Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: oilwar
Version : 1.2.1
Upstream Author : Jarmo Hekkanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.2ndpoint.fi/projektit/oilwar.html
* License : GPL
Description : Defend your country from oil-thirsty invaders
p (or "Heavy" maybe?)
* KDE
* GNOME
* Light desktop (or "Advanced" maybe?)
* openbox
* fluxbox
* etc.
I don't know if this would be practical but I think it could be
useful.
HTH,
--
Keegan Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://keegan.sniz.org
q=&q
Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Joey Hess wrote:
> > I think /etc/mtab is on its way out. A 2.4.x kernel with devfs has a
> > /proc/mounts that actually has a proper line for the root filesystem.
> > Linking the two files would probably actually work on such a system
> > with
asily become such a case.
Just a suggestion...
- Keegan
On Friday 13 June 2003 05:13 pm, Don Armstrong wrote:
> Oh, what the hell. This damn song won't get out of my head, so now you
> all get to be subjected to it to[1]:
FWIW, the original version of this song has also been in my head for weeks.
Thanks for digging up the full text :)
> 1: Misery lo
ing that knowing the date you last updated somehow helps you find
out who created the package?
ls -l /var/lib/apt/lists/*Packages
This would give you the time your Packages files were last updated. Is this
what you were looking for? Your message does not exactly make it clear.
- Keegan
duali-data
>
> I really don't know what to do so i thought about asking here for help.
The plan you outlined seems quite sensible to me.
- Keegan
eplies already -- sorry Adam, I'm afraid there are just too
> many people that lack even the most basic sense of humour.
Or perhaps not everyone thinks a threat of an RC bug is a laughing matter.
- Keegan
both pieces should be usable seperately.
The upstream author of this software has been contacted; I am waiting
for a reply before beginning serious packaging work.
- Keegan
pgpc0omAKCFdJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
age in the end. As I understand
it, both pieces should be usable seperately.
The upstream author of this software has been contacted; I am waiting
for a reply before beginning serious packaging work.
- Keegan
pgpqmByfD4Crt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
acted; I am waiting
for a reply before beginning serious packaging work.
- Keegan
pgpfWVWl8yv9k.pgp
Description: PGP signature
y-contest data for this, and perhaps
even all of the packages in your list... Of course it's not perfect, but
that might give us some vague idea of how widely used these packages are.
- Keegan
pgpCmCoiPLlzH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ts are available at the following apt source:
deb http://rune.thebasement.org/debian unstable keegan
deb-src http://rune.thebasement.org/debian unstable keegan
Sponsorship offers will be warmly welcomed, although I am aware
of some issues related to the build process which I am working out
with the autho
stead? Then at least this note
will survive, in case anyone ever does have time to deal with these
issues.
Thanks,
- Keegan
pgprcR07qE6k7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
27;ve had very good experiences with the CUPS in unstable, so
I'd not object to this. OTOH, installing it without it being 'default'
is already quite trivial. What would this change entail, exactly?
Just my non-DD US$0.02.
- Keegan
pgpD9zk1xuo7I.pgp
Description: PGP signature
these really specific to ams? LADSPA-compliant plugins can generally
be used with any LADSPA host software. You might want to update your
descriptions to reflect that fact. Having ams Recommend: this package
should be sufficient to denote the relationship.
Glad to see these getting packaged!
Thanks
his drug aggravates the pain" [syn: {worsen},
{aggravate}, {exacerbate}] [ant: {better}]
- Keegan
pgpkdhOOQymzr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
If you plan to submit many of them, ask here before you start.
Isn't that exactly what he did, in the message you just replied to?
I, for one, think it sounds like a good idea.
- Keegan
pgp4A7StvkRHr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Guillem Jover wrote:
It's one of the few native packages (if not the only one) that is still
statically linking.
dpkg appears to be dynamically linked on my unstable/amd64 box:
kee...@keegan:~$ file /usr/bin/dpkg
/usr/bin/dpkg: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV),
dynami
e of radio interface? It would be nice if the
final description said something about that.
- Keegan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
d supports a large number of high-quality audio
> effects through the LADSPA plugin architecture.
Does GNUsound work with ALSA, OSS/Free, or something else?
- Keegan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
BSD kernel, right? Why would the
> Linux and Hurd kernels even be in the list?
It would be nice to be able to [relatively] easily switch between
kernels. I have no idea if that is possible, but it would be nice. :)
- Keegan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ynaptics Touchpad including:
> ...
H... In the first instance you use the capitalization "TouchPad",
in the second "Touchpad". Maybe they should be consistent?
- Keegan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
x", which implies that it
> is the preferred kernel package.
Indeed. I would be much happier to see "linux-kernel-rmh" instead of
just "linux".
- Keegan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
matter, but I've never really thought of them
as such. Other summaries in this thread have pointed out their
neutrality. Can you provide some references?
I've no vested interest here, I just find this discussion interesting,
and I like the names offered by Branden.
Thanks; my apologies if this is considered OT...
- Keegan
, why not use /run/resolver/resolv.conf?
We're making all of these nice, clean new directories, and already kludging
them up.
Just a minor nit-pick. This FHS-remodeling business is serious stuff...
- Keegan
are for their way, and
you are not allowed to overwrite their actions.
Now, am I missing something?
- Keegan
On Monday 21 April 2003 04:24 pm, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> > On Monday 21 April 2003 03:29 pm, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> > > Am I missing something?
> >
> > Only the fact that, as Debian maintainer, you do not have the right to
#x27;, the i686 border
> makes sense because users who care about speed probably bought the machine
> during the last two years and those should be i686 compatible.
Not everyone buys brand new whiz-bang machines. I do not think we should
create arbitrary boundaries - this thread began with a boundary that was
enforced by code, not just a perception of which machines are newer or faster
or more readily available.
- Keegan
new code
into their own systems.
In other words, if you have serious (non-Debian) work to do on an unstable
machine that is functioning properly, don't upgrade - doing this is like
asking, "are there any new bugs I can work on?" If you don't really want to
work on those bugs right then, wait!
- Keegan
if you
see it. Although I won't deny this happens, purging completely unused
packages is generally a good idea, unless you want your system building up a
nice history of everything it has ever been used for.
- Keegan
On Tuesday 13 May 2003 07:31 pm, Brian May wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 09:21:33AM -0700, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> > On Monday 12 May 2003 04:40 pm, Brian May wrote:
> > > Also, just blindly purging packages can be dangerous, in some cases old
> > > packages wil
On Wednesday 14 May 2003 11:05 am, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2003 09:36:57 -0700, Keegan Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >> The only solution I think is if dpkg were to take over
> >> responsibility for deleting configuration files, so that the postrm
has a place and actually making it
happen are very different things. There seems to be a lot of the former, and
little of the latter - perhaps because unstable actually works just fine for
the majority of people actually working on it?
Just a guess, from my limited perspective.
- Keegan
security updates, testing becomes completely
pointless, as I see it.
- Keegan
Most likely
this breakage would occur on most architectures, if they were checked.
(This should be / is in a FAQ somewhere?)
- Keegan
er install the
> minimum sets of pkgs to provide the services.
Please do not try to force this methodology upon the standard Debian base
system. Administrators of embedded systems have many tools to deal with
these problems already, that do not require ever unpacking the full base onto
the target.
- Keegan
On Friday 16 May 2003 11:45 am, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2003, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> > > more than once i had to install small dns servers on boxes with less
> > > than 100Mb flash and stuff like that... so basically also the minimal
> > > insta
On Friday 16 May 2003 12:13 pm, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> On Friday 16 May 2003 11:45 am, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 May 2003, Keegan Quinn wrote:
> > > > more than once i had to install small dns servers on boxes with less
> > > > than 100Mb flash an
39 matches
Mail list logo
