> Eek!
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-developer-duties.en.html#s-key-maint
Double-eek! I'm rather embarrassed, now. :(
Anyway, my build-related gaffes aside, ncompress has now made it into
testing. Thanks to all of you for your advice and help.
KEN
--
Kenneth J. Prono
> Eek!
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-developer-duties.en.html#s-key-maint
Double-eek! I'm rather embarrassed, now. :(
Anyway, my build-related gaffes aside, ncompress has now made it into
testing. Thanks to all of you for your advice and help.
KEN
--
Kenneth J. Prono
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:43:58PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> > Dunno about fakeroot, but why do you want gpg on escher? You really
> > don't want to be storing your private GPG key on machines you don't
> > control; copy the built files back to a secure machine and sign there
> > instead.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 08:00:12PM +0100, James Troup wrote:
> Err, why do you need gpg? Surely, you're not signing the .changes on
> remote machines? :-/
I keep a copy of my own public key on some Debian machines so that I can
sanity-check my own signature on packages.
--
- mdz
> Dunno about fakeroot, but why do you want gpg on escher? You really
> don't want to be storing your private GPG key on machines you don't
> control; copy the built files back to a secure machine and sign there
> instead.
In retrospect, that's much more sensible than temporarily copying my
.gnu
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 01:29:44PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> Only problem now is that fakeroot isn't installed on casals and gpg
> isn't installed on escher. Should I just write debian-admin?
Dunno about fakeroot, but why do you want gpg on escher? You really
don't want to be storing your
Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Only problem now is that fakeroot isn't installed on casals
Fixed.
> and gpg isn't installed on escher.
Err, why do you need gpg? Surely, you're not signing the .changes on
remote machines? :-/
> Should I just write debian-admin?
In general, ye
> > I had no problems getting into debussy, raptor or crest, but casals and
> > escher denied my login.
>
> pdksh wasn't installed; try again.
That was it. Thanks!
Only problem now is that fakeroot isn't installed on casals and gpg
isn't installed on escher. Should I just write debian-admin?
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:43:58PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> > Dunno about fakeroot, but why do you want gpg on escher? You really
> > don't want to be storing your private GPG key on machines you don't
> > control; copy the built files back to a secure machine and sign there
> > instead.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 08:00:12PM +0100, James Troup wrote:
> Err, why do you need gpg? Surely, you're not signing the .changes on
> remote machines? :-/
I keep a copy of my own public key on some Debian machines so that I can
sanity-check my own signature on packages.
--
- mdz
--
To UNSU
> Dunno about fakeroot, but why do you want gpg on escher? You really
> don't want to be storing your private GPG key on machines you don't
> control; copy the built files back to a secure machine and sign there
> instead.
In retrospect, that's much more sensible than temporarily copying my
.gnu
Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I had no problems getting into debussy, raptor or crest, but casals and
> escher denied my login.
pdksh wasn't installed; try again.
--
James
Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I had no problems getting into debussy, raptor or crest, but casals and
> escher denied my login.
pdksh wasn't installed; try again.
--
James
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMA
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 01:29:44PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> Only problem now is that fakeroot isn't installed on casals and gpg
> isn't installed on escher. Should I just write debian-admin?
Dunno about fakeroot, but why do you want gpg on escher? You really
don't want to be storing your
Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Only problem now is that fakeroot isn't installed on casals
Fixed.
> and gpg isn't installed on escher.
Err, why do you need gpg? Surely, you're not signing the .changes on
remote machines? :-/
> Should I just write debian-admin?
In general, ye
> > I had no problems getting into debussy, raptor or crest, but casals and
> > escher denied my login.
>
> pdksh wasn't installed; try again.
That was it. Thanks!
Only problem now is that fakeroot isn't installed on casals and gpg
isn't installed on escher. Should I just write debian-admin?
> > > You login and do "dchroot sid". This solves alpha (escher), arm
> > > (debussy), s390 (raptor), m68k (crest) and mips (casals). - You are
> > > only missing ia64.
I had no problems getting into debussy, raptor or crest, but casals and
escher denied my login. I had assumed the machines page
> > > You login and do "dchroot sid". This solves alpha (escher), arm
> > > (debussy), s390 (raptor), m68k (crest) and mips (casals). - You are
> > > only missing ia64.
I had no problems getting into debussy, raptor or crest, but casals and
escher denied my login. I had assumed the machines page
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 01:19:19PM +0100, James Troup wrote:
> Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > You login and do "dchroot sid". This solves alpha (escher), arm
> > (debussy), s390 (raptor), m68k (crest) and mips (casals). - You are
> > only missing ia64.
> merulo has chroots.
Than
Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You login and do "dchroot sid". This solves alpha (escher), arm
> (debussy), s390 (raptor), m68k (crest) and mips (casals). - You are
> only missing ia64.
merulo has chroots.
--
James
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 01:19:19PM +0100, James Troup wrote:
> Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > You login and do "dchroot sid". This solves alpha (escher), arm
> > (debussy), s390 (raptor), m68k (crest) and mips (casals). - You are
> > only missing ia64.
> merulo has chroots.
Than
Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You login and do "dchroot sid". This solves alpha (escher), arm
> (debussy), s390 (raptor), m68k (crest) and mips (casals). - You are
> only missing ia64.
merulo has chroots.
--
James
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject o
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:19:21PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
[Building package by hand]
> According to the machines list, I can get access to a machine running
> sid for hppa, powerpc, sparc and mipsel. This leaves alpha, arm, ia64
> and s390 before ncompress can move into testing, and then
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:19:21PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
[Building package by hand]
> According to the machines list, I can get access to a machine running
> sid for hppa, powerpc, sparc and mipsel. This leaves alpha, arm, ia64
> and s390 before ncompress can move into testing, and then
> Yes - when I dug into this in April, it looked as if it wouldn't be
> safe for non-free in Europe until at least 2004, and I'm not sure about
> other places.
I don't think that this patent is valid in Europe (after all, software
patents are *still* supposed to be illegal in Europe), even if it
> If I were you I'd maybe build it on some of these architectures if I
> felt motivated to do so, and then file a bug on ftp.debian.org to get
> the old builds removed for the other architectures that are no longer
> autobuilding non-free software. If they don't want to autobuild it, why
> waste th
> Chroots are usually accessible with 'dchroot ' when and where
> they are available.
Got it. I was able to do that on debussy for arm, and m68k on crest
(although it turns out m6k autobuilds at least some non-free already).
> This is one of the reasons why non-free sucks.
I understand now. :-)
> > I've think that patent is about to expire. (June 20? I think I saw
> > it slashdotted within the past month.) If you can confirm this, just
> > wait till then and move it to main.
> Unfortunately it seems that that's only true for very us-centric
> people, not Debian.
Yes - when I dug into
Blars Blarson wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>As a side-note, this package
>>is non-free because of issues surrounding the LZW patent, not because
>>its license is non-free.
> I've think that patent is about to expire. (June 20? I think I saw
> it slashdotted w
> Yes - when I dug into this in April, it looked as if it wouldn't be
> safe for non-free in Europe until at least 2004, and I'm not sure about
> other places.
I don't think that this patent is valid in Europe (after all, software
patents are *still* supposed to be illegal in Europe), even if it
> If I were you I'd maybe build it on some of these architectures if I
> felt motivated to do so, and then file a bug on ftp.debian.org to get
> the old builds removed for the other architectures that are no longer
> autobuilding non-free software. If they don't want to autobuild it, why
> waste th
> Chroots are usually accessible with 'dchroot ' when and where
> they are available.
Got it. I was able to do that on debussy for arm, and m68k on crest
(although it turns out m6k autobuilds at least some non-free already).
> This is one of the reasons why non-free sucks.
I understand now. :-)
> > I've think that patent is about to expire. (June 20? I think I saw
> > it slashdotted within the past month.) If you can confirm this, just
> > wait till then and move it to main.
> Unfortunately it seems that that's only true for very us-centric
> people, not Debian.
Yes - when I dug into
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> As a side-note, this package
>is non-free because of issues surrounding the LZW patent, not because
>its license is non-free.
I've think that patent is about to expire. (June 20? I think I saw
it slashdotted within the past month.) If y
Blars Blarson wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>As a side-note, this package
>>is non-free because of issues surrounding the LZW patent, not because
>>its license is non-free.
> I've think that patent is about to expire. (June 20? I think I saw
> it slashdotted w
Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> Anyway, now that I've done all of this cleanup, I've realized that the
> package won't move into testing until I build it on all of the
> architectures it was built on for woody. Right now, according to the
> excuses list, I am missing alpha, arm, hppa, ia64, powerpc, s3
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:19:21PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> According to the machines list, I can get access to a machine running
> sid for hppa, powerpc, sparc and mipsel. This leaves alpha, arm, ia64
> and s390 before ncompress can move into testing, and then also m68k and
> mips befor
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> As a side-note, this package
>is non-free because of issues surrounding the LZW patent, not because
>its license is non-free.
I've think that patent is about to expire. (June 20? I think I saw
it slashdotted within the past month.) If y
> > Because I still use it[...]
>
> I have to ask...why? :-)
Well, I think you're poking fun at me, but I'm going to pretend that I
didn't notice and give you an answer anyway. :)
The main reason I took it is that my Cedar Backup package (not
officially in Debian) supports tar.Z backups and henc
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:19:21PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> Because I still use it[...]
I have to ask...why? :-)
--
- mdz
Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> Anyway, now that I've done all of this cleanup, I've realized that the
> package won't move into testing until I build it on all of the
> architectures it was built on for woody. Right now, according to the
> excuses list, I am missing alpha, arm, hppa, ia64, powerpc, s3
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:19:21PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> According to the machines list, I can get access to a machine running
> sid for hppa, powerpc, sparc and mipsel. This leaves alpha, arm, ia64
> and s390 before ncompress can move into testing, and then also m68k and
> mips befor
> > Because I still use it[...]
>
> I have to ask...why? :-)
Well, I think you're poking fun at me, but I'm going to pretend that I
didn't notice and give you an answer anyway. :)
The main reason I took it is that my Cedar Backup package (not
officially in Debian) supports tar.Z backups and henc
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:19:21PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> Because I still use it[...]
I have to ask...why? :-)
--
- mdz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I know this question (or a similar one) comes up periodically both here
and on -devel. Unfortunately, I have to ask it again, because I can't
find a complete solution to my problem.
Because I still use it, I adopted ncompress a few months ago when it was
orphaned. I spent a night or two and clos
I know this question (or a similar one) comes up periodically both here
and on -devel. Unfortunately, I have to ask it again, because I can't
find a complete solution to my problem.
Because I still use it, I adopted ncompress a few months ago when it was
orphaned. I spent a night or two and clos
46 matches
Mail list logo
