Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 07:24:52PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Robert Millan wrote:
>>
>> >There's no consistency in that, since FreeBSD and NetBSD are not kernels.
>>
>> Robert, your (frankly autistic) worldview worries me. What do you
>> believe
Just thought I should give you a better reply.
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 07:24:52PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
>
> >There's no consistency in that, since FreeBSD and NetBSD are not kernels.
>
> Robert, your (frankly autistic) worldview worries me. What do you
> believe w
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I apologise if this is covered elsewhere, I am currently totally
> swamped and can't afford too much time for Debian.
>
> I am going to be away from my machine(s) starting 22 Nov until the
> middle of December. I currently have 1 RC bug and several oth
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:49:49PM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
> >
> > Yes.
>
> Could you elaborate? The obvious interpretation of your "Yes" is that
> you do not understand a large part of your target audience (new users
> who do not customize their kernels). By and large, that set of users
> d
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 02:02:55PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> A liar? You have a very slant view on life.
>
> It's much better to say "you are mistaken" or "you are misinformed" then to
> call someone a liar. Because you have said it this way, it looks badly on
> you, no matter what the other pe
Below are the errors I am getting from apt-get on some machines running recent
unstable. Is this a known bug or have I screwed up something?
I've tried downgrading libc6 and a few other things but to no avail.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# apt-get update
Get:1 http://ftp.monash.edu.au unstable/main Pack
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 10:26:57PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> I apologise if this is covered elsewhere, I am currently totally
> swamped and can't afford too much time for Debian.
>
> I am going to be away from my machine(s) starting 22 Nov until the
> middle of December. I currently have 1 R
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Robert Millan wrote:
>
> Just thought I should give you a better reply.
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 07:24:52PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Robert Millan wrote:
> >
> > >There's no consistency in that, since FreeBSD and NetBSD are not kernels.
> >
> > Robert, your (frankl
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 03:59, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > Also I believe that Lee's statement regarding NIS is incorrect,
> > unix_chkpwd only does /etc/shadow.
>
> testing.
>
> You are wrong, unix_chkpwd does NIS (at least in the szenario I just
> tested). After changing unix_chkpwd from 4755 root
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Russell Coker wrote:
> Below are the errors I am getting from apt-get on some machines running recent
> unstable. Is this a known bug or have I screwed up something?
>
> I've tried downgrading libc6 and a few other things but to no avail.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# apt-get upda
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 01:24:32PM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Paul Hampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Cistron begat FreeRADIUS. FreeRADIUS is certainly actively maintained
> >upstream. xtRADIUS is also begat of Cistron. I'd assumed that Cistron
> >i
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:53:39PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:35:53AM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote:
> > I've been splitting out ODBC support locally since the very beginning,
> > but everytime I mooted it, Wichert Akkerman (amongst others, but he was
> > at the time gat
Scripsit Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Anyway, on the given topic, are "reverse-suggests" possible?
Quoth debian-policy, section 7.2:
|Enhances
| This field is similar to Suggests but works in the opposite
| direction. It is used to declare that a package can enhance the
| fu
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 10:43:58AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 03:59, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>>> Also I believe that Lee's statement regarding NIS is incorrect,
>>> unix_chkpwd only does /etc/shadow.
>> testing.
>> You are wrong, unix_chkpwd does NIS (at least in the sze
> Overly terse answers (and your previous dismissals of questions as
> "trivial" despite attempts to explain why they are non-trivial) do not
> reassure anyone that you are capable of packaging a critical system
> component, especially in an ambitiously different way.
I'm reassured.
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:15, Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Or do you have to be root for getpwnam() to work on NIS accounts?
>
> In certain NIS configurations you can only access the hashed password
> if your query to the NIS server comes from a privileged port <=1024,
> i.e. afaict
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 11:04:04PM +0100, Rico -mc- Gloeckner wrote:
> Saying that "another ftpmaster might think different" is proof enough
> of a doubt; it would be better to say: "your package has to wait, i will
> clear up with the group of ftpmasters wether this package is acceptable
> for
Scripsit Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Maybe we should have a debconf option for whether the program in question is
> to be SETUID root or SETGID shadow? Then the minority of people who use NIS
> can have full functionality, while the majority of people who don't use NIS
> can have bette
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 11:50:05AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:15, Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > Or do you have to be root for getpwnam() to work on NIS accounts?
> > In certain NIS configurations you can only access the hashed password
> > if your qu
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 10:28:15AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:41:10PM +0100, Roberto Suarez Soto wrote:
> > > Sure, keep lowering the quality of Debian in matter of freedom,
> > > there's no matter discussing that.
> > I don't see how making more packages availabl
101 - 120 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
