Anthony Towns wrote:
> Not directly afaik. If you say "Archive Signing Key (Date <= 2006-05-01)"
> apt could parse that from gpgv's output and perform the check itself, or add
> a "The key used to sign these packages expired on 2006-05-01; if you obtained
> this media after that date, you may have
Way to go Joey - well demonstrated :)
Andy
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 10 January 2006 03:08, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> why the can't you?
I can accept the fact that people complain about bugs / missing enhancements
on all kinds of mailing lists, bug tracking systems, feature request
documents and similiar. I however can not accept that
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 01:13:06AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 19:13 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Mon, 09 Jan 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> > > Miles Bader wrote:
> [snip]
> >
> > I, for one, am far more interested in the message than the way which
> > the message
Il giorno lun, 09/01/2006 alle 16.02 -0800, Matt Zimmerman ha scritto:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:32:32AM +0100, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> > What really I don't understand is how a proprietary tool can promote
> > more efficient collaboration on the development of _free software_.
> > Sounds
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006, Clint Adams wrote:
> ttf-kacst
> ttf-paktype
I am interested by these one, as maintainer of ttf-arabeyes.
> If you want one of these, upload it with yourself as Maintainer.
> Immediately.
My sponsor is going to upload them (thanks Christian!)
Thanks for your work on these
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 07:03:24AM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>
> The UK authorities can take away my amateur licence and fine me (and
> potentially put me in jail) for wilfully breaking the terms of my
> licence. My hobby is governed by an international agreement - so
> the ITU in Berne coul
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 01:03:33AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> How exactly do IP packets get transmitted via packet radio? Morse
> code, with binary files uuencoded?
Is that a serious question?
Packet radio IS the layer 1/2, which clearly rules out Morse code.
In fact, IP is encapsulated into AX
[Most of the replies from people appear to have completely missed the
point, but I'll just pick up on this one because it's not so far
off...]
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 11:52:43AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> It's also important to not completely conflate the people who work for
> Canonical with the
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> I don't[sic] the same rant over others Debian related companies
Have you ever actually subscribed to any Debian mailing lists?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `'
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 02:37:53PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> The same happened to the planner package, and has been reported as
>> #344538. It seems that hppa buildd is broken, don't know yet whether
>> the buildd admin (Lamont) or anybody of the de
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 05:00:53PM +0100, Isaac Clerencia wrote:
>> On Monday, 9 January 2006 15:03, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
>> > Unfortunately kpdf upstream seems quite reluctant to switch to poppler, see
>> > http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11945
Apparently - theres a major problem with immodule in Qt at the moment - which
causes
KeyReleasedEvent ro return a value of 0 for any QKeyEvent ... which is bad -
and means that anything
that relies on it will have problems processing the keypresses.
I found this out after my app in ubuntu had pr
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:08:14AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 02:37:53PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> The same happened to the planner package, and has been reported as
> >> #344538. It seems that hppa buildd is broken, do
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:08:14AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>
>> It *seems* it has been fixed; but I don't know whether it has just
>> disappeared, or has been fixed by human intervention, and if yes by
>> which. Since the first may be true, it might
Steve Langasek writes:
> Huh? The bottom of that bug log shows a proposed solution that should work
> just fine.
Ok, that's not quite how I read it. The discussion ended with an idea
for a fix and invitation to make such a package. That package never
materialized, so I assumed there must be mo
On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 09:28 +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 01:13:06AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 19:13 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > On Mon, 09 Jan 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> > > > Miles Bader wrote:
> > [snip]
> > >
> > > I, for one, a
On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 20:52 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 01:03:33AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > How exactly do IP packets get transmitted via packet radio? Morse
> > code, with binary files uuencoded?
>
> Is that a serious question?
Totally serious, since the only way
* Matthew Garrett [Tue, 10 Jan 2006 02:50:56 +]:
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > i've thought for a long time about how to reply to your message.
> Let's quickly outline what's happened here:
> 1) Luke files a bug agains Debian. So far, so good.
> 2) Some time l
On 1/10/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> > I don't[sic] the same rant over others Debian related companies
>
> Have you ever actually subscribed to any Debian mailing lists?
>
Hi Andrew,
Don't be fooled by From mail
* Russ Allbery:
> Debian isn't perfect at this. There are portions of the Debian
> infrastructure where the exact version that Debian is running are not
> necessarily available. However, these are generally considered within the
> project to be anomolies and Debian *does* have a general committm
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:08:14AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > or a bug in some
> > maintainer script or other;
> How a bug in a maintainer script could have the result that installing
> an arch-all package fails because an other arch-all package is no
Scripsit Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Though I love the aptitude interface and functionality, I've noticed
> that on my home machine (not so fast, but not too bad with average
> software), normal aptitude operation has been getting more and more
> slothlike in recent times, to the point where
LaMont Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:08:14AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > or a bug in some
>> > maintainer script or other;
>> How a bug in a maintainer script could have the result that installing
>> an arch-all packa
Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> Dishonesty is *not* an equivalent substitute for respect. If you're
> being nice to somebody even though you don't like them, that doesn't
> make you a better person, it just makes you a liar.
It is possible to be nice to someone that you do not like, and to do so
hones
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:24:47PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Historically such
> > problems were unpleasantly frequent on buildds due to a combination of buggy
> > postrm scripts, and a bug in dpkg's rollback support when calling dpkg
> > --purge fo
On Tuesday 10 January 2006 03:44, Miles Bader wrote:
> Juergen Salk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > According to their package descriptions, we seem to have exactly
> > six powerful text editors in Debian. These are elvis, jove,
> > mined, ne, nedit and zed. Emacs, vim and many others do not
> > be
Hello! We are a young couple from the Republic of Moldova (Central Europe). We graduated the State University of Moldova, Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literatures this year (2005) and we can't find a job concerning our knowledge. So we decided to open a translations bureau here, in Moldova,
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Victor Seva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libpwc
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : Luc Saillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.saillard.org/linux/pwc/files/
* License : LGPL
Description : library to un
On Monday 09 January 2006 09:52, Zak B. Elep wrote:
> On 1/9/06, Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I intend to orphan the following packages:
> >
> > bricolage
> > dbacl
>
> I intend to adopt the above packages.
>
> > If you want one of these, upload it with yourself as Maintainer.
> > Imm
On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 09:28 +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 01:13:06AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 19:13 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > On Mon, 09 Jan 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> > > > Miles Bader wrote:
> > [snip]
> > >
> > > I, for one, a
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Russ Allbery:
>> Debian isn't perfect at this. There are portions of the Debian
>> infrastructure where the exact version that Debian is running are not
>> necessarily available. However, these are generally considered within
>> the project to be an
On Tuesday 10 January 2006 13:04, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Matthew Garrett [Tue, 10 Jan 2006 02:50:56 +]:
> > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > i've thought for a long time about how to reply to your message.
> >
> > Let's quickly outline what's happened here:
> >
>
Package: installwatch
Version: 0.6.3-2
Severity: normal
I haven't touched installwatch in quite some time, and no longer have
any real interest in the beastie, so I've decided to orphan this package.
At one point Matt Hope had expressed interest in taking it over (more
recent versions are bundled
"Joey Hess" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
debconf
debconf-english
debconf-i18n
These are all necessary, and debconf is an essential package which is
not subject to the circular dependency postinst ordering problems afaik.
Well
On Saturday 20 February 2010 09:15, Joey Hess wrote:
> Nonzero exit; odd, it doesn't seem to notice that the key is expired at
> all. But apt won't use gpgv like that, I suppose, but instead like
> this:
Note though that other packages, like debmirror, do:
my $GPG="gpg --no-tty -q";
[...]
if (!-f
Stephan Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - Do not use foul language; besides, some people receive the lists
> via packet radio, where swearing is illegal.
Are you saying some people are transmitting the lists via radio
without taking personal responsiblity for their transmissions? Shame
on
Gustavo Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's up to Canonical how they will contribute back to the community,
> IMHO. I don't the same rant over others Debian related companies so
> i'm assuming that we're wasting time shooting Canonical, (mainly)
> because Ubuntu is sucessful.
No, I think it
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:43:16PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Dishonesty is *not* an equivalent substitute for respect. If you're
> > being nice to somebody even though you don't like them, that doesn't
> > make you a better person, it just makes you a liar.
> With beliefs like that, no wonder t
Adrian von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> You're right in general, but there actually seems to be a fairly
>> distinct divide in editors, between "simple editors for newbs" and
>> "not-so-simple but, er, powerful editors"
>
> So vim is in the simple, for newbies class?
Naw, it just needs "p
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Stephan Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
- Do not use foul language; besides, some people receive the lists
via packet radio, where swearing is illegal.
Are you saying some people are transmitting the lists via radio
without taking personal responsiblit
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 11:25:17AM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 09:26:33AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > Hello! This is one of 5 RC bugs, apparently with no maintainer response.
> > Apparently the list which is listed as the maintainer is rejecting messages
> > (33
Frans Pop wrote:
> On Saturday 20 February 2010 09:15, Joey Hess wrote:
>>Nonzero exit; odd, it doesn't seem to notice that the key is expired at
>>all. But apt won't use gpgv like that, I suppose, but instead like
>>this:
> Note though that other packages, like debmirror, do:
>
> my $GPG="gpg --
43 matches
Mail list logo
