Hi,
while snooping through the package list, I noticed that we have an
inconsistent spelling of those two words mentioned in the subject.
15 packages are using QT, while 33 packages use Qt. And 93 packages are
using Gnome, while 127 are using GNOME. This should be changed, since
it's called QT a
On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> 15 packages are using QT, while 33 packages use Qt. And 93 packages are
> using Gnome, while 127 are using GNOME. This should be changed, since
> it's called QT and GNOME and not Qt or Gnome. Since this issue effects
So far, so good.
> the quality of D
* Christian Kurz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20011104 11:16]:
> it's called QT and GNOME and not Qt or Gnome. Since this issue effects
You surely meant to say that it's "Qt". At least http://www.trolltech.com/
has it like this...
--
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
It looks like *I* am a bit too sleepy, too.
On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > 15 packages are using QT, while 33 packages use Qt. And 93 packages are
> > using Gnome, while 127 are using GNOME. This should be changed, since
> >
On 01-11-04 Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Christian Kurz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20011104 11:16]:
> > it's called QT and GNOME and not Qt or Gnome. Since this issue effects
> You surely meant to say that it's "Qt". At least http://www.trolltech.com/
> has
On 01-11-04 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > 15 packages are using QT, while 33 packages use Qt. And 93 packages are
> > using Gnome, while 127 are using GNOME. This should be changed, since
> > it's called QT and GNOME and not Qt or Gnome. Since t
On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> I had enough sleep and I'm quite aware about the e-Mails that I send and
> will send today.
See my reply to myself... too bad it did not reach you before you had send
yours.
> Wrong, I'm not of any authority to make decision about inconsistent or
> co
On 04/11/01, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > > 15 packages are using QT, while 33 packages use Qt. And 93 packages are
> > > using Gnome, while 127 are using GNOME. This should be changed
On 04/11/01, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > Wrong, I'm not of any authority to make decision about inconsistent or
> > consistent spelling of words in package descriptions. I can only write a
> Only the maintainers themselves and the Technical C
Package: leksbot
Version: 1.2-3
Severity: critical
Tags: security
Justification: root security hole
hi,
I just found this package while searching for setuid-root binarys:
-rwsr-xr-x1 root root 4060 Aug 29 21:29 /usr/bin/KATAXWR
compiling the packages from sources resulsts in this
Christian Kurz writes:
> On 04/11/01, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> So, let's drop the debian-qa list and the whole idea of Debian QA, if QA
> has no authority to make decision about what should be done to improve
> our quality. If this li
[If you really need to send people a Cc altough there header contains
"Mail-Copies-To: never", then please at least mark it as copy.]
On 04/11/01, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> Christian Kurz writes:
> > On 04/11/01, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
Package: kmail
Version: 4:2.2.1-1.6
Severity: wishlist
Hello,
It would be nice if kmail
- provides regular expressions in filters
(and not only rationnal expressions)
- have ability to log and display filters activity
- recognise qmail ./Maildir/ format for incomming mail
- provides Mes
Christian Kurz writes:
> On 04/11/01, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> > Erm. Why? debian-qa exists to improve the quality of Debian - to deal
> > with bugs that are causing maintainers problems, to NMU packages that
> > developers aren't dealing with for whatever reason. There's more to it
>
> That'
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 11:16:43AM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> while snooping through the package list, I noticed that we have an
> inconsistent spelling of those two words mentioned in the subject.
>
> 15 packages are using QT, while 33 packages use Qt. And 93 packages are
> using Gn
Other idea : ability to put new messages in the same folder than messages
corresponding to its ``References:'' or ``In-Reply-To:'' header fields.
--
Djèlil Chafaï - http://www.lsp.ups-tlse.fr/Chafai/
Installing:
ipchains-perl_0.5-11.diff.gz
to pool/main/i/ipchains-perl/ipchains-perl_0.5-11.diff.gz
ipchains-perl_0.5-11.dsc
to pool/main/i/ipchains-perl/ipchains-perl_0.5-11.dsc
ipchains-perl_0.5-11_i386.deb
to pool/main/i/ipchains-perl/ipchains-perl_0.5-11_i386.deb
Announcing to debian-deve
Work from Home, Guaranteed Minimum Monthly Income!
Have Your Downline Built BEFORE
you Spend Any Money!
This program even offers you
a Monthly Guaranteed Minimum
Income !
Guaranteed DOWNLINE, Guaranteed INCOME!
Don't miss out on this Great Opportunity
to secure yourself a
Guaranteed
On 04/11/01, Ivan E. Moore II wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 11:16:43AM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > Hi,
> > while snooping through the package list, I noticed that we have an
> > inconsistent spelling of those two words mentioned in the subject.
> > 15 packages are using QT, while 33 pack
On 04/11/01, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> Christian Kurz writes:
> > On 04/11/01, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> > > than just dealing with orphaned packages. We don't have any more
> > Which hopefully moves to an extra list and therefor an extra group
> > taking care of this. Orphaned packages are not di
Rejected: Can't read `shhmsg-dev_1.3.4-2.2_i386.deb'. [file not found]
===
If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the
override file requires editing, reply to this email.
Your rejected files are in incoming/REJECT/. (Some may also be in
incoming/ if your .changes file was
Your message dated Sun, 04 Nov 2001 15:09:41 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#111678: fixed in xmotd 1.16-4
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 08:29:54AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> File the wishlist bugs yourself,
s/wishlist/minor/
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 09:39:25PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote:
> On 04/11/01, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> > Indeed. Historically, debian-qa have been the people who deal with
> > orphaned packages - there are moves to make the BTS-generated traffic
> Well, but not only time is changing and I think i
24 matches
Mail list logo
