华威网络计算机信息技术中心（以下简称华威网络），成立于1999年5月18号，是一家网络服务性公司，目前公司处于中型规模。
目前公司主要经营的项目有虚拟主机、域名注册、主机托管、主机租用、程序开发、网站制作等业务，为企业及个人提供高性价比的服务，使信息化真正步入每个企业及个人。
为了使消费者权益、意志得到最完整的体现，一方面，华威网络通过核心技术、24/7支持
友好的人机界面等技术、流程方面加以保证；另一方面，通过契约化承诺经营，使消费者权益
得以在法规、制度层面得到终极保障。
公司的典型客户：
・ 一生相随影盟
・ 刀锋电子商务网
・ 安徽巢东水泥股份公司（最
* Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-11-10 03:41]:
| Can you point me to the ISO? I tried burning the sarge netinst twice
| but was never successful at installing Debian with it.
what does this mean? You're unable to burn the iso, the cdrom's are
corrupt? Or perhaps your have found an new bug in the
also sprach Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.11.09.2216 +0100]:
> You forgot to mention that "ps" uses it for displaying the WCHAN,
> or does that count as "debugging"?
no, probably not. but is it a vital function? not having System.map
will still let you use the system.
But don't get me w
This one time, at band camp, Eduard Bloch wrote:
>The fact of the too generic package name was mentioned before within
>other arguments against your "linux" package. IIRC you prefered not to
>answer to it but refered to an URL which did not contain the answers.
'linux' is a perfect name for the pa
This one time, at band camp, Eduard Bloch wrote:
>You repeat this again and again and got answers from me and others to
>such an ultimate argument. But did you ask yourself why Herbert does not
>participiate this discussion to help you?
Why does the lack of response from Herbert prove that this pa
This one time, at band camp, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>Robert Millan wrote:
>
>>But someone claimed there are critical problems with System.map in the way
>>my package is upgraded, which is not the case.
>
>If I get a new linux package after doing apt-get ugprade which replaces
>the one for my runnin
This one time, at band camp, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > * A package which requires a reboot on updates
> >
> > Oh, now I'm suposed to fix that, too? Bitch upstream for a run-time
> > updatable Linux kernel.
>
> ROTFL
>
> That's not the point, I thought that was obvious, sorry. The point
ii libc62.3.2.ds1-10 GNU C Library:
Shared libraries and Timezone data
ii perl 5.8.2-1 Larry Wall's
Practical Extraction and Report Language.
arch = i386
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# uname -a
Linux CR 2.4.22 #6 Sun Nov 9 00:27:15
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:56:04AM +0200, Cristian Rauta wrote:
> I know, maybe -devel is inappropriate list for my problems, but i don`t
> know another list for that.
debian-user might've been a better bet.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Hello,
> Does anybody know a way to find a mail sent to the BTS with a specific
> Message-ID? Neither google nor lists.d.o. nor gmane.org archive
> debian-bugs-(rc|dist).
See ~debian/lists/debian-bugs-dist/ on master.
Regards,
Joey
--
If nothing changes, everyt
On Nov/10, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I've ever met a guitar player who wouldn't know what I meant if I said,
> "hey, can you show me how to finger an F#7sus4 in the second position?"
I think you've known too few guitar players, or too seasoned ones.
Most "people that play guitar" (not "pr
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 02:50:33PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>> > Sure. My users are those who like the advantages described in:
>> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg00414.html
>> [...]
>> This *IMHO* does not includ
Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andreas Metzler wrote:
>> Does anybody know a way to find a mail sent to the BTS with a specific
>> Message-ID? Neither google nor lists.d.o. nor gmane.org archive
>> debian-bugs-(rc|dist).
> See ~debian/lists/debian-bugs-dist/ on master.
Thanks, that w
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:58:17AM -0800, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> (As if this ITP hasn't been nit-picked quite enough...)
>
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 03:12:19PM +0100, Mattia Dongili wrote:
> > Description : Synaptics TouchPad driver for XFree86
> >
> > An input driver for the XFree86
Juergen Kreileder wrote:
Frederik Dannemare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Frederik Dannemare wrote:
[cut]
Read the (recently closed) bug reports for nvidia-glx
[cut]
and install the current version of that package.
,[ /usr/share/doc/nvidia-glx/changelog.Debian.gz ]
| nvidia-graphics-drivers (1.0.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: zope-textindexng2
Version : 2.0.2
Upstream Author : Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://zope.org/Members/ajung/TextIndexNG/
* License : Several free llicenses (see below)
Description : Fulltext i
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 09:27:04PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.11.09.2118 +0100]:
> > Anyway, discussing this is not useful anymore. I just said I'll
> > provide it in the package.
>
> That won't do. Read Matthew's post carefully.
I read all
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 06:59:44PM +1100, Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
>
> I do not expect Robert's package to make any more of an attempt to convince
> you a reboot is required than any of the other kernel packages.
>
> I quote from the postinst generated by kernel-package:
>
>I repeat: you have
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 03:59:48PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 11:56:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:03:14AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
[...]
> > > I was thinking about xfree86-driver-synaptics, or
> > > xfree86-driver-input-synaptics, but
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:52:34AM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>
> >> This *IMHO* does not include a reason good enough to justify a 30MB
> >> source-package + resulting binary packages.
>
> > Why not?
>
> There is no equivalent amount of added value to the bound resources.
Yes, there is.
>
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:43:49PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > 1) You said before you were concerned about my package occupiing the package
> > namespace in the archive. The fact that you don't like the name of my
> > package
> > proves your previous argument was intentionaly bogus.
>
> The fa
Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
>I do not expect Robert's package to make any more of an attempt to convince
>you a reboot is required than any of the other kernel packages.
The current kernel packages include the version number in the package
name, whereas Robert seems to be suggesting that his package w
also sprach Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.11.10.1204 +0100]:
> > That won't do. Read Matthew's post carefully.
>
> I read all posts (or at least, attempt to). So please don't send redundant
> messages, they add more confusion.
... says the one who's ignoring Mail-Followup-To and explici
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: mozilla-locale-eu
Version : 1.5
Upstream Author : Librezale.org
* URL : http://www.librezale.org/mozilla/
* License : (GPL, LGPL, MPL)
Description : Mozilla Basque Language Package
Basque menu/message reso
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 08:04:21PM +0100, Mattia Dongili wrote:
> I'll package it. I'm a bit unsure about XFree configuration after
> installation. I'll simply provide a sample configuration and big fat
> README.Debian
Hey everyone,
Yeah, the configuration is a mess. I recently tried out 0.12.0 [
> How do the current kernel packages guarantee this?
>
> Why would Robert's package need to behave any differently?
The current kernel packages don't make the old stuff just dissappear,
so it's less of an issue in that case. In fact, the only "bad"
situation with the current kernel package
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 07:02:33PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> We are pleased to announce the first beta release of debian-installer, the
> new installation system for sarge. This first beta is for the following
> architectures only:
>
> * i386.
> * PowerPC, with support for the subarchitectures
Robert Millan wrote:
>On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:43:49PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
>> The fact of the too generic package name was mentioned before within
>> other arguments against your "linux" package.
>
>How many software programs called "linux" are around?
When people refer to "linux", they o
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:04:18AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 10:57:32PM +0100, Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> > These arguments are good, but...
> >
> > All packages which use this library depend on t1lib1. Of course, I can
> > provide dummy t1lib1 package which depend
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 09:20:36PM +0100, Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 12:22:14PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 11:09:27PM +0100, Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> > > I changed the naming scheme. All binary packages contain version in its
> > > name, i
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:55:21PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.11.10.1204 +0100]:
> > > That won't do. Read Matthew's post carefully.
> >
> > I read all posts (or at least, attempt to). So please don't send redundant
> > messages, they add mo
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 08:33:00PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> >
> >How bad? I'm happily running the Linux kernel without System.map right now.
>
> klogd will be unable to look up symbols, and ps and top need it for
> wchan to be displayable.
I'm so scared. wchan won't
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 07:47:37PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 02:40:11PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
>
> > The packaging method is the whole point. And indeed, some people like
> > the ability to do standard things like "apt-get source foo" and get
> > foo's sou
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 11:38:38AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
>
> >I do not expect Robert's package to make any more of an attempt to convince
> >you a reboot is required than any of the other kernel packages.
>
> The current kernel packages include the version number
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 10:24:05PM -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> I'm trying to figure out the reason why orbit2 is blocked from testing,
I can only guess, but I think it is because of orbit2's conflict with
liblinc-dev. I would really like to see ORBit2 2.8 to go into testing,
since I plan to remove t
Robert Millan wrote:
>On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 08:33:00PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> klogd will be unable to look up symbols, and ps and top need it for
>> wchan to be displayable.
>
>I'm so scared. wchan won't be displayable!
What were you saying about sarcasm? The fact remains that it's a b
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 06:44:55AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > How do the current kernel packages guarantee this?
> >
> > Why would Robert's package need to behave any differently?
>
> The current kernel packages don't make the old stuff just dissappear,
> so it's less of an issue
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:42:48PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> >How many software programs called "linux" are around?
>
> When people refer to "linux", they often mean the entire OS.
Yes. And when I refer to "something", I just mean "something".
> >> IIRC you prefered not to
> >> answer
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 02:22:14PM +0100, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 10:24:05PM -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> > I'm trying to figure out the reason why orbit2 is blocked from testing,
>
> I can only guess, but I think it is because of orbit2's conflict with
> liblinc-dev. I would
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:03:38PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 08:33:00PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > klogd will be unable to look up symbols, and ps and top need it for
> > wchan to be displayable.
>
> I'm so scared. wchan won't be displayable!
As a prospective ma
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 07:47:37PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > Look, if you want to waste time, waste _yours_. OTOH, if you want to
> > take part in the discussion, do bother to address the issues you are
> > being prese
Robert Millan writes:
> And even if it was, I claimed my packages has some advantages, but didn't
> claim it doesn't have any disadvantages.
Please explain why the putative advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
1) I haven't built a 2.4 kernel lately, but in linux-2.6, selecting
some mandatory f
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 06:44:55AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
>> > How do the current kernel packages guarantee this?
>> >
>> > Why would Robert's package need to behave any differently?
>>
>> The current kernel packages don't make the old s
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:24PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 09:37:16PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:32AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What not rena
I *know* I'm going to regret this...
On 10-Nov-03, 05:57 (CST), Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 07:47:37PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
>
> I'd really LOVE to. But this is my discussion. If I don't take part in it,
> who will respond to all these bogus arg
After publishing my first draft of the so-called Debconf Templates
Style Guide (DTSGmaybe this acronym is too close from the
DFSG) on October 28th, I have received many input and I have
completed some parts of the document.
Thanks to all people who already commented or encouraged me to
con
Hi,
working on the legal issues for LaTeX2HTML [1], at debian-legal [2], we
concluded that LaTeX2HTML will have to be removed from main because it
is considered non-free in the sense of the DFSG. After dozens of emails
with upstream and a thread [3] on the LaTeX2HTML mailing list, the
upstream mai
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> apt-get source kernel-image-* doesn't bring me the real source. Instead, if
> I want the real source I must be root and install a binary package. Do you
> deny that this is confusing?
I don't understand why you must be root, could you elaborate? I am no
#include
* Matthew Garrett [Mon, Nov 10 2003, 12:42:48PM]:
> >> IIRC you prefered not to
> >> answer to it but refered to an URL which did not contain the answers.
> >
> >I don't recall seeing this question before. So unless you provide a link to
> >that, you're liing.
>
> Technically, no - even
Jamie Wilkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This one time, at band camp, Eduard Bloch wrote:
>>You repeat this again and again and got answers from me and others to
>>such an ultimate argument. But did you ask yourself why Herbert does not
>>participiate this discussion to help you?
>
> Why does
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: oinkmaster
Version : 0.8
Upstream Author : Andreas Östling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.algonet.se/~nitzer/oinkmaster/
* License : BSD without advertising clause
Description : Simple snort rules m
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 04:06:02PM +0100, Roland Stigge wrote:
> Hi,
>
> working on the legal issues for LaTeX2HTML [1], at debian-legal [2], we
> concluded that LaTeX2HTML will have to be removed from main because it
> is considered non-free in the sense of the DFSG. After dozens of emails
> with
#include
* Jamie Wilkinson [Mon, Nov 10 2003, 06:54:22PM]:
> >The fact of the too generic package name was mentioned before within
> >other arguments against your "linux" package. IIRC you prefered not to
> >answer to it but refered to an URL which did not contain the answers.
>
> 'linux' is a p
Frederik Dannemare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> -8 is in fact the version I have installed, and it seems that I'm
> not the only one having problems with this one:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=219646
Ah, I see. Some games seem to try to load "/usr/lib/libGL.so" by
d
On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 10:58:03AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Nikita V. Youshchenko [Sat, Nov 08 2003, 12:39:58PM]:
> > Optimization is a serious issue too. Unlike most user space software, using
> > 386 kernel on modern PC will cause serious performance loose. Especially if
> > yo
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:56:04AM +0200, Cristian Rauta wrote:
> I know, maybe -devel is inappropriate list for my problems, but i don`t
> know another list for that.
> I think that problem was some time ago with woody ( see bug # 206187)
>
> btw my debian version is sid
Yes, see bug #206187
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 05:11:45PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> initrd-on-cramfs fix ,
You mean the kludge that craps in fs/block_dev.c? If so, feel free to
can it - the proper fix is to switch cramfs_read() to use of pagecache
and it's going upstream.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: spampd
Version : 2.11-1
Upstream Author : Maxim Paperno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.WorldDesign.com/index.cfm/rd/mta/spampd.htm
* License : GPL
Description : Spam proxy daemon using spamassassin
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Since you like playing word games... what else do you get when you
> > do apt-get source kernel-image-2.4.22-1-k7 if not
> > kernel-image-2.4.22-1-k7's source package?
> >
> > Do you want the Linux Kernel sources with all
> On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 10:58:03AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > #include
> >
> > * Nikita V. Youshchenko [Sat, Nov 08 2003, 12:39:58PM]:
> > > Optimization is a serious issue too. Unlike most user space
> > > software, using 386 kernel on modern PC will cause serious
> > > performance loose.
On 2003-11-10T17:28:10+0100 (Monday), François TOURDE wrote:
> Runlevels are distro dependants. Debian default is 2. Red Hat, for
> example is 2->text login, 3->[x|g|?]dm graphic login.
I had to retrofit my runlevels with the LSB-proposed run level usage.
*: Are there any plans to migrate to LSB
Scripsit Roberto Suarez Soto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Nov/10, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I've ever met a guitar player who wouldn't know what I meant if I said,
> > "hey, can you show me how to finger an F#7sus4 in the second position?"
> Most "people that play guitar" (not "pro guitar players")
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: gtk-acl
Version : 0.1.1
Upstream Author : Frédéric Gaudy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/gtk-acl/
* License : GPL
Description : GTK front end to manage ACL permissions
gtk-ac
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:04:18AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Recall that Apt figures out dependency chains for most people. The only
> people you're going to offend with the ugliness are people who already
> think like Debian developers. And in my experience, one can't cross the
> street w
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: mudpit
Version : 1.3
Upstream Author : G Savchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.fidelissec.com/mudpit.html
* License : GPL
Description : Spool processor for Snort's unified log/alert files
Mudpit i
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tobias Wolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 2003-11-10T17:28:10+0100 (Monday), François TOURDE wrote:
>> Runlevels are distro dependants. Debian default is 2. Red Hat, for
>> example is 2->text login, 3->[x|g|?]dm graphic login.
>
>I had to retrofit my runlevels wi
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 08:17:58PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> - I'm not trying to make a package, the package is already made and it works
>fine. I'm using it right now.
Okay, please don't write software or maintain any packages.
I can't think of anything more indicative of total inexperi
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> But the real results are shown through Popularity Contest [1] when my package
> reaches unstable. So keep your arguments on this for later.
That is possibly the stupidest thing I have seen all week.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux
The discussion about the libc6-dev package and its headers let me to the
impression that the Debian package structure isn't optimal for
libraries. If anyone wants to build his own version of a package (i.e.
libwxgtk2.4) he has to get all the dependent underlying dev packages as
well. This is a long
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 11:58:46AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:43:49PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > > 1) You said before you were concerned about my package occupiing the
> > > package
> > > namespace in the archive. The fact that you don't like the name of my
> > >
[If, after reading this mail, you continue to make the same invalid
assertions and broken arguments, then you should not be surprised when
people write you off as a troll].
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:01:01AM +1100, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 01:32:44 +0800
> Cameron Patrick <[EMAIL
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 02:17:59PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I wanted to try Sarge installer for a new box and thus I used jigdo with
>
>
> http://gluck.debian.org/cdimage/testing/jigdo-area/i386/sarge-i386-1.jigdo
>
> Unfortunately one package seems to be removed from the mirrors (see
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
On Monday 10 November 2003 19:54, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> Sometimes it even causes programs to stop functioning entirely
> (athlon and p4, gcc 3.0.0 until sometime in 3.1.x).
Especially on other architechtures (like arm) that have seen some horrific
bugs creep into gcc to do with certain optimis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Otto Wyss) writes:
> The discussion about the libc6-dev package and its headers let me to the
> impression that the Debian package structure isn't optimal for
> libraries. If anyone wants to build his own version of a package (i.e.
> libwxgtk2.4) he has to get all the dependent
Hello!
The discussion doesn't seem to be very productive any more.
Time to come to a compromise?
Obviously, Robert is not going to retreat.
He has put much time in posting already and hopefully will
spend much more time in making a good package (if this is
possible). So let him build his packag
A program that is CPU bound will benefit from compiler optimisations.
Compiler optimisation wont make any noticable improvment on largely IO
bound applications.
I was deliberatly speaking generally because it is a grey area, there
are very few practical programs that are completely CPU bound or
c
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 08:46:50AM +1100, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> A program that is CPU bound will benefit from compiler optimisations.
It is not wise to make generalizations about the effects of compiler
optimizations, because they vary widely from one chunk of code to the next.
> Other than exp
The freebsd developpers are making some changes to the XFree86 ports to
reduce the pain associated with upgrading and maintaining XFree86.
http://www.freebsdforums.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=16052
I found this idea very interesting. I think that the debian project should
take more advant
On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 15:46, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> A program that is CPU bound will benefit from compiler optimisations.
A program that is CPU-bound *and* can be encoded more efficiently will
benefit from compiler optimizations. Some CPU bound things just aren't
going to be helped much by vectori
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:29:48 + Colin Watson wrote:
>
> The lurkers support me in email
> They all think I'm great don't you know.
> You posters just don't understand me
> But soon you will reap what you sow.
>
> Lurkers, lurkers, lurkers support me, you'll see, you'll see
> off in
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> A program that is CPU-bound *and* can be encoded more efficiently will
> benefit from compiler optimizations. Some CPU bound things just aren't
> going to be helped much by vectorization, instruction reordering, etc. I
> mean, integer multiply is integer
Currently there seems to be a problem with the Sarge-i386-1.jigdo file.
I tried to build/download a new CD but it complains 57 files where
missing. Even getting the .jigdo/.template files again or choosing
another mirror didn't help. The script can only be stopped so I don't
know how to proceed fur
Hi,
some additional info:
On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 16:54, Adrian Bunk wrote to #204684:
> after reading through #204684, I'd suggest a different approach for
> latex2html:
> - move latex2html to non-free without renaming it
> - file RC bugs against packages in main build depending on latex2html
>
ma, 2003-11-10 kello 19:22, Eike Sauer kirjoitti:
> The discussion doesn't seem to be very productive any more.
> Time to come to a compromise?
Yes, please.
I am surprised at the vehemence at someone who dares do something new. I
don't care whether his approach is technically valid or not: as lon
On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 16:27, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
>
> > A program that is CPU-bound *and* can be encoded more efficiently will
> > benefit from compiler optimizations. Some CPU bound things just aren't
> > going to be helped much by vectorization, instructi
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 10:20:42PM +, Carlos Sousa wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:29:48 + Colin Watson wrote:
> > The lurkers support me in email
> > They all think I'm great don't you know.
> > You posters just don't understand me
> > But soon you will reap what you sow.
[...]
> >
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 06:22:13PM +0100, Eike Sauer wrote:
> The discussion doesn't seem to be very productive any more.
> Time to come to a compromise?
>
> Obviously, Robert is not going to retreat.
He doesn't need to, he can be slapped down.
> OTOH, most people (publicly) stating anything abo
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:44:20PM +, Anthraxz __ wrote:
^^^
If you don't have a proper From line, everybody will think you're a
dickhead.
> The freebsd developpers are making some changes to the XFree86 ports to
> reduce the pain associated
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:39:00 +
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:44:20PM +, Anthraxz __ wrote:
> ^^^
>
> If you don't have a proper From line, everybody will think you're a
> dickhead.
Andrew, i think
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 00:39, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:44:20PM +, Anthraxz __ wrote:
>
> > The freebsd developpers are making some changes to the XFree86 ports to
> > reduce the pain associated with upgrading and maintaining XFree86.
> >
> > http://www.freebsdforums
I demand that Adam Heath may or may not have written...
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
>> A program that is CPU-bound *and* can be encoded more efficiently will
>> benefit from compiler optimizations. Some CPU bound things just aren't
>> going to be helped much by vectorization, instr
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Eike Sauer wrote:
> What about letting Robert build and upload (if ftp-masters agree)
> his package, *if* he puts it in experimental, uses a description
> that contains a warning about the experimental status of the
> package in a prominent place, and not calling it "linux", b
Andrew Suffield schrieb:
> He doesn't need to, he can be slapped down.
"Keine Gewalt!" ("No violence!")
> We don't ignore minor issues just because there are major ones.
So let's hope Robert can cope with minor issues
and only talk about the big ones for now.
> - this packages adds nothing, a
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Santiago Vila wrote:
> If Robert is such an incompetent developer as some people say and the
> package does not build on the 11 different architectures, then the
> package will not propagate to testing and the world will be safe from
> the disaster.
You misunderstand how test
This one time, at band camp, Henning Makholm said:
> Scripsit Roberto Suarez Soto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Nov/10, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > > I've ever met a guitar player who wouldn't know what I meant if I said,
> > > "hey, can you show me how to finger an F#7sus4 in the second position?"
On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 19:31, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> > If Robert is such an incompetent developer as some people say and the
> > package does not build on the 11 different architectures, then the
> > package will not propagate to testing and the world will
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 01:14:30AM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 00:39, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:44:20PM +, Anthraxz __ wrote:
> > > The freebsd developpers are making some changes to the XFree86 ports to
> > > reduce the pain associated with
On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 06:43:09PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> And Nikita just pointed out there's libc6-i686. It might make sense to add
> linux-i686 too. I'm open for discussing that, but this discussion doesn't
> belong on the ITP bug.
And why is it only for 2.6 kernels? The processor specif
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 07:17:13PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 06:43:09PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > And Nikita just pointed out there's libc6-i686. It might make sense to add
> > linux-i686 too. I'm open for discussing that, but this discussion doesn't
> > belong on the
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
