On Sat, Sep 18, 2004 at 10:19:46AM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> > gdm can't get into sarge because libselinux is supposedly not yet
> > built on
> > arm, yet http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=arm&pkg=libselinux
> > reports a successful build on Sept. 3.
>
&
gdm can't get into sarge because libselinux is supposedly not yet
built on
arm, yet http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=arm&pkg=libselinux
reports a successful build on Sept. 3.
I asked debian-arm about this but got no response.
> IBM holds *so* many software patents (all invalid on their
> faces, of course) that if it decided to enforce them, and was
> successful, most of Debian would likely have to be removed.
Many of IBM's patents are clearly valid according to US law;
they are the result of real cutting-edge research
I wrote:
pciutils, kudzu, sndconfig, and athtool should be able to go into sarge
as a group with the proper hint.
It seems that the hint was applied but didn't work, but I can't tell why.
Any ideas?
pciutils, kudzu, sndconfig, and athtool should be able to go into sarge
as a group with the proper hint.
I wrote:
> > The solution is obvious: please include a list (ideally at the beginning)
> > of changed packages in the release that were not previously available from
> > security.debian.org. In most cases this will be a very small list.
Martin Schulze wrote:
> I already say "DSA nnn-m" in the fir
Hi,
I've had a consistent problem over the years with the announcements that
are sent out for updates to the stable distribution, one that should be
easily correctable.
The messages are written as if it is assumed that people don't apply security
updates. It is typical that an update to stable c
7 matches
Mail list logo
