Bug#214408: ITP: fastdep -- fast dependency generator for C/C++ files

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: fastdep Version : 0.15 Upstream Author : Bart Vanhauwaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://www.irule.be/bvh/c++/fastdep/ * License : (GPL) Description : fast dependency generator for C/C++ files The sugge

stable executable names

If this should go to -user, please holler - I'll happily subscribe if I can get this discussed somewhere. I use the following commands: mozilla-firebird => run Mozilla Firebird browser mozilla -edit => run Mozilla (trad. only?) editor mozilla => run Mozilla (traditional) browser (though rarely)

Re: kernel package names (was Re: Package libc6-dev depends on linux-kernel-headers)

On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 12:14, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > I'm in two minds whether or not to ask this, but I've been wondering > about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not > linux-kernel-* or linux-* ? If alternative kernels in debian become > more popular, is there a potential for

Re: libc6-i686 only for 2.6 kernels? was: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel

On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 15:29, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 05:08:16AM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: > > Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 07:17:13PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote: > > >> On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 06:43:09PM +0100,

Re: Closing. (Was: Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel)

On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 00:23, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 22:31, Robert Millan wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 02:37:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > > Package: wnpp > > > Severity: wishlist > > > > > > * Package nam

Re: Closing. (Was: Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel)

On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 22:31, Robert Millan wrote: > On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 02:37:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > Package: wnpp > > Severity: wishlist > > > > * Package name: linux > > Version : 2.4.22 > > Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and others, see: >

Re: Closing. (Was: Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel)

On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 06:38, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 12:23:44AM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > I > > for one _would_ appreciate having a debian-standard linux package. > > kernel-source-*, kernel-image-*, kernel-headers-* And truth be told, since

Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software

On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 19:32, Roberto Suarez Soto wrote: > On Nov/12, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > I don't see how making more packages available to our users is > > > "lowering the quality of Debian in matter of freedom". > > Oh, you think there's a positive correlation between quality and > > qua

Re: Some observations regardig the progress towards Debian 3.1

On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 23:02, Andreas Barth wrote: > > Actually, Adrian Bunk _was_ a Debian maintainer, but he retired; see > > . He actively chose to > > make these posts instead of trying to make things better from the inside. > > Actually, this articl

Re: Debian Enterprise?

On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 20:33, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Andres Salomon wrote: > > Suggestions are most welcome. > Feel free to ask about details if something is not clear about the slides > or any other things are missing. IMHO a debian-enterprise is very much > missing and would

Re: Debian Enterprise?

On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 05:17, Andres Salomon wrote: > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:51:43 -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > If the sub-project approach would mean that the new packages and > > enhancements would be folded into Debian, then I think that is definitely > > preferable. I do not think that basi

Re: Some observations regardig the progress towards Debian 3.1

On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 15:28, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 02:14:49AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > The problem is, this often chaotic development system doesn't scale to > > over 1200 developers (including many MIA developers). > > I think the only sticking point is determining

Re: Demudi.org

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 02:06, Andrea Glorioso wrote: > > "gg" == guenter geiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > gg> I think I have to clear up some misconceptions here. At the > gg> beginning of this year I stopped packaging for demudi > gg> directly, and put all my pack

Re: [custom] Custom Debian Distributions

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 02:46, Anthony Towns wrote: > So, using my definitions, the following conclusions are (IMO) true: > > * all flavours are policy compliant > > * some derived distros might be policy compliant Do you mean to include, eg. derived distros including non-free software

[custom] Debian Enterprise - a Custom Debian Distribution

Seems like now is a good time to start a new thread. Including [custom] tag too... On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 22:36, Alexander Kitzberger wrote: > Hello, > we and a couple of other linux companies are also thinking this way, > and we would like also to support a enterprise debian. > > We have the pro

Re: [debian enterprise] sub-project planning

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 05:12, Andres Salomon wrote: > I have discussed the idea of a Debian Enterprise sub-project with > various people, and have concluded that it's a worthy goal. I have > listed the technical reasons/goals for this sub-project below. Great to hear. I started a web page at http:

Re: [debian enterprise] sub-project planning

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 05:46, David B Harris wrote: > On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 13:12:52 -0500 > Andres Salomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have discussed this sub-project extensively at Voxel, and we are > > willing to commit to seeing this idea through - in a manner that allows > > the Debian commu

Re: [debian enterprise] sub-project planning

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 06:42, Steve Kemp wrote: > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 06:24:58AM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > And as I put on the web page, a goal of debian-enterprise ("should be", > > IMHO) to explicitly support *for-profit* organisations. Let's make no &g

Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - a Custom Debian Distribution

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 07:08, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > I have started a web site at > > > > http://debian-enterprise.org/ > Did you > apt-get install subproject-howto I did actually - after your last such recommendati

Re: Source only uploads? -- Survey evaluation

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 01:26, Roland Stigge wrote: > Meanwhile, I strongly suggest the utilization of pbuilder{,-uml} to > increase quality. Some developers (not the ones who participated here) I > talked with have never used these tools. Their usage will prevent many > of those stupid FTBFS bugs.

Re: Debian Enterprise - a Custom Debian Distribution

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 06:45, Bruce Perens wrote: > Note there is also a gnUserlinux.org, but RMS objects to that name - > he feels that people will percieve it as an official FSF project if > the GNU comes first. This came as something of a surprise. :) I'd be betting you're not the only one. Ho

Re: Revival of the signed debs discussion

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 07:00, Andreas Barth wrote: > * John Goerzen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031201 17:40]: > > Even if the attacker could place a new keyring file in the archive, > > people verifying signatures on signed .debs would not install it, since > > it would not have the signature of a develop

Re: Debian Enterprise - a Custom Debian Distribution

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 07:31, David B Harris wrote: > On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 11:45:35 -0800 > Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am still negotiating with the large industry group that approached me > > about this project. When the price tag is north of $1M, it takes time. > > If that work

Re: Debian Enterprise - a Custom Debian Distribution

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 06:45, Bruce Perens wrote: > Thanks. I can't get to your site at the moment. My ISP has been intermittent over the last week - obviously having server troubles. Usually fine though. Also if you were trying my personal domain: http://soulsound.net/, that might still be propag

Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - a Custom Debian Distribution

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 13:42, Niall Young wrote: > On 2 Dec 2003, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > > - debconf package configurations (with "enterprise" defaults) > > To me this is still the largest hurdle, having to work around packages > that don't yet use de

Re: [custom] Re: Custom Debian Distributions (was: Re: Integrate Knoppix in Debian (was: Re: Debian Enterprise?))

> Debian-Jr, Debian-Med, Debian-Edu, Debian-Np, Debian-Lex Is there a single place where all official Custom Debian Distributions (CDDs - even a reasonable TLA), aka internal projects, are listed? > These Custom Distributions use the technique of metapackages and have > common goals and try to de

Re: Bits from the RM

On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 15:45, Anthony Towns wrote: > Having critical, grave or serious bugs open for an extended period is simply > not acceptable. > > Nor is it excusable. While it's possible that you mightn't have the skill > required to fix some security bug, or mightn't have the time to respond

Re: Debian Enterprise?

On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 22:36, Alexander Kitzberger wrote: > we and a couple of other linux companies are also thinking this way, > and we would like also to support a enterprise debian. Great stuff ... we are forming it now. As you probably well know by now, there's a web page started at: http://de

Re: [debian-devel] Re: Bits from the RM

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 18:12, Magosányi Árpád wrote: > A levelezőm azt hiszi, hogy Zenaan Harkness a következőeket írta: > > Can "requesting removal from archive" be automated, to occur say after 3 > > weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug? > > > > As a

Re: [custom] Re: Custom Debian Distributions

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 19:14, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > Then, it's up to the projects to start using the term. A list would I > > think be very good for making cdd discussions stand out at this point - > > there seems to be enoug

Re: Bits from the RM

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 18:09, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > ] $ grep Harkness /var/lib/apt/lists/*_*; echo $? > ] 1 It's not much (directly) Debian related (yet), but: I'd be in NM but for the keyservers and NM regi

Re: Bits from the RM

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 18:56, Brian May wrote: > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:32:59PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > Can "requesting removal from archive" be automated, to occur say after 3 > > weeks of inactivity of rc/grave/serious bug? > > > > As a DD,

Re: [custom] Re: Custom Debian Distributions

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 19:14, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > Is there a single place where all official Custom Debian Distributions > > (CDDs - even a reasonable TLA), aka internal projects, are listed? > Unfortunately not yet under www.debi

Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - a Custom Debian Distribution

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 20:46, Enrico Zini wrote: > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 01:05:29AM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote: > > > > - GNU ERP software project ?name? > > > GNU Enterprise (gnue) http://www.gnue.org/ > > I've just learnt of Cubit from South Africa: http://www.cubit.co.za/ ... > ...and of the Im

Re: [debian enterprise] sub-project planning

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 21:41, Benj. Mako Hill wrote: > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 06:24:58AM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > I guess if you're a DD (I'm in the NM-process myself), you can creake > > "official" Debian wiki, etc? > > AFAIK, the "offic

Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - a Custom Debian Distribution

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 11:05, Enrico Zini wrote: > On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 02:33:57PM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote: > > > > - GNU ERP software project ?name? > > GNU Enterprise (gnue) http://www.gnue.org/ > > I've just learnt of Cubit from South Africa: http://www.cubit.co.za/ Thank you very much

Re: Some ideas quickly jotted down

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 08:07, Fabian Fagerholm wrote: > > (Just looking briefly at the diagram, I'm thinking "The Core" would be > > the organisation - eg. Enterprise-Debian.org, or UserLinux.com, or > > whatever is ultimately decided on.) > > Ok. I have probably mixed both technical and organisati

Re: Some ideas quickly jotted down

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 07:08, Fabian Fagerholm wrote: > Hi, G'Day from down under! > I trying to unload all my thoughts about the Enterprise Debian project. > I don't have time to participate actively in the discussion on > debian-devel, but I'm following it as much as I can since I'm very > inter

Re: [custom] The term "flavor" and encouraging work on Debian

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 07:58, Fabian Fagerholm wrote: > Debian Enterprise could, for example, have an > install-time option to set up a file and print server, an authentication > server, or a web server. Those would be _flavors_, in my view. Despite > all that has been written and referenced on this

Re: [custom] The term "flavor" and encouraging work on Debian

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 07:58, Fabian Fagerholm wrote: > Debian Enterprise could, for example, have an > install-time option to set up a file and print server, an authentication > server, or a web server. Those would be _flavors_, in my view. Despite > all that has been written and referenced on this

Re: [custom] The term "flavor" and encouraging work on Debian

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 09:21, Joerg Wendland wrote: > Fabian Fagerholm, on 2003-12-02, 22:58, you wrote: > > Debian is the super-project. > > XYZ is a Debian Subproject, > > which provides the flavors A, B and C. > > > > Opinions? > > I like that though my in opinion flavors should

Re: Some ideas quickly jotted down

And oh damn ... shoulda uploaded and linked to it. Sincere apologies Zen -- Debian Enterprise: A Custom Debian Distribution: http://debian-enterprise.org/ * Homepage: http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~zenaan/ * PGP Key: http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~zenaan/zen.asc * Please respect the confidentialit

Re: Some ideas quickly jotted down

URL for the PDF file (1-page image, ~350KiB): http://debian-enterprise.org/img/enterprise-debian.pdf (The debian-enterprise.org website is also updated in various other places.) Regards Zenaan -- Debian Enterprise: A Custom Debian Distribution: http://debian-enterprise.org/ * Homepage: http://h

Re: Some ideas quickly jotted down

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 13:09, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 01:04:49PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > URL for the PDF file (1-page image, ~350KiB): > > http://debian-enterprise.org/img/enterprise-debian.pdf > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]/scratch$

[custom] Debian Enterprise - policies

(Please CC [EMAIL PROTECTED]) To throw them into the ring: * DFSG Free Software only (I know this one will get debated, but this is the whole point of Debian Enterprise - if you want proprietary software, go buy Red Hat or SUSE/Novell). * Specifically targetting For-Profit entities (vs Debian-NP

[custom] Debian Enterprise - packages

To give limits to Debian Enterprise/ User Linux we need to define some areas of focus. Flavours (and sub-flavours/ tasks/ yadda) is as good a place to start as any. So here are some proposed flavours: - Enterprise (base packages and more "neutral" config) - Enterprise Desktop - with sub-flavour

[custom] Debian Enterprise - packages

As per the recommendations from Bruce Perens' User Linux paper http://userlinux.com/white_paper.html, this thread is to discuss the applications within the bounded set of Debian Enterprise/ User Linux. The bounded set will depend on the flavour. So first comes proposed flavours (and sub-flavours/

Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - packages

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 14:45, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > As per the recommendations from Bruce Perens' User Linux paper > http://userlinux.com/white_paper.html, this thread is to discuss the > applications within the bounded set of Debian Enterprise/ User Linux. > > The bounde

Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - policies

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 14:32, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > (Please CC [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > To throw them into the ring: > > * DFSG Free Software only (I know this one will get debated, but this is > the whole point of Debian Enterprise - if you want proprietary software, > g

Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - policies

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 14:52, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 14:32, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > (Please CC [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > > > To throw them into the ring: > > > > * DFSG Free Software only (I know this one will get debated, but this

Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - flavors

(re-titled to - flavors) To give limits to Debian Enterprise/ User Linux we need to define some areas of focus. Flavours (and sub-flavours/ tasks/ yadda) is as good a place to start as any. So here are some proposed flavours: - Enterprise (base packages and more "neutral" config) - Enterprise

Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - policies

(Really should read ahead further ... here are more, and all laid out together) * DFSG Free Software only (I know this one will get debated, but this is the whole point of Debian Enterprise - if you want proprietary software, go buy Red Hat or SUSE/Novell). * Specifically targetting For-Profit en

Re: UserLinux white paper

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 15:08, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 04:52:47PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote: > > I don't deny that many businesses do have to come to their vendor on > > bended knee to get support for a new platform. It's important, however, > > to realize that this does indi

Re: UserLinux white paper

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 11:12, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:04:31PM +, bruce wrote: > > > I did a first pass at the UserLinux white paper, it's at > > > http://userlinux.org/white_paper.html. I think I'll sleep for a while. > > The next logical question then is why will an

Re: Debian packages and freedesktop.org (Gnome, KDE, etc) menu entries

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 20:15, Herbert Xu wrote: > AKL. Mantas Kriauciunas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Solution is to add freedesktop.org standartized menu entry for programs, > > which could be started from menu (for example there is no meaning to > > start apt-get tool from menu). Then user

Re: [RFC] adding system users: which is the best way??

On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 01:51, Andreas Metzler wrote: > Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] > > I think the idea of a namespace for usernames used by packages is a good > > idea, but rather than "debian-", we should take this to the LSB folk, so > > that we can get it done once. > > T

Re: The term "Custom Debian Distribution"

On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 01:02, Benj. Mako Hill wrote: > On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 01:24:24PM +0200, Fabian Fagerholm wrote: > > If some of the people who participated in the Debcamp Custom > > Distribution BOF (see > > http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-nonprofit/News/2003/20030717) are > > listening,

Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - packages

On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 04:42, Andres Salomon wrote: > On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 14:45:51 +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > > As per the recommendations from Bruce Perens' User Linux paper > > http://userlinux.com/white_paper.html, this thread is to discuss the > > applicati

Re: [custom] The term "flavor" and encouraging work on Debian

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 22:44, VEROK Istvan wrote: > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Andreas Tille wrote: > > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Fabian Fagerholm wrote: > > > > > In my view (as I said), it would be logical to name a further > > > subdivision of that product "flavor". > > I like this interpretation of the term

Re: [custom] The term "flavor" and encouraging work on Debian

On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 20:23, Fabian Fagerholm wrote: > On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 13:44, VEROK Istvan wrote: > > Subsets can also have subsets, or a subset may even come from the > > confluence of other subsets, so there is no need to name one level a > > "custom Debian distro" and another level a "flav

Re: The term "Custom Debian Distribution"

On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 19:25, Fabian Fagerholm wrote: > I want to collect knowledge and pieces of text from all who have some > experience with subprojects, and work that material into the HOWTO. I > will contact some subproject people shortly to get their input. Any > pointers will be appreciated.

Re: Debian packages and freedesktop.org (Gnome, KDE, etc) menu entries

On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 05:49, Felipe Almeida Lessa wrote: > > On Thursday 04 December 2003 13:19, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > The other question is "how hard could it be to adapt menu to desktop files > > ?". > I think only one thing is blocking the whole idea of moving from Debian Menu > style to

Re: The term "Custom Debian Distribution"

On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 21:16, Andreas Tille wrote: > [BTW, declaring that SkoleLinux as "no CDD" ... is one of the most > impressive derivatives of Debian, but it just does not (yet) fall under our > definition.] So we have: Debian, parent project & parent GNU/Linux Distribution | +-

Re: Debian packages and freedesktop.org (Gnome, KDE, etc) menu entries

On Sun, 2003-12-07 at 08:41, Marc Wilson wrote: > On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 06:02:16PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > > I remember about a message from a guy from RedHat saying more or less > > that he see no point in supporting an environment/wm that do not > > follow the new standards decided at freed

Re: Many executables across Debian's archives share basenames

On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 01:32:47PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Thu, 05 Oct 2017, Kamil Cholewiński wrote: > > I wrote a short script that calls "apt-file find 'bin/'", filters > > results to include only stuff from /bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin, and > > looks for basename clashes. Turns out, i