On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 10:58:53AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> Otherwise, there is no way to filter out this bug report in BTS
> listings.
Not to mention the problem that if -1 is closed, XX needs to be
manually too, but the "owner" of XX is not informed that -1
has been closed (AFAIK).
--
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 02:47:12PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> For those playing along at home, I suspect this would look a lot like:
>
> clone XX
> severity -1 important
> retitle -1 Causes massive failures on package foo
> assign -1 bar
Would it be acceptable to add:
forwarded XX http:/
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 12:41, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 02:45:09PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > We've often downplayed asking for help in favour of encouraging people
> > to *offer* to help, but since we're having problems, it's important to
> > try everything we can to over
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 02:45:09PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> We've often downplayed asking for help in favour of encouraging people
> to *offer* to help, but since we're having problems, it's important to
> try everything we can to overcome them. One of the more effective way
> of getting usefu
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 06:31:02PM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > another package's was using convert in the build stage to convert
> > some images and it was failing. The bug was elevated to
> > release-critical. I don't think it would be fair
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 03:01:20PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> On 2003-12-01 14:45 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Another possibility is to just drop packages that aren't maintained well
> > enough. While this is somewhat attractive, it doesn't really serve our
> > users any better than saying "Wh
Hi aj, hi all others,
On 2003-12-01 14:45 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Another possibility is to just drop packages that aren't maintained well
> enough. While this is somewhat attractive, it doesn't really serve our
> users any better than saying "Why don't we just lower our standards?"
Basical
Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 08:46:19PM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > Anyone know the answer to my second question?
> > : Does the OTA bug get filled against the package you are offering to help
> > : with, or against wnpp? I presume against the package you are offering
>
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 08:46:19PM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> Anyone know the answer to my second question?
> : Does the OTA bug get filled against the package you are offering to help
> : with, or against wnpp? I presume against the package you are offering
> : to help with, but then there
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:38:10AM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > Anthony Towns wrote on debian-devel-announce:
> >
> > > I think the best way is to
> > > file a RFA (which we're redefining as "Requ
> On Dec 4, 2003, at 10:56, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> > But another package's was using convert
> > in the build stage to convert some images and it was failing. The bug
> > was elevated to release-critical. I don't think it would be fair to
> > remove imagemagick from the distribution for su
On Dec 4, 2003, at 10:56, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
But another package's was using convert
in the build stage to convert some images and it was failing. The bug
was elevated to release-critical. I don't think it would be fair to
remove imagemagick from the distribution for such a case.
More impor
Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> another package's was using convert in the build stage to convert
> some images and it was failing. The bug was elevated to
> release-critical. I don't think it would be fair to remove
> imagemagick from the distribution for such a case.
>From the
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:38:10AM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> Anthony Towns wrote on debian-devel-announce:
>
> > I think the best way is to
> > file a RFA (which we're redefining as "Request For Assistance" instead
> > of just "Request For Ado
"Nikita V. Youshchenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>>> Can "requesting removal from archive" be automated, to occur say after 3
>>> weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
>>>
>>> As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ o
Anthony Towns wrote on debian-devel-announce:
> I think the best way is to
> file a RFA (which we're redefining as "Request For Assistance" instead
> of just "Request For Adoption") report against wnpp
[cut]
> Third, personnel deployment. As a complem
Anthony Towns wrote:
* #203339 - freeswan - Rene Mayrhofer
FTBFS, patch in the bug log since July, no further activity
I feel that I need to respond to that, after being mentioned here :)
I fully admit that I have simply overlooked this one, because it is very
easy to fix (and in
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 09:33:39AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "aj" == Anthony Towns writes:
> aj> or overloaded with work, or, for that matter, fixing compromised Debian
> aj> servers -- do you think it's desirable and possible to:
>
> aj> * for confirmed bugs with a known fi
John Goerzen writes:
>On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:27:00PM -0500, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
>> release goal of December 1 didn't inspire any new activity. This gives
>> the appearance that the ARM port maintainers simply don't care if sarge
>> gets released at all. This is very discouraging.
>
>If t
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 07:17:57AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 01:46:02PM +, Mark Howard wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 06:56:13PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > > A release critical bug in one package could be caused by a non-release
> > > critical bug in another package
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 09:33:39AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> [...] It takes me about an
> afternoon to do a PAM or OpenAFS release even if I change one line.
> OK, for a one line change I can probably get that down to two hours or
> so.
>
> It's a lot easier for me if I batch bugs together and
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 01:46:02PM +, Mark Howard wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 06:56:13PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > A release critical bug in one package could be caused by a non-release
> > critical bug in another package.
>
> How?
> If the bug is caused by a problem in another package
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:27:00PM -0500, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> release goal of December 1 didn't inspire any new activity. This gives
> the appearance that the ARM port maintainers simply don't care if sarge
> gets released at all. This is very discouraging.
If that is what happens, then I
Op di 02-12-2003, om 14:46 schreef Mark Howard:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 06:56:13PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > A release critical bug in one package could be caused by a non-release
> > critical bug in another package.
>
> How?
A program could use some library for most of its core operation, an
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:09:37PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > What happens if say there are simply not enough people interested in
> > GNOME for example, and the RC counts rise, and rise at an increasing
> > rate, and we never release again?
>
> That's not a very interesting hypothetical -- t
> "aj" == Anthony Towns writes:
aj> or overloaded with work, or, for that matter, fixing compromised Debian
aj> servers -- do you think it's desirable and possible to:
aj> * for confirmed bugs with a known fix, upload a fixed package
aj> within a day or two
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 02:45:09PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Hello world,
Hello aj.
>* LSB 1.3 compatibility mostly achieved
>
> (LSB non-compliance issues are now Release Critical; bugs
> should be filed and addressed by the LSB team, which hangs
> aroun
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 06:56:13PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> A release critical bug in one package could be caused by a non-release
> critical bug in another package.
How?
If the bug is caused by a problem in another package then it should be
reassigned (and more importantly fixed). The bug is sti
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 10:34:26AM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> That said, it has been too long since I last looked at grep-dctrl. I'll
> try to fix that "in a couple of days" :) I can only say that my
> teaching duties have exhausted me during the autumn.
And hey, if you manage to fix
On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 18:56, Brian May wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > Can "requesting removal from archive" be automated, to occur say after 3
> > weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
> >
> > As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ or utili
On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 18:09, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> ] $ grep Harkness /var/lib/apt/lists/*_*; echo $?
> ] 1
It's not much (directly) Debian related (yet), but:
I'd be in NM but for the keyservers and NM registration page being down
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>> Can "requesting removal from archive" be automated, to occur say after 3
>> weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
>>
>> As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ or utility in having your
>> package in the archive. Thi
On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 18:12, Magosányi Árpád wrote:
> A levelezőm azt hiszi, hogy Zenaan Harkness a következőeket írta:
> > Can "requesting removal from archive" be automated, to occur say after 3
> > weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
> >
> > As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ o
On 20031201T144509+1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> * #208646 - grep-dctrl - Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
> unspecified problems with version in unstable, should take
> "a couple of days" to fix, no activity since September
The "unspecified problems" are mainly recorded in the other op
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Anthony Towns wrote:
>Without having evaluated null hypotheses or done exhaustive analyses,
>the correlation nevertheless seems fairly convincing. To put it bluntly,
>our regular package maintainers are doing such a bad job that without
>significant assistance from
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> Can "requesting removal from archive" be automated, to occur say after 3
> weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
>
> As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ or utility in having your
> package in the archive. This would g
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Hrm.
] $ grep Harkness /var/lib/apt/lists/*_*; echo $?
] 1
> Can "requesting removal from archive" be automated, to occur say after 3
> weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
It could, but it shouldn't be -- requests for rem
A levelezőm azt hiszi, hogy Zenaan Harkness a következőeket írta:
> Can "requesting removal from archive" be automated, to occur say after 3
> weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug?
>
> As a DD, I assume there is some pride and/ or utility in having your
> package in the archive. This would
Anthony Towns wrote:
[...]
> Fallback plans are important though, and in this case if we're not able
> to get in a position where maintainers are able to keep control of their
> RC bug count (which is to say, keep it at zero), we'll have to consider
> more drastic measures. An obvious one is to tra
On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 15:45, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Having critical, grave or serious bugs open for an extended period is simply
> not acceptable.
>
> Nor is it excusable. While it's possible that you mightn't have the skill
> required to fix some security bug, or mightn't have the time to respond
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 12:36:01AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:13:23AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
> > be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
> > time). From what Colin
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:13:23AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
> be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
> time). From what Colin Watson mentioned to me earlier today there are
> some other packages
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 06:09:10PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> However, at least lm-sensors and i2c need attention soon.
The i2c bugs are due to some major upstream breakage. I don't see how we're
really going to handle that stuff, the situation is just plain old ugly.
(FWIW I still haven't (mad
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 02:07:38PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:13:23AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
> > be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
> > time). From what Col
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:13:23AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
> be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
> time). From what Colin Watson mentioned to me earlier today there are
> some other packages
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 07:43:37PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Eventually I found aptitude's "Dselect" theme, which helped some.
>
> I guess aptitude could be made the recommended default package manager,
> but I would hope that:
> 1. Something more closely approximating the Dselect theme i
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:59:15PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> (e) I've heard about a "debtags" database system that's trying to
> find a general solution to the problem of categorizing packages.
> I took a look at their library at one point and wasn't able to
> figure out h
Daniel Burrows wrote:
> (e) I've heard about a "debtags" database system that's trying to
> find a general solution to the problem of categorizing packages.
> I took a look at their library at one point and wasn't able to
> figure out how to use it, but if this project is still going
>
Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Maybe we should ask the user at first boot if he wishes to use tasksel,
> dselect, aptitude or none-of-the-above, instead of going just tasksel
> and dselect...
Maybe we should look at a current install of debian before posting to
-devel.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Descri
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200, Robert Lemmen wrote:
> please do! dselect (whil ebeing verty simple and functional) has the
> most counter-intuitive user interface i have seen. the day i
> discovered aptitude and got rid of dselect meant a big step forward
> for my persoanl debian ex
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 06:18:58PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Aptitude is nice power tool for dealing with 6000+ packages (or
> whatever it is now)
try twice that:
$ apt-cache search .\* | wc -l
12204
--
gram, who wonders if this could be getting out of hand
signature.asc
Description: Di
On 2003-10-03, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I see. It's a lot simpler, from the point of view of maintainability,
> to have a single user's manual for both offline and online perusal.
>
> One nice way to make this less of an issue would be to rewrite the
> documentation in a str
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 02:07:00PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > The way this garbage collection is implemented is one of the main
> > dislikes I have about aptitude. Aptitude contains a database with
> > packages that have been installed through aptitude; as such, it contains
> > no information
Ervin Hearn III dijo [Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400]:
> > > > And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
> > > >well replace dselect as the recommended method.
> > >
> > > Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
> > > and therefore easier for new people to u
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 11:25:20PM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm also one of dselect haters. I find it difficult to learn in
> the way vi is: the keystrokes are so surprising and esoteric that
> I'm having hard time even reading the help about those keystrokes.
> For me, vi was worth learn
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400, Ervin Hearn III wrote:
> > > Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
> > > and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
> > Easier for new people to use?!?
> > /me rolls off chair laughing.
> > I sincerely hope the ":-P"
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 10:13:36AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Or, alternatively, this was the only crappy NMU that was noticed while
> quite a few others were made against ancient packages with inactive
> maintainers who didn't notice or didn't care. I'm not terribly
> interested in going throu
Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Or, alternatively, this was the only crappy NMU that was noticed while
> quite a few others were made against ancient packages with inactive
> maintainers who didn't notice or didn't care. I'm not terribly
> interested in going through all the NMUs done
On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 17:20:11 +0200, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 02-Oct-03, 21:59 (CDT), Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It will never be off by default while I am a maintainer of the package,
>> unless someone gets me to change my mind (which I don't think is
>> likely; I already thou
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 09:53:33AM -0500, Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> On 02-Oct-03, 21:59 (CDT), Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The Users Manual starts with a section on the non-interactive interface.
> > > Huh?
> >
> > I suppose the command-line in
On 03-Oct-03, 10:49 (CDT), Craig Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve Greenland wrote:
>
> > You might consider including a default filter so that the only
> > candidates for automatic removal begin with 'lib' and don't end with
> > '-dev'.
>
> This seems rather silly. The whole point of t
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 06:34:29PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> Op vr 03-10-2003, om 04:59 schreef Daniel Burrows:
> > In most cases, the garbage collection should operate without you
> > needing to know about it. (the increasing prevalence of meta-packages
> >
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> The way this garbage collection is implemented is one of the main
> dislikes I have about aptitude. Aptitude contains a database with
> packages that have been installed through aptitude; as such, it contains
> no information on packages that were installed through a diffe
Op vr 03-10-2003, om 04:59 schreef Daniel Burrows:
> > Figuring out how to tell aptitude not to automatically delete "unused"
> > packages
> > required reading the User Manual while knowing that this was an issue.
> >
> > This is on by default, and the information about marking a package
> > "man
Steve Greenland wrote:
> You might consider including a default filter so that the only
> candidates for automatic removal begin with 'lib' and don't end with
> '-dev'.
This seems rather silly. The whole point of this feature is to
distinguish those packages that you manually requested from those
On 02-Oct-03, 21:59 (CDT), Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The Users Manual starts with a section on the non-interactive interface.
> > Huh?
>
> I suppose the command-line interface could be documented later, but
> it's usually documented earlier. Or are you objecting to the odd
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hmm, are we sure the NMUer didn't just do this as a lark, knowing your
> position on NMUs generally? ;)
Considering he uploaded like three versions I tend to doubt it.
> Certainly, the possibility is there that this particular NMU would not
> have hap
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney arranged a set of bits
into the following:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200, Robert Lemmen wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > > Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:11:52PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400, Ervin Hearn III wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:50:09AM -0700, Chris Jantzen wrote:
> > >
> > > Easier for new people to use?!?
> > >
> > > /me rolls off chair laughing.
> > >
> >
* Jamin W. Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031002 22:18]:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400, Ervin Hearn III wrote:
> > Quite seriously, I prefer using dselect... the main complaint I've
> > heard from new users is being able to search for a specific package
> > quickly. As soon as I teach th
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 11:09:29PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:59:58PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:09:16PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:59:58PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:09:16PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > was heard to say:
> > > I also don't think it is a part
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:09:16PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > I also don't think it is a particularly good idea for aptitude to
> > default to installing suggests since it will likely bloat syste
As I indicated in a recent message, I don't currently have time to
get aptitude working the way I'd like. Please consider this a public
call for a codeveloper -- you can "interview" by submitting working
patches for one of the issues below, particularly the ones I've outlined
a fix for. (aptitu
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:38:18PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:22:34PM +0100, Rob Bradford wrote:
> > be fun though. I'm planning to only support upgrades from potato and
> > woody. So that means i can remove all the cruft about upgrading from
>
> I was under the impr
Hi,
aptitude has a lot of problems that I don't have enough time to fix,
but I would appreciate it if people would confine themselves to the
facts when criticizing it.
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 05:57:58AM +0100, Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> I think it's fair to say that we're not going to reach the following
> state within 14 days unless a miracle, or a hell of a lot of work
> happens:
I don't know about anyone else, but if we man
Well, aptitude is certainly better than it used to be.
At least now it's keystroke-compatible with dselect. I still find it
less useful though. :-P
--
Although aptitude uses only one fewer line of screen space for the
list of packages, somehow it manages to have less information. The
absence o
On 02-Oct-03, 16:10 (CDT), Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From what I have heard about aptitude it has the fun side effect of
> removing packages that it thinks you didn't purposely install.
[and]
> Further, if recommends/suggests are on how does a user manage to only
> install standard
Chris Cheney wrote:
> From what I have heard about aptitude it has the fun side effect of
> removing packages that it thinks you didn't purposely install.
After telling you it will and waiting for you to look over the list of
changes, sure. I have never seen this be a problem. It will also not
aff
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:36:50AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > It's been noted several times that the end of the 0-day NMU period was
> > accompanied by a marked reversal in the RC bug graph. I think it's time
> > for a group debriefing of this exp
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200, Robert Lemmen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
> > and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
>
> please do! dselect (whil ebeing v
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
> >well replace dselect as the recommended method.
>
> Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
> and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
What's
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400, Ervin Hearn III wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:50:09AM -0700, Chris Jantzen wrote:
> >
> > Easier for new people to use?!?
> >
> > /me rolls off chair laughing.
> >
> > I sincerely hope the ":-P" means you are using sarcasm.
> >
>
> Quite seriousl
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:50:09AM -0700, Chris Jantzen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > > And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
> > >well replace dselect as the recommended method.
> >
> > Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
> and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
please do! dselect (whil ebeing verty simple and functional) has the
most counter-intuitive user interface
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
> >well replace dselect as the recommended method.
>
> Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
> and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
Easier
> And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
>well replace dselect as the recommended method.
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:22:34PM +0100, Rob Bradford wrote:
> be fun though. I'm planning to only support upgrades from potato and
> woody. So that means i can remove all the cruft about upgrading from
I was under the impression (don't ask me how; perhaps my mind came up with
it on it's own) tha
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> It's been noted several times that the end of the 0-day NMU period was
> accompanied by a marked reversal in the RC bug graph. I think it's time
> for a group debriefing of this experience. I was pleasantly surprised
> to have not heard of a single co
On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 05:57, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> So "Where are we now?" Having played with d-i some and kept a watchful
> eye on the release-critical list, I guess we're currently at the
> "September 15th" dateline which puts us roughly 14 days behind schedule.
And I havent even started
I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
time). From what Colin Watson mentioned to me earlier today there are
some other packages that are holding KDE out as well so hopefully they
are resolved by the
Am Do, den 02.10.2003 schrieb Martin Michlmayr um 07:42:
> * Debian-Installer HOWTO Sebastian Ley
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/debian-devel-announce-200309/msg7.html
During the last debcamp we took the opportunity to introduce some last
major changes which leaves
On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 06:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 05:57:58AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
>
> > > * September 1st
>
> > > HOWTO use debian-installer to install sarge posted to
> > > -devel-announce (volunteers appreciated)
>
> > Ah yes, what
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 05:57:58AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > * September 1st
> > HOWTO use debian-installer to install sarge posted to
> > -devel-announce (volunteers appreciated)
> Ah yes, what a wonderful read that was ... no, wait, this never
> happened
* Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-10-02 05:57]:
> > HOWTO use debian-installer to install sarge posted to
> > -devel-announce (volunteers appreciated)
> >
> Ah yes, what a wonderful read that was ... no, wait, this never
> happened.
* Debian-Installer HO
I was interested how we're doing according to AJ's original timetable,
so had a read and see how we're doing given we've just passed the third
date milestone...
This is given "without comment", that is I'm not trying to start a
flamewar here.
On Tue, 2003-08-19 at 07:49, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 17:12:42 +0200
cobaco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> KDE is not mission critical in the sense that when a user's KDE-instance
> crashes the KDE-instances of the other users will continue to run. Just
> like when -in that same organization with some thousands of X terminals-
> 1 X
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:37:20AM +0200, Te?filo Ruiz Su?rez wrote:
> El 22-ago-2003 a las 10:03:47, Adrian von Bidder escribi?:
> > And what about postfix? 2.0 is in unstable quite a while and works ok. I
> > guess
> > it will make it to sarge.
> So, what do you think, since you wear the Postfi
El 22-ago-2003 a las 10:03:47, Adrian von Bidder escribió:
Content-Description: signed data
> On Wednesday 20 August 2003 09:49, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
>
> > ... what KDE, gcc, X,
> > gnome versions will be in sarge?
>
> And what about postfix? 2.0 is in unstable quite a while and works ok. I
1 - 100 of 184 matches
Mail list logo
