On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 01:28:39 -0500
Ztatik Light wrote:
> Subject: ITP: ted -- lightweight .DOC editor
There is also another package requesting the name ted - #605503. The
package should be renamed to something more unique.
Your message didn't successfully change the title of the bug - please
se
Neil Williams writes:
> I haven't allowed Recommends to be installed by default since it became
> the default - without problems so far. Makes me think that other
> maintainers aren't risking the default implementation being broken when
> a Recommends: is missing or else implementing something ak
This one time, at band camp, Camm Maguire said:
> Greetings!
>
> Peter Palfrader writes:
>
> > On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Camm Maguire wrote:
> >
> >> > On Mon, 27 Aug 2012, Camm Maguire wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Greetings! This is to build by hand in order to work around an
> >> >> unreproducible fault
Hello,
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 01:28:39 -0500
Ztatik Light wrote:
> The only "valid" .DOC editors in Debian are LibreOffice and AbiWord,
> which are both somewhat bloated (especially LibreOffice, as it's in
> Java) ...
That's not true. LibreOffice isn't written in Java, it's written in C++.
--
WB
Le jeudi 30 août 2012 à 00:38 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer a écrit :
> On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 07:16 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > A type is a subclass of another type if any instance of the first type is
> > also an instance of the second. For example, all image/svg files are also
> > t
Josselin Mouette writes:
> All applications implementing the XDG MIME specification (e.g. through
> GIO or kdelibs) get the benefit of such features (and others such as
> aliasing).
> Yet people keep screaming that mime-support is awesome and don’t want to
> drop it.
Please don't distort other
On Wed, 29 Aug 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-29 at 22:25 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Aug 2012, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > > On Aug 30, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > > > The obvious way is to not use a separate /usr anymore or simply mount
> > > > /usr via the in
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 05:12:15PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> We are building a binary distribution which main characteristic is to have
> the
> packages built _rarely_. As such, a useful but CPU-expensive operation is
> always worth it.
The situation is slightly different for Debian-
Le jeudi, 30 août 2012 14.46:33, Jon Dowland a écrit :
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 05:12:15PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> > We are building a binary distribution which main characteristic is to
> > have the packages built _rarely_. As such, a useful but CPU-expensive
> > operation is always
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neil Williams wrote:
[...]
> The problems described in #501638 would mean that the package would
> not be allowed back into Debian unless fixed.
It looks like this isn't an issue any more --- the relevant paragraph
from the docs is now:
Ted is fr
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:43:55 +0100
David Given wrote:
> > The problems described in #501638 would mean that the package would
> > not be allowed back into Debian unless fixed.
>
> It looks like this isn't an issue any more --- the relevant paragraph
> from the docs is now:
>
> Ted is free s
Konstantin Khomoutov wrote:
[...]
> There's still no such thing as the "GNU Public License", what the
> author seemingly try to refer to is called "GNU General Public
> License", that is, the 'G' in "GPL" stands for "General", not for "GNU".
IRL that's actually a link to the FSF page, so it seems
Greetings!
Stephen Gran writes:
> Why not add logging to the Makefile, or cat debian/mini-proveall.out or
> something? This doesn't look like a dead end to me.
>
Thanks so much for your suggestion! Can uploads instruct all
autobuilders but for a single arch to ignore the package? The build i
Hi Russ,
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 04:06:22PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Michael Biebl writes:
> > Imho moving pam modules around is just wasted (maintainer) time.
> > A much more sensible approach is to just lift the /-vs-/usr restriction.
> We just had a long discussion about this. I think i
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
* Package name: previous
Version : svn
Upstream Author : Gilles_Fétis
* URL : http://previous.alternative-system.com
* License : GPLv2
Programming Lang: C
Description : previous: NeXTcub
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 10:44:11AM +0200, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> How do you suppose it's possible to undo arbitrary network
> configuration done by arbitrary set of tools when there's no central
> place to hold such information (and can't possibly be)?
Actually, the kernel holds that information.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 03:23:53PM -0400, Camm Maguire wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> Stephen Gran writes:
>
> > Why not add logging to the Makefile, or cat debian/mini-proveall.out or
> > something? This doesn't look like a dead end to me.
> >
>
> Thanks so much for your suggestion! Can uploads ins
Hi,
I repost some extract from some private discussion about the
Files-Excluded enhancement of uscan where Nicolas Boulenguez found
some issues. (Nicolas, I hope you don't mind if I quote some of
your non-private remarks in public.)
Nicolas problem is mainly that if you specify
"Files-Exclu
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 12:11:44AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > > [Russ Allbery]
> > >> All PAM modules are installed under /lib, because that's the path
> > >> used by libpam to load them. However, I don't think the vast
> > >> majority of PAM modules could be considered critical for early boot
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120830225209.GA6550@pegase
On 12-08-30 at 11:44pm, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I repost some extract from some private discussion about the
> Files-Excluded enhancement of uscan where Nicolas Boulenguez found
> some issues. (Nicolas, I hope you don't mind if I quote some of your
> non-private remarks in public.)
>
> Nicolas
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 454 (new: 5)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 143 (new: 0)
Total number of packages request
2012/8/10 Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Please explain why adding another sysv-rc drop-in replacements cripples
>> the Linux port.
>
> Because being able to choose between alternatives for core features such
> as the init system only brings more bugs and no added value.
Sorry, I don't understand thi
(apologizes for the previous empty mail)
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:44:34PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 02:32:56AM +0200, Nicolas Boulenguez wrote:
> > Assume that "a" and "b" are directories, if I understand well, the
> > current behaviour is to recursively remove "a/b/
2012/8/30 Michael Biebl wrote:
>> All PAM modules are installed under /lib, because that's the path
>> used by libpam to load them. However, I don't think the vast
>> majority of PAM modules could be considered critical for early boot
>> or need to be usable without /usr mounted
> Imho moving pa
On Vi, 31 aug 12, 06:39:19, Serge wrote:
>
> For example if filesystem is supposed to be network-mounted, and network is
> brought by the user, which logs into GNOME session and manually selects wifi
> connection in nm-applet, initramfs still does not help there, since you
> can't put entire gnome
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Package name: libgoffice
Version: 0.9.5
Upstream Author: gnome.org
URL: http://git.gnome.org/browse/goffice/
License: GPL-2 or GPL-3
Description: Document centric objects library
On 08/30/2012 02:04 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> And I suppose Marco must remove all /usr dependencies from everything
> that installs a udev hook too?
>
Why not? Is the only argument against that is that upstream
took such decision, and that the work to be done is too big?
Thomas
--
To UNSUBS
28 matches
Mail list logo
