte gerne von ihnen gewust wann
> woody frozen ist.
Guten Tag. This is an english-language mailing list; please post in
English here.
The woody freeze
On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 02:49:00PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> I had a longer discussion with our release manager who said in this
> discussion that there's no progress in the freeze of woody. We won't enter
> the next stage of the freeze until the base and standard packages are in a
> releasable s
On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 03:48:53PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks for the replies. I believe that my confusion was founded in
> the idea that an MTA both sends and receives mail. The ssmtp package
> is an appropriate provider for the sendmail portion of the
> mail-transport-agent withou
On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 01:42:41PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> gcc to meet those same requirements? You do realize that there are
> plenty of free levels out there for quake2 right? We don't have to
> distribute that same code just to put quake2 in main.
And do you realise that none of those level
On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 11:06:11AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 11:57:21PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> >
> > Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > That's not true. If it is possible to create game levels for it that are
> > > free, than it is considered
On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 09:51:17AM -0500, David B Harris wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 14:37:48 +0100,
> Peter Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > There's no reason why the engine itself can't be included in Debian,
> > > as far as I'm concerned. It doesn't absolutely *have* to have game
> >
On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 09:28:39AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
>
> Now I seem to have some font problems. Netscape seems to be OK, but the
> GIMP comes up with [] [] [] [] [] in place of the hint text. The title
> bars are OK but any "filled in" text is just [] repeated. Any hints?
Branden gives a
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:00:48PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
> > The social contract says "Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software".
> > Such a win-port might indeed serve some users. But for my own part, I do
> > have some
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 08:06:19PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > This "bug" is only because of debian/rules which continue to use an
> > obsolete (and no longer required) hack in order to remove unwanted
> > -rpaths.
>
> > Just remove the hack, it is no lo
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 10:38:48AM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> subscriptions add and unsubscribes substract from there. A graph for a
> statistic is worth nothing if it doesn't have the zero point in it.
> First unit statistics lesson.
Rubbish. The correct lesson is to learn to always look at
On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 10:02:48AM -0500, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> Nazis. Hitler. Microsoft rules!
>
> (Die thread die!)
You fool you!
Godwin's law is powerless when deliberately invoked...
('s' a bit like the chronicles of thomas covenant, now I think about it)
Jules
On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 03:18:35PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi
> I'm a student at Kent University Canterbury UK I will be starting
> my final year project some time next
> year and I am looking to find a project that involves linux development
> ideally kernel / module based or a
On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 09:50:14AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> If they don't and rather continue to track unstable, then how
> will new optional package enter testing before the `optional'
> freeze? They may get built against library versions that aren't
> in woody and thus never allowed to
I just had to recompile balsa to make it installable again, after
another of these volatile gnome libraries changed soname on me in sid.
It was just a simple recompile, no source changes except the
changelog. Of course, it's going to trigger recompiles on all the
other architectures. And some of
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 11:45:38AM +1000, The Nose Who Knows wrote:
>
> What would be the best way of approaching these people who may find that
> Free licenses are the best way to distribute their work? If we find
> that fontographers are interested, we may gain a lot of good quality
> work quit
On Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 05:00:58PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> James LewisMoss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So my first inclination is just to stop producing the gnome versions,
> > but several users have requested that I not do so.
>
> If the GTK+/GNOME version of XEmacs isn't really usab
On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 08:15:11AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Basically once your library is frozen don't upload major changes to
> unstable until the release. If you know what you are doing and fully
> understand the issues involved you can actually get away with a fair
> bit more, but if you sc
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 05:00:29PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
> > > It might happen if there was a good reason, but nobody has suggested one
> > > yet.
> > > I doubt there is one.
> >
> > I have one. It's that dependency on perl makes owners of 486 machines die
> > of an h
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 07:04:52PM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote:
> >>>> "CW" == Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> CW> Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Programs shouldn't gratuitously break configurations whic
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 12:08:31PM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote:
> "TB" == Thomas Bushnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> TB> I'm perfectly happy for him to just do (3). But what he wants to do
> TB> instead is declare real bugs non-bugs, on the grounds that he "can do
> TB> nothing". If h
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 10:01:11PM -0700, Debian Linux User wrote:
[snip]
> > Please read: http://nm.debian.org
> >
> > --
> > Raul
> >
>
> Oh well, at least nobody can say, "Well, nobody ever said anything ... ".
> I tried.
Well, what, exactly? Would you mind actually telling us what you
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 07:55:11AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm in real trouble with apt-get and a squid proxy. First of all
> I found out that in contrast to the manual of apt.conf the environment
> variables
>
> ~# set | grep proxy
> ftp_proxy=http://wr-linux01.rki.de:3128/
> h
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 12:51:23PM -0300, Ben Woodhead wrote:
> >From the article I have read about debian Stand On KDE, which said that
> debian would like to help kde get there license issues resolved so kde could
> be put into debian. Perhaps, that was not the case, and debian just wanted
> to k
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 12:33:21PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Sep 07, Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >This is just your standard lack of reverse DNS.. Part of the anti-spam
> >bit. The sender needs to get working reverse DNS I suppose..
> Looks like a stupid check, to me.
I
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:43:21AM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> Still, if 1.6 were to replace 1.5.2, we had to check all packages that
> depend on Python, if we think their license is still compatible with the
> new Python license, and remove them if it's not. I'd opt against this.
Yup, that
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 05:51:28PM +0900, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> From: Henrique M Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: debhelper or fakeroot problem?
> Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 23:08:55 -0300
>
> > On Wed, 06 Sep 2000, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> > > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: unable to find depend
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 06:24:28PM +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
> So I drew the conclusion that what Debian needs for those users is simple
> GUI tools. [some will respond here with "we don't want those users" and I
> won't agree. This flamewar already happened. GUI tools doesn't mean you
> have
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 02:00:42AM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 11:54:05PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Software has bugs, it's a fact of life. New software is more likely to
> > > have unknown bugs that affect more people. What makes the Helix packages
> > > so nice is
On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 07:32:17AM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > commands. So having extremely long X-Keywords in mail messages
> > will screw things up. Double yuck.
> >
> > This is in imap-4.7c/src/osdep/unix/unix.c BTW.
> >
> > See the original message and the accompanying thread in debian-dev
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 04:17:42AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> Since my last upgrade to potato I've been getting a lot of messages like
> the following:
>
> DEBUG: --Relation pg_rules--
> DEBUG: Pages 0: Changed 0, Reapped 0, Empty 0, New 0; Tup 0: Vac 0,
> Keep/VTL 0/0, Crash 0, UnUsed 0, MinL
dless to say, there is no 'limitation' of Linux in this respect ---
a Linux firewall can be configured to forward and/or rewrite packets
in any way desired.
Jules
--
Jules Bean |Any sufficiently advanced
[EMAIL PROTECTED]| technology is indistinguishable
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | from a perl script
This shouldn't be necessary, it should be
simple enough to dpkg-deb -x the deb, then go through each file,
comparing size and then contents (with `cmp').
Jules
--
Jules Bean |Any sufficiently advanced
[EMAIL PROTECTED]| technology is indistinguishable
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | from a perl script
This would be very easy to implement, so I thought I'd see if anyone
else has already done it.
I'd like a utility which takes a .deb file, another version of which
is already installed. It checks (presumably by file size and md5sum)
for all differences between the files on the file system, and the
that have little or no basis.
>
> Professionalism is what I did. I fixed the package, and made comments for
> the maintainer. A simple request to do this yourself is not vindictive nor
> unprofessional. Me having to do your job...now that makes you
> unprofessi
On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 09:26:34PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
> Another reason to run unstable is to live on the actual bleeding edge:
> testing will always be around two weeks out of date. That can be a fair
> while, if you're impatient.
>
> Supporting this, there's some Apt changes in CVS th
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 10:17:30PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Automated Process?
> ~~
> So pretty much all the policy is encoded in some "automated process"
> which updates testing. It works at the moment, basically as follows:
>
> 1. First, it loads up all the Sources and
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 04:10:53PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> It's almost impossible to remember all the little things that might go
> wrong as well, so encapsulating that knowledge in a regression test
> suit is definitely the way to go.
In which vein, it might be helpful to have test machines
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 02:26:33PM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi, to all, and congrats on the potato release.
>
> I've been browsing cdimage. Do we release a base system as a 30/40-ish meg
> ISO that can network to enable apt handling retrieval of anything else? One
> would be really useful to me,
s
approaching, we'd like to have some .debs on gnome.org, could you
provide them?'.
Jules
--
Jules Bean |Any sufficiently advanced
[EMAIL PROTECTED],jellybean.co.uk} | technology is indistinguishable
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | from a perl script
.2 or 2.0) you want debian packages, the place
to bug is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jules
--
Jules Bean |Any sufficiently advanced
[EMAIL PROTECTED],jellybean.co.uk} | technology is indistinguishable
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | from a perl script
;
> The license is GPL.
This would be mildy convenient for me, since the next major release of
balsa may require, or simply prefer, GOB, to build.
[*sigh* why not just blasted use C++]
Jules
--
Jules Bean |Any sufficiently advanced
[EMAI
iner of maelstrom I'm rather concerned. I will now
> contact this "maintainer".
Well, be polite.
There's nothing wrong with sam (or someone he knows) doing unofficial
debs of hist software. If I were you, I'd just make him aware of the
duplication of effort.
Jul
y say is fine. But I didn't
look closely yet].
Jules
--
Jules Bean |Any sufficiently advanced
[EMAIL PROTECTED],jellybean.co.uk} | technology is indistinguishable
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | from a perl script
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 03:28:37PM -0500, Joe Block wrote:
> Jules Bean wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 10:45:07AM +0100, Nils Jeppe wrote:
> > > On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Can we please close the list
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 02:43:37PM +0100, Nils Jeppe wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Jules Bean wrote:
>
> > Making valid and useful actions impossible is not the way to fight
> > spam. To fight spam, our spam-masters work quite hard to block open
> > relays, etc.
>
>
Takao KAWAMURA wrote:
> Licence:
>
> Permission to use, copy, and modify this software and its
> documentation is granted under no conditions.
>
> I will upload it to master in a few days.
"..is granted under no conditions" reads like 'is not granted'.
I.e., there are no conditions under which
Jules Bean wrote:
>
> I don't want to start a flame-war, so be gentle..
Oh well. I did, anyhow.
>
> I was just mindlessly (in a tongue-in-cheek way) evangalising Debian on
> a mailing list I'm on, and I got a private response from a SuSE user.
> He had installed
I don't want to start a flame-war, so be gentle..
I was just mindlessly (in a tongue-in-cheek way) evangalising Debian on
a mailing list I'm on, and I got a private response from a SuSE user.
He had installed Debian from a CD (he didn't say which version, I'm
afraid) and 'vi fstab' to mount his o
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 08:26:21AM -0500, Richard Kaszeta wrote:
> > Note that CTAN recently has split their archive into main and non-free
> > trees based upon licenses like we do. :)
>
> Yes, I've noticed it.
>
> What criteria do they use? The DFSG? The OSD?
"Seth M. Landsman" wrote:
>
> > Basically, we're in BLATANT violation of the license currently. It states
> > quite clearly that redistribution is prohibited. So, plain and simple,
> > we're shit out of luck. As someone else pointed out, Kaffe is just as
> > good, with better response. But either
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I am given to understand that someone has found a problem in the license of
> jdk, to the point that same person finds that debian cannot distribute the jdk
> at all. I was told that the problem found in the license has existed for a
> long time.
>
> If this i
CTAN are adopting Debian's definition of free software!
(Follow the links in this article, which was
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.text.tex yesterday)
Jules
(Any replies for me to read, Cc: I haven't (yet) resubscribed to -devel)
Robin Fairbairns wrote:
>
> The CTAN team have been concerned, fo
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Thomas Gebhardt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when I tried to have a look at gnome-apt_0.3_i386.deb
> I found that it depends on several potato packages.
> I tried to install as much as needed (well, as the deb dependencies
> indicate) but still get some missing so dependencies:
>
> # gno
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> According to Jules Bean:
> > On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > > Every OS has a different set of mount options that may or may not be
> > > relevant to setuid security. I don't see what 'higher level
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > As it is, noexec is almost useless. I can't help thinking that
> > *all* interpreters *should* check noexec status.
>
> What's the point? Such files can be copied to /tmp and run there
If one were trying to secure such a system then you would
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
>
> The code exists to check the mount options relevant to an open file.
> It's just a Small Matter of Programming to integrate that into the
> Perl source code, and disable emultation of setuid scripts when the
> 'nosuid' mount option is set.
But, then
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> According to Michael Stone:
> > Quoting Wichert Akkerman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > What perl-suid should do is check the mountoptions for the filesystem on
> > > which the script resides and abort if that was mounted with nosuid.
> > > Should be quite
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote:
>
> > Dear overworked gtk maintainer...
> >
> > Did you deliberately upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused
> > to me..
>
> Doh!
>
> I'll shut up now
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote:
> Dear overworked gtk maintainer...
>
> Did you deliberately upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused
> to me..
Doh!
I'll shut up now.
Lesson - read the c
Dear overworked gtk maintainer...
Did you deliberately upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused
to me..
Jules
/+---+-\
| Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd|
| Jules aka | [EMAIL
On 30 Jan 1999, Chris Walker wrote:
>
> [1]Useful in UK academia where you have a fast network connection to a
> mirror site.
In Uk academia, the most useful site is
http://sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk/packages/debian
J
/+---+-\
| Jeli
On 31 Jan 1999, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> 1) A m68k computer with a 60Mb debian installation. Normally I use the nfs
> method. Apt is just not feasible, it wants to copy everything over before
> it starts - there simply isn't space on the disk to do this. Also the
> runtime cost of starting dpkg on
On 30 Jan 1999, Ole J. Tetlie wrote:
> *-Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> |
> | The fact that the *actual* libgtk1.1-dev package conflicts with
> | libgtk-dev, does not mean that the package libgtk1.13-dev, which provides
> | libgtk1.1-dev, must conflict with libgtk-dev
On 30 Jan 1999, Ole J. Tetlie wrote:
> *-Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> |
> | On 30 Jan 1999, Ole J. Tetlie wrote:
> |
> | > Am I overlooking something obvious here?
> | >
> | > libgtk1.1.13-dev provides libgtk-dev and libgtk1.1-dev
> | >
> | &g
On 30 Jan 1999, Ole J. Tetlie wrote:
> Am I overlooking something obvious here?
>
> libgtk1.1.13-dev provides libgtk-dev and libgtk1.1-dev
>
> but
>
> libgtk1.1-dev conflicts with libgtk-dev
>
> this means that gnome-apt refuses to install libgtk1.1.13-dev,
> a package that I sorely need. Aren
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Adrian Bridgett wrote:
> dists/slink/main/binary-all/kernel-source-2.1.125
>
> why?? and 2.0.33, 2.0.34, 2.0.35
>
> 2.0.36 I can understand :-)
2.1.125 - because we needed it for sparc, so we uploaded the source.
Jules
/+---+---
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 28 Jan 1999, Brandon Mitchell wrote:
> > >
> > > > About the xfonts problem. I haven't been
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jan 1999, Brandon Mitchell wrote:
>
> > About the xfonts problem. I haven't been following close enough to pardon
> > my ignorance on the subject. What if we make the pseudo xbase package
> > conflict with xfnt* packages < version x (a vers
On 28 Jan 1999, Gordon Matzigkeit wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Andreas Tille writes:
>
> AT> Sorry for my ignorance when deleting the mails under this topic.
> AT> I was absend from the net for a longer time and couldn't read all
> AT> my E-Mails. Please repeate the link where to vote for those li
On 27 Jan 1999, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jan 27, 1999, Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Since you do support -rpath in your system, you should probably extend
> >> your dynamic linker to work in this case too, or risk taking the blame
> >>
On 27 Jan 1999, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jan 27, 1999, Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 27 Jan 1999, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
[watch indenting carefully : I wrote this next bit, of course]
> > In general, it is not useful to have multiple versi
On 27 Jan 1999, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> > In normal cases the dymanic linker would figure this out one way or
> > another with rpath this functionality is disabled as it overrides
> > the library versioning scheme.
>
> > The linux dynamic linker will resolve things in some magical way based on
On 27 Jan 1999, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> If you do want to be able to freely move libraries around, -rpath must
> be forbidden. If -rpath is available for users, you can't move
> libraries around and expect things to work.
There are lots of things which users can do which might appear to wor
On 27 Jan 1999, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> > The contract simply states that the library will be found. Which
> > library is used can be determined by the linker.
>
> Except that, if you replace the library with an incompatible one, you
> *are* breaking the contract.
We don't replace libraries
On Wed, 27 Jan 1999, Ossama Othman wrote:
> Hi Jules,
>
> > > Another quick question...
> > > Why does potato's GNOME require slink's gtk/gnome/etc libs?
> >
> > Because potato is not yet a complete distribution, and should be
> > 'overlayed' over slink?
>
> Ah, I see. I did a "clean" potato i
On 27 Jan 1999, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > Having libtool default to -rpath is what's causing problems.
>
> This is IMHO completely backwards :-)
>
> When a program is linked with a shared library, a contract is
> established between them stating that the library (or any newer but
> compatible ve
On Wed, 27 Jan 1999, Ossama Othman wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Another quick question...
> Why does potato's GNOME require slink's gtk/gnome/etc libs?
Because potato is not yet a complete distribution, and should be
'overlayed' over slink?
/+---+---
Hi,
In response to an issue on -legal, I am reopening the debate on how free
those parts of debian which are not software (or not precisely software)
should be.
IMO, this debate should be conducted on -policy, and I ask all replies to
this message to trim the CC: line.
This issue was discussed i
On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Daniel Martin wrote:
>
> If we are going to have a gimp.org done contest, I would like to see
> that the rules allow people to use things that are not gimp, but that
> are DFSG free software. I find the command-line pnm tools very useful
> in manipulating images, and it woul
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 25-Jan-99, 19:06 (CST), Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree with James Treacy's observation that we will probably need two
> > logos: one logo with a liberal license that people can just freely, and
> > another, more restricted
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 12:15:11AM -0600, BugScan reporter wrote:
>
> > Package: emacs20 (main)
> > Maintainer: Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 28177 dpkg --print-architecture requires gcc
> >
> >
> > Pac
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, loic wrote:
> Fabrizio Polacco wrote:
>
> > Now I have to evaluate packaging systems for that platform, and I would
> > like to push a Free solution, a debian one specifically (because it's
> > the best :-).
>
> We do think the same... (we do the same thing:)
> I'm setting u
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 12:48:07PM -0600, David Welton wrote:
> > (and it's 'humor' by the way;-)))
>
> humour is a perfectly valid word. Ask your nearest dictd with Webster
> and Wordnet installed, for example.
Humour is correct (in British
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Paul Sheer wrote:
> > Also: there is no GPL secure shell (as far as I know).
>
> But people are working on that. From what I hear it's on the verge of
> becoming useable. Don't ask me about the name, I always forget it.
It's called psst.
Umm..
I still think we're talking at cross-purpose.
1) xfonts-* C/R/P xfnt-*. Yes, I knew this was true. Yes, I knew Branden
knew this :-)
2) Branden doesn't like xfnt-* hanging around. We agree.
3) However, if someone were to create xfnt-* packages which *Depend* on
the corresponding xfont-
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Why are we going to this trouble? If you want to rename package a1 to a2,
> simply make a2 conflict and replace a1 -- dselect or dpkg will do
> the rest. If you want to make 'upgrade' automatic, then you'll also
> need to upload a new version of the a1
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Raul Miller wrote:
> (
> until dpkg --remove xfntwhatever; do
> sleep 120
> done >/var/tmp/removexfntwhatever.log 2>&1 &
> )
OK.
We have three solutions suggested now:
a) dummy packages (and live with them)
b) dummy packages, which self-remove
c)
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> >Please note that a suboptimal packaging does not legitimate the conflict.
> >For example, my unzip and unzip-crypt packages do conflict at each other,
> >and they are optional, so I should probably make th
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Craig Sanders wrote:
> the libgtk* versions are compatible with each other. the libgtk*-dev
> versions, are not (it would be possible to make it so by installing
> header files in /usr/include/gtk-VERSION, but you'd still have to modify
> every source file that #included it. in
> > It's all available in the archives... Let's not start THAT discussion again,
> > ok?
>
> Sure no problem. I had no intention of doing so. I was just curious as
> to the status. There will be no argument from me, especially since I
> agreed with Debian's stance on the matter. :)
>
Brief
On 21 Jan 1999, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
> > "Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Ben> I've recently looked into the doc-base control file
> Ben> format. It seems pretty sane, except I realized since it does
> Ben> not provide for any macro expansion, I will have to
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, James A. Treacy wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jan, 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Given that from your description swish++ sounds like a general purpose
> > indexer, which has been set up to index 'natural language' is it the best
> > one
> > for our purposes?
> >
> Once I removed
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Tibor Koleszar wrote:
> Hello,
>
> So, if you have a script with a setuid flag after you edit+save it in
> mc's editor the flag will dissapear...
> I dont know, but i think it's a bug.
> Let me know if it is, and i'll report it.
i've observed the same thing in emacs.
Presum
On 19 Jan 1999, James Troup wrote:
> Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Could somebody explain me, why, oh why, do we have to wait more than
> > two months for trivial ftp.debian.org bugs to be fixed?
>
> Perhaps because the more you whine about it the more prone we are to
> ignore
On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Surely not?
> >
> > Surely the Replace/Provide/Conflict combination will make dselect pick the
> > new ones?
>
> I'm sorry but I'm afraid this is not the case.
>
> I hate to say this, but please read the packaging manual and/or the policy
> manual. I
On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, Brandon Mitchell wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
> >
> > > Mmm, what about the needed compatibility packages?
> > > Will you have some time for this?
> > >
> > > I think it is absolutely essential for the su
On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, Anthony Towns wrote:
[Thanks to anthony for a concrete list]
>
> Some of the other packages in this situation:
>
> rsync suggests ssh
>
> inn suggests pgp
> kbackup suggests pgp
> kbackup-doc suggests pgp (the documentation for KBackup)
> tm s
Hi all,
I've seen the edges of a few flamewars associated with autoconf/configure
style scripts, and I'm wondering if anyone can point me to (or provide me
with) arguments covering the following points:
Given a 3rd-party library A, which includes header files, and a 3rd-party
program B, which use
--On Mon, Oct 19, 1998 12:59 pm +0200 daville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Good morning,
>
>I'm a student in a french engineering school and I develop an
> application of mathematics. The problem is: I'would like what are
> requirements for including this application in one of Linux
> distr
1 - 100 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
