On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 06:12:36PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> la, 2006-02-18 kello 10:43 -0500, Michael Poole kirjoitti:
> > What's the purpose of an assembler without assembly code to use it on?
>
> It can be used, for example, to assemble code you write yourself. That
> is, after all, the pr
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 07:56:42PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> The solution would be to convince Ubuntu to branch from stable instead
> of sid. The problem is that this creates a lot of work for Ubuntu
> because they have to backport all of the desired bleeding-edge stuff.
> However, Debian d
On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 07:05:34PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Anyway, I don't think GNOME bashing is really on-topic here.
>
> It's not gnome "bashing", it's just airing of a very common gripe with
> gnome. If there were indeed a viable fork that imp
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 07:05:24PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 09 mars 2006 à 16:39 +0100, Amaya a écrit :
> > > but when will we try to solve some of the real problems we have
> >
> > Hey! It's DPL election time! Lobby around. I really am biting my tongue,
> > but you don't have to.
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 08:06:33PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 09 mars 2006 à 20:49 +0200, Daniel Stone a écrit :
> > I think you'll find what they're saying is, 'don't be an idiot on
> > mailing lists'. And here you are, being an idiot on a m
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 10:18:22PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> I haven't answered the question because it wasn't one. You are
> implicitly answering it the line after, and I already know we disagree
> on this matter.
Let me rephrase:
'Who exactly are the candidates claiming there are no probl
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 09:31:29PM +0100, Michael Koch wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 12:06:40PM -0800, John Gee wrote:
> > Guys honestly why aren't we as developers doing a massive overhaul on dpkg?
> > I feel we are running on pre-historic machines here. There needs to be at
> > least a litt
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 09:48:11AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Andres Salomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2) Yes, I have tried talking to him. After a number of blowups on the
> > debian-kernel list, myself and a number of kernel team members have
> > talked to him to calm him down (and in som
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 12:29:49PM +0100, Julien BLACHE wrote:
> Andres Salomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am going through the expulsion process to have Sven Luther removed
> > from the project.
>
> I want to see you leave the Project if this expulsion process fails.
There's a defined proc
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 08:08:27PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> I am still a bit disgusted of seeing a bug report i provided to ubuntu, with
> patch and all the proper research immediately after the breezy beta go
> unanswered and uncared for though, so this may color my relationship with
> ubuntu,
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:39:42PM +0100, Julien BLACHE wrote:
> So, this expulsion process looks more like a good way to hurt Sven
> than anything else. If it fails (hint: it will) Andres will be
> kind of singled-out,
> and this whole thing will turn into "I can't bear this
> guy, please kick h
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 02:34:27PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> I can't help but get the impression Daniel may have prematurely
> discounted the patch - admittedly I may not understand the issues
> though.
I dismissed the X patch Sven sent me because it was fundamentally wrong.
No amount of changes t
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 09:07:52AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 02:57:23AM +0100, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > > > * Three bodies (Security, System Administration, Release) are given
> > > > independent veto power over the inclusion of an architecture.
> > > > A) Do
ts off.
> > As the upstream X.Org tree gets modularized, we're going to begin to work
> > on packaging that instead. My personal preference is to use the modular
> > tree (which will be entirely equivalent to the 6.9 release otherwise,
> > except called 7.0) but if i
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 12:54:08PM -0500, Ian Murdock wrote:
> Daniel Stone wrote:
> > libc6 added interfaces between 2.3.2 and 2.3.5 and made several other
> > major changes, so all packages built with .5 depend on .5 or above,
> > in case you use one of the new interfac
On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 12:13:57AM -0700, Erast Benson wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-04-13 at 00:04 +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
> > Why not simply Provide: sunwlxsl all of the
> > time, doesn't it provide sunwlxsl on other arches?
>
> But how? sunwlxsl is something which is only present in
> OpenSolaris-b
On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 11:12:06AM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> Please tell me if I have this right:
> * You don't like .la files
Yes.
> * So you're unilaterally removing them from a core package
> (libxcursor) with dozens of reverse-depends, breaking all of
> them
On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 06:52:52PM +0200, Marco Cabizza wrote:
> I experienced the issue while recompiling some gnome packages. Is sed
> "s##/usr/lib/libXrender.la ##g" (in the .la references, ie
> libgdk-x11-2.0.la) the "best" temporary solution by now?
s##/usr/lib/libXrender.la##-lXrender##g, I
On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 04:17:28PM +0300, gustavo halperin wrote:
> I think that we have a problem when the common library between XFree and
> /usr/lib are update in /usr/lib.
> I currently have XFree 4.5, when the library libfontconfig1 was update
> to version 2.3.2-1 was also updated
> the fil
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 12:02:42PM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote:
> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > * Christian Marillat:
> >> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> >> Where are you reading that ?
> >
> > An upstream change is a change to the Debian package, to
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 12:18:58PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is there a way to force a specific library version known in
> ${shlibs:Depends} ?
>
> Using "Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}" is not really fine, if I want to
> force the library to be upgraded when the primary binary package is
> upd
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 04:31:10PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> I welcome the fact that you bear your responsabilities, that's a quality
> fewer of us have. Though, the .la problem is not the sole one the
> modular Xorg raised.
>
> - /usr/X11R6/bin/X disapearing broke login managers (gdm, kd
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 10:52:21AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
> As for the build-depends, pbuilder is, as far as I've been able to
> understand it, completely incapable of handling such a massive beast as
> this. You can't point it easily at a custom repository in order to have it
> pull from ther
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 07:19:40PM +0200, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote:
> In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 10:52:21AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
> > I'd like for you to back this claim up. So far I've fixed dozens of bugs
> > over the course of the past week at great personal an
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 07:19:40PM +0200, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote:
> I'm complaining because *you* created the huge load of bugs you have
> to cope with, and a lot of other you don't warn other packagers about
> (what pissed me, and made me write my previous mail is yet-another-RC
> bug because of
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 06:44:20PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> 6) Finally, in addition to everything else that's moving out of /usr/X11R6/,
> packages providing fonts for X should now install to /usr/share/fonts/X11
> instead of to /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts. The heirarchy is the same as
> before
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 06:18:21PM +0800, Eugene Konev wrote:
> This part is broken now. So I ask you please _do not_ yet upload rebuilt
> packages if you use dh_installxfonts. Or you should handle your
> maintainer scripts by hand. The required (as from X11R6) changes are:
> * place your *.scale
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 05:58:58PM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On 10/29/05, Olaf van der Spek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > Does anyone know the Apache2 maintenance status?
> > Lots of bug reports appear to be 'ignored'.
> >
> > Examples are:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bu
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 08:28:11PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Notice also that both you and Colin Watson, where donated pegasos machines,
> (and guess who arranged that), so the unavailability of a decent build machine
> is no excuse.
I can't speak for the other guys, but I have a Pegasos machine
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 02:51:08AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> >- So the answer is right, why would you want to use XFree now?
> I guess, he has unsupported hardware, ugly proprietary drivers, etc.
I don't know of any hardware supported by XFree86 4.5 th
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 11:22:42AM +0200, A Mennucc wrote:
> I use sid and Gnome ; I upgraded my box (after 3 weeks in which I did
> not have time to) ; now I have serious problems with fonts.
>
> Symptoms: some programs fail to find and use the fonts ,and are then
> almost unusable ; including '
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 04:13:10PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> So, with all that said, do you still believe it is normal that a perfectly
> running daily build was rejected in maybe a few minutes/hours after i sent
> that email, while i had offered to continue running it until a proper
> replacemen
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 09:03:19AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> There is no xorg 7.0 backport yet, and I fear it will not be easy to
> add one (as the Debian xorg 7.0 introduced _major_ packaging changes,
> if somebody puts up a backport it will probably be completely made
> from scratch to behave a
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 10:15:36AM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-05-03 at 15:23 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:26:21PM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> > > Wouter asked:
> > > > Just out of curiosity, could you point me to arguments in favour of
> > > > Xprint?
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 12:09:01AM -0700, Dustin Harriman wrote:
> Ubuntu benefits alot from Debian. They have custom development tools
> for streamlining the process of taking Debian packages and making them
> into Ubuntu packages.
>
> I'm curious: does the reverse of this exist for the convenie
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:08:17AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> By reading your email, I feel you are acknowledging the fact the
> ftp-masters cabal (I can't name it otherwise after seeing their behavior
> IRL) is treating other developers as second-class contributors who
> should just do as th
On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 04:18:15PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Friday 26 May 2006 00:50, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le jeudi 25 mai 2006 à 02:36 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
> > > It has come to my attention that Martin Kraff used an
> > > unofficial, and easily forge-able, ident
On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 06:42:40AM -0400, sean finney wrote:
> the latest upstream version of nagios-plugins has incorporated libtool
> into the build process, and no longer successfully builds in a pbuilder
> chroot with the following error:
The real fix there, is to not install the .la file, eve
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 09:41:27AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Anthony Towns
> > [...] If people have
> > weighed the costs and benefits of contacting -legal and decided not to,
> > that's entirely their choice.
>
> Yes, that package maintainer may choose to ignore all of policy. It's
> entirely my c
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 03:49:01PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 02:59:37PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > The fix should be somehow unclumsified, though. Currently I inject
> > some horrible runtime testing in the configure script to find out
> > whether the clib support
> from the secret journal of Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Solution: just deal with the few spam we get so as not to hinder real
> > discussions.
> >
> > Ben
>
> amen.
OK, if you can do that, I'm absolutely thrilled to do it, PLEASE make
debian-devel spam-free. But the problem is that you
> On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 02:21:46AM +0100, Robert van der Meulen wrote:
> > Quoting Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > BTW, I'm on a 28.8, and I get over 1000 emails a day from all the lists I
> > > am sub'd to. So I do see a lot of spam, even beyond Debian's lists. If I
> > > can ignore it, s
> I am running exim for my local network and would like to be able to pop mail
> from the mail machine using netscape. What is the default ma
ilbox netscape tries to open on the mail server?
what the hell is this?
a) it's simple, RTFM RTFM RTFM.
b) the sender name?!?
c) wtf is this kinda crap doi
> On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 02:35:46PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > I am running exim for my local network and would like to be able to pop
> > > mail from the mail machine using netscape. What is the defaul
t ma
> > ilbox netscape tries to open on the mail server
> On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 04:03:45PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > Happy new year to everyone!
> >
> > gcc 2.95.3 appeared in Sid, but it hasn't been announced by the
> > GCC steering committee yet. Is this some kind of early access
> > version?
>
> It's based on the CVS branch, which is note
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 11:42:22AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 04:03:45PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > > > Happy new year to everyone!
> > > >
> > > > gcc 2.95.3 appeared in Sid, but it hasn't been announce
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 11:42:22AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
>
> > Ack!(tm). Not shades of rh7, I hope? I know that people using sid (like
> > myself) are willingly sado-masochists, but a CVS GCC?
>
> GCC 2.95.3 is in final testing and due for release RSN, making i
n
it's to existing code.
(Replying to Andreas:)
Plus, I don't see any kernel packages for 2.4.3-ac12+loadsa netfilter
patches out there. Could you please point me to them, and then I will become
a convert to this argument, and use kernel .deb's?
-d
--
Daniel Stone
Linux Kernel Deve
up any new kernel options (i.e. ones that aren't in your
.config). make config-like interface, but this does fine between kernel
versions and is IMHO the best option if you want to just go up a version and
see what new CONFIG_ options there are.
:) d
--
Daniel Stone
Linux Kernel Developer
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 07:25:10PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 06:18:14PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > (A lot of) Netfilter stuff also doesn't go in the kernel without patching
> > the kernel proper. Plus, your own hacks don't work too
o install. Then, past there, the end-users should be
compiling their *own* kernels. Reliance on stock kernels is sheer stupidity,
IMNSFHO.
--
Daniel Stone
Linux Kernel Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.1
G!>CS d s++:- a C++ ULS$>B P L+++>
regressing
> the C++ ABI transition progress?
Well, this isn't a problem for buildds, because I made libstdc++5-dev
the preference.
> 2) Is libstdc++5-3.3 ABI-compatible with libstdc+5? Does the former
> have any symbols that the latter lacks?
I *believe* it's completely ABI-compatib
bian/ dbtcp/
deb-src http://www.trinity.unimelb.edu.au/~dstone/debian/ dbtcp/
Cheers!
:) d
--
Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne
pgpIMvUk8ZAZH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 09:06:40PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Gentlemen,
> I've restored Galeon on pila to its former 1.2.x glory. A few packages
> (galeon, galeon-common, mozilla-browser, mozilla-psm, libnss3, libnspr4)
> are now on hold: don't touch them (and watch ap
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 10:07:07PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> [stuff utterly irrelevant to -devel]
Please ignore the parent post; somehow, mutt managed to take a mail sent
to 'oldk, bhat', and reply to -devel. *shrug*.
Sorry,
Daniel
--
Daniel Stone <
on the
9800 Pro than the GeForce FX, and the 9800 Pro has been out longer than
the FX. Not only that, but ATI have offered outstanding support to
XFree86, and I can do my acceleration with a Free driver, not needing to
depend on nVidia to fix my bugs, or make the kernel module not use up
1mb RSS, or
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-06-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: debbackup
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.trinity.unimelb.edu.au/~dstone/debbackup/
(not function
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 11:02:09AM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> I see that yesterday a modularized xserver (xorg) entered ubuntu
> breezy (the current development branch) archives.
>
> I've some questions: Is XSF coordinating its work with them or what ?
> Is modularized xorg a goal for us ? I t
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 11:43:50AM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 7/14/05, Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The server hasn't been modularised yet, it's just that I split up all
> > the packaging. I've been working closely with Josh Triplett on
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 04:28:56PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> I know, but as written before, IMHO the abi version number should
> not be encoded in the package name. Usually you just get a new
> abi, but no new functionality, so why introduce a new name? Just
> to work around the limitations of
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 02:59:17PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Steinar H. Gunderson]
> > How do you make this work? Last time I tried it, X would only show
> > the one connected to the ???active??? virtual console, and blanked
> > the other.
>
> It need some patches to the kernel and X.
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 06:19:08PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Daniel Stone]
> > Ubuntu implements this from the installer down (although only for
> > the special cases of four nVidia, MGA, or ATI cards, and even then
> > you may need to fiddle with the configuration
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 09:50:41PM +0200, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> wasnt it me who included the interesting patches into the
> *debian* kernel a year ago?
Depends if you want multiseat X or multiseat VTs, but hearty
congratulations in any case. Well done.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PR
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 02:33:31PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.08.19.1422 +0200]:
> > Compared to SVN from the view of somebody who is acquainted with CVS,
> > arch sucks badly. I tend to agree with most of the things that Florian
> > Weimer list
On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 17:25 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> Daniel also said he'd send a package via email which I never got, so I
> went ahead and did my own thing. (No Matt, I'm not happy with the idea
> of fishing patches out of some random, cluttered, and very unusable
> webpage; every
On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 22:00 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 12:07:46PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I've really just not had any time recently, and there are some
> > things I wanted to clean up before I fired off to you (e.g. the
On Sat, 2005-09-03 at 01:34 +0200, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> The wiki markup languages of twiki and moin-moin are not
> compatible. Still it would be nice to have some content moved
> from the old .net wiki to the new .org one. (the debconf team for
> one is interested in using the features of moin
On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 09:04 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 02:58:19PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
>
> > Right. My solution for that was to split them into a separate
> > mesa-utils source package, with a slightly hacked Makefile. They
&g
On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 17:05 +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > I'm starting to suspect you do not trust the release team nor the
> > porters to make good judgement [...]
^^^
> Nono... of course not!
> It's just my personal experience tha
[Not subscribed, Cc if you want me to see it.]
On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 01:19:58PM -0800, Mike Bird wrote:
> Ian hijacked his own program back from the people who had been blocking
> updates for six months
So Ian Murdock would be perfectly entitled to kick out the DAM, DPL, TC,
DSA, and all others
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 02:31:16PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 09:04:24PM +0100, Norbert Preining wrote:
> > Bummer, please stop that bullshit. I don't know your origin, but Lisi
> > Reisz doesn't sound like an Arabic, nor Indian, nor African name, so
> > probably your ma
er-synaptics, or
xfree86-driver-input-synaptics, but the last one is too unnecessarily
longwinded. (I was going to package this as an XSF project, post-exams).
> > I'll package it. I'm a bit unsure about XFree configuration after
&g
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 11:56:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:03:14AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > There is one unreachable person; IIRC, he was a reasonably major
> > contributor.
>
> Double bummer.
Aye; sort of condemns it to extern
hile. Unreleased libraries do not belong in
> > unstable.
>
> It's not about released vs. unreleased but XFree86 vs. freedesktop.org.
And about how responsive/cluey the upstreams are, specifically.
Daniel, dreaming of source package Xu-ification (no really; it would be
a good thing).
Jim Gettys has a vague idea of
what he's doing.
Also, note I specified no timeframe. I would've ITPed it already if I
wanted it nownownow, only I don't. I want to wait until fd.o deems it
ready.
Getting tired of this,
Daniel
--
Daniel Stone
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:58:15PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 03:59:48PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 11:56:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > I thought about the latter as well. It's not too long-winded if
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-11-12
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: xserver-freedesktop
Version : (unreleased)
Upstream Author : Keith Packard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and other
freedesktop.org hackers
* URL : http://xserver.freede
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-11-12
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: xlibs-freedesktop
Version : (unreleased)
Upstream Author : Jim Gettys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, and other
freedesktop.org hackers
* URL : http://xlibs.freedesktop.
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 01:58:44PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 11:32:14AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:58:15PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > I think it would be really dumb for a driver author to re-use an
> &g
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 2:43:29PM +0100, Daniel Silverstone wrote:
> Also, if you search for my GPG key id (20687895) then I get a listing of my
> packages and also those maintained by [EMAIL PROTECTED] We've had issues of
> my being mistaken for Daniel Stone in the past, and I don&#
ne on 2.2->3.1 upgrades before it goes into sid, but that's a
completely moot point, because it probably won't go in for over a month,
even if gcc 3.2 on SPARC is finally fixed.
Daniel, occasional KDE package monkey
--
Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 10:02:34AM +0100, Michael Meskes scrawled:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 05:17:19PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Secondly, ftpmasters have to add overrides for new packages, in case you
> > didn't realize. That takes time: their time adding them, and
ldn't that be non-free?
Binary-only modules should be slain. Plus, they've broken so much stuff over
the past (do an l-k search for vmware), that they should not be distributed
with Debian, the user should have to that myself.
IMHO.
--
Daniel Stone
Linux Kernel Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTE
ey don't need more
load, or bloat to fill up the bandwidth and hard drives), and countries that
pay by the meg for bandwidth.
Sure, I'll reconsider this argument when the new debian-installer is ready
(which sounds great already), but right now, no way.
--
Daniel Stone
Linux Kernel Devel
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 07:27:42PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 09:37:55PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm talking about people like VMWare, i.e., people who distribute binary
> &
kernel-headers-2.4.3-common: all the 2.4.3 headers
kernel-headers-2.4.3-piii: autoconf.h and modules/ for p3
kernel-headers-2.4.3-k7: autoconf.h and modules/ for athlon
etc, etc.
and then, have kernel-headers-2.4.3-piii depend on
kernel-headers-2.4.3-common?
Of course, if you're already doin
tely *minute*.
> and/or
>
> o the hits on the mirror is untolarable technically/financially.
dist-upgrades broken for about a week?
> I won't agree the following though
>
> o users need to be educated/trained to compile the kernel for
> themselves.
>
> the rea
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 07:50:34PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 07:49:45PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > If you're including the entire headers in every package, this is an awful
> > fallacy. Why not just do something like this:
> > kern
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 07:49:48PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 07:47:48PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > They still suck, and they're still non-free.
>
> Who said that we were going to distribute them?
If we don't distribute them, why
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 08:01:39PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 08:00:01PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > If we don't distribute them, why in hell are we breaking mirrors by
> > supporting them? Sounds dodgy to me.
>
> So that they can compile the
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 08:21:28PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 08:18:42PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > I can understand why you might say that that's a valid point, but IMHO, we
> > shouldn't fuck up current users (by overloading mirro
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 08:20:43PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The thing is, by including all these headers, you're helping break stuff for
> > everyone. But you're also helping a small percentage of people who don&#x
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 09:33:52PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 08:45:11PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 08:20:43PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > >
> > > FUD. Show me what's actually broken.
> >
> > Mir
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:07:03PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:02:54PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > > That's not what you were claiming though. You said:
> > >
> > > > The thing is, by including all these head
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:20:33PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:14:12PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > Let me restate the facts. Again. Very slowly.
> >
> > ftp.au.debian.org was broken.
> > mirror.aarnet.edu.au was broken.
> >
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:30:22PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:27:18PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > No argument there, but this is where necessity and duplication comes into
> > play. These documentation packages, don't have 14 copies of
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:39:14PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:34:24PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
>
> > Oddly enough, I now *start* to see his point. BTW, I have neither the time
> > (p100 with 48meg? multiple kernel builds, each time you build th
nting that this would be shit as it
would add an hour to the install. Why not just provide a stock i386 kernel
and let people compile it later on? Some people need to patch in mm/swap
patches, netfilter patches, their own hacks, etc, etc.
--
Daniel Stone
Linux Kernel Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
lking
> about.
Not everyone has a quad-Athlon 1.4GhZ. Some of us have to deal with
shit-slow machines. On which 14 builds take a very, very long time.
--
Daniel Stone
Linux Kernel Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 09:33:13AM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> 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 b
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
