Remco Blaakmeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since the DFSG defines which packages can go into 'main' and which
> can't,
No it does not. Please read the DFSG. Policy defines what can and
can't go in main.
--
James
Some people have been arguing that probrams that are only useful if you
use them to talk to a non-free server should not be in main.
Since the DFSG defines which packages can go into 'main' and which can't,
can somebody please point out which part of the DFSG these programs fail?
Remco
On Wed, May 05, 1999 at 02:27:07PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> We have lost the opportunity to get a foothold in yet another
> area. I think it would be arrogant to assume that we have won the
> battle, and that we should start coercing people just like MS does.
While I have withdr
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph Carter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>ICQ is a _DOCUMENTED_ protocol.
By Mirabilis or still by the guy who worked it out by sniffing packets?
--
Ian Lynagh - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.lynagh.demon.co.uk/
Oxymoron #13: Almost exactly
Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcus> When you have a free client, the objection against the
Marcus> non-free server may drop in certain areas (ccoperations etc).
Marcus> A: "Hey, I heard Linux is great, can we use it for our desktop?"
Marcus> B: "Sure."
Marc
On Wed, May 05, 1999 at 06:42:40PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> A: "Hey, I heard Linux is great, can we use it for our desktop?"
> B: "Sure."
> A: "But we have NT servers..."
> B: "Linux can use them."
> A: "Great, let's do it."
Common to see this..
> The alternative could be:
>
> A: "Hey,
On Wed, 5 May 1999, Brederlow wrote:
> Heres my proposal about how a more userfriendly and/or automatik
> configuration should be done. Its still a draft so feel free to rip it
> apart. :)
You may want to take a look at the wn package which I
maintain. It has a configuration system based on the
On Wed, May 05, 1999 at 10:19:52AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> d) Before we go any further, I would like to have explained to me how
> starting a free software foray in an proprietary protocol is
> harmful to the free software community
(Please don't try to extract my personal opinio
Hi,
On 5 May, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> [43 pollux:~] egrep '(library_names|revision|current|age)=' \
> /usr/lib/libEterm.la /usr/lib/libgltt.la
> /usr/lib/libEterm.la:library_names='libEterm.so.0.8.7 libEterm.so.0
> libEterm.so'
> /usr/lib/libEterm.la:current=8
> /usr/lib/libEter
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> contrib and non-free aren't part of Debian
> and in fact contrib is no longer distributed with our CDs.
Say What!!! Disc 2 of the Official CD Set has a contrib
directory. The Packages file in that directory lists 97
One wrong assumption I keep seeing in this thread is that if you can
read a format, then you can write it. That's simply not true. You
may not have enough information.
For instance, suppose that a file format contains a checksum, with the
calculation of the checksum undocumented. In that case,
On Wed, May 05, 1999 at 07:34:02AM -0600, Gordon Matzigkeit wrote:
> > Guy Maor writes:
>
> GM> Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> 1) Make "-e" the default.
>
> GM> No way! -e is a horrible argument that makes makefiles break for
> GM> mysterious reasons.
(Note that dpkg-
many ppl have been using the word2x reader as an example of something that
is useless without nonfree software, and as i don't use it i'd like to ask a
question: is there any free word-format writer around (doesn't have to be
totally functional in that every possible word document can be written by
On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 10:14:40PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> > I suggest not using the term versioning to refer to sonames, it is
> > too easy to confuse it with symbol versioning.
>
> I used the term versioning because .la files contain 3 different version
> numbers.
yes, but those three numbe
Heres my proposal about how a more userfriendly and/or automatik
configuration should be done. Its still a draft so feel free to rip it
apart. :)
My proposal consists of several parts:
1. Changes to dpkg
2. configure
3. configure.set_var, configure.get_var and other spezialities
4. dpkg-question
On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 05:48:06PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> Can you get more details? I'm concerned that though .la files may be useful
> on some architectures libtool supports, they may be quite useless in debian.
> Reading some .la files, they seem to contain only things like libraries the
>
Hi,
>>"Gord" == Gordon Matzigkeit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Gord> [I think my mail entitled `pure' got lost in the shuffle. Otherwise,
Gord> why has nobody commented on it? I think it's the way to end the flame
Gord> war. Here it is again:]
Actually, no, I did read it, but there w
Hi Ben and Joey,
I got answers to your questions from one of the libtool team members,
Gary V. Vaughan. I've added him to the Cc list, with his permission.
The answers to concerns stated below are from Gary.
--
On 4 May, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Tue,
On Wed, May 05, 1999 at 07:39:54AM -0600, Gordon Matzigkeit wrote:
> Proprietary protocols are a problem. Let's create a new distribution
> to set apart the packages that can work just as well (or better) when
> connected to a network that uses only free software (say an intranet
> that runs only
[I think my mail entitled `pure' got lost in the shuffle. Otherwise,
why has nobody commented on it? I think it's the way to end the flame
war. Here it is again:]
> Branden Robinson writes:
BR> Anyway, my suggestion (which wasn't even a policy proposal,
BR> you'll note) is withdrawn.
I
> Guy Maor writes:
GM> Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 1) Make "-e" the default.
GM> No way! -e is a horrible argument that makes makefiles break for
GM> mysterious reasons.
GM> You should just arrange for the overrides to be set on the
GM> command line.
I agree with
Luis Villa wrote:
> P.S. I fully support the maintainers who reject tik,
I don't.
> and hope that policy
> will be clarified so that the various ICQ clients and word-format
> converters can be moved out of main.
Now that would be even wor
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1) Make "-e" the default.
No way! -e is a horrible argument that makes makefiles break for
mysterious reasons.
You should just arrange for the overrides to be set on the command
line.
Guy
I say this not because I care, but because it seemed polite to summarise
the IRC `debate' for those not on at the time. And if I get do it, I get
to bias it my way. So. What the hell... :)
On Wed, May 05, 1999 at 12:57:58AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Anthony> On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 10:53:1
Hi,
>>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns writes:
Anthony> On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 10:53:14PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Imagine when a group of people say "Hey, call us using
>> foo-grubble, and we can have a neat game". And we have to say, sorry,
>> no can do, I use linux, and I am unable to
Hi,
>>"Luis" == Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Luis> On 4 May 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately, we do not live in a world where all software is
>> free. Neither are all protocols. Sometimes, some communication
>> protocols gain popularity with the masses that have no
Joel Klecker wrote:
> I'm not sure if you mean DT_SONAME or DT_NEEDED.
>
> For the former:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:[~]% objdump -p /lib/libc-2.1.1.so | awk '/SONAME/ {print
> $2}'
> libc.so.6
Actually what I really need for debhelper is the library name and major
version number, as is seen in a shli
On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 10:53:14PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Imagine when a group of people say "Hey, call us using
> foo-grubble, and we can have a neat game". And we have to say, sorry,
> no can do, I use linux, and I am unable to do that.
Not exactly. You'd have to say "Sorry,
I've been snooping on this list and thread for quite some time, but this
one finally made me need to respond.
On 4 May 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, we do not live in a world where all software is
> free. Neither are all protocols. Sometimes, some communication
> pro
On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 10:53:14PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
[..]
> Of course, it would be nice if we had free server software
> too. That shall come with time. But turning away free software cause
> it talks to non free software on *ANOTHER MACHINE*, hurts the free
> software commu
Hi,
>>"James" == James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
James> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Really? I think otherwise. I think your views are fascist. Stop
>> trying to control people, and impose your mores on them.
James> Control people? Who am I trying to control? I si
Hi,
Unfortunately, we do not live in a world where all software is
free. Neither are all protocols. Sometimes, some communication
protocols gain popularity with the masses that have no free
implementations.
Imagine when a group of people say "Hey, call us using
foo-grubble, a
On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 11:32:23PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> there is a small problem with dpkg-architecture nobody seems to have noticed
> before.
[snip]
> 1.b) Specify "MAKEFLAGS=-e" in dpkg-buildpackage. Note: make documentation
> does not recommend -e to be the defaul
Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcus> On Mon, May 03, 1999 at 03:15:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Theoretically, one does not provode the software to do
>> _anything_. You may look at it. You may feel inspired to write a free
>> server. You may take p
At 16:58 -0500 1999-05-04, Ossama Othman wrote:
On 4 May, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> if the soname is libltdl.so.0.1.1 the package should be called
libltdl0.1.1;
> if, OTOH, the soname is libltdl.so.0 (which is more likely, given libtool
> generates that kind of sonames), then the package sh
At 17:48 -0700 1999-05-04, Joey Hess wrote:
Reading some .la files, they seem to contain only things like libraries the
library depends on and versioning info. Is there really any info in
those files that cannot be obtained in other ways on linux?
Nope, that is all in the shared object itself,
Hi Joey,
On 4 May, Joey Hess wrote:
> Can you get more details? I'm concerned that though .la files may be useful
> on some architectures libtool supports, they may be quite useless in debian.
> Reading some .la files, they seem to contain only things like libraries the
> library depends on a
Ossama Othman wrote:
> The latest GNU libtools (>= 1.3a) can take advantage of installed
> libtool archive files (`*.la'). According to Thomas Tanner (one of the
> GNU libtool mainters):
>
>Version >= 1.3a of libtool will search for those
>files, which contain a lot of useful information
38 matches
Mail list logo
