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
43 matches
Mail list logo
