What happened to libstdc++2.8 ? I have local files installed that depend on
this library. Is there a solution?
Package libstdc++2.8 has no available version, but exists in the database.
This typically means that the package was mentioned in a dependency and
never uploaded, has been obsoleted or i
I was interested how we're doing according to AJ's original timetable,
so had a read and see how we're doing given we've just passed the third
date milestone...
This is given "without comment", that is I'm not trying to start a
flamewar here.
On Tue, 2003-08-19 at 07:49, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
* Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-10-02 05:57]:
> > HOWTO use debian-installer to install sarge posted to
> > -devel-announce (volunteers appreciated)
> >
> Ah yes, what a wonderful read that was ... no, wait, this never
> happened.
* Debian-Installer HO
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 05:57:58AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > * September 1st
> > HOWTO use debian-installer to install sarge posted to
> > -devel-announce (volunteers appreciated)
> Ah yes, what a wonderful read that was ... no, wait, this never
> happened
On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 06:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 05:57:58AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
>
> > > * September 1st
>
> > > HOWTO use debian-installer to install sarge posted to
> > > -devel-announce (volunteers appreciated)
>
> > Ah yes, what
The number of bugs on the adduser package has constantly increased for
the last few months, though none of them is release critical. Since I
was busy with other stuff (mostly OpenLDAP and related stuff) I didn't
keep up with all the feature requests and non-critical bugs. This is
also partly due to
Am Do, den 02.10.2003 schrieb Martin Michlmayr um 07:42:
> * Debian-Installer HOWTO Sebastian Ley
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/debian-devel-announce-200309/msg7.html
During the last debcamp we took the opportunity to introduce some last
major changes which leaves
I still need to get KDE 3.1.4 into sid and stablized. I hope for it to
be ready to migrate into sarge by Oct 20 (including the 10 day wait
time). From what Colin Watson mentioned to me earlier today there are
some other packages that are holding KDE out as well so hopefully they
are resolved by the
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 12:58:51AM -0400, Gregory Stark wrote:
> What happened to libstdc++2.8 ? I have local files installed that
> depend on this library. Is there a solution?
You could always pull it from an old release - I doubt it's changed.
--
Colin Watson
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:02:38AM +0200, Roland Bauerschmidt wrote:
> The number of bugs on the adduser package has constantly increased for
> the last few months, though none of them is release critical. Since I
> was busy with other stuff (mostly OpenLDAP and related stuff) I didn't
> keep up wi
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:16:28AM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:02:38AM +0200, Roland Bauerschmidt wrote:
> > Matthew Palmer has done some nice work in abstracting the passwd storage
> > backend, and adding methods for LDAP storage. The latter, though, still
> > need
尊敬的debian-devel：
迎国庆大优惠[特卖] ！
因艾商城为了答谢新老顾客的厚爱！决定在2003年09月25日―2003年10月30日
VP-RX阴茎增大疗程装 9 折大优惠。欢迎新老顾客光临选购！注册会员订购有产品增送！
详细介绍和图片请看：http://www.yinlove.net
电话订购：021-56728806
联系人： 李小姐
QQ咨询： 202963
On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 16:22, Marcos Dione wrote:
> 'frankie', where I have my apps debs and symlinks to the versions I want
> E: Release 'farnkie' for 'galeon' not found
frankie != farnkie
could that be what's wrong?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ALERT!This e-mail, in its original form, contained one or more attached files that were infected with a virus, worm, or other type of security threat. This e-mail was sent from a Road Runner IP address. As part of our continuing initiative to stop the spread of malicious viruses, Road Runner scans
/*
You might ignore this comment...
Looking at the list of RC bugs the packages seems to fall in two
categories. Packages I don't use and packages I don't feel comfortable
in touching (glibc being an example of the latter).
I don't know the reason for some packages being marked [REMOVE] but
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 12:38:57PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
> A script that reads packages I'm interested in and prints out the
> RC-bugs I should try to fix would be usable. Does anyone have such
> script?
Yup. It's been posted before (it's called rc-alert). I've got a copy here;
if you can'
Hi!
Am 2003-10-02 12:38 +0200 schrieb Peter Makholm:
> I don't know the reason for some packages being marked [REMOVE] but it
> seems to me that it is not just an 'This package is not essential for
> a releas an useful distribution'.
OTOH, php4 is marked for removal. I assume that I'm not the onl
On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 05:57, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> So "Where are we now?" Having played with d-i some and kept a watchful
> eye on the release-critical list, I guess we're currently at the
> "September 15th" dateline which puts us roughly 14 days behind schedule.
And I havent even started
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 12:38:57PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
>> A script that reads packages I'm interested in and prints out the
>> RC-bugs I should try to fix would be usable. Does anyone have such
>> script?
>
> Yup. It's been posted before (it's
Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I did not dig into the reasons why php4 should be removed (BTS says
> "see -release", but that doesn't tell me anything), so I don't object
> against it loudly. But I would certainly call it a pity if it
> disappears. It would make Debian much less useful f
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> It's been noted several times that the end of the 0-day NMU period was
> accompanied by a marked reversal in the RC bug graph. I think it's time
> for a group debriefing of this experience. I was pleasantly surprised
> to have not heard of a single co
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:06:27PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Am 2003-10-02 12:38 +0200 schrieb Peter Makholm:
> > I don't know the reason for some packages being marked [REMOVE] but it
> > seems to me that it is not just an 'This package is not essential for
> > a releas an useful distribution'.
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:22:34PM +0100, Rob Bradford wrote:
> be fun though. I'm planning to only support upgrades from potato and
> woody. So that means i can remove all the cruft about upgrading from
I was under the impression (don't ask me how; perhaps my mind came up with
it on it's own) tha
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:06:27PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Am 2003-10-02 12:38 +0200 schrieb Peter Makholm:
> > I don't know the reason for some packages being marked [REMOVE] but it
> > seems to me that it is not just an 'This package is not essential for
> > a releas an useful distri
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:10:21PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
> Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 12:38:57PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
> >> A script that reads packages I'm interested in and prints out the
> >> RC-bugs I should try to fix would be usable.
Colin Watson writes:
> That would mean we'd have to add python to the base system.
I'd _really_ rather not see that. While I now use Python in preference to
Perl, I don't think its advantages justify bloating base. Perl's just
another procedural language.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John
[Matthew Palmer]
> Yup. It's been posted before (it's called rc-alert). I've got a
> copy here; if you can't find it in the archives (recently, like < 6
> months) e-mail me and I'll send it to you.
And if you want to figure out why a valid package still fail to enter
testing, you can use http://
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 12:38:57PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
> Looking at the list of RC bugs the packages seems to fall in two
> categories. Packages I don't use and packages I don't feel comfortable
> in touching (glibc being an example of the latter).
Personally, I recommend getting over your
Hi,
Am Do, den 02.10.2003 schrieb Peter Makholm um 12:38:
> - Gnome
> - KDE
I just wondered how far your understanding of these goes? Only the base
environment, or also those applications that don't really belong to -
for example - the official Gnome distribution, but are needed to make
the com
I'm seeking for someone who'd be willing to maintain pyslsk package in
debian. It's a p2p client for Soulseek filesharing network (which is great
for finding obscure music), written in Python/wxPython. It was maintained
by Josselin Mouette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), but recently he replaced pyslsk
with a
Am Do, den 02.10.2003 schrieb Joachim Breitner um 16:55:
> I just wondered how far your understanding of these goes?
Uh. Please don't get it wrong, and consider the .de in my mail address.
I am not at all saying that you don't understand something. Merely, I
wonder what you _meant_ by this. The ex
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 05:49:47AM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 16:22, Marcos Dione wrote:
> > 'frankie', where I have my apps debs and symlinks to the versions I want
> > E: Release 'farnkie' for 'galeon' not found
>
> frankie != farnkie
>
> could that be what's wrong
The closer sarge release is, the higher the problem I'll write about
below becomes annoying.
When we are close to a release, most package maintainers focus on what
I call "package polishing" besides tracking down all remaining
bugs. That's perfectly respectable and certainly a Good Thing. Fine.
T
Joachim Breitner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am Do, den 02.10.2003 schrieb Peter Makholm um 12:38:
>> - Gnome
>> - KDE
>
> I just wondered how far your understanding of these goes? Only the base
> environment, or also those applications that don't really belong to -
> for example - the officia
> And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
>well replace dselect as the recommended method.
Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 07:12:52PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
> We didn't have OpenOffice at last release and it doesn't seem to be in
> unstable yet. 'apt-cache search openoffice' only find myspell
> dictionaries.
It's in contrib, package openoffice.org. It is scheduled to
move into main around
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 12:38:57PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
> There are some packages we should have if we want Debian to be a
> general purpose distribution. I guess we can have a long flamewar
> about which packages this includes and in the end it is the release
> manager's decission but it is
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
> >well replace dselect as the recommended method.
>
> Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
> and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
Easier
who r u
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 12:38:57PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
> I believe this is the bugs it would be most effective to actack when
> the packages I'm personally directly interested in. It can be hard to
> look at the RC-list and decide if the time is better spend fixing
> libtse3, libvorbisfile3
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
> and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
please do! dselect (whil ebeing verty simple and functional) has the
most counter-intuitive user interface
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 07:12:52PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote:
> Joachim Breitner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Am Do, den 02.10.2003 schrieb Peter Makholm um 12:38:
> >> - Gnome
> >> - KDE
> > I just wondered how far your understanding of these goes? Only the base
> > environment, or also th
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:50:09AM -0700, Chris Jantzen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > > And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
> > >well replace dselect as the recommended method.
> >
> > Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:27:48PM -0400, Ervin Hearn III wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:50:09AM -0700, Chris Jantzen wrote:
> >
> > Easier for new people to use?!?
> >
> > /me rolls off chair laughing.
> >
> > I sincerely hope the ":-P" means you are using sarcasm.
> >
>
> Quite seriousl
Steve Langasek wrote:
> What's hard to see at a glance is how large collections of packages are
> interrelated in their dependencies. Many packages that you *don't* use
> may be having a direct effect on the packages you *do* use as a result
> of their bugginess. I'd like to be able to make as mu
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > And as aptitude is kinda useable it might
> >well replace dselect as the recommended method.
>
> Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
> and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
What's
Quoting Christian Perrier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> The closer sarge release is, the higher the problem I'll write about
> below becomes annoying.
BTW, folks, sorry for having written so badly.I realize that my english
wasn't really good this morningI really shouldn't try to write
good englis
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200, Robert Lemmen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:14:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > Please don't do this yet, since dselect is still more self-documenting,
> > and therefore easier for new people to use. :-P
>
> please do! dselect (whil ebeing v
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:36:50AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > It's been noted several times that the end of the 0-day NMU period was
> > accompanied by a marked reversal in the RC bug graph. I think it's time
> > for a group debriefing of this exp
Package: general
Severity: important
greetings,
jan
PS this is my first bugreport, sorry if I should have pointed it to a
package, but I just don't know which one causes the problem...
Recipient of the attachment: SEXCHANGE, RADIANT\RII,
StellaHsieh(謝立欣)/刪除的郵件
Subject of the message: Re: That movie
No action was taken on the attachment.
Attachment document_9446.pif was Logged Only for the following reasons:
Scan Engine Failure (0x80004005)
Chris Cheney wrote:
> From what I have heard about aptitude it has the fun side effect of
> removing packages that it thinks you didn't purposely install.
After telling you it will and waiting for you to look over the list of
changes, sure. I have never seen this be a problem. It will also not
aff
Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > - Gnome
> > - KDE
>
> I just wondered how far your understanding of these goes? Only the base
> environment, or also those applications that don't really belong to -
I think that the equivilant metapackages are a good first step. Pity
that one of them has still not m
On 02-Oct-03, 16:10 (CDT), Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From what I have heard about aptitude it has the fun side effect of
> removing packages that it thinks you didn't purposely install.
[and]
> Further, if recommends/suggests are on how does a user manage to only
> install standard
Hi,
One package of mine needs to conflict with a few consecutive versions
of a package. Let's say that the package foo introduced a feature that
conflicts with my package in version A and removed it in version B.
So I'd like my package to conflict with versions A to B of foo. I tried
to specif
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 07:23:36PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > > - Gnome
> > > - KDE
> >
> > I just wondered how far your understanding of these goes? Only the base
> > environment, or also those applications that don't really belong to -
>
> I think that the equivilan
also sprach Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.10.03.0121 +0200]:
> I have given you the reason for this many times already. Please
> reread the thread on debian-devel carefully.
This one post did in fact slip my eyes. In it, you mention some
checks when it comes to patch inclusion.
I have a p
Well, aptitude is certainly better than it used to be.
At least now it's keystroke-compatible with dselect. I still find it
less useful though. :-P
--
Although aptitude uses only one fewer line of screen space for the
list of packages, somehow it manages to have less information. The
absence o
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:43:24PM +0200, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > What's hard to see at a glance is how large collections of packages are
> > interrelated in their dependencies. Many packages that you *don't* use
> > may be having a direct effect on the packages you *do*
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 05:57:58AM +0100, Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> I think it's fair to say that we're not going to reach the following
> state within 14 days unless a miracle, or a hell of a lot of work
> happens:
I don't know about anyone else, but if we man
Hi,
aptitude has a lot of problems that I don't have enough time to fix,
but I would appreciate it if people would confine themselves to the
facts when criticizing it.
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:38:18PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:22:34PM +0100, Rob Bradford wrote:
> > be fun though. I'm planning to only support upgrades from potato and
> > woody. So that means i can remove all the cruft about upgrading from
>
> I was under the impr
As I indicated in a recent message, I don't currently have time to
get aptitude working the way I'd like. Please consider this a public
call for a codeveloper -- you can "interview" by submitting working
patches for one of the issues below, particularly the ones I've outlined
a fix for. (aptitu
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:09:16PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > I also don't think it is a particularly good idea for aptitude to
> > default to installing suggests since it will likely bloat syste
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:59:58PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:09:16PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > was heard to say:
> > > I also don't think it is a part
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 11:09:29PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:59:58PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 10:09:16PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:10:21PM -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL
66 matches
Mail list logo
