Is /usr/bin/pager a Debianism, or is it common to other
distributions and/or unices?
Regards,
Bob
--
_
|_) _ |_Robert D. Hilliard<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|_) (_) |_) 1294 S.W. Seagull Way <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Palm City, FL 34990 USA GPG Key ID: 390D655
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 05:07:11PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> According to the Debian Constitution, he only has mastery over the
> keyring because he's a "Delegate" appointed by the DPL.
Yeah, like that's ever mattered. I can't actually remember someone
saying "for this period of time
> Uh, no. You have 3 possible pools.
>
> 1: Someone likes Debian.
> 2: Someone dislikes Debian.
> 3: Someone hasn't formed an opinion of Debian or doesn't care about Debian.
>
> Do you want contributions from 2 or 3? IE, someone who dislikes it or
> someone who is uninformed or ambivale
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:25:58PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> Trivialities such as people
> refusing to disclose their real names jump to mind.
This strikes me as one of the *best* reasons to deny someone. If someone is
unwilling even to trust Debian with their real name, then why shou
It's very annoying to pull my mail and get several bug reports that were
reassigned to debhelper (one of them falsely grave), with no explanation
cced to me. Not only is something like this very easy to skip over, but
it forces me to wait until the next time I am online (in this case, two
days) to
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:25:58PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > the person who's in charge of the keyring has to be as paranoid as
> > > James. The other person in the project that comes to mind is
> > > Manoj. And that's it. I wouldn't trust Martin with such a
> > > responsab
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 06:15:12PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > reassign 204169 debhelper
> Bug#204169: docbook-utils: Build from source on reiserfs gives dangling
> symlinks
> Warning: Unknown package 'debhemper'
> Bug reassigned from package `debhemper' to `debhelper'.
Actually that particular o
Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 06:15:12PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > reassign 204169 debhelper
> > Bug#204169: docbook-utils: Build from source on reiserfs gives dangling
> > symlinks
> > Warning: Unknown package 'debhemper'
> > Bug reassigned from package `debhemper' to `debhelpe
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 02:26:57PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:23:20 +0100
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Of course that isn't true, I was just showing the farce of your
> > > statement. Obviously you want people who like the project to contribute.
>
> >
Andrew Suffield wrote:
>glibc is even worse. It has multiple maintainers, and they still don't
>have enough time to chase down all the important bugs, let alone
>insignificant ones like this.
This is unfortunately true; glibc seems to be severely broken on a
routine basis upstream. Kinda makes m
Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No. But you said that the opposite is the wrong reason. If we like
> Debian it is a bad reason to want to contribute.
No. I think Andrew meant that liking Debian or wanting to contribute
is a bad reason to join Debian. He wants people to contribut
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:25:41 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I *do not* want people to contribute *because* they "like the
> project".
What other reason would their be? Why would they want to contribute to a
project they don't like esp. when there is no financial gain for it
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Joey Hess wrote:
> Please, as a courtesy, when you reassign a bug report to another
> package, cc it to the package maintainer, and put enough information in
> so they can know why their package is at fault. Also check the severity
> to make sure it makes sense for the new pack
Bob Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is /usr/bin/pager a Debianism, or is it common to other
> distributions and/or unices?
>
Don't really know, but it's alternatives-managed, so likely to be a
Debianism.
Andy
--
Andreas Rottmann | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 06:25:27PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >glibc is even worse. It has multiple maintainers, and they still don't
> >have enough time to chase down all the important bugs, let alone
> >insignificant ones like this.
>
> This is unfortunately true;
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 04:56:44PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >I'm not sure there are any good ones other than having some specific
> >(technical, not political) things you want to see done and are willing
> >to do. In that case, you won't have to be told to demonstra
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 03:57:10PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:25:41 +0100
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I *do not* want people to contribute *because* they "like the
> > project".
>
> What other reason would their be? Why would they want to contribute
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:57:32PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 04:56:44PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > Wrong. There have been specific technical things I wanted to do
> > which simply cannot be done easily as an outsider.
> >
> > Generally it's QA stuff. I'm doi
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>Wrong. There have been specific technical things I wanted to do
>which simply cannot be done easily as an outsider.
In this sort of case, the answer is not necessarily to make the NM
process faster - it's to make it easier for outsiders to contribute to
the rest of Debi
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 00:08:38 +0100
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anybody who has to ask "Why should I/we/they contribute?" is not
> suitable for Debian.
Oddly enough, I've never asked that.
> (The "answer", incidentally, is "because we can"
> or "because it's there", or some oth
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 02:41:44PM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:25:58PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > Trivialities such as people refusing to disclose their real names
> > jump to mind.
>
> This strikes me as one of the *best* reasons to deny someone. If
> som
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 08:52:04PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Good grief, how easy do we have to make it?
> >
> > http://bugs.debian.org/tag:patch
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=&include=patch
> >
> > See the form at
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 04:14, Otto Wyss wrote:
> I just upgraded to the current Sarge and also got GCC 3.3. It seems this
> version can't compile all the drivers in kernel 2.4.21. Which version
Which drivers and what errors do you get? If you tell us the errors then we
can get them fixed.
--
http:
Suggested Answer
---
Dear Correspondent:
Recently you requested personal assistance via our web site. Below is a summary
of your request and our response.
Thank you for allowing us to be of service to you.
Title: Military Public Affairs
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 12:55:14AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 02:41:44PM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:25:58PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > Trivialities such as people refusing to disclose their real names
> > > jump to mind.
> >
>
Hi, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote:
> rpm -Uvh estracts in /usr/src/rpm/SOURCES
The best idea probably is to use rpm2cpio => extract to the current
directory.
--
Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | htt
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-08-07
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: bsgloss
Version : 0.6
Upstream Author : E. A. Tacão <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
http://br.tldp.org/ferramentas/vp/bsgloss/bsgloss-0.6.tar.gz/
* License : (GPL)
Descrip
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 21:49, Chris Cheney got eaten by the Troll:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 05:10:01PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > I've always thought KDE a wonderful example of what happens when you
> > give commit access to just about anybody too.
> >
> > Scott
> > (GNOME user)
>
> O
Craig Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Obviously you want people who like the project to contribute.
>
> For meaningful values of "contribute", sure. But being a project member
> with a d.o account is not essential to contributing, and its arguable
> how significant a "
Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 09:02:20PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
> > Also aren't mails between AM, DAM, Advocate and NM archived somewhere?
>
> This is not the case for at least the AM<->NM mails. Also, advocating
> someone is basically just a vir
Josef Spillner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That being said, the cyclic mentioning of non-openness problems on d-d does
> not invalidate the fact that those who invest time into a project are
> steering it, independent of whether they're a "member" or not (true also for
> KDE and certainly oth
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 08:50:36PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 05:42:36PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > >
> > > > Maybe an interface/filter for the bts that
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 08:52:04PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Good grief, how easy do we have to make it?
> > >
> > > http://bugs.debian.org/tag:patch
> > >
> > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
On Thursday, Aug 7, 2003, at 02:51 America/Denver, Peter Mathiasson
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:34:28PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Here it isn't. That is because that correspondence is done on
company
time using company equipment supposedly for company purposes. They
have the
right to
I'm currently at the SAGE-AU annual conference, and Apple presented a
paper about their Rendezvous technology, which is their implementation of
Zeroconf[1].
Is anyone working on getting Debian to do any of this sort of stuff? If
not, I might look into spinning off a subproject. I don't think it
Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> > Please, as a courtesy, when you reassign a bug report to another
> > package, cc it to the package maintainer, and put enough information in
> > so they can know why their package is at fault. Also check the severi
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Anybody who has to ask "Why should I/we/they contribute?" is not
>suitable for Debian. (The "answer", incidentally, is "because we can"
>or "because it's there", or some other variation; it is a goal in
>itself, and not a means to an end)
OK, now *that*
Andrew Suffield said:
>On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 04:56:44PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> Wrong. There have been specific technical things I wanted to do
>> which simply cannot be done easily as an outsider.
^^
>>
>> Generally it's QA stuff. I'm doing it an
101 - 138 of 138 matches
Mail list logo
