On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 08:02:58AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
| On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 12:54:08AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
| > The thing is that a machine that can't load the correct kernel can be
easily
| > fixed, just use another machine to dd a kernel to a floppy.
|
| You really need th
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 08:02:58AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 12:54:08AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > The thing is that a machine that can't load the correct kernel can be
> > easily
> > fixed, just use another machine to dd a kernel to a floppy.
>
> You really nee
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 12:54:08AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> The thing is that a machine that can't load the correct kernel can be easily
> fixed, just use another machine to dd a kernel to a floppy.
You really need the kernel you have compiled for your machine,
not just any kernel.
Hamish
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 07:55:04AM -0700 , John Galt wrote:
> Of course, the .conf in lilo.conf implies that packages really shouldn't
> futz with it without warning. I really don't remember a exception in
yes. though lilo.conf is always autogenerated - either by boot floppies or
by liloconfig (s
On Thursday 11 January 2001 01:55, John Galt wrote:
> >> > 1) This situation does not stop a running machine from working, it
> >> > will only stop it from booting.
> >>
> >> Oh, well, as long as THAT'S all it is...
> >
> >The thing is that a machine that can't load the correct kernel can be
> > e
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001, Russell Coker wrote:
>On Wednesday 10 January 2001 03:23, Branden Robinson wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 02:34:39AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
>> > 1) This situation does not stop a running machine from working, it will
>> > only stop it from booting.
>>
>> Oh, well, as
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 12:54:08AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> From: Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
debian-devel@lists.debian.org
This was CC'ed to me why, exactly?
--
G. Branden Robinson | Religion is something left over fr
On Wednesday 10 January 2001 03:23, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 02:34:39AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > 1) This situation does not stop a running machine from working, it will
> > only stop it from booting.
>
> Oh, well, as long as THAT'S all it is...
The thing is that a
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 02:34:39AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
| I don't think that unstable should be limited to Debian developers, but I
| think that it should be restricted to discourage people who aren't reading
| debian-devel. What if we setup the servers to use a different random
| passwo
Today, Mark Mealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > 1) This situation does not stop a running machine from working, it
>> > will only stop it from booting.
>> Oh, well, as long as THAT'S all it is...
> Heh, it's not like you're rebooting a Linux box more than one a year
> anyway
Only applies
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 11:23:08AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 02:34:39AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > 1) This situation does not stop a running machine from working, it will
> > only
> > stop it from booting.
>
> Oh, well, as long as THAT'S all it is...
Heh, it
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 02:34:39AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> 1) This situation does not stop a running machine from working, it will only
> stop it from booting.
Oh, well, as long as THAT'S all it is...
--
G. Branden Robinson | Experience should teach us to be most on
Debian
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 02:34:39AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> But I think that there is some merit to having discouragement towards running
> unstable on production machines. I've been getting flamed immensely recently
> about my lilo package that over-wrote lilo.conf incorrectly. Even thou
On Tuesday 09 January 2001 03:17, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> 5) A Debian Developer will never knowingly run a production server on
> "unstable" and will never encourage a non-developer to run "unstable".
I understand that people don't like being told what to do and agree that it
isn't the place of
** On Jan 09, Marcin Owsiany scribbled:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 08:03:40PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > How can you be on the keyring while not having an account on auric?
> > > Either you are a developer and you have both, or you are not a developer
> > > and you have neither.
> >
> > Pro
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 08:03:40PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > How can you be on the keyring while not having an account on auric?
> > Either you are a developer and you have both, or you are not a developer
> > and you have neither.
>
> Probably you can't. I don't know the NM process well en
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 09:59:39AM +0100, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> You wrote:
>
> > If you're in the keyring but have no account you can upload
> > through an upload queue. There are a few of those around the world.
> > This adds probably 1 day to the processing time.
>
> How can you be on the keyr
Hi Hamish!
You wrote:
> If you're in the keyring but have no account you can upload
> through an upload queue. There are a few of those around the world.
> This adds probably 1 day to the processing time.
How can you be on the keyring while not having an account on auric?
Either you are a develo
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 08:25:53AM -0800, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:17:42AM -0600, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> > "waiting for DAM approval, whenever that is supposed to happen" (emphasis
> > on the "supposed to happen")
>
> No offense to the DAM, but I share Eray's pedicament
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 11:23:05AM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> What I'm trying to say is that if you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that
> you would benefit the project, you will be accepted.
All I stated was that it was less efficient for many people to do work
through sponsors. Well, let's do a
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 09:52:25PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
>
> >...
> > 5) A Debian Developer will never knowingly run a production server on
> > "unstable" and will never encourage a non-developer to run "unstable".
> >...
>
> Tou want to forbid tha
Sullivan To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]cc: (bcc: Vince
Mulhollon/Brookfield/N
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
>...
> 5) A Debian Developer will never knowingly run a production server on
> "unstable" and will never encourage a non-developer to run "unstable".
>...
Tou want to forbid that:
- I run unstable on a production server even if I know what I'm doing
- I
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Marek Habersack wrote:
> Same for me... My application was accepted in September, I applied in June -
> the only thing missing is the account. I have 8 packages waiting to be
> uploaded, one more to overtake from the current maintainer (he could/would
> sponsor it, but I prefer
On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 16:17:42 Vince Mulhollon wrote:
>
> 5) A Debian Developer will never knowingly run a production server
> on
> "unstable" and will never encourage a non-developer to run
> "unstable".
For the record I object to any Code of Condust that includes this
clause.
btw I'm a Ham opera
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 11:23:05AM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> I created my pgp key on Dec. 27, 1997. 2 weeks later, I was a
> developer. Granted, this was before the closing, and the reorganization, but
> even for that time frame, that was fast.
>
> What I'm trying to say is that if you prove be
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 08:54:07AM -0800, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
| A case where it might make sense to encourage someone to run unstable
| is if [...] the developer thinks that they are resonably competant.
I think that this is the key. If the user is competent enough there
is no harm suggesting to
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Marek Habersack wrote:
> > Note that I did not flaunt my deeds to the new maintainer team. My nightly
> neither do I do that... It's just that I _really_ want to work and
> contribute to Debian and being a de-facto developer but not _Debian_
> developer my contributions are ve
** On Jan 08, Adam Heath scribbled:
[snip]
> > Hmm... http://debian.vip.net.pl/caudium,
> > http://debian.vip.net.pl/caudium-unstable - does that prove _anything_ about
> > me? I guess not and the NM process is what there's needed to confirm whether
> > the applicant can do anything good for the pr
"Vince Mulhollon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Now that you and Eray have publically complained about the team's slowness,
>that means that after you complete the NM process, you both be joining the
>NM team to help your fellow developers get processed quicker, right?
>
>I'm not being sarcastic, my
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Marek Habersack wrote:
> ** On Jan 08, Adam Heath scribbled:
> > On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, it took me about a year's wait also.
> >
> > I created my pgp key on Dec. 27, 1997. 2 weeks later, I was a
> > developer. Granted, this was before the
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:17:42AM -0600, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> Some Eray quotes, one paragraph of advice for Eray, and a possibly useful
> idea at the end for everyone.
I think you are grossly overestimating Eray's desire to work well with
others, his ability to contribute anything of substanc
** On Jan 08, Adam Heath scribbled:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
>
> > Yes, it took me about a year's wait also.
>
> I created my pgp key on Dec. 27, 1997. 2 weeks later, I was a
> developer. Granted, this was before the closing, and the reorganization, but
> even for that time
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> Agreed. Bitching about problems in unstable is bad. Running unstable
> is not necessarily evil.
Just to make sure everyone understands, bitching about unstable bugs is
bad. Finding and reporting unstable bugs is ok.
BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK
Versio
On 20010108T084511-0800, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> The DAM is quite busy, and I sympathize with him. However, once
> allowed to I would voulenteer to aid him with his duties to expedite
> the processes.
I doubt that a fresh developer would be allowed to take on such a
vulnerable position as the DAM.
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> Yes, it took me about a year's wait also.
I created my pgp key on Dec. 27, 1997. 2 weeks later, I was a
developer. Granted, this was before the closing, and the reorganization, but
even for that time frame, that was fast.
What I'm trying to say is t
** On Jan 08, Aaron Lehmann scribbled:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:35:51AM -0600, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> > Now that you and Eray have publically complained about the team's slowness,
> > that means that after you complete the NM process, you both be joining the
> > NM team to help your fellow de
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 06:47:01PM +0200, Yotam wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:17:42AM -0600, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> > 5) A Debian Developer will never knowingly run a production server on
> > "unstable" and will never encourage a non-developer to run "unstable"
>
> Why shouldn't a develope
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:17:42AM -0600, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> 5) A Debian Developer will never knowingly run a production server on
> "unstable" and will never encourage a non-developer to run "unstable"
Why shouldn't a developer encourage an ordinary user to run unstable?
* It would speed up
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:35:51AM -0600, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> Now that you and Eray have publically complained about the team's slowness,
> that means that after you complete the NM process, you both be joining the
> NM team to help your fellow developers get processed quicker, right?
>
> I'm
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:17:42AM -0600, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> 5) A Debian Developer will never knowingly run a production server on
> "unstable" and will never encourage a non-developer to run "unstable".
I don't see how this affects the Debian community. If anything, it
would result in more
01/08/2001 Fax to:
10:25 AM
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:17:42AM -0600, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> "waiting for DAM approval, whenever that is supposed to happen" (emphasis
> on the "supposed to happen")
No offense to the DAM, but I share Eray's pedicament and feel that I
could definately contribute more effectively if I had th
Some Eray quotes, one paragraph of advice for Eray, and a possibly useful
idea at the end for everyone.
"Non-regulation is a false claim"
"His actions are simply not tolerable"
"I'd be greatly surprised if anybody told me that developers have the right
to swear publicly in an outburst of adolesc
44 matches
Mail list logo
