On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 06:43:57PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 04:33:50PM +0200, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > Probably the biggest reason why I
On Sun, Jun 25, 2006 at 12:08:17PM +0200, Rolf Kutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Quoting Graham Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 01:52:58PM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> >
> > I think the more important thing to realize is that the reason we have
> > -doc packages i
On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 07:38:56PM +0200, Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hello,
> currently "libgnutls-config --libs"' output looks like this,
> -L/usr/lib -lgnutls -L/usr/lib -ltasn1 -lgcrypt -lgpg-error
> listing both direct (-lgnutls) and indirect dependencies. - Its output
> can
On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 11:54:42AM +0200, Tim Dijkstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:14:07 -0300
> "Gustavo Franco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 6/29/06, Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Software suspend which exists in kernel for several years?
>
On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 01:25:39PM -0300, Gustavo Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 6/30/06, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 11:54:42AM +0200, Tim Dijkstra
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15
On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 06:29:40PM +0200, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> * Marc Haber:
>
> > The machine in Question is a P3 with 1200 MHz. What's making the
> > process slow is the turnaround time for the http requests, as observed
> > multiple times in this thread alone.
>
> Then
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 08:09:43AM -0700, Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 10:38 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 08:57:54AM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> > > Kevin Bube wrote:
> > > > What about switching to dvdrtools? I think this project wa
On Sat, Jul 08, 2006 at 12:40:57PM +0200, Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Many thanks to the KDE developers for removing the similar blurb that
> they used to have. They did it nicely, and in a way that others could
> follow.
... which is... ?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTEC
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 12:47:32AM -0400, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> * Matthew Garrett ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Just to point out that as of Firefox/Thunderbird 2 the entire codebase
> > > is triple licensed under the MPL, GPL
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 07:49:31AM +0200, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It might not be impossible to have it in etch (and would be preferable,
> since upstream will stop support of Firefox 2 6 months after release
> of Firefox 3, which is itself due Q1 2007).
... and wh
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 02:18:27AM -0400, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> * Mike Hommey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 12:47:32AM -0400, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > * Matthew Garrett ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 10:10:29AM +0200, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Last time I checked (and it was after Gerv's post), the relicensing changes
> were still not applied to the MOZILLA_1_8_BRANCH. Things seem to have
> changed, but that needs some checking. I to
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 03:58:13PM -0400, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Some examples and test files are licensed under Mozilla-sample-code.
>
> Uh, is that actually a license?
Yes it is:
BEGIN LICENSE BLOCK
Version: Mozilla-sample-code 1.0
Copyright (c) 2002 Netscape Commu
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 06:49:52PM +0200, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 10:10:29AM +0200, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Last time I checked (and it was after Gerv's post), the relicensing changes
>
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 02:50:27PM -0400, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Another thing that is a bit annoying is that the LICENSE file in the
> > upstream tarball is the MPL license text. It'd be better for everyone if
> > they'd make it clear that everything in the tarball, except ex
On Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 07:25:25PM +1000, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 07:11:59PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> >On 2006-01-29 Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>Package: libpcre3
> >>Version: 6.4-1.1
> >>Severity: wishlist
> >
> >>It woul
On Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 12:27:16PM +0200, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jul 22, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Instead of moving libpcre and making it quasi-essential, why not
> > slightly modify grep so that it can dlopen libp
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 04:39:24AM +0200, David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 06:32:54PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Steve Greenland wrote:
> > > This really seems like something that while they may, very occasionally,
> > > be required, are mostly unnecessary and
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 11:16:30AM -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 07:45:53PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > A number of applications currently fail to build with something like:
>
> > | sparc-linux-gnu-gcc -g -O2 -o .libs/ots ots.o ../src/.libs/libo
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 08:27:58PM +0200, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 11:16:30AM -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 07:45:53PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > > A number of app
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 11:44:54AM -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 08:27:58PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 11:16:30AM -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 12:29:15PM -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 08:50:48PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > So yes, please re-add the dependency on libxml2-dev for the time being.
>
> > We're still not so much in a r
On Sunday 25 May 2003 07:27, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Remember, the rest of the world does *not* owe you and yours a
> > living.
>
> Quite. But if they take delibrate action to hurt _any_
> country, or its economy, they shall have to live with the consequences.
And what is US trying to d
On Saturday 24 May 2003 00:43, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> * The rest of the world is sick to death of US imperialism;
>
> * The US government ignores world opinion and does it's thing;
>
> * The rest of the world puts pressure on the US people to change things,
> since they've at least got half a chan
On Thursday 19 June 2003 18:36, Thomas E. Vaughan wrote:
> Has anyone else noticed this?
This is due to the fact that Mozilla is now compiled with gcc 3.3, and that
j2re1.3 is still compiled with gcc 2.95 ; both are incompatible.
You can get a working j2re1.4 (blackdown doesn't provide 1.3 compi
On Sunday 22 June 2003 19:21, Allan Jacobsen wrote:
> I have been looking for working j2re1.4 packages for some times, but
> unfortunatly this does not work for me:
>
> isis:~/testdir/j2sdk# dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot
> dpkg-buildpackage: source package is j2se1.4-i586
> dpkg-buildpackage: source
On Sunday 27 July 2003 13:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This Apache module does Dynamic Virtual Servers based on directory names.
> It supports user home directories and individual cgi-bin directories. When
> creating a directory (and thereby a virtual server) there is no need for
> restarting apa
On Saturday 02 August 2003 09:01, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> Secondly, we need to signal to upstream to fix up _their_ act, too. If
> we can't ship, for example the latest gcc because glibc isn't ISO C
> compliant and working with gcc-3.3 (see other thread), then others need
> to act: glibc mainta
On Monday 04 August 2003 23:12, Nikolai Prokoschenko wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just found this, maybe aîuseful read
>
> http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1060025253&count=1
Unfortunately, his main problem is "Having not used Debian for about 8 years".
The strange thing is that he has been able to apt-get ins
On Tuesday 05 August 2003 10:33, Ian Hickson wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I was amused to see my blog post [1] made it to this list. I figured
> I'd clarify a few points which were omitted from that blog in the
> interests of brevity and humour.
>
> Mike Hommey
On Wednesday 06 August 2003 02:38, Erich Schubert wrote:
> Hi,
> i have built packages for the bootsplash tools (no package for the patch
> itself though. just download and apply the diff).
> They are available on http://people.debian.org/~erich/boot/bootsplash/
> and work fine on my notebook as we
On Wednesday 20 August 2003 00:34, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mar 19/08/2003 à 23:33, Mike Hommey a écrit :
> > Ok, let's google a bit, and shazaam !
> > http://www.linex.org/sources/linex/debian/linex/nvidia-glx_1.0.4349-1_i38
> >6.deb Oh ! non-free software !
On Wednesday 20 August 2003 02:16, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> "The biggest deficiency in our free operating systems is not in the
>software--it is the lack of good free manuals that we can include in
>our systems. Documentation is an essential part of any software
>package; when an
On Wednesday 20 August 2003 20:13, Hans Ekbrand wrote:
> There's more of it: http://www.linex.org/sources/linex/debian/linex/
> lists acroread_4.05-3, mplayer_0.90pre5-3
> flashplugin-nonfree_6.0.79-1, hsflinmodem-linex_0.5.2-1
... and j2re, yes, I saw that afterwards...
Some are quite badly packa
On Sunday 21 September 2003 23:10, Remi Vanicat wrote:
> Why use epoch ? 1.4.0.20030921-1 should work (or am i missing something
> here ?)
>
> epoch should only be used when needed...
and it is... since current mozilla package version is 2:1.4-4
Mike
--
"I have sampled every language, french is
On Monday 22 September 2003 16:53, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > helps catching 95%... But the bandwidth is still used... I'm still
> > looking for a pure MTA solution...
>
> A pure MTA solution would still need to scan the body and thus would
On Tuesday 23 September 2003 01:45, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 12:28:44AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > Maybe I'm wrong, but I think an MTA rejecting a mail because of oversized
> > body doesn't have to get the whole body before rejecting the ma
On Monday 29 September 2003 19:32, Graham Wilson wrote:
> Changes:
> mini-dinstall (0.6.8) unstable; urgency=low
[...]
>* Change DTD in manpage and manual to locally installed version.
Why do you need that ? (X|SG)ML catalogs are your friends...
Mike
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ieee80211-source
Version : 1.0.3
Upstream Author : James P. Ketrenos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://ieee80211.sf.net/
* License : GPL v2
Description
Hello,
I'm about to remove the libxslt1 package, which has been created a long
time ago for backward compatibility, when upstream did screw up ABI and
removed support for the libxsltbreakpoint library.
Now that no package depend on it, I am going to remove it, but that
leaves a libxslt1.1 package
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 01:40:41PM -0500, Graham Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 07:41:08PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > Now that no package depend on it, I am going to remove it, but that
> > leaves a libxslt1.1 package alone, not really res
- Forwarded message from Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: BTS version tracking
To: Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>&g
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 03:41:43PM -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 02:00:04PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 12:06:29PM +0100, Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > (...)
> >
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 09:43:26AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > >> Today I did a update of the system (yes, sid and yes I know
> > >> it can be unstable but...) and the update includes grep where
> > >> no open critical bug was seen. After Boot the syste
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 10:08:29AM +0100, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Le vendredi 25 janvier 2008 à 09:50 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> > > As a second runner up, quilt is ok by me. :)
> >
> > For historical reasons I use dpatch but I'm not really happy with this.
> > I would
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 11:14:24AM +0100, sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 25 January 2008 11:08:13 am Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:55:02AM +, Jon Dowland
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Does anyone know how
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:55:02AM +, Jon Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 10:13:37AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > The only sad thing is that quilt only deals with patches (i.e. diffs),
> > whereas dpatch can do scripts, too. Anyways, I
On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 05:23:16PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 03:44:20PM +, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [...]
> > > I???d be glad if we could standardize on quilt. It is the only one to be
> > > both simple and powerful
On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 07:10:42PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 04:35:24PM +0000, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 05:23:16PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 03:44:20PM +, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> &
On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 02:25:49PM +0100, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> On fredagen den 25 januari 2008, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:55:02AM +, Jon Dowland
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 10:13:37AM +0100, Mike Hommey
On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 10:53:59PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> (...) so that we have
> the chance to drop gcc-4.2 for the next release (together with
> gcc-3.4/g++-3.4/gcc-4.0).
Except if you want to remove qemu and kvm from the archive, there are
currently no chances of removing gcc-3.4.
Mike
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 12:17:48PM -0200, Margarita Manterola <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 28, 2008 4:53 AM, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 10:53:59PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > > (...) so that we have
> > >
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 08:17:11PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> > * Package name: latencytop
> > Version : 0.3
> > Upstream Author : Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > * URL : http://www.latencytop.org/
> > * License : GPL-2
> > Description : A tool for
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 05:11:43AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> With the new style of "mass tirage" of bugs,
>
> The user submits a bug;
> while (sleep 1 year) {
> He gets a message asking him to verify if the bug still exists;
> He perhaps especially reinstalls the package that he long a
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 02:09:11PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > Yeah, it must be really hard to be an heavy bug filer.
> >
> > * 1552 Outstanding
> > * 136 Forwarded
> > * 10
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:56:09PM +0300, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> Hi
>
> I maintain libetpan package, which build-depends on libcurl4-gnutls-dev.
> Resulting library package dependency is calculated using ${shlib:Depends},
> however libdev package dependency on libcurl4-gnutls-dev is manua
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:48:21PM +0300, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > > While it is easy for build-dependency (just use libcurl4-gnutls-dev |
> > > libcurl3-gnutls-dev), I see a problem here with libdev package
> > > dependency. It should depend not on libcurl4-gnutls-dev |
> > > libcurl3-gnut
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 02:54:18PM +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> Le Tuesday 26 February 2008 14:41:41 Nico Golde, vous avez écrit :
> > > Fine. I have other arguments: it would make it "yet another FOSS
> > > project with an animal mascot".
> >
> > I strongly agree, also because we already have a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: mozilla-dom-inspector
Version : ??
Upstream Author : Mozilla Foundation
* URL : https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/6622
* License : MPL/GPL/LGPL
Progr
On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 07:10:20PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The package "perl" doesn't ship its own copy of changelog.Debian, but
> > instead relies on it's dependency, perl-base. Yet, it does ship other
> > stuff in /usr/share/doc/perl/, includ
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 03:49:30PM +, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Better bounce handling
> ~~
> We checked our bounce handling because we have more than 500 bounces
> for some lists, and in the process found that we didn't have working
> bounce handling for other lists (other-*
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 09:29:12AM +0100, Reinhard Tartler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:59:52PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> 2 small CDs per arch (business card, netinst)
> >> ~30 CDs per arch for a full CD set
> >>
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 02:21:45AM -0700, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I guess there's an inequality like:
> >
> > images on mirrors <= images on torrents <= images via jigdo
>
> Is there any way we can construct the torrent image o
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 03:50:32PM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 13:51 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > To get those Vistaesque questions, "alias rm='rm -i'" is surely not
> > worth a
> > package. It's slightly larger in scope, but only slightly, as
> > removing
> >
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 08:09:04PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 06:57:48PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 05:34:05PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
>>> I just wondered: is it possible to reverse/disable the effects of
>>> -Bsymbolic-functions if LD_PRE
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:23:59PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:51:00PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
>>> According to ld(1):
>>>
>>> -Bsymbolic-functions
>>> When creating a shared library, bind references to global functi
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 11:22:58PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> On lun, 2008-03-31 at 02:09 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > update-icon-caches/update-desktop-database would have to be made
> > triggers-aware and install a triggers control file
> > (e.g. interest /usr/share/icons or interest /us
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 03:34:18AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
(...)
> Thus, I wrote Dolt, a drop-in replacement for libtool's compilation
> mode. Dolt runs any necessary system-specific or
> configuration-specific logic as part of configure, writes out a simple
> shell script "doltcompile"[1], an
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 04:41:26PM +0200, Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Exim has the habit of trying to find out about its host names and IP
> addresses when it starts up. This has, in the past, been an issue for
> the Debian packages, since a Debian system might be on a
> dial-o
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 02:36:17PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
> Bradley Smith skrev:
>> 1. Should these shared libraries be built, or should it just stick to
>> static libraries as upstream intended?
>
> There are advantages and disadvantages with either... I don't really
> have a strong opinion my
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:32:34AM +0200, Amaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James Vega wrote:
> > "The version must be the version of the last upload, plus +nmuX, where
> > X is a counter starting at 1."
>
> I have found that NMUing native source packages is a bit tricky, as in,
> what is the con
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 01:01:53PM +0200, Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> * Bastian Blank [Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:55:23 +0200]:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > > * Mike Hommey [Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:54:59 +0200]:
>
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 03:03:55PM +0200, Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008, Osamu Aoki wrote:
>
> > Considering recent issues, http://db.debian.org/password.html requires
> > updated as "s/id_dsa.pub/id_rsa.pub/".
>
> My mail to d-i-a said that you need to use RS
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 05:11:30PM +0200, Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008, Mike Hommey wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 03:03:55PM +0200, Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 15 May 2008, Osamu
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 11:30:40PM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008, Norbert Preining wrote:
>
> > On Do, 15 Mai 2008, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > I beg to differ. This particular mail is important enough to be sent to
> > > d-d-a instead of d-i-a
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 03:27:42PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Martin Uecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> In this case, the security advisory should clearly be updated. And all
> >> advise about searching for weak keys should be removed as well, because
> >> it leads
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 12:45:20AM +0200, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> 2008/5/16 martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Lucas Nussbaum threw the idea of having a webpage with posisbly
> > annotated patches for each Debian package on *.debian.org at me the
> > other day, in response to the OpenSSL deba
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 05:13:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 23:27:03 +0300, George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On Friday 16 May 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> >> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> >> > I totally agree that we need to make our changes more visible. In
> >>
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:51:22AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 11:40:43 +0200, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>
> > Le vendredi 16 mai 2008 à 17:08 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
> >> diffing the tips of branches in a SCM has been far more friendly. So
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 10:40:53PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 05:04:56PM +, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 May 2008 15:24:13 +0200, Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > said:
> >
> >
> > > (publishing my branch in a gitweb) isn't normalized, and won't
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 05:01:08PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> What if we just decide that changes made to upstream sources[1] qualify
> as a bug? A change might be a bug in upstream, or in the debianisation,
> or in Debian for requiring the change. But just call it a bug.
> Everything else follows f
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:08:06PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 09:01:08PM +, Joey Hess wrote:
> > What if we just decide that changes made to upstream sources[1] qualify
> > as a bug?
>
> WTF ? What's the point of free software if we invent rules for not
> modifyi
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 05:21:52PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Mike Hommey wrote:
> > The BTS would also need something to make it easier to spot patches in a
> > bug. Patch tracking is one of the few things bugzilla is not bad at, for
> > instance.
>
> I guess you
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 02:50:33PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Also, these aren't bugs in the Debian package, but rather bugs in upstream
> (at least arguably), which put them into a different brainspace than
> Debian bugs at least for me, and I'd find it awkward and confusing to have
> them mixed
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 07:14:31PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > At some point, we will need to find a way to decide which v3 format we
> > are going to choose in adddition to the v3 (native) format (with a GR?).
> > We can't afford to allow several different v3 formats to coe
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 11:19:31AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > On Fri, 16 May 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > > Coming up with a complex set of requirements that everyone has to follow
> > > > up front in their workflow[1] is n
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:03:17PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 09:39:07AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 May 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> >
> > >... glibc without patches can't work.
> >
> > Isn't this the best support for Joey's proposal?
> > A software wh
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 04:44:29PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 18/05/08 at 11:27 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 11:19:31AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > On Sat, 17 May 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > > Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> >
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 04:54:28PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 18/05/08 at 16:48 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 04:44:29PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > On 18/05/08 at 11:27 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > > On Sun, May 18, 200
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 10:55:00AM +0200, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> 2008/5/19 Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Because the git format is imho conceptualy broken and the
> > implementation is far from completely thought out. The strongest
> > point against it is that the user has to learn
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 09:58:55AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, 19 May 2008 10:42:54 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> Hmm. You say things like this:
> > Because the git format is imho conceptualy broken and the
> > implementation is far from complet
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 03:10:14PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 21-May-08, 11:15 (CDT), Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi, (Composed as UTF-8 mail with graphic characters)
> >
> > I have been trying to update debian reference. As a part of this
> > effort, I made snapshot of pop
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 02:05:02PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 05:52:13PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> > I demand that Alexander E. Patrakov may or may not have written...
> >
> > > Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > >> That already has a problem: How to define "large"? One way,
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 02:27:11AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 07:20 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> > On 2008-06-16, William Pitcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > That doesn't strike me as a valid configuration. Infact, it shouldn't
> > > work with lilo because l
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 11:54:52AM +0300, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> William Pitcock wrote:
>>
>> It seems like moving to grub for everything may be a good choice on the
>> archs where lilo is used.
>>
> Lilo has one killer feature that is totally missing from GRUB - the -R
> option. It allows m
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 10:53:22AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 02:27:11AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 07:20 +, Sune Vuorela
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 10:57:32AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> We still very regularly get installation reports where people use lilo
> rather than grub, so it must still have a fairly significant user base. I
> would say that the activity on the bug report shows the same.
OTOH, aren't most of the
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 01:28:36PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 18 juin 2008 à 09:52 +0300, Eric Pozharski a écrit :
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 11:19:03AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > OTOH, aren't most of these choosing lilo over grub only
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 08:39:09PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> This is very strange. Let's see if the friendly folks on d-devel can help.
>
> Cheers,
> FJP
>
> On Friday 20 June 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> > But there should be no reason for these terminfo files to be
> > executable. And if I rebuild
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:05:53PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes ("Re: RFC: Idea for improved diversions and
> alternatives handling"):
> > Declarative diversions are a much-needed enhancement to dpkg; there are
> > cases one cannot deal with on upgrade without rm'ing one's own
201 - 300 of 877 matches
Mail list logo
