Re: That need to close bugs?

2007-09-18 Thread Reinhard Tartler
Sarah Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As one of those who triages various KDE bugs...in the area of KDEBase, > in particular, there are around 450 open bugs, we *have* to close > invalid bugs. There are around 750, with the INVALID and WONTFIX bugs > included. Please correct me, but I suspec

Re: Apturl (security) issues and inclusion in Gutsy

2007-09-18 Thread Alexander Sack
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 10:33:15PM +0200, Wouter Stomp wrote: > 1. It's possible to run arbitrary scripts in the preinst/postrm phase > of dpkg installation or the installed program itself could be > malicious. By allowing the repository to be specified the deb can come > from anywhere. So, you've

Re: That need to close bugs?

2007-09-18 Thread Henrik Nilsen Omma
Reinhard Tartler wrote: > Sarah Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> As one of those who triages various KDE bugs...in the area of KDEBase, >> in particular, there are around 450 open bugs, we *have* to close >> invalid bugs. There are around 750, with the INVALID and WONTFIX bugs >> includ

Re: That need to close bugs?

2007-09-18 Thread Fergal Daly
On 18/09/2007, Henrik Nilsen Omma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > Sarah Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > >> As one of those who triages various KDE bugs...in the area of KDEBase, > >> in particular, there are around 450 open bugs, we *have* to close > >> invalid

Re: Ubuntu 7.10 beta approaching

2007-09-18 Thread Till Kamppeter
hplip-gui is marked as a binary-only demotion to Universe. Should it not stay in main, only not being on the Ubuntu and Xubuntu desktop CDs? On Kubuntu it should be even seeded to get onto the CD, as Kubuntu ships the needed python-qt3 by default. Till Colin Watson wrote: > The Ubuntu 7.10

Re: Ubuntu 7.10 beta approaching

2007-09-18 Thread Martin Pitt
HI, Till Kamppeter [2007-09-18 13:34 +0100]: > hplip-gui is marked as a binary-only demotion to Universe. Should it not > stay in main, only not being on the Ubuntu and Xubuntu desktop CDs? On > Kubuntu it should be even seeded to get onto the CD, as Kubuntu ships > the needed python-qt3 by def

Re: Ubuntu 7.10 beta approaching

2007-09-18 Thread Till Kamppeter
Martin Pitt wrote: > HI, > > Till Kamppeter [2007-09-18 13:34 +0100]: >> hplip-gui is marked as a binary-only demotion to Universe. Should it not >> stay in main, only not being on the Ubuntu and Xubuntu desktop CDs? On >> Kubuntu it should be even seeded to get onto the CD, as Kubuntu ships >>

Re: The latest amd64 nightly desktop ISO is 730 megs

2007-09-18 Thread (``-_-ยดยด) -- Fernando
On Monday 17 September 2007 06:11:01 Scott Ritchie wrote: > Murat Gunes wrote: > > You may want to file a bug in the ubuntu-cdimage product at Launchpad if > > you feel the warning should be in some other form and/or made more explicit. > > Fair enough. Done: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-cd

Re: That need to close bugs?

2007-09-18 Thread Markus Hitter
Am 17.09.2007 um 17:44 schrieb Sarah Hobbs: > There is simply no way to deal with the current lot of open bugs, > to get > an overview of them all, let alone having the invalid ones in there - > the problem gets too great, and you can't solve any of it (and become > very demotivated in the proc

Re: That need to close bugs?

2007-09-18 Thread Hugo Heden
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 19:13:44 +0200, "Markus Hitter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Am 17.09.2007 um 17:44 schrieb Sarah Hobbs: > > > There is simply no way to deal with the current lot of open bugs, > > to get > > an overview of them all, let alone having the invalid ones in there - > > the pro

Re: That need to close bugs?

2007-09-18 Thread Brian Murray
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 10:11:49AM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > Sarah Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > As one of those who triages various KDE bugs...in the area of KDEBase, > > in particular, there are around 450 open bugs, we *have* to close > > invalid bugs. There are around 750, wi

nspluginwrapper a solution for 64-bit

2007-09-18 Thread Andrew Jorgensen
Would it make sense to promote nspluginwrapper [0] to main for amd64? openSUSE will be including it in 10.3[1]. It seems a better solution user-wise than including the still-alpha gnash. [0] http://gwenole.beauchesne.info/projects/nspluginwrapper/ [1] http://en.opensuse.org/Factory/News#Changes_

Re: nspluginwrapper a solution for 64-bit

2007-09-18 Thread Todd Deshane
On 9/18/07, Andrew Jorgensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would it make sense to promote nspluginwrapper [0] to main for amd64? > openSUSE will be including it in 10.3[1]. It seems a better solution > user-wise than including the still-alpha gnash. > > [0] http://gwenole.beauchesne.info/projects/n

Re: Apturl (security) issues and inclusion in Gutsy

2007-09-18 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 12:25:00PM +0200, Alexander Sack wrote: > > 2. Repositories added through apturl could provide packages included > > in Ubuntu but with higher version numbers with malicious code. > > ... this is a feature, not an issue. I'm really not convinced by that. We shouldn't be m

Re: nspluginwrapper a solution for 64-bit

2007-09-18 Thread Todd Deshane
On 9/18/07, Todd Deshane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/18/07, Andrew Jorgensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Would it make sense to promote nspluginwrapper [0] to main for amd64? > > openSUSE will be including it in 10.3[1]. It seems a better solution > > user-wise than including the still-al

Re: Why is amd64 late?

2007-09-18 Thread Todd Deshane
On 9/17/07, Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 01:09:44PM +0200, Mihamina (R12y) Rakotomandimby > wrote: > > Why is the amd64 release/tribe always late? > > It isn't. amd64 releases happen at the exact same time as i386. > > > My favorite example is about the Xen sup