> Still, breaking bind's access to root name servers is particularly
> troublesome because it may tend to break all net access. It may be
> worthwhile to remove db.root from the list of configuration files.
> Especially, because this list isn't something anyone should need to
> change.
I beg to d
> > Okay, then solve the problem of which one should actually work on the
> > standard port? You can't use update-alternatives if the software is
>
> Well, I would prefer that things didn't start listening for connections
> without asking first, but I can't imagine that that's a popular
suggestion
>These packages don't conflict; they merely provide the same
> service. There is no reason that these three packages cannot
> coexist on the same system. Any namespace overlap can be
> solved by alternatives or renaming, as such things are normally
> rectified.
>Debian policy should prosc
On 29 Jan 1999, Stephen Zander wrote:
> >>>>> "Scott" == Scott K Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Scott> On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Russell Coker wrote:
> >> What is a close(-1) supposed to do? The http program does one
> >>
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Russell Coker wrote:
> What is a close(-1) supposed to do? The http program does one and I'm curious
> as to why...
IIRC, close(-1) closes all open file handles. I'm not certain exactly
wher this is documented though.
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Florian La Roche wrote:
> There are reasons why all distributions stayed with /var/spool/mail.
> Even Debian who also thinks a lot about making things sane/clean has
> stayed with /var/spool/mail.
Note that Debian has not yet moved from FSSTND to FHS for the most part,
and re
On Thu, Oct 15, 1998 at 02:39:05PM -0700, Philippe Troin wrote:
> "Scott K. Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, Sep 30, 1998 at 07:14:20PM -0700, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
> > > I'm a little confused. freetype2-dev conflicts with freetype1 (<=
e the upgrade of libc6.
>
> Now the first thing that apt wants to do when you run it is to commit
> suicide by removing itself. Is there a workaround?
Yes, you encountered a bug in apt 0.0.16 (an error in the sorting code. Get
apt 0.0.17 from http://master.debian.org/~doogie/
--
S
On Sat, 10 Jan 1998, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Craig Sanders wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Lindsay Allen wrote:
> > > > Still one problem. /wg-15-locale/s//wg15-locale/
> > > damn. i thought i got that one this morning.
On Sat, 3 Jan 1998, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 28, 1997 at 03:47:22PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > Philippe Troin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > perlmagick-1.15-2
> > imagemagick-3.9.0-1
> > libhdf4g-dev-4.0.2-4 (Depends on libhdf4)
>
> It's a strange dependency, but libhdf4 actual
On 30 Dec 1997, Mark W. Eichin wrote:
> I was just upgrading a system from [hamm a few weeks old] to [hamm
> today] using, for the first time, dftp (instead of a mirror and manual
> dpkg -BORGiE runs.) I selected libnfslock, it created
> /etc/ld.so.preload, and since then any attempt to run a dyn
On Sat, 20 Dec 1997, Tim Ferrell wrote:
> I am in the process of upgrading my system to run current with hamm and
> had a problem with the libmime-perl pkg relating to the libwww-perl pkg
> that prevented both pkgs from configuring.
>
> First libwww-perl requires libmime-base64-perl which does no
On Sat, 20 Dec 1997, Radu Duta wrote:
> I've got a package version 1.5.0-1 that I've already packaged.
> There is a new upstream release 1.5.1.
> Should the new package be named 1.5.1-1 or 1.5.1-2 or is it up to
> my discretion.
>
> Since it's an entirely new source tree it would make sense
> to
On Sat, 13 Dec 1997, Remco Blaakmeer wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 1997, Scott K. Ellis wrote:
>
> > The problem is that libc5-dev doesn't exist in hamm. Hamm has
> > libc5-altdev instead. This forces people who want to compile libc5 stuff
> > into the altgcc/lib*-al
On 13 Dec 1997, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> "Scott K. Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, David Engel wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Dec 12, 1997 at 03:19:29PM -0500, Chris Fearnley wrote:
> > > > libc6: Conflicts: (
On Sat, 13 Dec 1997, David Engel wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 1997 at 01:06:07AM -0500, Scott K. Ellis wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Dec 1997, Remco Blaakmeer wrote:
> > > Would it? What if they would also upgrade their libc5-dev to the same
> > > version as the libc5 in hamm? W
On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, David Engel wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 1997 at 03:19:29PM -0500, Chris Fearnley wrote:
> > libc6: Conflicts: (libc5<<5.4.33-6)
> > (Necessary due to utmp issue -- Hell, someone upgrading from a CD
> >with stock 1.3.1 will be able to corrupt utmp in the current scheme
> >
On 12 Dec 1997, Rob Browning wrote:
> The problem is that maybe *you* know what packages those are, but most
> users expect to be able to upgrade without major system services
> breaking if dpkg/dselect doesn't indicate that there's a problem.
> Your approach would cause silent failures.
>
> Imag
On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, Joe Emenaker wrote:
>
>
> On 12 Dec 1997, Rob Browning wrote:
>
> > Scott Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY REASONS WHY UTMP CORRUPTION IS SO EVIL THAT WE
> > > NEED TO MAKE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO RUN A FEW LIBC6 PROGRAMS ON BO GO
> > > THROUGH H
On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, David Welton wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 1997 at 01:44:51PM +1100, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> >
> > If they want to remain with a libc5 development environment, they have two
> > choices, stay with bo, or use altdev from hamm. You regard utmp corruption
> > as a minor issue, I wou
On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, Brandon Mitchell wrote:
> Would it possible to make a (not altdev):
>
> debian/dists/unstable/main/binary-i386/oldlibs/libc5-dev_5.4.33-7.deb
>
> that conflicts with libc6-dev? And would this solve everyones problem?
> I'm just wondering if the libc5 in this directory doesn
On Sat, 13 Dec 1997, Remco Blaakmeer wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 1997, Scott K. Ellis wrote:
>
> > This still forces people installing libc6 to upgrade libc5 past a version
> > that can be used with libc5-dev.
>
> Would it? What if they would also upgrade their libc5-dev
On 13 Dec 1997, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> Scott Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Installing libc5 from hamm forces you to abandon your old libc5
> > development system since it CONFLICTS (correctly) with libc5-dev. Not
> > everyone is going that route yet.
>
> True, so they can stay with
On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, Chris Fearnley wrote:
> 'Martin Mitchell wrote:'
> >
> >If they want to remain with a libc5 development environment, they have two
> >choices, stay with bo, or use altdev from hamm. You regard utmp corruption
> >as a minor issue, I would not, especially if I expected that stay
On Thu, 11 Dec 1997, Chris Fearnley wrote:
> The reason for my bug is to get the broken package off the ftp site.
> Before anyone else breaks their system. Guy, if everyone believes that
> 5.4.33-7 in hamm solves the problem, could you replace
> libc5_5.4.33-6.deb with libc5_5.4.33-7.deb? I won'
On 12 Dec 1997, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> "Scott K. Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > Huh? The upgrade path is quite clear: install a newer libc5 (5.4.33-7)
> > > from hamm, then you may install libc6.
> >
> > The solution isn'
On 12 Dec 1997, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> Chris Fearnley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > debian/bo/binary-i386/base/libc5_5.4.33-6.deb conflicts with libc6
> > making it IMPOSSIBLE to upgrade!! I had to downgrade to
> > libc5_5.4.33-3.deb from a LSL CD (thank goodness this bug is not
> > shippe
On Sun, 30 Nov 1997, Yann Dirson wrote:
> Greg Stark writes:
> >
> > We've got be be a little more careful with the Replaces header. I just
> > installed the libc6 version of comerr, and dpkg helpfully deinstalled
> > e2fsprogs.
>
> That's perfectly normal if you previously had e2fsprogs <=
le my ability to read that. However, when the
upstream source is something else, such as info/texinfo, I don't want HTML
as well.
- --
|The mark of your ignorance is the depth of
Scott K. Ellis | your belief in injustice and tragedy.
http://
ccess to sudo). However, you may not want that
arangement.
- --
Scott K. Ellis |In order to live freely and happily,
http://www.gate.net/~storm/| you must sacrifice boredom.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | It is not
by default. It's just too
> user-hostile.
I'm not advocating any particular editor here. I personally use joe for
brief editing jobs and emacs for the big stuff, but I can understand the
expectations of someone familiar with unix typing vipw or such.
+---------
hould be a suggest for foo-doc-html|foo-doc-info.
Recommends is too strong, it is annoying to beat dselect into submission
when you really don't want a package.
++
|| Your friends will know you better i
out
providing the functionality elsewhere. And I'm not convinced an HTML
search engine is the solution, that requires cluttering my drive up with
cache files for the engine.
++
|| Your friends wil
| | of my employer, my terminal, or the view out my |
| | window are purely coincidental. Any resemblance |
| | between the above and my own views is|
| Scott K. Ellis | non-deterministic. The question of the existence |
| [
/fcntl locking at the same time?
You create fun deadlocks when one program does it lockfile/flock and the
other does it flock/lockfile.
+--------+
| Scott K. Ellis | Argue for your limitations and
| of my employer, my terminal, or the view out my |
| | window are purely coincidental. Any resemblance |
| |between the above and my own views is|
| Scott K. Ellis | non-deterministic. The question of the existence |
| [EMAIL PRO
s your chance to fix the
capitilization :)
+--------+
| Scott K. Ellis | Argue for your limitations and |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | sure e
iner uploads of glibc packages for orphaned packages and so
forth.
++
| | Your friends will know you better in the |
| Scott K. Ellis | first minute you meet than your acquaintances |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | will know you in a thousand years
r friends will know you better in the |
| Scott K. Ellis | first minute you meet than your acquaintances |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | will know you in a thousand years.|
||
cause they DIDN'T READ THE DOCUMENTATION.
Really, we knew about the epoch problem in 1.2, we fixed it, the fix has
been discussed on debian-user a number of times. The solution is:
dpkg -i dpkg_1.4.0.8.deb
dpkg --clear-available
+-
solicit more comments) before rocking that boat.
+------------+
| Scott K. Ellis | Argue for your limitations and |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | sure enough, they're yours. |
|
te than perl is. Does perl look at the
site-perl directory before looking in its normal librarys?
+----+
| Scott K. Ellis | Argue for your limitations and |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | sure enough
> Forwarded message from debian-devel to file as a bug report:
>
> > Hi...
> >
> > I'd rather open this for discussion that a bug report, but I'd like to
> > have multiple root accounts (ie: root, root2, root3 etc) on one system -
> > however it buggers adduser up when adding a normal user.
> >
>
--
Scott K. Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Argue for your limitations
Systems Administrator, Anexis Inc. and sure enough,
Business Web Presence Hosting they're yours.
http://www.anexis.com/ -- Illusions
44 matches
Mail list logo
