Thank you Harald for scrutinizing.
Am Fri, 28 May 2010 14:50:27 +0200
schrieb Harald Braumann:
> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 11:30:25AM +0200, C. Gatzemeier wrote:
> > I'm not sure yet, if I do properly understand the point when/why
> > relaxing conditionally is a bad idea. To me, setting *fixed* um
[Harald Braumann]
> Why would you create such a mixed system? I don't see a usecase for
> that.
You should not really allow your lack of imagination to limit what
computer systems can handle. :)
Here at the University of Oslo, the user database is probably 25 years
old, and some users have priva
On Fri, 28 May 2010 16:44:11 -0400 (EDT), Peter Samuelson wrote:
> Stephen Powell wrote:
>> It *does* recognize lilo and has special logic to patch lilo after
>> the restore so that the machine will boot.
>
> So can this software be fooled into thinking it is dealing with lilo?
> Would it be suffi
On 2010-05-26 00:18:23 +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> You're getting things the wrong way around. The version of dash that
> will be put in experimental will be the correct one, the one in unstable
> will be the crippled one. The reason things fails isn't because of
> dash, but because of sloppy
Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote:
> Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote:
>>> So far this is independent of third packages which is IMHO fine and
>>> desirable. So far, this could be solved by a postfix-conf.d-snippet
>>> shipped with the amavis package.
>> Quite not. You also need
David Kalnischkies writes:
> 2010/5/28 Stephen Leake :
>> Ludovic Brenta writes:
>>
>>> Stephen Leake wrote:
Ludovic Brenta writes:
> The reason for all this is that when a package libX2-dev Conflicts:
>>> with
> and Replaces: a package libX1-dev, aptitude does not remove libX1-dev
Den 23. mai 2010 15:47, skrev Ove Kaaven:
Is it okay if I go ahead and do such a NMU?
Well, since there have been no objections for a week, I guess I'll go ahead.
I had been ready for some feedback from the mingw32 maintainers like
"we're working on an updated mingw32, just wait a bit", or "g
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 07:45:30PM -0400, James Vega wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:47:47PM +0200, Thomas Weber wrote:
> > How many packages are we talking about here? Is there a way to get the
> > number of packages that have the same version in Lenny and Squeeze?
>
> According to a quick qu
On Sun, 23 May 2010 16:26:48 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli
wrote:
>On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 02:08:59PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>> This also means that the grub2 maintainers (both Debian and Upstream)
>> need to work on the regressions that exist in regard to moving from
>> lilo or grub "legacy" to gru
On Wed, 26 May 2010 18:42:50 +0200, Michael Banck
wrote:
>Eh, Debian can patch upstream software if it thinks it is necessary for
>inter-operation, that's the one of the major points of having a
>distribution.
This is not always liked by the upstream communities though. For
example, the exim com
On Tue, 25 May 2010 11:42:34 -0400 (EDT), Stephen Powell
wrote:
>You're missing the point. The main selling point to management
>is that Linux is free. If they have to buy new backup software
>in order to accommodate Linux' backup requirements, that will
>kill it on the spot. Whatever boot load
On Thu, 27 May 2010 21:36:17 +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq
wrote:
>On 27/05/2010 21:17, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> I wasn't around for the libc5 => libc6 transition, but my understanding
>> is it was larger than 20% of the archive. I would guesstimate the
>> removal of /usr/X11R6 at being around t
On Wed, 26 May 2010 23:43:12 +0100, Stephen Gran
wrote:
>This one time, at band camp, Roger Leigh said:
>> How will adduser cope with group addition; does it skip UIDs until
>> it finds an unused unique UID/GID pair?
>
>That certainly is the only approach that makes sense - it has the
>benefit of
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 16:09:25 +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
> Den 23. mai 2010 15:47, skrev Ove Kaaven:
> >Is it okay if I go ahead and do such a NMU?
>
> Well, since there have been no objections for a week, I guess I'll go ahead.
>
> I had been ready for some feedback from the mingw32 maintainer
Den 29. mai 2010 17:51, skrev Julien Cristau:
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 16:09:25 +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
Den 23. mai 2010 15:47, skrev Ove Kaaven:
Is it okay if I go ahead and do such a NMU?
Well, since there have been no objections for a week, I guess I'll go ahead.
I had been ready for som
* Stephen Powell (zlinux...@wowway.com) [100523 21:21]:
> On Sat, 22 May 2010 23:39:52 -0400 (EDT), William Pitcock wrote:
> > After some discussion about lilo on #debian-devel in IRC, it has pretty
> > much been determined that kernel sizes have crossed the line past where
> > lilo can reliably de
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: chrysn
* Package name: opencsg
Version : 1.3.0
Upstream Author : Florian Kirsch
* URL : http://opencsg.org/
* License : GPL-2+
Programming Lang: C++
Description : image-based CSG (Constructive Solid Geometry) lib
clamz [1] has been rejected from Debian NEW [2] some time ago.
The FTP assistent that processed the package was of the
opinion that it belongs to contrib instead of main because it's
only useful to download non-free content.
The purpose of clamz is to download MP3 files after buying them
from Amaz
On Sat, 29 May 2010 10:51:10 -0400 (EDT), Marc Haber wrote:
> On Tue, 25 May 2010 11:42:34 -0400 (EDT), Stephen Powell wrote:
>>
>> You're missing the point. The main selling point to management
>> is that Linux is free. If they have to buy new backup software
>> in order to accommodate Linux' b
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Carl Johnson wrote:
Hi Carl, and thanks for your reply!
(I'll include my full original email, since I extended the audience to
the debian-devel list as well)
> Per Lundberg writes:
>
>> Isn't there any XDMCP-capable server available in squeeze that can
>> speak
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 22:32:07 +0300, Per Lundberg wrote:
> >> Isn't there any XDMCP-capable server available in squeeze that can
> >> speak ipv4 any more?
I'm fairly sure xdmcp over ipv4 works just fine with both xdm and gdm in
squeeze, because I tested them (and made them work with the bindv6
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 02:17:27PM +0200, Thomas Weber wrote:
> So, we are talking about 1000 packages which are up-to-date in
> unstable currently. Bugs don't change that picture much. I consider this
> manageable during a full cycle.
>
> And frankly, arguing back and forth about this is an exerc
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 23:16:06 +0300, Per Lundberg wrote:
> On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
>
> Hi Julien,
>
> > I'm fairly sure xdmcp over ipv4 works just fine with both xdm and gdm in
> > squeeze, because I tested them (and made them work with the bindv6only=1
> > se
David Kalnischkies writes:
> No. Replaces is used to say to dpkg: It is okay that this package
> overrides files of the other package - otherwise dpkg would complain
> loudly for good reasons. It doesn't say something about the
> upgrade path.
I disagree with this particular part of your analysis
On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 21:14 +0200, Felix Geyer wrote:
> clamz [1] has been rejected from Debian NEW [2] some time ago.
> The FTP assistent that processed the package was of the
> opinion that it belongs to contrib instead of main because it's
> only useful to download non-free content.
>
> The pur
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
Hi Julien,
> I'm fairly sure xdmcp over ipv4 works just fine with both xdm and gdm in
> squeeze, because I tested them (and made them work with the bindv6only=1
> setting) a month or two ago.
OK, that's interesting... Just for the sake of
On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:40:41 -0400 (EDT), Andreas Barth wrote:
> Stephen Powell wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 May 2010 23:39:52 -0400 (EDT), William Pitcock wrote:
>>> After some discussion about lilo on #debian-devel in IRC, it has pretty
>>> much been determined that kernel sizes have crossed the line pas
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 23:16:06 +0300, Per Lundberg wrote:
>> p...@terah:/etc/sysctl.d$ sudo netstat -l -n -p | grep 177
>> udp6 0 0 :::177 :::*
>> 1632/xdm
>>
> That's fine, bind() on in6addr_any lets
On 05/29/2010 03:28 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 21:14 +0200, Felix Geyer wrote:
clamz [1] has been rejected from Debian NEW [2] some time ago.
The FTP assistent that processed the package was of the
opinion that it belongs to contrib instead of main because it's
only useful to
On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 19:33 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 05/29/2010 03:28 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 21:14 +0200, Felix Geyer wrote:
> >> clamz [1] has been rejected from Debian NEW [2] some time ago.
> >> The FTP assistent that processed the package was of the
> >> opinio
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I think the policy being applied is that if a package is only useful in
> conjunction with non-free data, it belongs in contrib (just as if it
> depends on some non-free library).
Should I move libwww-topica-perl to contrib?
Personally I
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
>> I think the policy being applied is that if a package is only useful in
>> conjunction with non-free data, it belongs in contrib (just as if it
>> depends on some non-free library).
>
> Should I move libwww-topica-perl to contrib?
> Personally I
On Fr, Mai 28, 2010 at 22:49:43 (CEST), Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 05/28/2010 09:20 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>> On Fr, Mai 28, 2010 at 16:00:27 (CEST), Ron Johnson wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/28/2010 01:25 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
I'm going to package rtmpdump next week.
On Fr, Mai 22, 2
33 matches
Mail list logo
