[±¤°í] 5ºÐ¸¸¿¡ °ú¿Ü ¼±»ý´Ô ±¸Çϱâ!!!

2002-03-02 Thread ³ªÀ̽º°¡À̵å
Title: Untitled Document º»¸ÞÀÏÀº Á¤ÅëºÎ ±Ç°í»çÇ׿¡ ÀÇ°Å Á¦¸ñ¿¡ [±¤°í] ¶ó°í Ç¥±âµÈ ¸ÞÀÏÀÔ´Ï´Ù. º»¸ÞÀÏÀº ¹ß½ÅÀü¿ë ¸ÞÀÏÀÔ´Ï´Ù À̸ÞÀÏÀº ÀÏȸ¼º ¸ÞÀÏÀ̸ç Àç¹ß¼ÛµÇÁö ¾Ê½À´Ï´Ù. ±ÍÇÏÀÇ ¸ÞÀÏÁÖ¼Ò´Â À¥¼­ÇÎÁß¿¡ ¾Ë°ÔµÈ °ÍÀ̸ç, À̸

Re: Bug#136374: sbuild: /etc/sbuild.conf should be a conffile

2002-03-02 Thread Joey Hess
Rick Younie wrote: > summary: the sbuild package has three configurations files, each > overriding the previous one: /etc/sbuild.conf, /etc/sbuild.conf.local, > ~/.sbuildrc. > > sbuild.conf is for upstream changes, sbuild.conf.local (a > conffile currently) for local system-wide changes, .sbuildrc

Re: Bug#136374: sbuild: /etc/sbuild.conf should be a conffile

2002-03-02 Thread Junichi Uekawa
Rick Younie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit: > summary: the sbuild package has three configurations files, each > overriding the previous one: /etc/sbuild.conf, /etc/sbuild.conf.local, > ~/.sbuildrc. Really, /etc/sbuild.conf.local should really have been named /etc/sbuild, and /etc/sbui

Re: non-buildability always RC?

2002-03-02 Thread Joey Hess
Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > I maintain freenet-unstable, a free Java application that builds with > jikes, but unfortunately not with the version in unstable and testing. > I've now got a bug about that and wonder whether it should really be > serious. It's not that this package is not buildable in p

Re: is this license DFSG compliant ?

2002-03-02 Thread christophe barbé
On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 05:51:21PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > Hello Christophe, > > On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 04:53:52PM -0500, christophe barbé wrote: > > Is the following license DFSG compliant ? > > I think that it is with the clause 4 of the DFSG but I would like to be > > sure. > > Also I w

Re: Bug#136374: sbuild: /etc/sbuild.conf should be a conffile

2002-03-02 Thread Joey Hess
Rick Younie wrote: > summary: the sbuild package has three configurations files, each > overriding the previous one: /etc/sbuild.conf, /etc/sbuild.conf.local, > ~/.sbuildrc. > > sbuild.conf is for upstream changes, sbuild.conf.local (a > conffile currently) for local system-wide changes, .sbuildr

Re: is this license DFSG compliant ?

2002-03-02 Thread Steve Langasek
Hello Christophe, On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 04:53:52PM -0500, christophe barbé wrote: > Is the following license DFSG compliant ? > I think that it is with the clause 4 of the DFSG but I would like to be > sure. > Also I would like to know which (or how much) packages in debian use > this clause '#4

Re: Bug#136374: sbuild: /etc/sbuild.conf should be a conffile

2002-03-02 Thread Junichi Uekawa
Rick Younie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit: > summary: the sbuild package has three configurations files, each > overriding the previous one: /etc/sbuild.conf, /etc/sbuild.conf.local, > ~/.sbuildrc. Really, /etc/sbuild.conf.local should really have been named /etc/sbuild, and /etc/sbu

±âÀûÀÇ ¿µ¾î 7English »ùÇà [ ±¤°í ]

2002-03-02 Thread º»Å俵¾î
Title: 이메일문서    기적의 영어 7English 샘플    ìƒ˜í”Œì„ 보시려면 <한글97>이 설치되어 있어야 합니다. ë‹¤ìŒì€ 영어교육개혁 협회의 발표문을 인용한 것입니다.  ã€Š1》 폐지되

Re: non-buildability always RC?

2002-03-02 Thread Joey Hess
Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > I maintain freenet-unstable, a free Java application that builds with > jikes, but unfortunately not with the version in unstable and testing. > I've now got a bug about that and wonder whether it should really be > serious. It's not that this package is not buildable in

Re: is this license DFSG compliant ?

2002-03-02 Thread christophe barbé
On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 05:51:21PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > Hello Christophe, > > On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 04:53:52PM -0500, christophe barbé wrote: > > Is the following license DFSG compliant ? > > I think that it is with the clause 4 of the DFSG but I would like to be > > sure. > > Also I

is this license DFSG compliant ?

2002-03-02 Thread christophe barbé
Is the following license DFSG compliant ? I think that it is with the clause 4 of the DFSG but I would like to be sure. Also I would like to know which (or how much) packages in debian use this clause '#4 Integrity of The Author's Source Code' to be accepted. Christophe > This software is provi

Re: is this license DFSG compliant ?

2002-03-02 Thread Steve Langasek
Hello Christophe, On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 04:53:52PM -0500, christophe barbé wrote: > Is the following license DFSG compliant ? > I think that it is with the clause 4 of the DFSG but I would like to be > sure. > Also I would like to know which (or how much) packages in debian use > this clause '#

±âÀûÀÇ ¿µ¾î 7English »ùÇà [ ±¤°í ]

2002-03-02 Thread º»Å俵¾î
Title: À̸ÞÀϹ®¼­    ±âÀûÀÇ ¿µ¾î 7English »ùÇà    »ùÇÃÀ» º¸½Ã·Á¸é <ÇѱÛ97>ÀÌ ¼³Ä¡µÇ¾î ÀÖ¾î¾ß ÇÕ´Ï´Ù. ´ÙÀ½Àº ¿µ¾î±³À°°³Çõ ÇùȸÀÇ ¹ßÇ¥¹®À» ÀοëÇÑ °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù.  ¡¶1¡· ÆóÁöµÇ´Â ¿µ¹®¹ý 80% 25°³Ç× - »ó¼¼È÷ º¸±â-Ŭ¸¯Çаè¿Í ±³

Re: non-buildability always RC?

2002-03-02 Thread Josip Rodin
On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 06:18:40PM +0100, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > I maintain freenet-unstable, a free Java application that builds with > jikes, but unfortunately not with the version in unstable and testing. Well, reassign it to jikes? It broke your package... -- 2. That which causes joy

Re: Bug#136374: sbuild: /etc/sbuild.conf should be a conffile

2002-03-02 Thread Gergely Nagy
> > > sbuild.conf changes occasionally upstream with new watches > > > and alternatives and I'll be tracking that. The user > > > shouldn't have to pay much attention to the file. > > > > And marking it as conffile allows that. If the user didn't change the > > file, it will be replaced with the

Re: Bug#136374: sbuild: /etc/sbuild.conf should be a conffile

2002-03-02 Thread Rick Younie
Cc to mentors for input summary: the sbuild package has three configurations files, each overriding the previous one: /etc/sbuild.conf, /etc/sbuild.conf.local, ~/.sbuildrc. sbuild.conf is for upstream changes, sbuild.conf.local (a conffile currently) for local system-wide changes, .sbuildrc for u

is this license DFSG compliant ?

2002-03-02 Thread christophe barbé
Is the following license DFSG compliant ? I think that it is with the clause 4 of the DFSG but I would like to be sure. Also I would like to know which (or how much) packages in debian use this clause '#4 Integrity of The Author's Source Code' to be accepted. Christophe > This software is prov

non-buildability always RC?

2002-03-02 Thread Robert Bihlmeyer
Hi, I maintain freenet-unstable, a free Java application that builds with jikes, but unfortunately not with the version in unstable and testing. I've now got a bug about that and wonder whether it should really be serious. It's not that this package is not buildable in principle -- but woody & sid

Re: non-buildability always RC?

2002-03-02 Thread Josip Rodin
On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 06:18:40PM +0100, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > I maintain freenet-unstable, a free Java application that builds with > jikes, but unfortunately not with the version in unstable and testing. Well, reassign it to jikes? It broke your package... -- 2. That which causes jo

Re: Bug#136374: sbuild: /etc/sbuild.conf should be a conffile

2002-03-02 Thread Gergely Nagy
> > > sbuild.conf changes occasionally upstream with new watches > > > and alternatives and I'll be tracking that. The user > > > shouldn't have to pay much attention to the file. > > > > And marking it as conffile allows that. If the user didn't change the > > file, it will be replaced with the

Re: Bug#136374: sbuild: /etc/sbuild.conf should be a conffile

2002-03-02 Thread Rick Younie
Cc to mentors for input summary: the sbuild package has three configurations files, each overriding the previous one: /etc/sbuild.conf, /etc/sbuild.conf.local, ~/.sbuildrc. sbuild.conf is for upstream changes, sbuild.conf.local (a conffile currently) for local system-wide changes, .sbuildrc for

non-buildability always RC?

2002-03-02 Thread Robert Bihlmeyer
Hi, I maintain freenet-unstable, a free Java application that builds with jikes, but unfortunately not with the version in unstable and testing. I've now got a bug about that and wonder whether it should really be serious. It's not that this package is not buildable in principle -- but woody & si