On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 03:59:12PM +0100, Stefan Esser wrote:
> So basically all points you bring up are no issues.
The bit about "good relationship with upstream" seems to hold; especially given
the tone of your responses. It's *very* important for Debian to have a good
working relationship with
On 02/03/2012 08:28 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> The reasons why I've opened #657698 was just, because I though it could
> be possible for the PHP maintainers to reduce their burden, by just
> offering both, packages with suhosin and without.
> If there are bugs in the with suhosin version
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:31:15AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jan 30, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > It would be nice to have some documentation about how lxc is different from
> > them, and how to work around bugs and limitations. I for one spent ~10
> Let's start with this: in its current form,
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 07:37:38PM +, Moritz Naumann wrote:
> So there are obvious issues with LXC as a container solution for Linux, such
> as
> lacking actual containment (for the root user)
No, it is not obvious. If you give a process a certain permission, it
can use it. If you remove this
Josselin Mouette writes ("Re: Breaking programs because a not yet implemented
solution exists in theory (Was: Bug#658139: evince: missing mime entry)"):
> This is a blatant lack of knowledge of the current state of the
> distribution.
I'm afraid you are demonstrating your own blatant lack of know
Am 03.02.2012 12:46, schrieb Thomas Goirand:
I think you are under estimating how much work Ondrej has done
already
in the past, and how much *more* work you are asking him to do here,
when the whole PHP team is shouting for help! Yes, adding yet another
build *is more work*, not less.
Well I
Am 03.02.2012 03:15, schrieb Russell Coker:
Some shared libraries have code which can't be run without an
executable
stack, it's a small number of libraries that are written in assembler
code.
We want to allow running them but don't want to give all programs
permission
to execute code on the s
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 12:31:03PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:31:15AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On Jan 30, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > It would be nice to have some documentation about how lxc is different
> > > from
> > > them, and how to work around bugs and li
On 02/01/2012 06:41 PM, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
[...]
> Now indeed when doing the job for Squeeze kernel it's a bit less
> straightforward because of the huge amount of driver backports, but from
> my own experience, the conflicts are still mostly about changed context
> lines.
Remember, just be
The changes have ill side-effects:
- DDTP/DDTSS is partially broken (1). The Database has $(nr_of_packages)
new entrys since 01-22 containing just the short description.
- These (untranslated) one-liners is what one gets visiting (2), e.g. (3).
- There are no new Translation-xx files (4).
-
Hi,
as this issue affects quite a few packages, I'd like to bring this up
for wider discussion.
The issue basically is, that the waf build system uses a python script,
which embeds a bz2 tarball containing further python sources. Those are
unpacked to .waf-*/ when the waf script is executed. More
Le Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 09:50:09AM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit :
>
> 1) DEP 5 and directory/file names with spaces
>(http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/06/msg00155.html)
>
> My summary is that the participants were quite divided on whether separating
> the list of files by spaces or
OoO Peu avant le début de l'après-midi du jeudi 02 février 2012, vers
13:11, Andreas Beckmann disait :
> I'm planning to file bugs against all packages that currently fail the
> piuparts test with a 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' error in
> wheezy and sid.
> Currently 17 binary packages
13 matches
Mail list logo
