On Sunday 2023-06-18 23:37, Rob Landley wrote:
>On 6/18/23 14:58, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>>> Three years ago Samba maintainer Jeremy Allison lamented that "Both GPLv3
>>> and
>>> the AGPL have been rejected soundly by most developers" and talked about
>>> how he
>>> regretted the move and the dam
On 6/18/23 15:19, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Besides that it would also have been clear from actually reading the IRC
> log which incidentially also says
Good to know what the expectations for participation are.
>> This is the same GPLv3 package that Red Hat just dropped support for?
>
> As I said
On June 18, 2023 11:37:55 PM GMT+02:00, Rob Landley wrote:
>On 6/18/23 14:58, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>>> Three years ago Samba maintainer Jeremy Allison lamented that "Both GPLv3
>>> and
>>> the AGPL have been rejected soundly by most developers" and talked about
>>> how he
>>> regretted the m
On 6/18/23 14:58, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> Three years ago Samba maintainer Jeremy Allison lamented that "Both GPLv3 and
>> the AGPL have been rejected soundly by most developers" and talked about how
>> he
>> regretted the move and the damage it had done to the project,
>> https://archive.org/det
Hi again,
some more comments.
Am 18.06.23 um 21:28 schrieb Rob Landley:
No, that's how I read it too. You said getting the _architectures_
removed, not
getting libreoffice removed from those architectures.
That is hilarious. The subject says we are talking about LibreOffice
here, not genera
Hi,
Am 18.06.23 um 21:28 schrieb Rob Landley:
Of course I mean "getting those architectures removed from unstable"
*for libreoffice*.
This is the same GPLv3 package that Red Hat just dropped support for?
GPLv3 doesn't have anything to do with this here.
https://lwn.net/Articles/933525/
Inde
On 6/18/23 03:45, Rene Engelhard wrote:> Am 18.06.23 um 10:32 schrieb Rene
Engelhard:
I don't really like sweeping it under the carpet again and would
actually pursue the "getting those architectures removed from unstable"
way pointed out and (implicitely) approved/suggested by the r
Hi Daniel!
Apologies for the late reply. I had seen your message back then but it
somehow fell of the table and eventually forgot to answer. I just now
found your report again since I resumed working on the hfsprogs package.
On Mon, 2021-09-27 at 12:45 +0200, Daniel Höpfl wrote:
> Apple (the upst
> On Jun 18, 2023, at 3:53 PM, Simon McVittie wrote:
>
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2023 at 14:47:00 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
>> I rebuilt librsvg in bookworm on the s390x porterbox zelenka, and can
>> confirm that 2.54.5+dfsg-1 now fails in bookworm too. So something must
>> have triggered a regress
On Sun, 18 Jun 2023 at 14:47:00 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> I rebuilt librsvg in bookworm on the s390x porterbox zelenka, and can
> confirm that 2.54.5+dfsg-1 now fails in bookworm too. So something must
> have triggered a regression between September 2022 and now.
It would be helpful if someon
On Sun, 18 Jun 2023 at 13:40:09 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> librsvg 2.54.5+dfsg-2 failed to build on s390x, powerpc and ppc64 with
> multiple test failures. At first glance, they seem to be the same test
> failures, meaning this is about endianness rather than any specific
> architecture.
>
> 2
Source: librsvg
Version: 2.54.5+dfsg-1
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs help
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past)
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-s...@lists.debian.org, debian-powerpc@lists.debian.org,
ru...@packages.debian.org
Forwarded: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/
> Le 18 juin 2023 à 13:37, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
>
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 10:32:55AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> Am 18.06.23 um 10:19 schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz:
>>> On Sun, 2023-06-18 at 09:31 +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Also note I am not talking about the
On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 10:32:55AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Am 18.06.23 um 10:19 schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz:
>> On Sun, 2023-06-18 at 09:31 +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> > Also note I am not talking about the debian-ports architectures. Those I
>> > forgot and I have no problem
Marco LANDI was born in Italy. He worked at APPLE (he was world
president) and now lives in France, he invests in artificial intelligence.
https://editions-balland.com/Marco-Landi_auteur_6667.html
Or sending a petition to Apple?
If you have an idea how to do that, I am more than listening.
ht
On Sun, 2023-06-18 at 12:04 +0200, David VANTYGHEM wrote:
> Perhaps asking to Marco LANDI at info AT quest-it.com?
I don't know who that is. Can you enlighten me?
> Or sending a petition to Apple?
If you have an idea how to do that, I am more than listening.
Adrian
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian
Perhaps asking to Marco LANDI at info AT quest-it.com?
Or sending a petition to Apple?
Le 18/06/2023 à 11:55, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz a écrit :
Hello!
I have made some more progress on the hfs package to the point that it
now builds fine on Linux. I have not tested the binaries yet, except
Hello!
I have made some more progress on the hfs package to the point that it
now builds fine on Linux. I have not tested the binaries yet, except for
a quick "mkfs.hfsplus" which seemed to work.
All the changes can be found in the "linux" branch in [1]. I have also
added a TODO file for Linux ca
Hi again.
Am 18.06.23 um 10:32 schrieb Rene Engelhard:
I don't really like sweeping it under the carpet again and would
actually pursue the "getting those architectures removed from unstable"
way pointed out and (implicitely) approved/suggested by the release
team...
You want Debian to drop sup
Hi,
Am 18.06.23 um 10:19 schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz:
On Sun, 2023-06-18 at 09:31 +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Also note I am not talking about the debian-ports architectures. Those I
forgot and I have no problems making them stay into "testsuite ran but
results ignored" set.
Why did you
Hello!
On Sun, 2023-06-18 at 09:31 +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Also note I am not talking about the debian-ports architectures. Those I
> forgot and I have no problems making them stay into "testsuite ran but
> results ignored" set.
Why did you send this mail exclusively to debian-ports then?
Hi,
I originally wanted to send the mail after all the architectures got
result but now even after 6d mips64el didn't try it so I send it now.
Prompted by riscv64 supposed to be added to the archive and even
as a release arch for trixie - see
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/
22 matches
Mail list logo
