On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 12:18:04AM +0100, Andrew McDonald wrote:
> Even the hostname check can be problematic - does the user really need
> to accept the certificate every time because the name doesn't match?
I think the issue is this: if no hostname check is done, how to you know
you really are a
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 12:15:48AM -0400, Joe Drew wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 14:36, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I think it would be fair to tar mpg321 with the brush of "non-free" when
> ^un?
Yes.
> > that clearly wasn't your intent when you wrote it. Having a giant
> >
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 07:06:47AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a couple of days uncompressed Packages files for unstable will cease
> to be generated, and bzip2'ed Packages files will be generated in their
> place (actually, if you look carefully, they're already being generated).
> Source
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 03:43:32PM +0200, Erich Schubert wrote:
> Redhat seems to be going to use a common look for their desktops (GNOME
> as well as KDE) in their new beta featuring a new icon set.
> Check out the screenshots at
> http://www.gnomedesktop.org/article.php?sid=616&mode=&order=0
Le Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 05:21:12PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe écrivait:
> > Then apt, or debian-cd, needs to be fixed. *shrug*
>
> Huh. debian-cd can just uncompress them, but file: uris are a bit of a
> pickle.
debian-cd uses apt (with file uris) to get a handle on the mirror.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël H
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 05:34:48PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> > Presuming things continue to work in unstable, the same change will be
> > made to testing in a few weeks. Similarly, the Contents-*.gz files for
> > unstable will probably be switching to .bz2 in the not too distant future.
The chang
On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 23:05, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> That will also break rsyncing them, which saves a lot.
Let's just keep pestering gzip upstream to include the rsyncable patch.
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Rodrigo Henriquez wrote:
> I don't know if this is the place to send this mail, so
> sorry if i'm wrong.
>
>
> I like contribute in some of the following projects :
>
> emelfm (#158150), orphaned 119 days ago
> Description: file manager for X/gtk
>
> gadfly (#113080),
#include
* Sebastian Rittau [Sat, Aug 31 2002, 03:44:31AM]:
> > I like them and i think they are impressive...
> > It's one of the things Apple proved: desktop and apps that look smooth
> > do make their users feel comfortable with them ;)
>
> While I think that it's generally a good idea to int
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 11:09:04PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> I looked at a Yellow Dog Linux machine and noticed, however, that they had
> a texinfo 4.2 source package that builds an info package with a binary
> /usr/sbin/install-info instead of the perl version we have. Why is that
> and why don
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 10:05:10AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 07:06:47AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > In a couple of days uncompressed Packages files for unstable will cease
> > to be generated, and bzip2'ed Packages files will be generated in their
> > place (act
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 10:05:10AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 07:06:47AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > In a couple of days uncompressed Packages files for unstable will cease
> > > to be generated, and bzip2'ed Packa
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 11:15:17AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> The changes uncomrpessed -> .gz seems fine to me, but the changes .gz ->
> .bz2 is IMO a bit risky. I'm thinking about the lack of binding for
You misread the mail. .gz will continue to be available, .bz2 will be
there as well
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 12:15:51PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> What amazes me here the most is that the first thing that pops into your
> head as a solution is a non-maintainer upload.
>
> My god, sometimes I really think we need to raise the bar even higher.
As long as people are only talking
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Brian May wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 12:18:04AM +0100, Andrew McDonald wrote:
> > Even the hostname check can be problematic - does the user really need
> > to accept the certificate every time because the name doesn't match?
>
> I think the issue is this: if no hostname
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 01:44:18PM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> So here is the list of the new nominations:
>
> FTP Archive Maintenance: Ryan Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You forgot Randall Donald there.
> System Administration:Ryan Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 01:26:17PM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> > What amazes me here the most is that the first thing that pops into your
> > head as a solution is a non-maintainer upload.
> >
> > My god, sometimes I really think we need to raise the bar even higher.
>
> As long as people
Hi,
For the record, http://lintian.debian.org/ now has reports for the current
contents of sid, i.e. unstable.
Knock yourself out, or something. :)
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Hi All,
we had similar problem with AGNULA, about mp3 and after an accurate
investigation
we have reached the following conclusions (a deliverable on free software will
be
soon ready at www.agnula.org):
(Inter alia i suggest to read the following document,
http://web.media.mit.edu/~eds/mpeg-pa
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 2:43:29PM +0100, Daniel Silverstone wrote:
> Also, if you search for my GPG key id (20687895) then I get a listing of my
> packages and also those maintained by [EMAIL PROTECTED] We've had issues of
> my being mistaken for Daniel Stone in the past, and I don't appreciate it
Adam Heath wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
Greetings,
Just writing to request a "second opinion" on this bug.
Current dpkg behavior does not allow a package to replace a directory
with a symlink during upgrade. This broke a libc6-dev upgrade when I
made an unstable chroot fr
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 11:09:04PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> the perl version we have. Why is that and why don't we
> just NMU texinfo in sid to start building a binary
> install-info until perl 5.80's regex stops leaking
> memory like a sieve?
Why wouldn't we fix perl instead?
You're not on
Hi debian-devel!
It's about ardour, a Ardour is a multichannel hard disk recorder (HDR)
and digital audio workstation (DAW) [http://ardour.sourceforge.net/]. An
ITP was filed a while ago [http://bugs.debian.org/95870]. It is quite
big, written in C++, making heavy use of jack, ladspa, midi, rt.
Has there ever been any discussion of the binary
/usr/sbin/install-info in terms of the Linux Standard
Base? I ask because dpkg is providing a perl based
version of this utility whereas all other distros
appear to be using binary only version. This came up
because the regex in perl 5.80 is bugg
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Robert Jordens wrote:
> Users complained they were not able to compile ardour because of these
> libraries and C++'s ABI instability.
Distribution users (well, at least Debian's) don't have to worry about this,
since you (the maintainer) will have taken care of those details a
>It's about ardour, a Ardour is a multichannel hard disk recorder (HDR)
>and digital audio workstation (DAW) [http://ardour.sourceforge.net/]. An
>ITP was filed a while ago [http://bugs.debian.org/95870]. It is quite
>big, written in C++, making heavy use of jack, ladspa, midi, rt. =20
>
>Way back
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002 04:48 pm, Robert Jordens wrote:
> So there remain the following options:
>
> a) No ardour in Debian
>
> b) build the libraries with ardour and link statically against them
>(Pauls wish, against policy and my feelings)
>
> c) dynamically link against the libraries in Debian (
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Paul Davis wrote:
> >Way back last year, Mandrake distributed a C++ library compiled
> >with options, that caused ardour not to be compilable and/or showing
> >strange behaviour, strange bugs...=20
>
> This was not the only reason. Similar breakage occurs as soon as the
> user
Le sam 31/08/2002 à 17:18, Paul Davis a écrit :
> This was not the only reason. Similar breakage occurs as soon as the
> user acquires a C++ library in binary format that was compiled by a
> g++ with either different options and/or a different ABI compared the
> one used to compile and link the ap
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 11:18:26AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> This was not the only reason. Similar breakage occurs as soon as the
> user acquires a C++ library in binary format that was compiled by a
> g++ with either different options and/or a different ABI compared the
> one used to compile and
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002 08:53:11 -0400,
marco trevisani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3) to my knowledge, neither bladeenc nor lame do use these algorithms
> (they are mainly for encoding at low bit rate, something these
> encoders don't do well - they were'nt designed for that)
> 4) however, from w
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-31
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: fonty-rg
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : Radovan Garabík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.some.org/
* License : GPL
Description : Set of fonts for linux console
Based
* Anthony Towns
| Presuming things continue to work in unstable, the same change will be
| made to testing in a few weeks. Similarly, the Contents-*.gz files for
| unstable will probably be switching to .bz2 in the not too distant future.
This will break debian-installer. It is probably easy to
It appears that Debian is finally being used in the ways that we have been
wishing for since before Bruce was DPL. YES, there are now some very
impressive Debian-based distributions available from several sources.
The first one I was shown by my neighbor is called Knoppix 3.1 and is
produced by a
Hi users,
I am in need of assistance regarding the addTREE function in the
libarchive-zip-perl-0.11.
Is this the correct mailing list for support questions regarding the Debian
libarchive-zip-perl-0.11.
If not which mailing list would be the most appropriate?
Regards,
Normand Charette
PathFind
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 01:42:36PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> The first one I was shown by my neighbor is called Knoppix 3.1 and is
> produced by a German group. As a result it comes up in German, but there
> is a simple fix that will boot it in English (boot: knoppix lang=us) that
> only require
On Sat, 2002-08-31 at 11:39, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> If they insist we are violating their patent, it is their job
> to prove it, no? "Guilty unless proven otherwise" is illegal
> (at least in Japan).
Yes, this is true. However, we also have the burden of hiring legal
counsel to defend ourselves, a
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002 at 11:00:25AM -0700, PathFinder Software wrote:
> Is this the correct mailing list for support questions regarding the Debian
> libarchive-zip-perl-0.11.
>
> If not which mailing list would be the most appropriate?
Usually help/questions should be placed on debian-user. Certai
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002 17:39, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> > 3) to my knowledge, neither bladeenc nor lame do use these algorithms
> > (they are mainly for encoding at low bit rate, something these
> > encoders don't do well - they were'nt designed for that)
> > 4) however, from what I understand Fraunho
Le Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 01:42:36PM -0400, Dale Scheetz écrivait:
> The other CD I have seen is provided by CheapBytes, and is simply called
> DemoLinux 3.01. I haven't figured out who produces it, but it is very
DemoLinux is done by 3 french (-speaking) guys (working in a parisian
university) :
h
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Has there ever been any discussion of the binary
> /usr/sbin/install-info in terms of the Linux Standard
> Base? I ask because dpkg is providing a perl based
> version of this utility whereas all other distros
> appear to be using binary only version.
#include
* Dale Scheetz [Sat, Aug 31 2002, 01:42:36PM]:
> The main reason I mention these two excellent Debian "spin-offs" is that
> they both do a remoarkable "on-the-fly" hardware configuration for X and
> everything is wonderfully integrated and "ready-to-use" to a much greater
All this on-th
Since I have access to both Intel and Sparc hardware, it would be possible
for me to upload both the i386 version and the Sparc version of the binary
packages when I build a new release.
Is there any reason not to do this? It seems that it might speed up the
autobuild process, specially when it is
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 03:09:52PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> Since I have access to both Intel and Sparc hardware, it would be possible
> for me to upload both the i386 version and the Sparc version of the binary
> packages when I build a new release.
Several people do this. It's not exactly co
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> Is there any reason not to do this? It seems that it might speed up the
> autobuild process, specially when it is a library like libgmp3 which other
> packages depend upon for their builds...
Not really. Once you upload the pkg, and in the next 15 minut
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 01:24:51PM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> You misread the mail. .gz will continue to be available, .bz2 will be
> there as well and the uncompressed files will be dropped.
Similarly, the Contents-*.gz files for unstable will probably be
switching to .bz2 in the n
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 03:09:52PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> Is there any reason not to do this? It seems that it might speed up the
Save you time, and if you aren't actually following the current status of
the extra archs you build for, you might end up uploading it during an
arch-specific tra
>I am trying to get the glibc debian cvs for 2.2.92 to
> package (it builds and passes make check fine on debian
> ppc sid with the new gcc 3.2.1pre). However the buggy
> perl 5.80 in sid has broken install-info. I looked at
> a Yellow Dog Linux machine and noticed, however, that they
> had a
I demand that Stefano Zacchiroli may or may not have written...
> On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 01:24:51PM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
>> You misread the mail. .gz will continue to be available, .bz2 will be
>> there as well and the uncompressed files will be dropped.
>
>Similarly, the Conten
Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since I have access to both Intel and Sparc hardware, it would be possible
> for me to upload both the i386 version and the Sparc version of the binary
> packages when I build a new release.
>
> Is there any reason not to do this? It seems that it might
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 04:55:46PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 10:31:23AM -0400, Joe Drew wrote:
> > On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 10:16, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > currently non-US is the only place where it can be without breaking law.
> >
> > This is incorrect: mp3 patents ex
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 03:09:52PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> Is there any reason not to do this? It seems that it might speed up the
I do that frequently and it seems to work well. I use Alpha, PowerPC, and
i386 regularly and all three are machines I use to build on for Debian.
Sometimes I n
On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 12:17:01AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Don't upload binaries at all.
>
> The autobuilder will check the build-process of your package. It will
> build in a clean chroot with proper build-depends. With proper
> versions of all tools.
>
> If you upload binaries you get
Package: general
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-31
Severity: normal
Tags: sid
I don't know what is causing this problem but all I know is that I have
narrowed it down to being caused either by a package or by the install
system. I installed from the woody install disks then upgraded to sid.
What
Goswin Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There are several reasons not to do this.
> Don't upload binaries at all.
Why?
> The autobuilder will check the build-process of your package.
YOU should do that.
> It will build in a clean chroot with proper build-depends.
> With proper versions
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 05:15:00PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
> > we definitely need an mp3 decoder in debian if we want to fight the
> > patent oppression at all. i think we need another branch for that kind
> > of problems.
>
> lol, I doubt it would help. Just go to US patent office website and
>
Hello,
In violation of policy (sorry!), I've been using a virtual package in
my source package cl-sql. cl-sql defines a number of binary packages.
The binary package cl-sql depends on the presence of one at least one
cl-sql database backend. Thus, I have each of the binary database
backend package
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Dale Scheetz wrote:
***
> The main reason I mention these two excellent Debian "spin-offs" is that
> they both do a remoarkable "on-the-fly" hardware configuration for X and
> everything is wonderfully integrated and "ready-to-use" to a much greater
> extent that Debian is by
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 07:35:08PM -0600, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:
> In violation of policy (sorry!), I've been using a virtual package in
Oops, never mind. I see now in the policy manual:
"Packages MUST NOT use virtual package names (except privately, amongst
a cooperating group of packages)"
We have detected a virus (WORM_KLEZ.H) in your mail traffic sent from [EMAIL
PROTECTED] in the file href.exe on 08/31/2002 21:26:41. We took the action
delete. If you have questions regarding files or updating/installing Anti-virus
protection on your PC, please contact your e-mail administrator
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 12:17:01AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > Don't upload binaries at all.
> >
> > The autobuilder will check the build-process of your package. It will
> > build in a clean chroot with proper build-depends. With proper
> > versio
Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goswin Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > There are several reasons not to do this.
> > Don't upload binaries at all.
>
> Why?
>
> > The autobuilder will check the build-process of your package.
>
> YOU should do that.
To err is human.
> >
"Matt Filizzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Package: general
> Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-31
> Severity: normal
> Tags: sid
>
> I don't know what is causing this problem but all I know is that I have
> narrowed it down to being caused either by a package or by the install
> system. I instal
Hi,
I just crasht my system working on libsafe and hat to boot from CD.
I the discovered that the woody CD (linuxtag prerelease) doesn't
boot. I heard of similar for the real woody release CDs on irc.
Can anyone boot the CDs, which one of the set and what hardware?
Same if you can't boot.
Also
65 matches
Mail list logo
