On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Marc Haber wrote:
> Yes, I have heard your (it was you, wasn't it) talk in Heidelberg. I
> took with me that you plan to adopt a "once you're out of testing,
> you're out of stable for the next release, unless you're really really
> important" policy for stretch, wh
Hi,
I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section
and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what we need
to do next?
Besides the ftp team setting the new section up, I expect the installer
would need changes to enable it instead of non-free when non-free
On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 07:09:59PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 17:54:49 +, Jonathan McDowell
> wrote:
> >You're not communicating clearly and this is indeed causing problems
> >in this thread. You said "all my clients run unstable", not "all my
> >client machines run unstable
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 18:32:28 +0800
Paul Wise wrote:
Rather a critical element has been snipped there, Paul, sadly.
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 15:42:07 +, Niels Thykier
wrote:
> Given the latter half of our
>freeze tends to involve mostly frustration, fragmentation of developers
>and very few bug fix
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Neil Williams wrote:
> Rather a critical element has been snipped there, Paul, sadly.
Thanks for pointing out my error, sorry for the noise.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section
> and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what we need
> to do next?
I have a question about the implementation; will non-free firmware be
in non-fre
Le 8 janvier 2016 23:54:41 GMT+01:00, m...@linux.it a écrit :
>On Jan 08, Robert Edmonds wrote:
>
>> If it really does need to do MD5, maybe it could use the one in
>libbsd0
>> instead of dragging in libgnutls-openssl27 and its dependencies.
>I did not notice this recent addition...
>Folks, ther
Ansgar Burchardt (2016-01-09):
> I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section
> and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what we need
> to do next?
>
> Besides the ftp team setting the new section up, I expect the installer
> would need changes to enabl
Paul Wise writes:
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section
>> and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what we need
>> to do next?
>
> I have a question about the implementation; will non-f
Russ Allbery writes ("Re: support for merged /usr in Debian"):
> What will kill Debian faster than anything else is to have every idea for
> changing something large, interesting, or possibly revolutionary in Debian
> be met with anger, derision, and attacks.
I know you are engaging in hyperbole,
Hi,
this is my yearly hint to the teammetrics graphs you can find for your
team at
http://blends.debian.net/liststats/
This year I was merging the teams
debian-science and pkg-scicomp
and
pkg-grass (=Debian GIS) and pkg-osm
since both teams are merged in reality.
Last year
Package: wnpp
Followup-For: Bug #804490
Owner: IOhannes m zmoelnig
Control: retitle -1 ITP: pd-purest-json -- pd library for working with JSON
data and RESTful webservices
i intend to package this under the umbrella of the pkg-multimedia-maintainers
team.
Ian Jackson writes:
> Russ Allbery writes ("Re: support for merged /usr in Debian"):
>> What will kill Debian faster than anything else is to have every idea
>> for changing something large, interesting, or possibly revolutionary in
>> Debian be met with anger, derision, and attacks.
> I know yo
On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 11:51:08AM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section
> and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what we need
> to do next?
I applaud this call for action; I'd certainly be an enthusiastic
user.
On Jan 09, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 11:51:08AM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> > I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section
> > and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what we need
> > to do next?
> I applaud this call for
2016-01-09 21:15 GMT+01:00 Marco d'Itri :
> On Jan 09, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 11:51:08AM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> > I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section
>> > and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what w
On Jan 09, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> I wonder if we should widen the scope of a "non-free-firmware"
> component a little, to "anything non-free you sometimes unfortunately
> need to make your hardware usable".
> This would mean having a "non-free-hardware" section instead, which
> could possibly a
On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 11:51:08AM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section
>and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what we need
>to do next?
>
>Besides the ftp team setting the new section up, I expect the ins
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Then why should one have "non-open" at all? The argument was that this
> somehow brings some sort of "security" by being able to audit things
> (though the license may probably still forbid you from doing so or
> publishing your results, i
Hi debian I have a big problem and I need help immediately. ... I was
installing kali linux mini 2.0 in my pc then I power off the pc becouse
the downloads wants a lot to finish when I want to open my pc it
cant .the monitor stays black I tried to install kali linux again
eand w
Matthias Klump wrote:
>
>I wonder if we should widen the scope of a "non-free-firmware"
>component a little, to "anything non-free you sometimes unfortunately
>need to make your hardware usable".
>
>This would mean having a "non-free-hardware" section instead, which
>could possibly also include non
Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware
> section
> and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what we
> need
> to do next?
While it's good that at least something happens it's really sad and
kinda disturbing to see that a more narro
And btw:
Even if Debian doesn't want to do the non-open thing now or perhaps
generally doesn't want to allow people to opt-out of closed source
software while keeping other non-free software, then the name
non-free-firmware seems to break the current naming, doesn't it?
main
contrib
non-free
These
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 22:07:15 +0100
Patrik Liçi wrote:
> Hi debian I have a big problem and I need help immediately. ... I was
> installing kali linux mini 2.0 in my pc then I power off the pc becouse
> the downloads wants a lot to finish when I want to open my pc it
> cant .the mon
Philippe Cerfon wrote:
> Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> > I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware
> > section
> > and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what we
> > need
> > to do next?
>
> While it's good that at least something happens it's really sad and
>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Kevin Murray
* Package name: hail
Version : 0.1.1
Upstream Author : Kevin Murray
* URL : https://github.com/kdmurray91/hail
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : Efficiently extract arbitrary lines fro
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:47 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Not true at all. A future change to build a more fine-grained version
> of non-free could happen just as easily with or without this change.
I don't agree.
If there is now lots of effort put into adding another suite, people
will probably n
Patrik,
this is off-topic for debian-devel.
I have never used Kali Linux and do not use Windows.
It sounds to me like you have a problem with your boot loader.
To reinstall Windows, you may need to select your CD as the boot device
in BIOS. What may be happening is that your hard disk is the
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 12:22:28AM +0100, Philippe Cerfon wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:47 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Not true at all. A future change to build a more fine-grained version
> > of non-free could happen just as easily with or without this change.
>
> I don't agree.
> If ther
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:00 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Just in non-free-firmware. This means users will have to update their
> sources.list, but they will have to do so anyway[1].
Hmm, that is going to be annoying. It also seems strange because
non-free firmware is a subset of all non-free r
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:11 AM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> They will if people care as much about that separation as they do about
> separating firmware.
Which effectively still means, that it won't happen for exactly those
reasons I gave you before.
While following the lists, I've noted that sever
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬)"
* Package name: dumb-init
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Author : Yelp
* URL : https://github.com/Yelp/dumb-init
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: C, Python
Description : minimal init system for
32 matches
Mail list logo
