Exim can provide UUCP capabilities. It cannot do bang path routing. I doubt
that anyone is using that though.
--
> From: John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Hamm: Exim + Chos standard?
> Date: Saturday,
> I don't see your point, and you seem to have missed mine.
My point is that there's no need for a package with no user-level
functionality of its own, such as a library, to have a priority
of its own.
If an Important package such as 'at' depends on libelf0 for whatever
dubious reason, libelf0 mi
This is from Linux kernel, and it sounds to me, that there might be
versions that we can distribute with Debian.
Mike
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 20:05:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAI
Alexander Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (I'd vote for exim if uucp is guaranteed to work)
Ok, so what are the arguments for exim over qmail (at least why do you
prefer it?)
I've heard arguments for qmail and exim over sendmail.
--
Rob
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the
Chiming in here, I'm going to be gone until the 23rd, camping on the outer
banks of North Carolina.
If any of my packages blow up, don't hesitate to release non-maintaner
versions. :-)
--
see shy jo
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi,
I have another policy issue which is related to topic 11 (see below).
The current layout of Info entries in the main Info menu (in the file
/usr/info/dir) looks rather messy. I found the following "descrepencies":
- not all packages are placed in an ap
I have volunteered to become maintainer of this package, which is currently
orphaned.
I don't regard myself as particularly well qualified, so if there is anyone
else interested in maintaining it, please let me know.
--
Oliver Elphick[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Isle of Wight
On Jun 15, Mark Baker wrote
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Erv Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > perl: warning: Setting locale failed.
> > perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings:
> > LC_ALL = (unset),
> > LANG = "us"
> > are supported and ins
I recently walked a friend through installing dunc-2.1 on a
slackware box (from the debian package). The first thing we both
noticed was how easy it is to install debian software on
non-debian systems[1]. The second thing we noticed was the the
version of dialog (although the upstream version was
On 16 Jun 1997, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> Ofcourse there also needs to be a file (LocalIP with sendmail) to define
> IP ranges that may use your SMTP host as a relay - for customers that
> use your host as smarthost (Eudora, pegasus, netscape, sendmail null
> clients etc).
Well, exim certai
Hi!
Is anybody already working on a debian package containing the selfhtml
manual? This is a real great description of the HTML tags in German
language. If not I'll make a package.
I'll upload my first debian package (doc-linux-de) in the next days. Bug
reports are welcome ;-).
cu, Marco
On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Dale Scheetz wrote:
[snip]
> It seems to me that packages of any priority level should not be dependent
> upon packages of lower priority.
I totally agree to this. AFAIK, the reason for the "priorities" is that
the users get "good defaults" in dselect. Thus, if someone wants
On 15 Jun 1997, Rob Browning wrote:
> Alexander Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > (I'd vote for exim if uucp is guaranteed to work)
>
> Ok, so what are the arguments for exim over qmail (at least why do you
> prefer it?)
>
> I've heard arguments for qmail and exim over sendmail.
qmail is
> On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Dale Scheetz wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > It seems to me that packages of any priority level should not be dependent
> > upon packages of lower priority.
>
> I totally agree to this.
Yes, I noticed this myself too (in libg++272). I didn't quite
know what to do with it at the time
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>TOPIC 4: editor/pager policy
> What is the benefit of /usr/bin/sensible-{editor,pager}?
> Why don't we just default to EDITOR=/usr/bin/vi and PAGER=/usr/bin/more
> if both variables are unset? (auch, don't beat me)
Tim Cutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
> I am, for example,
> irritated that qmail's forwarding file is called .qmail. What was the
> point of that? Does changing the name from .forward to .qmail really
> improve security?
[snip]
> qmail does not understand anything but
> the most simpl
If you (debian developper) need a libc6 system to compile your
packages on, but feel you are unable to upgrade your system
to libc6, I can give you an account on my system. (The connection
with the internet is only about 6kByte/second (max), so
it may not be very usefull for big packages).
I'll s
On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Mark Baker wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> David Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >>TOPIC 4: editor/pager policy
> > What is the benefit of /usr/bin/sensible-{editor,pager}?
> > Why don't we just default to EDITOR=/usr/bin/vi and PAGER=/usr/bin/more
>
On 15 Jun 1997, Rob Browning wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Baker) writes:
>
> > Would programs _have_ to use this library, or is implementing the same thing
> > in acceptable? The latter has problems in that it forces us to keep the same
> > method, but I don't want to see lots of #ifdef debia
On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> > > All packages that provide HTML documentation should register these
> > > documents to the menu system, too. Check out section section 4.1,
> > > `Web
> > > servers and applications' for details.
> >
> > Is that as well as registering w
Tim Cutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> qmail is supposed to be more secure. Theoretically, exim's design
> allegedly means there might be some security issues, but none have
> been found yet. There has been argument about this ad nauseam on
> the exim-users mailing list.
qmail also has stronger
Stephen Zander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Further in my attempts to setup up a Thinkpad 760CD...
>
> When attempting to load the ibmtr_cs.o mdules under the standard
> 2.0.30 kernel, I get the folliowing unresolved symbols.
>
> netif_rx_R9117ffb8
> dev_alloc_skb_R24e337ab
> dev_kfree_skb_R7a6
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> Two packages in the list of "important" refused to install because they
> declared (correctly) their dependence upon packages of lower priority.
>
> at depends on libelf0 priority: optional
>
Hello all.
Some time ago there was a posting on the list stating that typical Debian
user is of SysAdmin type. The guy received a lot of negative responses and
as a result we have now dotfile-generator in the distribution as our
statement of being friendly to novices. Good thing, but what is Debia
> On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> >
> > > > All packages that provide HTML documentation should register these
> > > > documents to the menu system, too. Check out section section 4.1,
> > > > `Web
> > > > servers and applications' for details.
> > >
> > > Is that as wel
On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>
> On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > Two packages in the list of "important" refused to install because they
> > declared (correctly) their dependence upon packages of lower priority.
> >
> > at
Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This really is an _excellent_ idea! So, we just need a volunteer to
> implement and maintain this "upstream library". (The packaging for Debian
> should not be a problem.)
Ideally we could provide C, perl, python, etc versions of the code.
--
Rob
>
> Alex Yukhimets:
> > Debian is the effort of a large number of developers and primararily
> > *for* developers.
>
> I disagree. I think Debian is for anyone who wants a good Linux
> system, and who doesn't need much non-free software.
^^^
That
Hello,
I just saw this post in comp.os.linux.x. I think this is enough reason to
upgrade bash from 2.00 to 2.01. When will this happen?
Remco
On 16 Jun ,[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Greg DeFreitas") wrote about
Re: bash upgrade killed Netscape shelling...:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Baker) wrote on 15.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > perl: warning: Setting locale failed.
> > perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings:
> > LC_ALL = (unset),
> > LANG = "us"
> > are supported and installed on your system.
> > perl: warning
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Alan Dorman) wrote on 15.06.97 in <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>:
> My two personal reservations:
>
> 1) I think Daniel J. Bernstein (qmail's author) doesn't seem to know
> how to have a technical discussion without seeming as if he's tacking
> an implicit "you stupid idiot" on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Miquel van Smoorenburg) wrote on 16.06.97 in <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Kai Henningsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [exim]
> >I also hope to figure out how to get exim to have a customer-configurable
> >spam block when acting as MX for those custo
Brian Mays wrote:
> This is caused by an incompatibility between the pcmcia modules and
> the kernel's configuration. I've created new packages that fix this
> problem (pcmcia-cs and pcmcia-modules-2.0.30-7, both version 2.9.6-1)
> that currently are waiting to be included in the distribution. I
On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:
>
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >
> > On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > > Two packages in the list of "important" refused to install because they
> > > declared (correctly) their dep
On Mon, 16 Jun 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just saw this post in comp.os.linux.x. I think this is enough reason to
> upgrade bash from 2.00 to 2.01. When will this happen?
Guy Maor is the current maintainer of the "bash" package. However, he told
us that he is offline for about
On 16 Jun 1997, Rob Browning wrote:
> Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > This really is an _excellent_ idea! So, we just need a volunteer to
> > implement and maintain this "upstream library". (The packaging for Debian
> > should not be a problem.)
>
> Ideally we could provide C
On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, joost witteveen wrote:
[snip]
> > I'm somehow confused now. Is registering to "dwww" any different from the
> > "menu" system? Joost, perhaps you can give use some hints here (I think
> > Jim is offline now).
>
> It used to be the same, and that's why I also asked Jim about t
Hi,
With the advent of perl 5.004, the package CGI-modules is now
obsolete (all the libraries are present in the new Perl package).
It should be therefore removed from hamm. Could the powers
that be take care of this please?
manoj,
ex-maintainer of CGI-modules
--
"In
Hi,
On debian-user, I noticed that apparently one does not need to
carry around /boot/psdatabase, since ps can read the information from
System.map. Is there anything at all that needs psdatabase?
If there is no other reason to keep psdatabase, I'll modify
kernel-package not t
On 15 Jun 1997, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote:
> I have another policy issue which is related to topic 11 (see below).
>
> The current layout of Info entries in the main Info menu (in the file
> /usr/info/dir) looks rather messy. I found the following "descrepencies":
>
> - not all packages are p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > So IMHO you should have added to your initial list of packages the ones on
> > which they depend, until all dependencies are satisfied. dselect does this
> > automatically. If you don't like it, it is supposed to be done by hand.
>
> If this is true then ther
On 16 Jun 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With the advent of perl 5.004, the package CGI-modules is now
> obsolete (all the libraries are present in the new Perl package).
>
> It should be therefore removed from hamm. Could the powers
> that be take care of this please?
Gu
>
> TOPIC 8: packages have to specify their source urls
> ---
> STATUS: DISCUSSION
>
In addition to what you propose below, I think that "dpkg -I" should be
concerned with some of that info. Specifically, three important fields are
missing:
A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 16 Jun 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> With the advent of perl 5.004, the package CGI-modules is now
> obsolete (all the libraries are present in the new Perl package).
>
> It should be therefore removed from hamm. Could the powers
> that be ta
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> TOPIC 7: new definition of ``free software''
This is only about the "main" section.
In addition to that, I wonder why we are supporting this packages in the
`contrib' section:
* whose copyright permission n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> TOPIC 11: policy about including documentation
>
> The current policy concerning docs is:
>
> - HTML is the preferred format
> - if the package includes docs than can be converted into HTML,
>th
Hello!
# dpkg-gencontrol
dpkg-gencontrol: failure: chown new files list file: Illegal seek
I can't figure out what dpkg-gencontrol want to tell me 8-(
Even old packages which build pretty fine some weeks ago, fails this
way. As there is no verbose option, I don't know where I have to look
8-((
Brian Mays wrote:
> If anyone needs these packages now, before they can be included into
> the distribution, send me a message and I can e-mail them using either
> MIME encoding or uuencode.
Could I ftp copy from somehwere? My fire-wall gets sensetive about large
mailings
Stephen
---
"Normality
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The current structure (of packages installed on my system) is:
>
> Miscellaneous
> Development
> Document Preparation
> Information
> Emacs
> Programming
> teTeX
>
Christian Leutloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> # dpkg-gencontrol
> dpkg-gencontrol: failure: chown new files list file: Illegal seek
>
> I can't figure out what dpkg-gencontrol want to tell me 8-(
That's a bug, you have to use dpkg-dev from development.
Sven
--
Sven Rudolph <[EMAIL P
> dpkg-gencontrol: failure: chown new files list file: Illegal seek
It means that you don't have a utmp entry for that shell. Upgrade to
a newer dpkg-dev (probably from unstable) for a version that just
whines about the lack of utmp entry, instead of actually breaking...
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM
> The problem of having both libc5 and libc6 run-time libraries is minor,
> the main one is that those stuck with libc5-dev cannot use other
> newly-available versions of *libraries* from hamm.
How do you mean? You can install the *libraries* just fine, it's just
the development versions that fai
Everything I know about file locking[1], I've learned from the short
chapter on it in "Beginning Linux Programming" (WROX Press), part of a
chapter that I've only skimmed in "UNIX Systems Programming for
SYSVr4" (O'Reilly), and from the manual pages to `fcntl', `flock',
`lockf', `open', and `lockf
I cannot agree more. We should definatly add these fields to the
.deb package format! This will involve a bit of work, but will be
VERY worth it. No more licensing surprises, for instance.
-Erik
--
Erik B. Andersen Web:http://www.inconnect.com/~andersen/
email: [EMA
54 matches
Mail list logo
