On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:54:40PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> I don't know. Call me an optimist, but I seem to be hearing a rough
> consensus.
Where? Branden seems to believe that anything that Debian packages is
software, for the purposes of the DFSG. A number of people would argue
that small,
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 23:54, David Starner wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:20:28PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > Also consider that pulling gcc from main would fracture the project; it
> > would become literally impossible to build a completely free OS, given
> > that the whole ball of wax wou
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 19:36, Adam Heath wrote:
> 54 days with of Packages(sid/main/i386) gives 900k of xdeltas.
Thanks for the info. I think that keeping 54 days of diffs (or xdeltas)
is unnecessary -- most of the benefit is accrued by keeping only 20 days
or so. But I need real stats on frequen
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 00:05, David Starner wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:54:40PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > I don't know. Call me an optimist, but I seem to be hearing a rough
> > consensus.
>
> Where? Branden seems to believe that anything that Debian packages is
> software, for the pu
Le Lundi 8 Avril 2002 05:08, David Starner a écrit :
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:26:48PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > So the FDL is a free license because it's inconvenient for it to be
> > > not?
> >
> > No, they're saying that a vast majority of programs which are widely
> > considered free
At 19:35 -0400 07 Apr 2002, JPS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> me to raise my awareness!). How about prefacing the scripts in
> `/etc/init.d' with something along the lines of:
>
> if [ ! $EUID == 0 ]; then
> echo "Sorry, this script must run with root privileges."
> if
If
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:27:40AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines".
Yes, and since Debian is 100% Free Software, that applies to everything
in Debian.
In any case, I don't see why an invariant rant about the evils of
Microsoft-extended Kerbeous (fo
$EUID is a bash-ism; you'd need to run "id" instead.
Also, the echo should include the name of the script...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Craig Brozefsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> me. I did not intend to use the Closed: syntax in the changelog, but
> instead sent email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with close BUGID as
> described in my copy of bug-maint-mailcontrol.txt which I guess is out
> of date and I should have paid closer attenti
This one time, at band camp, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines". IMHO we ave to create a
>DFDG, "Debian Free Documentation Guidelines".
I wrote this up last night after getting fed up with this thread, then
modified it this morning after reading the thread on
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:08:53PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:26:48PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > So the FDL is a free license because it's inconvenient for it to
> > > be not?
> >
> > No, they're saying that a vast majority of programs which are widely
> > cons
debian-devel:您好!
互联网从无到有，在短短的几年时间里迅速发展壮大，各大网站也由开始的大把大把烧钱，到现在逐步走向
成熟，一夜之间，我们发现，现在网上有用的免费资源已经少的可怜了。各大门户网站纷纷推出了收费服务，
收费电子邮件，收费主页空间，收费注册搜索引擎，其实这也无可厚非，网站要生存，就要有盈利，但我们网
民该怎么办呢？面对昂贵的上网费用已经是捉襟见肘了，再想去享受那些优质（收费）服务就更难了，因此，
我们普通网民也要学会在网上来养活自己，传统的网络广告商也不会再轻易的给你发来支票了。现在，国外最
火的网上赚钱模式MLM（多层次信息网络营销MULTI-LEVEL M
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 04:01:55PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> you're not allowed to change the license or the author's name of a
> GPL-licensed program so, by your "strictly literal reading of the DFSG"
> that makes the GPL non-free.
True. But by long tradition and, as you say, common sense, th
On Sun, 07 Apr 2002, JPS wrote:
> `/etc/init.d'. Every once in a while I attempt to execute one of these
> scripts while logged in as a non-root user. For example, I might type
...
The problem is, the initscript should actually check if it has the rights it
needs, if it is to do what you want...
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:27:40AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines". IMHO we ave to create a
> DFDG, "Debian Free Documentation Guidelines".
Why? What freedoms are important for software that aren't for documentation?
If the GFDL fails the DFSG, I'
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:36:17AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Apr 2002, JPS wrote:
> > `/etc/init.d'. Every once in a while I attempt to execute one of these
> > scripts while logged in as a non-root user. For example, I might type
> ...
>
> The problem is, the initscri
Joe Drew wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 15:30, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > However, I still cannot find a request for help with setting up a
> > registration site/form on this list, neither including nor excluding
> > specs, searching from November 2001 until now.
>
> You were looking in the wrong s
Am 7.04.02 um 16:53:16 schrieb Jason Gunthorpe:
> Bzzt, I accepted the parts of your patches that met my criterea and asked
> you to rework the rest, you never did, so big surprise that it is
> incomplete.
Oh, I'm very sorry that I didn't read your mind correctly.
The problem is I really don't k
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 07:25:55PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Sending this bug report to debian-devel so that hopefully the maintainer
> of this package will see it.
>
> Please rename your package.
Yes, my fault. I renamed it to "libxbase" and just uploaded it again.
Sorry for any trouble I
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:01:16AM +0200, Otto Wyss wrote:
> The best would be if "man would bring up a list of man pages
> with a choose facility when more than one page exists. Maybe this change
> in behavior could be set through an environment variable.
No need. Try 'man -a '.
Also, when more
>> > What does this package do, that dsniff's 'arpspoof' doesn't ?
>> I know, but I'd like to have it in Debian for the users to be able to
>> choose the one the see fit, as we do in editors, window-managers...
>> I think you know what I mean :-)
I'll consolidate this opinion : last time I reall
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 05:57:43PM -0500, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> There are an ever growing number of packages that make use of the GNU Free
> Documentation License. Isn't it about time to put a copy of this license
> into the common reference area?
>
> Who should I talk to about this?
Please check
Does rameau (arm autobuilder) use outdated mirror, or does not source
build depends on all autobuilders work as expected.
Solfege depends on python-gnome, and python-gnome depends on
python-gdk-imlib, but the build log say:
Checking for source dependency conflicts...
/usr/bin/sudo /usr/bin/apt-
I realize this is not strictly debian development question, I am
looking for any hints related to how it all works (or doesn't work)
together (kernel ide drivers, VIA MB, IRQs). I did found some
indications that ide was quite broken sometime early in 2.4 series but I
didn't find anything about wh
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jérôme Marant wrote:
> > I guess that the package will have to predepend on python, right?
> > So, unlike the current debconf usage, a debconf dependency is no
> > longer sufficient.
>
> No, pre-depending on python will not ensure that your package
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 02:09, Colin Watson wrote:
> I'm currently in the process of filing bugs on those packages in
> unstable that still depend on libpgsql2.1 rather than libpgsql2, or
> upgrading bugs to grave where they'd already been filed. Since the
> versions in woody all appear to be fine, I
* Emanuele Aina
| Stephen Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> criticò:
|
| > My principal objection to calling anything related to the Hurd
| > "production ready" is that THERE IS NO SUPPORT FOR BACKUP HARDWARE
| > OF ANY KIND. WTF? No tape, no CD or DVD burners, no USB, no
|
* Jeroen Dekkers
| It does also other things, like making distribution creation more
| flexible. I'm thinking of having a some kind of package file for every
| source package. That would include the current information and maybe a
| lot more things like URL of upstream, license, etc. This file wo
* Drew Parsons
| On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 02:27:18PM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
| > I don't want to start a flame war, I just want a quick opinion.
| > Two bug reports against libforms0.88 want me to correct the spelling of
| > "publically" for "publicly":
| >
| > >From WordNet (r) 1.6 [wn]
* Brian May
| On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 02:18:37AM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
| > I'm working on a hack for dpkg to allow equivalent functionality to rpm
| > triggers.
|
| What applications does this have?
Recompile bytecode files when installing a new version/variant of an
interpreter (emacs,
* martin f krafft
| also sprach Sebastien J. Gross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.03.28.1819 +0100]:
| > cvs-conf allows users to manage their configuration files using
| > CVS. On the server, a global configuration project is created and
| > each host is a part of the global configuration module.
The dillo and gpm packages are missing some binaries. The dillo
binary for ia64 was built on 2002-03-22, but is still missing from the
archive. The gpm binary for powerpc was built on 2002-03-23, but is
also missing from the archive.
Could someone have a look to find find out what happened.
-
Previously Mark Eichin wrote:
> google finds supersparrow 0.0.0 from Feb 2001 on supersparrow.org and
> sourceforge, and nothing more recent -- is there any life to it? it
> certainly sounds interesting...
That is Horms-versioning. He starts version numbers at 0 instead of
1 (which (almost) did c
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 12:05:45AM -0500, David Starner wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:54:40PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > I don't know. Call me an optimist, but I seem to be hearing a rough
> > consensus.
>
> [...] And you, and another group of people, see to think that Debian
> should
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:20:28PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> Given that gcc, binutils, and KDE are in main, it would seem that the
> status quo and the DFSG are in conflict, or the status quo and someone's
> interpretation of the DFSG are in conflict at least.
As far as I can see neither the g
Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Sun, 7 Apr 2002 13:48:51 +0200:
> Don't worry, ./ will be faster. There's nothing we can do about it... ;)
>
You can always ask them not to post it before the mirrors are ready,
not?
--
*=-+-__
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]: _ Ugh! Nio2f says something
Jeroen Dekkers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Of course it's nice of them that they help, but I still think it's
> wrong that the registration page is hosted on a server with non-free
> software and with a link to a site trying to sell non-free
> products. Certainly because we can make the registra
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 10:00, Tom Cato Amundsen wrote:
> Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies:
> python-gnome: Depends: python-gdk-imlib (>= 0.6.8-17) but it is not
> going to be installed
> E: Sorry, broken packages
>
> Other archs are ok.
>
> python-gdk-imlib 0.6.8-17 for
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-04-08
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: openca
Version : 0.8.1
Upstream Author : Multiple; see website.
* URL : http://www.OpenCA.org/
* License : "Apache-style" license
Description : Open Source Certification Aut
also sprach Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.04.07.1306 +0200]:
> It does not disable anything. If you had read the info file it states
> pretty clearly:
>
>All `,v' files are created read-only, and you should not change the
> permission of those files. The directories inside the r
Sayin Internet Kullanicisi,
Turkiye'de yayin yapanlar basta olmak uzere, Dunya'daki tum sifreli TV
kanallarini cozen ve basit bir TV kartiyla bu yayinlari bilgisayarinizdan size
izleme olanagi saglayan, sifre kirici programlarin kayitli oldugu,
DECODER CD (v2.0)" satisa sunulmustur (40 EURO +
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 02:44, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Since I had to use grep to find it in the mail, it was well hidden
> and I don't consider this a proper call for help like done by other
> people who actively seek for help and receive them. Personally, I
> don't wonder why only two people volun
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
JPS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There is something that has always bothered me about the scripts in
>`/etc/init.d'. Every once in a while I attempt to execute one of these
>scripts while logged in as a non-root user.
This is Unix. It gives you enough rope to hang y
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 11:33, Philip Blundell wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 10:00, Tom Cato Amundsen wrote:
> > Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies:
> > python-gnome: Depends: python-gdk-imlib (>= 0.6.8-17) but it is not
> > going to be installed
> > E: Sorry, broken package
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 10:15, Wilmer van der Gaast wrote:
> Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Sun, 7 Apr 2002 13:48:51 +0200:
> > Don't worry, ./ will be faster. There's nothing we can do about it... ;)
> >
> You can always ask them not to post it before the mirrors are ready,
> not?
>
Hah, it is their
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 12:53, Tom Cato Amundsen wrote:
> Just of curiosity, is the queue for the autobuilders available anywhere,
> either on the web or by logging into the machines?
Yes (kind of) - see http://auric.debian.org/~pb/shame/arm.html and
http://buildd.debian.org/stats/arm-all.txt
p.
Am Son, 2002-04-07 um 21.35 schrieb Matthias Klose:
> King "Leo (Martin Oberzalek)" writes:
> > Hello,
> >
> > it's not possible linking a C++ library compiled with g++-2.9x to a C++
> > application compiled with g++-3.0.
> >
> > We all no the reasons...
> >
> > My question is how I should handl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefan Hornburg (Racke)) cum veritate scripsit:
> > No, pre-depending on python will not ensure that your package's
> > config script has python available at preconfgiuration time.
>
> So we are really restricted to a fix set of packages at preconfiguration
> time ? Hmm, that's
Hi,
I've noticed that some reports around libmagick5 incompatibility
are floating around -bugs-dist.
It's unnerving considering that we are trying to release,
and apparently, a new upstream version has been uploaded today.
There needs to be some checking,
a. if the program runs
b. if the progr
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:24:34PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> kvdr masqmailxtell
As much as I like to have woody released soon, I'm quite confused
because I don't understand why masqmail has to go:
masqmail (- to 0.1.16-2)
* Maintainer: Debian QA Group
Previously Herbert Xu wrote:
> Quite the contrary. I think he makes a fine treasurer. However, there
> is an improtant difference between the treasurer and the DPL. If the
> treasurer runs amok, then the DPL can replace him.
Wrong, the DPL can not change the SPI board membership.
Wichert.
--
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:12:12AM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 02:09, Colin Watson wrote:
> > I'm currently in the process of filing bugs on those packages in
> > unstable that still depend on libpgsql2.1 rather than libpgsql2, or
> > upgrading bugs to grave where they'd al
Wouter,
Thanks for the upload of openh323gk hopefully it should clear testing now.
While I'm sure there is some history and some good reasons for the m68k
autobuilders list on nocrew.org. It does make it difficult for non-m68k
maintainers to find out where to forward their email such as mine.
Hi,
in case someone's curious about the current status of subversion, you
can fetch packages for i386 from:
http://people.debian.org/~mmagallo/packages/subversion/
These are just an update of David Kimdon's packages. I only tweaked
stuff here and there to get it to build with current ve
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 06:30:29AM -0400, Joe Drew wrote:
> Two quotes come to mind:
[...]
You left out my favourite :)
"Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself."
- A. H. Weller, according to the first google hit.
Richard Braakman
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 12:08:05AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> The point is that pulling everything out that's GFDL isn't really a good
> option; it damages the project for zero gain. This is especially true
> in the long term, as projects follow the FSF's lead and start releasing
> GFDL docs.
O
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:33:11PM +0200, Thimo Neubauer wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:24:34PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > kvdr masqmailxtell
>
> As much as I like to have woody released soon, I'm quite confused
> because I don't understand why masqmail
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 12:46:23AM -0700, Martin Quinson wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 05:57:43PM -0500, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > There are an ever growing number of packages that make use of the GNU Free
> > Documentation License. Isn't it about time to put a copy of this license
> > into the co
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:05:31AM +0200, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:20:28PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
>
> > Given that gcc, binutils, and KDE are in main, it would seem that the
> > status quo and the DFSG are in conflict, or the status quo and someone's
> > interpretat
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 00:43, David Starner wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:27:40AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines".
>
> Yes, and since Debian is 100% Free Software, that applies to everything
> in Debian.
Documentation isn't software. Neithe
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:28:12PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Jeroen Dekkers
>
> | It does also other things, like making distribution creation more
> | flexible. I'm thinking of having a some kind of package file for every
> | source package. That would include the current information and
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 01:42, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:27:40AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines". IMHO we ave to create a
> > DFDG, "Debian Free Documentation Guidelines".
>
> Why? What freedoms are important for software th
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:02:07AM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:33:11PM +0200, Thimo Neubauer wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:24:34PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > kvdr masqmailxtell
> >
> > As much as I like to have woody rele
King "Leo (Martin Oberzalek)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:
> The alternative will be packing all required libraries of this package
> into this package too.
This would be rather painful.
> Or maybe creating a package bar-shared which contains all required
> libraries and the packag
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 09:01, Richard Braakman wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 12:08:05AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > The point is that pulling everything out that's GFDL isn't really a good
> > option; it damages the project for zero gain. This is especially true
> > in the long term, as proje
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 05:12:07PM +0200, Thimo Neubauer wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:02:07AM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:33:11PM +0200, Thimo Neubauer wrote:
> > > None of these packages have RC bugs. masqmail itself just has two
> > > important bugs which will
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 01:48:51PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 01:38:59PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 12:13:38PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> > > after the dust settles after the CD stampede
> >
> > Speaking of which, what's the tactic to get thi
> As much as I like to have woody released soon, I'm quite confused
> because I don't understand why masqmail has to go:
This is "had had to go".
AJ mailed "over the past few weeks". note the plural.
Greetings,
Erich
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe"
Quoting Jerome Petazzoni ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I'll consolidate this opinion : last time I really NEEDED dsniff's arpspoof,
> it did not work. I don't know why ; maybe it was because my host had many
> eth. interfaces, some of them with "redundant" routes and other crap ; but
> arpspoof died imme
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:08:10AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> I have this sneaking suspicion that we need a tool more appropriate than
> the BTS to handle the WNPP. The BTS seems rather fragile for this
> purpose - the format for bug titles and to a greater extent the way
> followups for bug repor
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Erich Schubert wrote:
> > A little knowledge of series tells me to apply n*(n+1)/2 to sum an
> > arithmetic
> > progression of common difference 1, starting at 1. This seems even quicker:
> > 100*101/2 becomes 5*101*10 becomes 505*10 = 5050.
>
> Yep, but you aren't teache
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:01:00AM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Phillips) writes:
> Petr Vandrovec wrote:
>
> > As SUSv2 mandates that new nice return value is correct,
> > please use [EMAIL PROTECTED] (or @GLIBC_2.2.6 as it is in CVS
> > only) for new nice() interface, so o
debian-devel:您好!
互联网从无到有，在短短的几年时间里迅速发展壮大，各大网站也由开始的大把大把烧钱，到现在逐步走向
成熟，一夜之间，我们发现，现在网上有用的免费资源已经少的可怜了。各大门户网站纷纷推出了收费服务，
收费电子邮件，收费主页空间，收费注册搜索引擎，其实这也无可厚非，网站要生存，就要有盈利，但我们网
民该怎么办呢？面对昂贵的上网费用已经是捉襟见肘了，再想去享受那些优质（收费）服务就更难了，因此，
我们普通网民也要学会在网上来养活自己，传统的网络广告商也不会再轻易的给你发来支票了。现在，国外最
火的网上赚钱模式MLM（多层次信息网络营销MULTI-LEVEL M
On Saturday 06 Apr 2002 7:35 pm, Will Newton wrote:
> Quite simple fixes:
>
> - Fixes build on hppa and quite possibly others.
> - Bump version number to replace older packages correctly. (RC bug)
> - Fix a minor bug in the description.
>
> Packages and diff are here:
>
> http://www.misconception.o
Just wondering why libpam-pgsql was removed from the woody lineup. As of
libpam-pgsql-0.5.2-3, libpam-pgsql has been built against libpgsql2, not
libpgsql2.1.
Also, CJ Watson erroneously filed a bug against that version simply
because it depended on libpgsql. He erroneously assumed that that meant
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 07:35:57PM -0400, JPS wrote:
> There is something that has always bothered me about the scripts in
> `/etc/init.d'. Every once in a while I attempt to execute one of these
> scripts while logged in as a non-root user. For example, I might type
> `/etc/init.d/foobar restart'
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Well, since there are these other issues being raised
> (specificcally, the concern that GFDL may not meet the DFSG [I happen
> to disagree with that statement, for what that counts for]), we
> should wait for the dust to settle down before mo
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:53:54AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> Documentation isn't software. Neither are conffiles, icons, etc.
When I buy software, all of that is part of what I buy. Foldoc says
that one definition of software is "programs plus documentation though
this does not correspond wi
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> Revisionist history, for one. I'm sure the FSF wouldn't appreciate the
> GCC document being modified to make it look like Linus Torvalds wrote
> GCC, for example.
How does the GFDL stop that? I can add a section to the GCC
documentat
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:36:28PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > 3. I placed my book under this license with the express understanding
> > that it was considered free. Now I'm hearing noise that this is a
> > non-free license. While I disa
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:30:18AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > On the other hand, by taking action we might be able to stop those projects
> > from taking such a misguided course of action. I think the FSF is making
> > a big mistake with the GFDL.
>
> I'm curious about your reasoning. Have y
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 12:22:00AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 00:05, David Starner wrote:
> > Where? Branden seems to believe that anything that Debian packages is
> > software, for the purposes of the DFSG.
[...]
> In that thread in debian-legal, he seemed to accept the pos
Title: Untitled Document
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 08:50:43PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> I think that the point being made is that, if the GNU FDL is not a free
> license, then we will need to redefine "free" or watch our project
> splinter into uselessness.
The GNU FDL is a license, period. It can applied in a manner co
* martin f krafft
| > See #10448 and #15516 (and my comments to them).
|
| we're talking about the PreservePermissions configuration option,
| which is something different. i should have been more clear.
Uhm, that is actually just not enabled. I might enable it post-woody.
--
Tollef Fog Heen
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Michael Piefel wrote:
> clear to someone who takes the easy path like me. It would also help if
> I could see your current source; the CVS archive on cvs.debian.org does
> not seem to be current.
It is current.
Jason
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a su
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:03:11AM -0500, Donald J Bindner wrote:
Hi Donald,
>
> Let me see if I understand this. I am running VMWare 2.0.4 and
> this morning I discovered that it dies with:
>
> VMware Workstation PANIC:
> AIO: NOT_IMPLEMENTED F(566):1081
>
> This is on a relatively curr
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:03:11AM -0500, Donald J Bindner wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:01:00AM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Phillips) writes:
> > Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> >
> > > As SUSv2 mandates that new nice return value is correct,
> > > please use [EMAIL PROTEC
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 08:34:45AM -0600, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 03:17:02PM +0200, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> > Yes, of course. It only says a newer version is in sid, and that it will
> > be considered tomorrow.
>
> It also says:
>
> Depends: galeon mozilla
>
> galeon 1.
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:40:04AM -0700, David D.W. Downey wrote:
> Just wondering why libpam-pgsql was removed from the woody lineup.
It has not. Check madison's output on pandora.
> As of libpam-pgsql-0.5.2-3, libpam-pgsql has been built against
> libpgsql2, not libpgsql2.1.
>
> Also, CJ Wats
May you should consider VMware's current beta of 3.1?
Good luck
Harri
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Donald J Bindner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> VMware Workstation PANIC:
> AIO: NOT_IMPLEMENTED F(566):1081
> This is on a relatively current Woody system, and VMWare was
> running fine last week. Is this the same issue, and does that
> leave me in the "sorry" category?
Yes, you're screwed
Dale Scheetz wrote:
> So, in fact, both of these licenses are non-free, as they
> contain clauses that can be used, and will be considered
> non-free.
Your objection is true of the OPL, but RMS argues
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/debian-legal-200111/msg00017.html
that that is not true
begin Dale Scheetz quotation:
> On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > As usual, this issue has been beaten to death on a list you don't read.
> >
> > Please review the archives of debian-legal for the past several months.
> >
> > In a nutshell:
> >
> > 1) The current version of t
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:12:06PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> So, in fact, both of these licenses are non-free, as they contain clauses
> that can be used, and will be considered non-free.
It is software that is or is not DFSG-free, not licenses.
The simple fact is, a work licensed under versio
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 03:57:42PM +1000, Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines". IMHO we ave to create a
> >DFDG, "Debian Free Documentation Guidelines".
>
> I wrote this up last night after getting fed up w
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 11:51, David Starner wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:53:54AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > Documentation isn't software. Neither are conffiles, icons, etc.
>
> When I buy software, all of that is part of what I buy. Foldoc says
> that one definition of software is "pr
Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I find it ... foolish to declare a license to be free IFF some clauses of
> the license are not exercised. Using this language, any proprietary
> license becomes free as long as none of the proprietary sections are
> inforced by the author...
>
> The lice
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 12:25, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Jeff, you might want to read:
Noted.
> People who want to opine about licensing issues really, really should
> subscribe to -legal.
And I have (though only recently).
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubs
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 12:32, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 12:22:00AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > In that thread in debian-legal, he seemed to accept the possibility that
> > some things packaged for Debian might not be software. His problem
> > seemed to be with corner case
1 - 100 of 139 matches
Mail list logo
