On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Andrew Mitchell wrote:
> Blame my bad CDROM drive - it decided to not read the image off it properly
> >
> > > > As well, hurd-K2-CD4.iso is missing.
> > > I will check on this. Thanks.
>
> See above :)
>
> Got my other computer working with a different drive last nig
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 09:18:58AM +1300, Andrew Mitchell wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 07:29:15AM -0500, Simon Law wrote:
>
> > I'm sorry, it doesn't look like ftp.gnu.org/iso is exposed via
> > rsync. I've downloaded hurd-K2-CD3.iso twice and both times it comes
> > up with the same erro
On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 07:29:15AM -0500, Simon Law wrote:
> I'm sorry, it doesn't look like ftp.gnu.org/iso is exposed via
> rsync. I've downloaded hurd-K2-CD3.iso twice and both times it comes
> up with the same erroneous MD5 hash. I can only conclude that it is
> corrupted on the ftp.gn
On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 08:03:18PM +1300, Philip Charles wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Simon Law wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:08:13AM +1300, Philip Charles wrote:
> > > On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Jaap Karssenberg wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Last time I installed hurd I used to cross-install u
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Simon Law wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:08:13AM +1300, Philip Charles wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Jaap Karssenberg wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Last time I installed hurd I used to cross-install using the tar ball.
> > > This time I decided to use the CD's, but on every sys
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:08:13AM +1300, Philip Charles wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Jaap Karssenberg wrote:
>
> >
> > Last time I installed hurd I used to cross-install using the tar ball.
> > This time I decided to use the CD's, but on every system I tried them
> > the menu option 'install base
Hi,
Works fine over here.
Thanks Philip nice work : )
Matt
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Philip Charles
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Jaap Karssenberg wrote:
>
> >
> > Last time I installed hurd I used to
cross-install using the tar ball.
> > This time I decided to use the CD'
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Jaap Karssenberg wrote:
>
> Last time I installed hurd I used to cross-install using the tar ball.
> This time I decided to use the CD's, but on every system I tried them
> the menu option 'install base system' which seems to untar the base tar
> ball ends quickly in an error.
Last time I installed hurd I used to cross-install using the tar ball.
This time I decided to use the CD's, but on every system I tried them
the menu option 'install base system' which seems to untar the base tar
ball ends quickly in an error. The console which tails the log says
tar exited whith
Grant,
Thanks for the reminder. Done.
Phil.
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Grant Bowman wrote:
> Please feel free to use this page for comments as well:
>
> http://hurd.gnufans.org/bin/view/Distrib/CDNotesK2
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> -- Grant Bowman<[EMAIL PROTEC
Please feel free to use this page for comments as well:
http://hurd.gnufans.org/bin/view/Distrib/CDNotesK2
Cheers,
--
-- Grant Bowman<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Philip Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030302 15:39]:
> The release was frozen after yesterday's puls
The first two K2 images are now on ftp.gnu.org/iso thanks to Andrew
Mitchell. The next two should be available in the next day or so.
The main change has been a revision of how the packages are placed on the
CDs and the introduction of install.sh which installs the required,
important and
The release was frozen after yesterday's pulse.
There are now five images, six if the excluded packages are put into a
separate filesystem.
All the *hurd-i386.deb's are on the first two CDs. However, more of these
have been pushed onto the second image which means that the placement of
the packa
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003 01:45:58 +1300 (NZDT)
Philip Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks. Now included in the CD docs.
I have update the files since they had an black square an one page that
has now been corrected.
Bye Oliver
~~
-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.12
GO d- s
On Sun, 2 Mar 2003, Oliver Beck wrote:
> You can found the latest version on:
>
> http://www.std-err.de/hurd-install-guide/german
>
Thanks. Now included in the CD docs.
Phil.
--
Philip Charles; 39a Paterson Street, Abbotsford, Dunedin, New Zealand
+64 3 488 2818Fax +64 3 488 2875
You can found the latest version on:
http://www.std-err.de/hurd-install-guide/german
Best regards Oliver
~~
-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.12
GO d- s: a-- C+++ UL++ U*+ P+ L+++ E- W++ N++ o+ K- w-- w---
O- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP- t-- 5- X+ R- tv- b++ DI D+ G e h++ r y++
--END G
Any chance of html, txt and pdf versions being available in the next 24
hours? I am about to test the final version of the K2 discs and I would
like to include the German docs.
Phil.
--
Philip Charles; 39a Paterson Street, Abbotsford, Dunedin, New Zealand
+64 3 488 2818Fax +64 3 488
Is it worth while writing a script that will install the Xfree packages?
>From what I have seen it is not going to work.
Phil.
--
Philip Charles; 39a Paterson Street, Abbotsford, Dunedin, New Zealand
+64 3 488 2818Fax +64 3 488 2875Mobile 025 267 9420
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 11:33:44AM +0100, pancake wrote:
> > I think that LSH is more correct on hurd because the license (GPLvsBSD)
>
> Once the package conforms to the Free Software Definition, we
> shouldn't worry about which license a project uses
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 09:44:48AM +0100, pancake wrote:
> Why not use lsh instead of OpenSsh? I think that in hurd project there
> are more political reasons than security ones.
> http://www.lysator.liu.se/~nisse/lsh/
While this might be true in the general sense - A GNU Project should
prefer G
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> lsh is equally correct as OpenSSH. Both are Free Software. If you
> want to go down this dark, and dangrous road you might just as well
> say that running only FSF copyrighted software is the correct thing on
> GNU/Hurd, and all software that is n
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Care to say more about how lsh gatheres its random bits? How good are
> they?
The quality is quite system dependent, so in general, it's hard to
guarantee anything more than "better than nothing".
The current sources are:
/dev/random or /dev/ur
lsh can create a random seed with some entropy from other sources,
like various system state or even the traditional random typing
thing. So even if real /dev/random is strongly recommended, it is
not absolutely necessary.
Care to say more about how lsh gatheres its random bits? How g
I think that LSH is more correct on hurd because the license
(GPLvsBSD)
lsh is equally correct as OpenSSH. Both are Free Software. If you
want to go down this dark, and dangrous road you might just as well
say that running only FSF copyrighted software is the correct thing on
GNU/Hurd, and
pancake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why not use lsh instead of OpenSsh? I think that in hurd project
> there are more political reasons than security ones.
Well, it's true that lsh is a "GNU Project", while openssh is not. But
that probably doesn't matter much in a debian context.
As the lsh a
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But lsh is _still_ useless on GNU/Hurd since no good source of
> random bits exists...
lsh can create a random seed with some entropy from other sources,
like various system state or even the traditional random typing thing.
So even if real /dev/ra
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 11:33:44AM +0100, pancake wrote:
> I think that LSH is more correct on hurd because the license (GPLvsBSD)
Once the package conforms to the Free Software Definition, we
shouldn't worry about which license a project uses.
The GNU position, generally, is that the GPL is the
OPenSSH:
is freely useable and re-useable by everyone under a BSD license.
LSH:
A GNU implementation of the Secure Shell protocols.
I think that LSH is more correct on hurd because the license (GPLvsBSD)
there are many random translators, but I think that anybody says that will
build the d
Why not use lsh instead of OpenSsh? I think that in hurd project
there are more political reasons than security ones.
Both are Free Software correct? Then there are no "political" reasons
to prefer the one over the other. But lsh is _still_ useless on
GNU/Hurd since no good source of random
Philip Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> libl1 (needed for xdm)
I can't find this library in any source repository
--
Bruno Bonfils
http://www.debian-fr.org/ http://www.asyd.net/
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 08:50:33PM +1300, Philip Charles wrote:
> I'm back. Sorry about my silence, I have been far too busy even to follow
> what has been happening with GNU. Things should ease up at the middle of
> the year.
>
> The K2 images are coming along nicely. I wi
I'm back. Sorry about my silence, I have been far too busy even to follow
what has been happening with GNU. Things should ease up at the middle of
the year.
The K2 images are coming along nicely. I will need to have them finalised
by Wednesday.
Some questions.
x-windows. There are
32 matches
Mail list logo
