The first time I rebooted after iproute2 removed the /sbin/ip link, my system
failed to boot. I eventually discovered this was because /sbin/vconfig (from
the "vlan" package) calls /sbin/ip and when that failed the network was not
configured. This meant having to boot into single user mode for dia
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 04:54:02PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
Quite. If nothing else, I think the code actually in the Debian archive
that relies on the old path ought to be changed _first_, e.g. via an
MBF. I see a bunch of cases that are relatively subtle and might suck a
lot of other people'
On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 10:57:39AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Agreed: either it's drop-in compatible or we may as well switch the
default to NM and/or systemd-networkd.
Well, here's a heretical thought: why don't we do that anyway, at least for new
installations?
Frankly the default
On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 02:13:26PM +0200, Daniel Gröber wrote:
If ifupdown's paradigm were working for people we wouldn't be having this
conversation.
Well, the problem is that there's a selection bias in people having this
conversation--the people who are using ifupdown without issues aren't
On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 09:49:24AM +0200, Ansgar 🙀 wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, 2024-09-15 at 23:07 -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 02:13:26PM +0200, Daniel Gröber wrote:
> If ifupdown's paradigm were working for people we wouldn't be having this
> conversation.
>
now if this is The Right Way, but I'm using:
$ftpdir='/debian/';
$distribs='dists/unstable/hamm dists/unstable/non-free dists/unstable/contrib';
--
Michael Stone, Sysadmin, ITRI PGP: key 1024/76556F95 from mit keyserver,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]finger, or email
meone tells me the best way
to do so.
--
Michael Stone, Sysadmin, ITRI PGP: key 1024/76556F95 from mit keyserver,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]finger, or email with "Subject: get pgp key"
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Quoting Mark W. Eichin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > seems to be at fault. My /usr/include/X11 was empty, so the cp failed
>
> Any idea how it *got* that way? Were you upgrading (from what) or
> installing fresh? [you can look at /var/lib/dpkg/status.yesterday.*
> for hints, if you don't remember...]
o header to _your own_ email? Then you can
have things the way you want them, and other people can do things
the way they want. I see this as more fair than dictating a policy that
a lot of people disagree with.
--
Michael Stone, Sysadmin, ITRI PGP: key 1024/76556F95 from mit keyserver,
[EMAI
liked the idea of secure-su but it was too incompatable
and I stopped using it.
--
Michael Stone, Sysadmin, ITRI PGP: key 1024/76556F95 from mit keyserver,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]finger, or email with "Subject: get pgp key"
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-
you're making it out to be, it would have already been done.
--
Michael Stone, Sysadmin, ITRI PGP: key 1024/76556F95 from mit keyserver,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]finger, or email with "Subject: get pgp key"
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
reas long long is a non-standard extension. (Although I also seem to
recall some talk of ANSI standardizing long long, so that might not be
true anymore.)
--
Michael Stone, Sysadmin, ITRI PGP: key 1024/76556F95 from mit keyserver,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]finger, or email with "Subjec
Quoting Adam P. Harris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> [(Dale Scheetz)]
> >With a small patch to the kernel and some modification of the loop device
> >code, you can create a file-system-in-a-file.
>
> You can do this already in stock debian (rex and hamm) with
> mount -o loop -t
>
> Why do you ne
ouple of weeks ago. Is there some way of automatically
getting such updates using dselect that I'm not aware of? I always
thought that the ability to pull up dselect and see all the updates was
one of debian's major strengths.
--
Michael Stone, Sysadmin, ITRI PGP: key 1024/76
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 01:02:44AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> The Doctor What wrote:
> > Why shouldn't *all* daemon packages ask these questions, and whether to even
> > run *upon install*?
>
> Because we need to decrease the number of questions asked at install time,
> not increase it.
Bzzt. Secu
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 03:32:25PM +0200, Martin Bialasinski wrote:
> Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Bzzt. Security is more important than usability. We're not building
>> windows 2000 here...
>
> Ii I install a daemon, I want to use it.
That doesn
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 03:51:37PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 12:52:16AM -0400, Mark W. Eichin wrote:
> > True, but don't forget the case of an initial install - you pick some
> > profile, and get lots of stuff, with no hints. (In this case, I like
> > they idea of a deb
getdents is documented in manpages-dev (and used to work) but isn't
in libc6. What's the deal?
Mike Stone
pgpsIfP4jzmwa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 08:05:32AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> sorry, it's you who needs to wake up to the real world.
>
> if people don't know how to administer a unix machine then they need
> to learn fast.
Not true. Maintaining a unix-like machine for desktop or personal use
requires a diff
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 02:59:38AM -0400, Rick wrote:
> I'm uncertain whether this is a good idea or not. I have helped many
> people install redhat linux and, frankly, the daemon enable screen
> confuses them. They don't know what all these things are or which ones
> they may need. If this gets
[moved to -devel]
On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 02:34:20AM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I like this idea, but I think it is orthogonal to the existing bug
> categories.
>
> I don't know what you would call it, but I imagine a 4-way status switch:
>
> unreproduced
> reproduced
> possible fix
> know
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 08:56:34AM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> Eh, well, it is correct[1] behavior to toss out an error message in this
> case since it's notifying you of a *security* problem. In fact, it's
> telling you that the server key is half as secure as the server claims
> it is.
But
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 09:18:06AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Use the Source, Luke. Quit whining and start coding.
Why? On hosts where this is an issue, f-secure's ssh does the job just
fine. (Not to mention that I don't live in a free country and can't work
on ssh...)
--
Mike Stone
pgp
On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 07:17:47PM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> According to Christian Hammers:
> > According to the automated report:
> > > Package: nfs-kernel-server (debian/main)
> > > Maintainer: Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 59641 nfs-kernel-server: conflicts with Standard pa
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 01:54:04PM +0100, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 11:14:55AM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > Package: fortify (non-US/non-free).
> > Maintainer: Roberto Lumbreras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 60162 fortify: Does the index file / database need to be updat
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 08:17:00PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Josip Rodin wrote:
> > But slink is practically completely adjusted for 2.2 already.
>
> Sure, if you ignore the 12 packages that break
> (http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/running-kernel-2.2)
Most people can run 2.2 on slink withou
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:29:23AM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> I just noticed that the quota package (that I did maintain earlier) has a
> release critical bug. In fact it is only a typo. The quota maintainer seems
> to be unreachable. Is it okay, if I adopt the package for the time being or
> a
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 05:27:26PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > it doesn't distract me at all. i mostly ignore it these days as it is of
> > little or no relevance to me.
>
> Safe to say, that is a really self-centered attitude. One which I hope
> that most developers don't have. Not a very team
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 12:45:40PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 08:32:48AM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > I just checked through the bugs open against quota and found that quite a
> > lot of them are fixed in the new upstream version 2.00-pre4. Yes, it is not
> > final
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 09:03:18PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 09:35:35AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > You have 3 RCB open against your packages (11, 25 and 21 days old),
>
> two of them for the same package (vtun). again, they hardly seem
> "release critical"
>
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 11:18:49PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 07:07:51AM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 09:03:18PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > i haven't yet decided what to do about vtun. i'll probably get aro
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 01:56:09PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 07:01:25AM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> > fixed and the new version of quota should go into woody--better the
> > devil we know that the devil we don't. (And we really don't need an
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 02:36:47PM -0500, Ed Szynaka wrote:
> The problem that I see is that there is too much time between stable
> releases. I think that shorter and much more regular time periods
> between freezes is necessary. By fixing the number and date of freezes,
> with say three or four
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 03:17:09PM -0500, Ed Szynaka wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 02:36:47PM -0500, Ed Szynaka wrote:
> > How does this account for drastic changes to something like libc that
> > might take weeks or months to shake out?
>
> Well say that there are 3 releases a year. That gi
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 03:27:18PM -0500, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Ed Szynaka wrote:
> > > How does this account for drastic changes to something like libc that
> > > might take weeks or months to shake out?
>
> Build daemons could take care of the 90% or so of packages that w
On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 01:43:22AM +0100, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> BTW: there is a idea for settig groups for console access to devices
> like cdrom, floppy, sound, mic, cam... so each user who logs into the
> sonsole will get added to that groups, then your program does not need to be
Which is a
On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 09:39:41PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Mar 16, Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Which is a waste of effort if the user can create a sgid shell.
> Do you really mount user-writeable directories without the "nosuid"
> op
On Tue, Mar 21, 2000 at 01:13:03PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> I just scanned through the quota bug reports and found that 4 open bugs
> (34980, 44585, 46610, 48103) are fixed in the latest upstream version.
>
> Does this justify a new package in frozen? From the changelog it seems that
> the
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 10:38:22PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> You have to change all "lists" commands in your ~/.muttrc in
> "subscribe".
Was that just a gratuitous change?
--
Mike Stone
pgpez67xQtsKl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 12:53:12PM +0200, Stefan Hornburg wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 10:11:57AM +0200, Stefan Hornburg wrote:
> > > OK, now as MV 4.03 is out, there is a Debian package available now
> > > for testing.
> >
> > Excellent. I'
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 07:19:09AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> If you don't want to download realplayer right now, why are you
> installing the package?
E.g., you might have a slow network connection and want to deal with
the download later. (So you can finish installing everything else
without pau
On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 07:09:45PM +0200, Igor Mozetic wrote:
> Is there any difference between the packages in
> deb http://ANY.DEBIAN.MIRRIR/debian dists/potato-proposed-updates/
> and
> deb http://security.debian.org/ potato/updates main contrib non-free
Yes.
--
Mike Stone
pgpzFNgreH9vi.pgp
This useless thread generated more traffic than I've seen in spam in the
last couple of months. (And if you add the traffic from the last couple
of times we had this *same discussion*...)
I'd like to propose that we blacklist people who propose solutions to
deal with non-existant spam problems on
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 01:24:08PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> The most important problem this has is how katie (the new dinstall)
> processes it. It goes through the following motions:
I guess it needs to be fixed, right? I'd actually like to see
source-only become the norm--we've seen too many
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 01:09:17AM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> There could be a helper setuid program, man-cache-writer. man would call
> this program and pipe it the catpage. man-cache-writer would just write it's
> stding to the proper place. End of the problems.
No so simple. You don't
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 12:33:34PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Joey Hess (See Bug#81249) complains about the fact that local changes
> to /etc/debian_version are not preserved on upgrades (he wants this
> file to read "unstable" instead of the current "testing/unstable").
>
> What should I do?
Screw it, just kill the file. We don't have a mechanism for coping with
it.
--
Mike Stone
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 07:42:30AM -0500, Scott Ellis wrote:
> Of course the -I option to tar was completely non-standard. The changelog
> explains why it changed, to be consistant with Solaris tar. I'd prefer
> portability and consistancy any day, it shouldn't take that long to change
> any cust
On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 01:17:40AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> One point the maintainer has made on the gnu mailing lists in response
> to complaints about this change is that there has actually been no
> *released* version of gnu tar that uses -I for bzip (I don't know
> whether it's true or not).
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 11:43:10AM -0500, Neal H Walfield wrote:
> I think that your argument is equivalent to someone complaining that
> unstable is broken. Of course it is, nothing has been finalized and it
> is, by definition, unstable. If you want stability, use the released
> version, not un
Since solaris compat is now a release goal for tar, should we also
expect dramatic changes in the behavior of the following options?
(Some of these are actually supported on more platforms than just
solaris; gtar is the only oddball.)
F
i
k
l
o
P
--
Mike Stone
On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 04:25:43AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 03:28:46AM +0100, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > "tar -xIvvf file.tar.bz2" has been in use under linux for over a year
> > by pretty much everybody. Even if the author never released it as
> > stable, all linux
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 12:12:59AM +1100, Sam Couter wrote:
> Goswin Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Just as linux-centric as the other way is solaris-centric.
>
> Not true. There's the way GNU tar works, then there's the way every other
> tar on the planet works (at least with respect to
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 08:32:33AM +1100, Sam Couter wrote:
> My point is that the -I option *doesn't* mean "uncompress this file using
> bzip2" for anything other than GNU tar. Now that it doesn't mean that for
> GNU tar either, people are complaining. I think they probably shouldn't have
> been u
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 09:09:06PM +0100, Ingo Saitz wrote:
> option? Is -j fixed for the next stable tar version or will it
> probably change to something different again? If yes, we should
> not support -j in potato, as suggested above, of course.
It's already changed several times before. I wou
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 03:09:34PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> I'm satisfied with this solution, and will work with Paul to deliver an
> implementation for Debian as soon as possible.
sounds very good.
--
Mike Stone
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 12:52:30AM +0900, Yasuhiro Take wrote:
> The biggest problem about TrueType font configuration for X is the syntax
> of .scale file. X provides two backends to handle TrueType fonts, xtt backend
> and freetype backend. The former features dynamic decoration of TrueType font,
On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 04:51:17PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
The problem is that the kernel provides no way to
get the required information.
s/no way/no reasonable way/
It is possible to parse /proc/cpuinfo (that's what the experimental
patch in the debian coreutils-4.5.2-1 did) but that's a losin
On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 07:00:07PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
That said, removing -p and -i option may be problematic. It should be
done upstream.
I'm tired of people complaining about the "unknown" entries. They're not
required and they are useless on these systems, so there's no point in
having t
(Please CC: me, I no longer track debian-devel)
I am contemplating the upload of a version of coreutils that will have
support for file acls. (I.e., mv & cp -p will preserve acls, and ls -l
will indicate whether a file has an acl.) Doing this would promote
libacl1 and libattr1 to base and required
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:05:34PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
What'd be the problem with a package "coreutils-acl" that just Conflicts:
and Provides: coreutils?
I'd worry about the fragility of such a system in the face of upgrades,
the inability for a coreutils-acl to do a versioned provides:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 09:43:17AM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
How about selinux support?
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=193328
Mike Stone
On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 11:50:14AM +0100, Sam Vilain wrote:
> You might want to investiage `security contexts', a new kernel feature
> that can be used for virtual IP roots as well as making processes in
> one context (even root) not able to see other contexts' processes.
> The userland utilities a
On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 10:00:35AM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 08:16:46AM +0200, "J.H.M. Dassen (Ray)" <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> > "The main point of the GCC 3.2 release is to have a relatively stable and
> > common C++ ABI for GNU/Linux and BSD usage. Un
On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 05:28:48PM -0700, Michael Cardenas wrote:
> Do we really need a font author? How about just starting a project and
> learning how to make our own tt fonts?
A good font is a work of art. Your suggestion can be paraphrased, "how
about just starting a project and learning how
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 02:09:35PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> You won't find out if there's good enough talent hiding inside you
> until you try and learn and try again. The first glyphs you'll do (or
> the first fonts, ftm) will be total crap. But you certainly won't
> produce a fine font
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 08:26:19AM -0500, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> I think I can safely speak for everyone on debian-devel as per this:
>
> 1) The difference in overall speed is small, and rarely publically
> reported.
> The 1% gain is individually considered either vital must-have, or
> worthless
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 03:35:58PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> The shared library is 179 kB. Why don't you just provide the optimized
> versions in the same package? Are the any stability/correctness issues
Now for the real overachiever, what would be really cool is if you
hacked opens
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 02:07:00PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
The habits (and I have them too) of thinking that disk space is costly
are really old habits that it's time to break.
No, it's not. Low end disks are cheap. High end disks still aren't.
Bandwidth still isn't. Especially when you
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 02:29:48AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
Nothing is installed from experimental because of dependencies.. you
have to be explicit about each and every package.
Either it automatically installs upgraded packages, potentially
clobbering something you don't want clobbered, or i
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 05:48:47PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Disks are still $1 per gigabyte. IDE disks are more than sufficient
for this task, aren't they?
No.
IDE is great for most applications these days, IMHO, but not on a server
where dozens or hundreds of clients are going to be
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 12:05:44PM -0500, Clint Adams wrote:
Odd, then, that Debian has turned down resource donations in the past.
How is that relevant? Not all donations are immediately required.
Accepting donations for which there is no immediate need incurs overhead
and isn't sensible.
Mike Sto
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 06:32:41PM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
Why so formal?
We haven't met our bureaucracy quota for the month. I hope that everyone
will do his part.
Mike Stone
On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 12:14:23AM -0800, Thomas Zimmerman wrote:
On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 13:33:29 + Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, this is the sort of anecdotal 'evidence' that is of no use
whatsoever. Most of the time it turns out to be a matter of local
[snip]
Is it really? I tw
On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 12:13:42PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
I'm not saying this is the only way that can happen; VNC could just
have been built first and never rebuilt against the new libc6. That
happens a lot. But this way you can upload packages which are already
unbuildable.
That's bad,
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 10:03:40AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Roberto Suarez Soto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I may be wrong, but I assume you're talking IDE here. And, IMHO, IDE
disks are not the best thing for a medium/high traffic server.
A 120 GB ATA-100 IBM disk costs $162 at g
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 06:18:15AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
Therefore folks should make top Info nodes with proper headers.
How about a debian Info pages policy.
How 'bout just filing wishlist bugs with patches?
Mike Stone
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:43:03PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
Certainly it will have a hard time working on any of the BSDs anytime soon,
if it relies on devfs more than trivially; they have no concept of it, nor
are they really likely to anytime soon.
Use of /proc should also, prefferably, be limite
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:20:40PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
In practice, I find that once such assumptions creep in, it can be very,
very hard to remove them without yanking out a lot of entrails to go with.
Which is the price to be paid for using a different kernel. An
installer, by its nature, is
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:21:27PM -0800, Jon Kent wrote:
What distrowatch tries to achieve is gauging interesting in a distro,
Wouldn't it be gauging people going to distwatch to find a *different*
distro? I mean, why go to distwatch if you're happy with what you're
running and don't care about a
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:26:16PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
I must admit to some confusion, here. Should I take this as implying that
there is no particular intent to try to make Debian-Installer play nicely
on anything but Linux kernels?
I'm saying that some things that an installer does are by th
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:07:51PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
In the origional message, I merely pointed out that keeping such things
properly encapsulated is crucial, if you EVER want to be able to run on any
other kernel.
Which original message? The one I saw said "Certainly it will have a
hard tim
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 09:55:52AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
Ideally have some way for the user to override the default choice if
automatic selection fails...
Can you detect smp from non-smp kernel?
Mike Stone
On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 08:56:37AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
Nobody should be checking forward == reverse(forward), it is
reverse == forward(reverse) that is important.
s/is important/was important/
Mike Stone
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 04:06:40PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
The problem with the net installs isos is mainly that they are
unofficial and there are several varying cd's produced by different
folks, and of varying quality (though quality is overall good; I've used
Yeah. The i386 all work afaik, but t
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 10:42:41PM +0100, Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
You misunderstood the way such things work, you only have to confirm once
that you intended to send a message.
Still too much. If someone initiates a communication, they should make
sure they can get the reply.
Of course, people sho
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 11:13:59PM +0200, Anders Widman wrote:
Wow.. what an reaction :). Hans's original message was that the
credits were not included with the distributed files, nothing else.
Or am I completely mistaken?
Who knows. The original message was an non-specific rant.
Mike Ston
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 10:07:16AM +0300, Chris Leishman wrote:
Yes, there are. But all of these loose one of the main reasons I feel
we even have a testing distribution - to have people testing it.
You are falling into the trap of overselling testing. Having people test
testing at this point in
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 10:14:53AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
I'm sorry, I am on a public terminal, and can't quite remember where I
read it - But testing should always be close to a releasable state.
That assumption is both false and absurd. Testing has exactly two
advantages over unstable--1) all
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 07:07:16AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
But we don't advertize this, so it is natural that people make the
mistake and use testing instead of unstable.
People say this all the time. Then other people go around telling
everyone to run testing. I'm not sure how to fix misplaced a
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:15:21PM -0500, Anthony Towns wrote:
Please don't bother listening to or arguing with Michael on this,
he's wrong, but likes to keep repeating his opinion as though it's
gospel whenever this comes up anyway.
aj likes to say I'm wrong, but hasn't fixed the problems to make
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:19:29AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> I'm actually referring to all binary modules. But for binary-only modules
> in particular, since you don't have the luxuary of being able to recompile
> them, it's even more important to supply the builder with enough information
> assu
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 01:02:47AM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> mkfs doesn't fry harddrives, it fries data on harddrives. However, using
> wrong video settings can actually destroy certain monitors.
Would any of those monitors even work after you dug them up from the
bottom of the dusty parts close
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 02:50:24AM -0700, Mike Markley wrote:
> Admittedly, it's "sort of" buried; I don't see why we couldn't modify
> update-rc.d to use one of the unassigned but allowed runlevels to keep track
> of this junk. I have no problem with removing all but the K symlinks in
What would
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 10:59:35PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Paul Martin wrote:
> > Looks like it would be a good idea to add "export LC_ALL=POSIX" to the
> > default dh_make "rules" file.
>
> Well, we _could_ do that. It would probably have nasty effects if you
> expected to be able to build a pa
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 12:22:47AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 10:29:58PM -0600, Dwayne C. Litzenberger wrote:
> > Why does a server automatically get run just because it's installed?
>
> because if you didn't want it to run, you wouldn't have installed it.
As always, th
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 05:51:53PM -0700, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
> > "Paul" == Paul Seelig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Paul> I think that *mutt* is definitely broken in this regard,
> Paul> because *no* other console program i know (e.g. mc or pine)
> Paul> breaks like this usin
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:03:18AM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp/LC]% LANG=hr_HR ls -A
> .A .B .C .a .b .c A B C a b c
Probably because your locale.gen isn't configured to build an hr_HR
locale.
--
Mike Stone
On Tue, Dec 25, 2001 at 10:29:49PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> The last time I checked the maximum sentence for treason in Great Britain
> was death...
Hmm, that can't be right. Aren't the brits complaining about the US
wanting to execute terrorists, because of conflicts with EU declaration
of huma
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 02:35:06PM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> That's primarily a BIOS problem, right? Does it matter for Linux?
Actually, current kernels have a problem with current 160G drives.
Mainstream 48bit ide support is expected Real Soon Now. :)
--
Mike Stone
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
1 - 100 of 362 matches
Mail list logo
