On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> But our users should not be expected to look at control files in order
> to know what to install, should they?
>
> Following this reasoning, we might suggest that policy only states the
> mandatory fields in control, and any field not covered by policy
> s
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> The fact that the tool authors have not seen fit to implement
> some functionality has nothing to do with policy (despite what you
> may think, policy is not dpkg documentation).
Policy is also not something that should document something tha
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Look, I'm not against being transparent; not at all. I try to be very
> open and approachable. But in some cases it just doesn't make sense.
Now, why'd you have to go and mention Chewbacca?
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Samuele Giovanni Tonon wrote:
>
> > anyone has information regards him ?
>
> As far as I know he is still alive. I saw him a few days ago in irc.
Me, or someone else(my first name is Adam).
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Andreas Tille wrote:
> just an idea from a completely uneducated person regarding buildd:
>
>What about if each freshly uploaded package which contains architecture any
>packages would enter kind of a staging area first and buildds grab these
>files from there. Af
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Roger Leigh wrote:
> In late 2001, I spent several weekends hand-building quite a large
> chunk of woody (over 200 source packages). I found quite a number of
> serious bug in several packages, including missing Build-Deps, and, in
> the case of (IIRC) Tcl 8.x, it wouldn't bui
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, wrote:
> new software for the best price for you
I am saying the same for my list
> Adobe Illustrator CS - 90.00
inkscape - 0.00
> Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Professional - 100.00
xpdf - 0.00
> McAfee Personal Firewall Plus 2004 v. 5.0 - 20.00
Why?
> Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Grzegorz Prokopski (Debian Developer) wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-12
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: free-java-sdk
> Version : 0.1
> Upstream Author : Grzegorz B. Prokopski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * License : LGPL
>
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Brian May wrote:
> This proposal would also allow, say bochs, to provide i386 too (although
> I think more work might be needed here).
No, it wouldn't.
Say you install bochs on alpha. If bochs provides i386, then this would tell
dpkg that it is ok to install i386 binaries i
On 12 Aug 2002, Grzegorz Prokopski wrote:
> W li¶cie z pon, 12-08-2002, godz. 18:13, Adam Heath pisze:
> > Er, you say free, but are restricting me to only use what is listed in the
> > depends.
So, what about kaffe? What about gcj? Why are you saying that sable is
better th
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 12-Aug-02, 14:22 (CDT), Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 12 Aug 2002, Grzegorz Prokopski wrote:
> >
> > > W li¶cie z pon, 12-08-2002, godz. 18:13, Adam Heath pisze:
> > > > Er, you say free,
On 12 Aug 2002, Grzegorz Prokopski wrote:
> Facts that caused that I have choosen this set of tools.
> * kaffe
> It contains it's own JAVA_HOME environment, so it wouldn't make sense
> to just copy it. If you can build with kaffe - then stick with
> it and don't use free-java-sdk. However -
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Mail Delivery System wrote:
> This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
>
> A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
> recipients. The following address(es) failed:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> generated | /org/packages.qa.
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Please, could you mail people who are responsible ? I have not
> been cced and [EMAIL PROTECTED] has not been either.
>
> I have fixed everything now. Sorry for the mistake.
Sorry.
> > I have disabled the BTS -> PTS link, until the above error is fix
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> > * If you maintain a library written in C++, add a `c' to the end of
> >the name of your .deb, eg libdb4.0++.deb -> libdb4.0++c.deb. This
> >is similar in spirit to the glibc transition adding `g' to the end
> >of libraries.
On 16 Aug 2002, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I finished a first version of my ZINF packages (ZINF is not FreeA*p).
>
> They seem to reproducibly cause a dpkg degfault on my machine when
> doing the following:
>
> ~# apt-get install freeamp freeamp-extras libfreeamp-esound
> ~# dpkg -i --auto-
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Adam Heath wrote:
> > Selecting previously deselected package zinf.
> > dpkg: considering removing freeamp in favour of zinf ...
> > dpkg: yes, will remove freeamp in favour of zinf.
> > (Reading database ... 101551 files and directories currently i
On 17 Aug 2002, Luca Barbieri wrote:
> Here is a plan on how to do so. It requires to modify dpkg but allows
> complete compatibility and no breakage of binaries (building with
> G++-2.95 would no longer work unless wrappers are written).
>
> 1. Create a new version of dpkg that does the following
On 17 Aug 2002, Luca Barbieri wrote:
> > HAHAHAHAHA. No.
> >
> > .__.
> > _|doogie|_ <-- dpkg hat
> >
> No because of technical reasons, or because it's too much work?
Because you have no clue what you are talking about.
On Sun, 18 Aug 2002, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Josip,
> Changing the font didn't help, but deleting my .xmms
> directory in my account seemed to have cured it. Odd.
> Jack
Never delete. Rename/move/copy. Make backups. Even of bad stuff.
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Ben Collins wrote:
> Not only that, it's only useful for linking, so has no reason being in
> the primary runtime.
ltdl needs them at runtime.
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Ben Collins wrote:
> Then ltdl is broken. How does one install libfoo.so.1 and libfoo.so.2
> and only have libfoo.la, and ltdl expect to work?
libtool itself is broken, but I digress.
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Steve Greenland wrote:
> apt-get --option Dpkg::Options=--force-confmiss
apt-get \
-o Dpkg::Options::=--force-confmiss \
-o Dpkg::Options::=--force-somethingelse \
Note the trailing ::
On Fri, 23 Aug 2002, Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote:
> [snip]
I've been working on an interface to several archive formats. Currently, I
have .ar, .cpio(binary and compat) and .tar(sysv, gnu, posix). I've used it
to make a .deb with pure java code, and then install it with dpkg.
I'm currently adding
On Fri, 23 Aug 2002, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> Or
> remove all of the Java packages since we still don't have a free Java
> implementation.
kaffe/gcj.
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Hello,
> Considering how unstable perl 5.80 currently is, wouldn't it be
> wise to regress sid back to perl 5.60 and move 5.80 into experimental
> instead? So far this upgrade has done major damage to dpkg by breaking
> install-info making any additio
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, David D.W. Downey wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 03:37:14AM +0300, Nir Peled woke up, and decided to
> spew forth:
> > I'm SURE you'll have a lot more *customers* If you'll add KDE3.0.3 (Released
> > few days ago) I'm also idleing in your server on the OPN network, And if
>
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> [snip uselss crap]
Duh, no shit. Tell us what we don't know.
Why don't you get off your soap box, off your ass, and actually make what you
suggest work?
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Just writing to request a "second opinion" on this bug.
>
> Current dpkg behavior does not allow a package to replace a directory
> with a symlink during upgrade. This broke a libc6-dev upgrade when I
> made an unstable chroot from a
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, it was written:
> Hello world,
>
> In a couple of days uncompressed Packages files for unstable will cease
> to be generated, and bzip2'ed Packages files will be generated in their
> place (actually, if you look carefully, they're already being generated).
> Sources.bz2 files
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Jack Howarth wrote:
>I am trying to get the glibc debian cvs for 2.2.92 to
> package (it builds and passes make check fine on debian
> ppc sid with the new gcc 3.2.1pre). However the buggy
> perl 5.80 in sid has broken install-info. I looked at
> a Yellow Dog Linux machine
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> If its compressed its all or nothing.
nope. you can append compressed data to the end of a gzip file, and gunzip
will cope.
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Has there ever been any discussion of the binary
> /usr/sbin/install-info in terms of the Linux Standard
> Base? I ask because dpkg is providing a perl based
> version of this utility whereas all other distros
> appear to be using binary only version.
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> Is there any reason not to do this? It seems that it might speed up the
> autobuild process, specially when it is a library like libgmp3 which other
> packages depend upon for their builds...
Not really. Once you upload the pkg, and in the next 15 minut
On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Anyway, this discussion is superfluous too, as the dpkg maintainers have
> already decided to move over to the C, GNU version in the future. (See
> debian-dpkg list archives for details.)
We have?
On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> I assume it's because the search engine ignores common words like "the"
> :-) Also, because the BTS uses the search engine to link to the package
> pages, the package link on the BTS page for "the" will never turn up
> anything.
The BTS uses the search eng
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 05:43:43PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > > I assume it's because the search engine ignores common words like "the"
> > > :-) Also, because the
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> You touched on a few of them at the end. The new version stuff, new
> Release files, signed Release files and translated package descriptions
> are the most evident missing functions.
Well, on this note, the version stuff is no longer a problem. I por
On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Bullshit. Making noise about spelling errors is extremely unpolite
> (with few exceptions). Making fun this way is a sign of personal
> problems. Doing this again and again, even trying to make this look as
> a harmles 'joke' shows the critical level. Ple
On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Brian May wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 12:43:28AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> > This could me especially amusing if the first, delayed email was:
> >
> > cd /tmp
> >
> > And the second was:
> >
> > rm -rf *
> >
> > (Dumb contrived example, but you get the idea.)
>
> I th
Please fix your mailer to wrap long lines.
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Joshua Cummings wrote:
> (There's no debian-installer list afaik. If there is, let me know and I'll
> redirect this to it)
debian-boot
On 26 Nov 2002, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> Let's first have a working installer on at least a few arches before
> walking down that road. However, it is a problem which I was notified
> of a few days ago: d-i relies heavily on devfs and, well, 2.4 doesn't
> work on m68k and it doesn't look like it
On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> On Monday 21 April 2003 03:29 pm, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> > Am I missing something?
>
> Only the fact that, as Debian maintainer, you do not have the right to decide
> which files Debian users may or may not edit. Policy says they can do as
> they like,
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Richard Braakman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 04:25:11PM -0500, Drew Scott Daniels wrote:
> > I wouldn't call it malicious, but I question the use of the word "harmful".
>
> I would definitely consider an easter egg that disables the package
> to be "harmful". By contrast
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Ed has graciously agreed to restore the credits, and I thank Debian for
> its respect for the wishes of the original author in regards to
> prominently crediting those who have contributed.
Again, what does Debian(as a community/organization) have to do w
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 03:58:34PM +0200, Alexander Wirt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > Its interactive, I don't want to launch a GUI if I want so simple add a
> > package. Additionally it seams that aptitude is currently broken in Sid.
>
On 30 Apr 2003, Leo "Costela" Antunes wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: unavailable; reported 2003-04-30
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: gnome-velocity
> Version : 0.1alpha
> Upstream Author : Kyle Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://velocity.sf.net
> *
On Wed, 14 May 2003, Colin Watson wrote:
> so maybe it was actually only filed in my
> brain (which has no web interface) ...
We need a bug system for developer's brains.
On Wed, 14 May 2003, Clay Crouch wrote:
> Folks,
>
> My most humble apologies.
Doubt that. You haven't changed your ways.
> It has become quite clear that the culture that the DD community
> shares has evolved in my absence. My absence disallowed me to
> evolve with it. The culture you now enjo
On Wed, 14 May 2003, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> IIRC, the debian-devel mailing list has always been a no-nonsense forum.
> Honestly, the anti-spam technique you employ is very simple, but also
> very draconic, in-flexible, and rude. It is far better to set up some
> sort of cookie handshake autorespo
On Mon, 19 May 2003, Brian Nelson wrote:
> reopen 193287
> reopen 193286
> thanks
>
> Marco Presi (Zufus) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Format: 1.7
> > Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 20:30:39 +0200
> > Source: pointless
> > Binary: pointless
> > Architecture: source i386
> > Version: 0.3-3
> > Distrib
On Thu, 22 May 2003, Brian Nelson wrote:
> If you don't do this, the original bug submitters will see a bug has
> been fixed, but probably not remember what the bug was, especially if he
> or she filed multiple bugs for the package. Furthermore, it's a real
> pain to have to look at the BTS, and
On Fri, 23 May 2003, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 08:11:23PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> > Consider the admin, who discovers some bug. They look at the changelogs for
> > the problem package, seeing if it had a similiar bug. Also, consider that
> > this
On Fri, 23 May 2003, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 09:51:33PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> > Admin installs from cd. Admin runs programs. Admin finds something he
> > thinks
> > is a bug. Admin reads changelog to see if the bug existed previously.
>
On Fri, 23 May 2003, Colin Watson wrote:
> bugs.debian.org's web interface now decodes each part of MIME messages
> for display, so for example quoted-printable and (God forbid)
> base64-encoded text is now displayed in a readable form. In addition,
> attachments are now only displayed as a downlo
On 24 Apr 2001, zhaoway wrote:
> Your point is ridiculous. You think linux kernel compiling is
> something as fundmental as tying shoelaces. rotfl. sorry.
If tying shoelaces was so easy, then why do we have velco shoes?
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:15:09AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > I think your concerns are not well-founded. If you have a sane build
> > system, then building them is as simple as a for loop. Have look at the
> > way kernel-image-i386 is built if you do
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Who says you have to compile debian packages on only machines you own?
>
> So tell elmo to get me through, and not, not do anything for 2 months. The
> only other faster machines I have access to, run RedHat or Mandrake, and I
> can't afford anything be
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Someone, please create a
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] list.
s/daniel-stone-is-not-really-a-Linux-Kernel-Developer/daniel-stone-is-looking-to-make-trouble-with-the-listmasters-and-alienate-even-more-people/
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Ben Collins wrote:
> If we left everything to "you have to be smart enough", then let's just
> leave out the entire linux kernel, most of the software in Debian, and
> go for a minimum cygnus install. Let's just ditch all non-i386
> architectures. Hell, let's get rid of everyt
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> > Previously Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > > Then you break things for no good reason. These "module builders" you
> > > speak of should be using the same headers as glibc.
> >
> > Absolutely definitely not. User
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Shaul Karl wrote:
> Package: ng-cjk
> Priority: optional
> Section: editors
> Installed-Size: 164
> Maintainer: Yasuhiro Take <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Architecture: i386
> Source: ng
> Version: 1.4.3.1-1
> Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.1), libncurses5, ng-common
> Filename: pool/main/n/
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Jean Charles wrote:
> wouldn't it be great if you could just download what has changed
> on some package ? for exemple
>
> the maintainer changes something in /etc/init.d/sendmail and you
> have to download 1mo .
> with rsync you would just download the part that changed ...
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Marcin Owsiany wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 06:00:07AM -0500, BugScan reporter wrote:
> >
> > Package: cvs (debian/main)
> > Maintainer: Eric Gillespie, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 95263 missing build dependency
>
> The policy says:
>
> A source package may declar
On Sat, 28 Apr 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
> This is not correct. All packages have to follow current policy: if they
> miss out on most issues, that's a bug, if they miss some other issues,
> that's an RC bug. It doesn't matter what Standards-Version they claim.
Maybe dinstall should include a st
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 04:25:16AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I have just added support to debbugs in cvs, and on master, so that the
> > maintainer address for a package can be overriden. This allows the real
> > maintainer to be someone diffe
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 11:50:59PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > But I'm *not* the maintainer; I'm one of a group of maintainers. If
> > > we do this, then every time one of us uploads, we need to change the
>
On Tue, 1 May 2001, Jon Eisenstein wrote:
> I seem to be in a very troublesome spot... My dpkg segfaults in any needed
> situation:
What version?
On Tue, 1 May 2001, Mariusz Przygodzki wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 May 2001 12:34, Adam Heath wrote:
> > On Tue, 1 May 2001, Jon Eisenstein wrote:
> > > I seem to be in a very troublesome spot... My dpkg segfaults in any
> > > needed situation:
> >
> > Wha
On Tue, 1 May 2001, Francois Gouget wrote:
> On Tue, 1 May 2001, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> [...]
> > I had an idea (and a working script) to extract changelogs from source
> > packages
> > and insert them into a SQL database. My original intention was to allow
> > apt-listchanges to display change
On Tue, 1 May 2001, Jon Eisenstein wrote:
> I'm now having problems with dpkg complaining about Available: and
> Size: fields from my /var/lib/dpkg/status. Should I just get rid of
> them? Or, as I asked before, is there a way to regenerate my status file
> so it complies?
>
> Interestingly, I tri
dpkg 1.9.4 is in incoming.
On Wed, 2 May 2001, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2001, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>
> > Actually, I think it has been implemented recently. I think maybe a
> > Debian package would have to go into contrib though, unless you can find a
> > way to squeeze pigeons into a .deb ;-)
> >
>
> Have
On Thu, 3 May 2001, Joey Hess wrote:
> Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
> > > It might happen if there was a good reason, but nobody has suggested one
> > > yet.
> > > I doubt there is one.
> >
> > I have one. It's that dependency on perl makes owners of 486 machines die
> > of an heart-attack whenever a
On Sun, 6 May 2001, Chris Waters wrote:
> This is supposed to happen once enough packages make the transition.
> Now, if we're really down to 253 packages that use /usr/doc (with no
> symlink), then maybe it's time. But, unfortunately, that number, 253,
> measures *claimed* compliance, not actual
On Sun, 6 May 2001, Joey Hess wrote:
> Chris Waters wrote:
> > > - A change in the policy to remove the obsolete /usr/doc symlinks.
> >
> > This is supposed to happen once enough packages make the transition.
>
> No, it is supposed to happen one release _after_ a release in which all
> the package
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> There are two ways to handle those packages on Debian systems
> now: one is using alien, and the other is using Albert's dpkg-rpm
> patch which makes it possible for dpkg to use those packages
> directly.
Um, where is this patch?
On Tue, 8 May 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 05:29:30PM -0400, Jon Eisenstein wrote:
> > > I use cvs in Debian for lots of things but I'm still a newcomer in
> > > this field, I think I am not being able to get new created directories
> > > and files from the cvs repository
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello
>
> This is only an automated notification mail from the ddts (Debian Description
> Translation Server).
As an automated mail, to which I have not request, I consider this spam.
Please remove me, and all ways of contacting me, from your automat
On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Richard A Nelson wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Eduard Bloch wrote:
>
> > Summary: we need an "changemaint" command in the BTS. It should be
> > probably protected with PGP, though.
>
> That'd be nice, but if we do anything to the BTS, I'd like to request
> an additional field
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
>
> On 09/04/2001 09:44:11 AM Adam Heath wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hello
> >> >
> >> > This is only an automated notification mail from the ddts (D
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Michael Bramer wrote:
> OH, this is now the second 'remove me' request.
>
> Now the server can only mail notifications to all packages or to no
> packages. Should I stop it?
You mailed -devel-announce on Aug 30. I then started getting these mails over
the weekend. I would ha
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> > package, so rather that send you a message in BR language (which you
> > probably can't read) you get the English form letter. Overall, better to
> > get a form letter in a language you can read, than a personally written
> > email in a languag
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Michael Bramer wrote:
> I don't see a real problem with this mail. If someone don't like it he
> can make a procmail rule and move the mails to /dev/null and I can
> improve the server by time.
With spam, there is nothing I can really do to stop from even receiving it in
my ac
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > Adam, who is a dpkg developer.
>
> Ok, But why the dpkg so quiet?
No one sees a need? We all have to split our time different ways, and the
current developers/authors/programmers don't see it as useful.
If someone were to develope a patch, test it,
yOn Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hello Richard,
>
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Richard Atterer wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 01:22:16PM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > > 1.) use all the time _gettext_!
>
> > I agree, otherwise we'd just have to keep re-inventing the wheel.
>
> > > 2.)
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Michael Bramer wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 01:04:58PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> > Please, turn off this mail-spamming service, until you have a facility to
> > exclude certain maintainers(note, I don't care about package excludes, but
>
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Michael Bramer wrote:
> Now I have no time for this. First I must (only ddtp-TODO list)
> - write the bts code in the ddpt
> - clean the code and write a better api
> - help with the html interface
> - make the code more modular (hocks for the french boys, more config,
>
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > A proper solution, at the very least, invovles storing the data in the
> > foo.deb{control.tar.gz/control} file.
>
> gettext is not a hack. Gettext for translations and dpkg use gettext
> is self for translation. Why re-inventing the wheel?
gettext ca
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Nick Phillips wrote:
> > Well, shouldn't it? Wouldn't it make sense to have the translated
> > description
> > in there rather than the original one?
>
> I actually makes more sense to remove even the english description
> from status to an
On 6 Sep 2001, Mikael Hedin wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ntp 4.1.0 IS in unstable... at least for i386. Check another mirror, your
> > apt sources, or tell us which arch you're using if it is not i386...
>
> I use i386. But
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ madison
On Sat, 8 Sep 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
> The Packages file, see above. Note that Task: fields tend to appear *after*
> the long description.
Anything that uses dpkg code to generate PAckages files will do this. dpkg
places user-defined fields after all others.
Requests to make Tasks a known f
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Martin Albert wrote:
> Sorry for abusing the list - can't find pseudo packages list on www.d.o?
>
> For a few days now i get this:
>
> > index maint [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Error getting Bug list for maintainer [EMAIL PROTECTED]' (code 256
> ):
> Your terminal lacks the ability to
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 06:11:53PM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > I have a simple question. Is it possible to run dpkg -r foo
> > from within a postinst-script when using dselect or apt?
> >
> > What is the result?
>
> You can't do it directly, as dpkg
On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> http://people.debian.org/~shaleh/lintian.
It's normally customary to include a brief list of things we should be
testing.
On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
> On 21-Sep-2001 Adam Heath wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> >
> >> http://people.debian.org/~shaleh/lintian.
> >
> > It's normally customary to inclu
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Craig Sanders wrote:
> a discussion on debian-devel is not policy. and even if it was
> established as policy, i would as a matter of principal refuse to accept
> anyone's idiosyncratic spelling rules.
No, of course not. Policy is policy. But policy does not come first.
Di
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Craig Sanders wrote:
> yawn. you're wrong. again.
I have seen no quotes from you, of other, *outside* sources, that show
'zonefile' in widespread use. I *have* seen posts saying that 'zone file' is,
however.
> i'm just pissed off by trivial bug reports about bugs that are
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 02:55:13AM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > yawn. you're wrong. again.
> >
> > I have seen no quotes from you, of other, *outside* sources, that sh
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > [ drivel deleted ]
>
> in a word, No.
So, you refuse to fix a bug. You refuse to provide reasons why.
> btw, learn to spell "authoritative".
I never said that my spelling of that was correct. And seen Branden's
response(mail(like irc) is conversat
301 - 400 of 460 matches
Mail list logo
