"Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David,
>
> this is the place were source code lives:
>
> http://www.gnusolaris.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/browser/gnusolaris1/gnu
, Permission Denied
| Insufficient permissions to access /gnusolaris1/gnu
`
Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 09:35:38PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> A new version of kernel-package is imminent, it is undergoing
> boot camp out in experimental. For the impatient, this release brings
> the log awaited debconf usage for kernel image packages -- and the
> raison d'etre
* Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-08 00:28:07]:
> "The authors have the freedom to pick a DFSG-free license" means that
> they *may* do so, but are not required to. Am I correct?
>
> IMHO, DebConf paper authors should be *required* to publish in a
> DFSG-free manner, as a condition for
On Tuesday 08 November 2005 01:48, Erast Benson wrote:
> www.gnusolaris.org is *the same place*.
Oh, I expected some tar-ball to be linked from the same place as the ISOs
(i.e. the Downloads page) not some point-and-click SVN-webinterface.
> > this URL also does _neither_ offer access to the apt
Hi,
I posted this question yesterday on -mentors, but since nobody answered,
it seems it isn't as trivial as I had hoped.
I have either some fundamental misunderstanding of how debconf or
maintainer scripts work, or there is an error in the descriptioin of how
debconf-using scripts should handle
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Matt Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: miredo
Version : 0.5.3
Upstream Author : Rémi Denis-Courmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.simphalempin.com/dev/miredo/
* License : GPL v2
Description : IPv6 T
Hi,
once again, the ldap-part of the bts2ldap-gateway changed its location.
It is now on bts2ldap.debian.net (but this host name has the advantage
that it can stay, even if the ldap-server moves once again :), port is
10101.
Thanks to Andrew Pollock for offering some space on one of his machines
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Matt Zagrabelny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: cdpr
Version : 2.2.0
Upstream Author : Lance O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.d.umn.edu/~mzagrabe/debian/cdpr/
* License : GPL
Description : Cisco D
El Martes, 8 de Noviembre de 2005 1:11, Thomas Bushnell BSG escribió:
> "Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I understand your concern. We will release ISO image with CDDL/GPL
> > sources very soon. Majority of them already available at /apt. The rest
> > is comming.
>
> Once again, delet
* Andy Teijelo Pérez:
> El Martes, 8 de Noviembre de 2005 1:11, Thomas Bushnell BSG escribió:
>> "Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > I understand your concern. We will release ISO image with CDDL/GPL
>> > sources very soon. Majority of them already available at /apt. The rest
>> > is c
Szia!
Levelet kaptam Tõled a [EMAIL PROTECTED] email címemre! Ezt a postafiókomat már
nem használom!
Légyszives ide írj: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cég Vezetõ
* Thomas Bushnell BSG ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [051108 07:11]:
> "Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I understand your concern. We will release ISO image with CDDL/GPL sources
> > very soon. Majority of them already available at /apt. The rest is
> > comming.
> Once again, delete the binari
Suppose someone has reported a bug that the maintainer can't
reproduce, but the reporter can. Is it reasonable for the maintainer
to email the reporter and ask whether a new version fixes the problem,
or is that considered obnoxious?
--
Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u
--
To UNSU
Re: Eric Cooper in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Suppose someone has reported a bug that the maintainer can't
> reproduce, but the reporter can. Is it reasonable for the maintainer
> to email the reporter and ask whether a new version fixes the problem,
> or is that considered obnoxious?
You mean, rather
On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 09:53 -0500, Eric Cooper wrote:
> Suppose someone has reported a bug that the maintainer can't
> reproduce, but the reporter can. Is it reasonable for the maintainer
> to email the reporter and ask whether a new version fixes the problem,
> or is that considered obnoxious?
D
On Nov 08, Eric Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Suppose someone has reported a bug that the maintainer can't
> reproduce, but the reporter can. Is it reasonable for the maintainer
> to email the reporter and ask whether a new version fixes the problem,
> or is that considered obnoxious?
It's
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 03:43:36PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> You could send them e.g. a DMCA Takedown Notice. Especially as they
> didn't listen before. Of course only if you're the author of one of the
> relevant programms.
you could also send their isp(s) and/or hosting provider(s) said
tak
Hi,
* Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-08 16:18]:
> On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 09:53 -0500, Eric Cooper wrote:
> > Suppose someone has reported a bug that the maintainer can't
> > reproduce, but the reporter can. Is it reasonable for the maintainer
> > to email the reporter and ask whether a ne
Le lundi 07 novembre 2005 à 14:06 +0100, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
> On Nov 07, Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
> > > not even know where to find one).
> > At least /sbin/bootlogd does not work without BSD ptys an
(X-post to kde-devel. please reply to debian-devel@lists.debian.org)
Liebe Entwickler, dear developers,
as far as I can tell, current alternatives to commercial products (I
dare name Abbyy Finereader and Omnipage Pro) such as gocr and ocrad,
fail to reach the same standards. This is partly a ma
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Eugeniy Meshcheryakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: systemtap
Upstream Authors: Frank Ch. Eigler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Graydon Hoare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Martin Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To
Frank Küster wrote:
> However, in case apt-utils is installed, this script will be run twice:
> Once by dpkg-preconfigure, i.e. in the preinst stage, and once by
> confmodule when the postinst script sources confmodule. As far as I can
> see, this will have a confusing effect. Assume the configfi
> On Tuesday 08 November 2005 01:48, Erast Benson wrote:
>> www.gnusolaris.org is *the same place*.
>
> Oh, I expected some tar-ball to be linked from the same place as the ISOs
> (i.e. the Downloads page) not some point-and-click SVN-webinterface.
>
>> > this URL also does _neither_ offer access t
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dpkg-reconfigure runs the config script exactly once, so the config file
> is read once, its values are used for defaults to the questions to allow
> reconfiguration, and are saved to the config file by the postinst.
Yes, I was wrong about this - it's only r
(
Please mail followups to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-legal@lists.debian.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
)
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 10:13:42AM -0500, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Quoting Lionel Elie Mamane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 08:51:26PM -0500, Roberto C. Sanc
On Tuesday 08 November 2005 17:17, Erast Benson wrote:
> OK, for your convenient, http://www.gnusolaris.org/sources shold has
> everything latest/not-committed tarballs of source code with our
> modifications for every package we are using.
>
> We are preparing cron job, so, will update them every
Frank Küster wrote:
> I found no way to cleanly solve the problem of
>
> - writing the current state into the debconf database, so that
> noninteractive installs don't change anything
>
> - actually reflect changed answers in the system.
The config script is passed parameters that you can use
Andy Teijelo Pérez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> El Martes, 8 de Noviembre de 2005 1:11, Thomas Bushnell BSG escribió:
>> "Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > I understand your concern. We will release ISO image with CDDL/GPL
>> > sources very soon. Majority of them already available at
Eric Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Suppose someone has reported a bug that the maintainer can't
> reproduce, but the reporter can. Is it reasonable for the maintainer
> to email the reporter and ask whether a new version fixes the problem,
> or is that considered obnoxious?
It's certainly
> On Tuesday 08 November 2005 17:17, Erast Benson wrote:
>> OK, for your convenient, http://www.gnusolaris.org/sources shold has
>> everything latest/not-committed tarballs of source code with our
>> modifications for every package we are using.
>>
>> We are preparing cron job, so, will update them
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Andy Teijelo Pérez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
El Martes, 8 de Noviembre de 2005 1:11, Thomas Bushnell BSG escribió:
"Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I understand your concern. We will release ISO image with CDDL/GPL
sources very soon. Majority of them alr
On 11/8/05, Alex Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note that we have limited resources.
How is that relevant?
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Erast Benson wrote:
> OK, for your convenient, http://www.gnusolaris.org/sources shold has
> everything latest/not-committed tarballs of source code with our
> modifications for every package we are using.
>
> We are preparing cron job, so, will update them every night until we
On 11/8/05, Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> This is the (long awaited) report from the DevJam (Debian Java
> Meeting) from Oldenburg (September 23 2005)[0]. You can find other
> reports at the SkoleLinux Wiki[1] or
Package: lintian
Severity: wishlist
I am including a list of 73 packages which happened to be installed on
my laptop which contain a maintscript with the fragment:
# dh_installdeb will replace this with shell code automatically
# generated by other debhelper scripts.
Maybe this is a debhelpe
On Tuesday 08 November 2005 20:29, Erast Benson wrote:
> > For example, I have found
> > http://www.gnusolaris.org/apt/dists/elatte-unstable/main/binary-solaris-i
> >386/base/apt_0.6.40.1-1.1_solaris-i386.deb which seems to be installed on
> > the ISO image, but no corresponding source package unde
Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Package: lintian
> Severity: wishlist
> I am including a list of 73 packages which happened to be installed on
> my laptop which contain a maintscript with the fragment:
> # dh_installdeb will replace this with shell code automatically
> # generate
Eric Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Suppose someone has reported a bug that the maintainer can't
> reproduce, but the reporter can. Is it reasonable for the maintainer
> to email the reporter and ask whether a new version fixes the problem,
> or is that considered obnoxious?
I think it's a
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, I prefer the approach over apt-cacher, as the apt-sources
> entries remain independent of the server that will be used to retrieve
> the files.
I originally kept away from apt-cacher for exactly that reason, but it
now (as of version 1.0.6) support
Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OH. Maybe I understand. The maintscripts of the packages in my list
> were probably initially dh_make templates, and the maintainers didn't
> remove that comment. The packages not in my list either have
> maintscripts created from scratch by debhelper
Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anyone have a suggestion about what to do when the maintainer
> can't reproduce it and the reporter can only reproduce it on one
> of his machines? I'm kind of stymied on #329333 for Autoconf.
> No idea what the problem is here.
Well, the problem is that f
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 12:57:40PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "This" refers to the #DEBHELPER# token.
OH. Maybe I understand. The maintscripts of the packages in my list
were probably initially dh_make templates, and the maintainers didn't
remove that
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Erast Benson wrote:
>
>> OK, for your convenient, http://www.gnusolaris.org/sources shold has
>> everything latest/not-committed tarballs of source code with our
>> modifications for every package we are using.
>>
>> We are preparing cron job, so, will update them every night
Scripsit Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Don't you agree that seeing non-free or even undistributable (no license
> means "All Rights Reserved", with current laws!) papers at a DebConf is
> really a shame?
I don't.
Remember that non-free != evil, and that some of the arguments why
free soft
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Florent Bayle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: natstat
Version : 0.0.10
Upstream Author : Tommy Wallberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://svearike.sytes.net/natstat/
* License
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 07:43:14 +0100, Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Quoting Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>> Hi,
>>
>> A new version of kernel-package is imminent, it is undergoing boot
>> camp out in experimental. For the impatient, this release brings
>> the log awaited de
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 09:07:12AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Like I said, this defeats the entire point of the FHS.
What is the "entire point" of the FHS? If it is to disallow alternative
implementations of the same interface to co-exist then the FHS is
broken. Fortunately, this is not my read
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 03:39:23PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> They began distributing binaries to a large audience *after* they were
> notified of the problems. This gives the impression that they don't
> care about GPL compliance, and want to gain publicity *now*,
> exploiting the "GNU" and "
Anthony Towns wrote:
> I'm amazed at the level of intolerence that's greeting a pretty major
> contribution to the free software community. There are, what, five major
> OS/kernels for PCs/workstatsions these days -- Windows, OS X, Solaris,
> BSD and Linux. How does it make any sense at all to be
Eric Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Suppose someone has reported a bug that the maintainer can't
> reproduce, but the reporter can. Is it reasonable for the maintainer
> to email the reporter and ask whether a new version fixes the problem,
> or is that considered obnoxious?
It doesn't seem
Anthony:
I'm amazed at the level of intolerence that's greeting a pretty major
contribution to the free software community. There are, what, five major
OS/kernels for PCs/workstatsions these days -- Windows, OS X, Solaris,
BSD and Linux. How does it make any sense at all to be hostile to the
fac
Eric:
Miles Bader wrote:
Eric Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Suppose someone has reported a bug that the maintainer can't
reproduce, but the reporter can. Is it reasonable for the maintainer
to email the reporter and ask whether a new version fixes the problem,
or is that considered ob
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Erast Benson wrote:
> > The source and binaries *must* match, period. You can't have tarballs
> > being
> > constantly upgraded, and the binaries not, or vice versa. The
> > source+binary
> > must be done as a whole unit.
> >
> > Also, with this email, I am making a formal re
On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 11:39:20AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I'm amazed at the level of intolerence that's greeting a pretty major
> contribution to the free software community. There are, what, five major
> OS/kernels for PCs/workstatsions these days -- Windows, OS X, Solaris,
> BSD and Linux.
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 08:29:31PM -0600, Bill Gatliff wrote:
> I think that in this instant case, the "hostility" is the allegation
> that a Debian-based "GNU/Solaris" system as described by Erast isn't
> possible.
Of course it's possible. Trivially: you do it by buying a majority of
shares i
On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 02:23:30AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I'm amazed at the level of intolerence that's greeting a pretty major
> > contribution to the free software community. There are, what, five major
> > OS/kernels for PCs/workstatsions these days -- Windows,
Anthony Towns writes:
> When you see some code that's not available under the GPL's terms,
> what's your reaction:
>
> (a) gosh, what can I do to convince the author to give it to me
> under the GPL?
>
> (b) you aren't/shouldn't be allowed to do that. stop now.
>
> (c) *shrug*
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 08:55:41PM -0600, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> You'll note that even in the initial part of the thread when Debian
> folks were (generally) being polite,
From the very first response:
] > and openness.
] You keep using that word. I do not think it means, what you think it
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libpoe-filter-ircd-perl
Version : 1.2-1
Upstream Author : Jonathan Steinert, now Chris Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL or Web page : http://search.cpan.org/~bingos/POE-Filter-IRCD-1.2/
* License : GPL/Artistic
Descripti
Anthony:
Loved your "for those of you following at home" post.
As is "pressing" people. You can justify hostility, certainly; but it's
at least worth trying "honest and cooperative" as an approach first.
It didn't start out that way, not as I read it anyway.
When you see some code that's
60 matches
Mail list logo
