On Tue, 05 May 2009, Marco d'Itri wrote:
I know that Debian supports this, but I also know that maintaning
forever large changes to packages for no real gain sucks.
I wonder what these are, and I hope you will start a separate thread with
that information.
So, does anybody still see reasons
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 20:23:53 -0300
Source: autotools-dev
Binary: autotools-dev
Architecture: source all
Version: 20090427.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org
Changed-By: Henrique
On Sat, 02 May 2009, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
First of all, you do not discuss the most common type of packages: do
not change the build-system, but just use it. This means autotools are
never called, neighter when preparing the package, nor when building the
package.
Yeah, it is really
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Hal checks the drive capabilities and shouldn't be polling drives that
support async notifications. Is that code not working for you?
It is working
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009, Luk Claes wrote:
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Michal ?iha? ni...@debian.org writes:
Dne Sat, 25 Apr 2009 07:10:24 +0300
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net napsal(a):
Like lintian, your list falsely includes packages that use cdbs to build,
which automatically updates
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Michael Biebl wrote:
powertop encourages to disable polling, so it is a big point.
I agree with you in general, but I doubt polling every 2 or 16 seconds
will make
any
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Michael Biebl wrote:
powertop encourages to disable polling, so it is a big point.
I agree with you in general, but I doubt polling every 2 or 16 seconds will
make
any significant difference power consumption wise.
It does. It won't be much, but still... in any
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009, Michal ??iha?? wrote:
Dne Sat, 25 Apr 2009 07:10:24 +0300
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net napsal(a):
Like lintian, your list falsely includes packages that use cdbs to build,
which automatically updates config.{sub,guess}.
If you don't build depend on
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009, Darren Salt wrote:
For me, lilo works fine as it is. If I see something which affects me, I'll
at least have a look at it; no guarantees, though, since there's a lot of
stuff here with which I'm not familiar.
From memory, lilo doesn't support partitioned md arrays. Since
On Mon, 06 Apr 2009, Matthew Johnson wrote:
On Mon Apr 06 11:07, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
So lets get grub2 working everywhere. :) A worthy goal.
Sure, but don't remove lilo until we're happy that grub2 does work
everywhere.
And that we have something resembling acceptable, up-to-date
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
Any idea how much effort would it take to integrae it into the existing
Debian linux-2.6 package?
Zero chance. The RT kernel is no plaything. The RT changes are being
slowly fed to the mainline Linux kernel, but due to the complexity, it is an
ongoing
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Paul Wise wrote:
debian-volatile isn't an appropriate place for this because many
stable users don't use volatile and it is fairly important they are
kept up to date with this, kinda like the timezone database.
AFAIK, volatile.d.o _is_ the proper way to keep the timezone
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Harald Braumann wrote:
Otherwise, we will have massive pains to switch initsystems (as in:
it will be either completely impossible, or it will take two or three
stable releases to do it). It was trouble enough to implement
invoke-rc.d.
Who would want to do that,
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org (16/03/2009):
So, ethtool really needs to grow an option to iterate over all
netdevs, and another one to print a summary of link state and
speed,duplex before mii-tool could be dropped.
I won't
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 09:16:31AM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
It seems to me that it would be a lot less effort to fix this by removing
file-rc in Debian, which has only a handful (137) of popcon reports. Even
if we take into consideration that
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Mar 19, Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net wrote:
With respect to #494001, I would like to determine the minimum
version of the linux kernel we will
For the new udev package[1] I am trying *very* hard to keep it working
even with 2.6.18 kernels long
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Mar 18, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
A peek at the source says it uses /proc/acpi/ibm/light.
Other people told me that they believe that nowadays all modern
thinkpads use a kernel driver.
A driver which I happen to be the maintainer of
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Please do not as it will allow users which need to access Thinkpad-specific
devices (== /dev/nvram) access to /dev/{mem,kmem,port}. That's a huge security
hole in my opinion.
Which are? If you mean people running tpb, tpb is as far as I know,
On Sun, 15 Mar 2009, Martín Ferrari wrote:
* mii-tool: it could be dropped and replaced by a pointer to ethtool as
it's not meant to be used automatically by scripts. On the other hand,
mii-tool behaviour when you call it without parameters is *extremely* useful
to locate which cable goes
On Mon, 09 Mar 2009, Tino Keitel wrote:
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 22:18:15 +0100, Marcus Better wrote:
* Package name: xca
Description : x509 Certification Authority management tool based on
QT4
Is there anything significant that distinguishes this from TinyCA?
XCA has
On Sat, 24 Jan 2009, Arthur de Jong wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-24 at 11:07 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
The question is whether we can consider safe to pass authentication
tokens as environment variables. Either we do, and we fix applications
that pass environment where they shouldn???t.
On Sun, 11 Jan 2009, Stephen Gran wrote:
Agreed - I don't think hdparm should be used outside of a 'last resort'
situation where the kernel gets it wrong. This is happening less and
There is one common situation for hdparm usage: -W 0 (disable write cache).
That one is not likely to go away
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
(Does nscd honor DNS TTLs properly yet? Last time I looked at it, its DNS
caching was horribly broken, but it's been quite a while.)
It can't, it would be a layering violation. What one would need is to
selectively apply nscd only to some maps (and
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Now, as of version 3.005, ucf started using a feaure that has
long been a part of cdebconf, but was only ported to debconf in version
1.5.19, so now ucf started depending on:
debconf (= 1.5.19) | cdebconf
and this is where trouble
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008, Vincent Bernat wrote:
On some systems like OpenBSD, all those users are starting with
underscore to avoid collision with real users. On Debian, I have never
seen this, even for packages that comes from OpenBSD (like openntpd
which uses ntpd). Is there some
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
acceleration, right? So the box can be installed, and is usable for
non-gaming purposes. The drm stuff can possibly be gotten from non
You
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
acceleration, right? So the box can be installed, and is usable for
non-gaming purposes. The drm stuff can possibly be gotten from non
You can always use VESA, yes. I don't think the X.org driver can get an ATI
GPU to work without the memory
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seems like upstream udev firmware loader does look at
/lib/firmware/$(uname -r)/, which seems sane.
Why was this removed?
It wasn't removed, upstream added
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Please hit me with the cluebat; apparently I'm not understanding anything. Why
would I want to have more than one firmware installed? AIUI, the firmware is
The firmware has an ABI to the kernel driver. If it changes, both have to
change. This has
On Thu, 18 Sep 2008, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 17 septembre 2008 à 19:52 -0500, Peter Samuelson a écrit :
[Josselin Mouette]
Yes, but that could be worked around by making libncurses6 conflict with
libncurses5 ( version.with.symbols).
That only works if you rebuild
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008, Daniel Baumann wrote:
Adeodato Simó wrote:
* introduce a ncurses5 source package.
sounds elegant to me, will do like that. thanks for beeing constructive.
As you have been warned already, do watch out for symbol colisions due to
the lack of symbol versioning in
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
I offer to fix up all packages to exim4 | mail-transport-agent *and*
Don't do it on any packages that tagged the bug wontfix, at least not
without asking first (AND getting a positive response). Some of the
packages have real reasons to prefer an
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
It is done in a installation where PXE installing work, and the first
step in the compatibility test is to install Debian Edu automatically
with all questions preseeded. If installation work, the hard drive
work.
[...]
Your idea is good, and a
On Thu, 07 Aug 2008, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[Matthew Johnson]
Or at least didn't block testing migration. I'm happy if porters decide
my package isn't for them, as long as it doesn't stop it being for
anyone else either...
I agree.
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Guido Günther wrote:
Why don't we let sysv-init (at least optionally) use policy-rc.d?
Because that would make policy-rc.d and invoke-rc.d useless crap.
The DESIGN behind invoke-rc.d and policy-rc.d is to help MAINTAINER SCRIPTS
don't screw up when
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Guido Günther wrote:
The DESIGN behind invoke-rc.d and policy-rc.d is to help MAINTAINER SCRIPTS
don't screw up when restarting/starting/stopping services automatically,
either in the normal system context, or inside special chroots.
They are NOT, and I repeat:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008, Franklin PIAT wrote:
I haven't investigated it, but I wonder if it isn't the sane way to have
complex dependency (à la LSB) stored in one place, and system admin
preference in another place.
Well, policy-rc.d is obeyed by invoke-rc.d, and therefore, by all maintainer
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Well, it doesn't affect upgrades. And for new installs, _all_ the
packages are new, so this falls under the case of Debian picking one
alternative of something as a default.
Well, if Debian defaults
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:40:03 -0300
Source: autotools-dev
Binary: autotools-dev
Architecture: source all
Version: 20080123.2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Here's a try (against current master branch):
diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
index c9bd84f..772afce 100644
--- a/policy.sgml
+++ b/policy.sgml
@@ -5946,9 +5946,11 @@ rmdir /usr/local/share/emacs 2/dev/null || true
The
On Tue, 01 Jul 2008, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mardi 01 juillet 2008 à 11:55 +0100, James Westby a écrit :
Given that in runlevels 0 and 6 there is an init script that terminates
all running processes it is a waste to run an init script for each
process before that. In Ubuntu we remove the
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008, William Pitcock wrote:
On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 19:12 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 12:49:50PM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
Have you ever heard the fable concerning a father, a son and a donkey?
In a nutshell, first, nobody rides down the road on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 12:54:05 -0300
Source: rng-tools
Binary: rng-tools
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2-unofficial-mt.12-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Martín Ferrari wrote:
Both, I know that many people had written stuff on top of that output
and interface.
Including Debian.
net-tools doesn't suffer any showstoppers, is there a good reason to
replace it at this time? iproute is indeed much better, but it is not even
On Thu, 29 May 2008, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
I am not quite sure what to do to reduce it even further. Anyone got
any ideas?
Yes, but for the kernel. You want to reduce the time to /sbin/init
being run by removing anything you don't want or need, and you want to
have the udev coldplug run
On Sat, 10 May 2008, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
The X-Debian-Package: header can be omitted if it is not possible to
name a specific source package for a mail, like when the mail is
about multiple packages.
One could consider several X-Debian-Package headers when it is about
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh dijo [Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 07:44:02PM -0300]:
For the nth time, I have a package that dpkg is unable to remove
because
it tries to stop a service that either is already stopped (I didn't
want
For the nth
On Sun, 23 Mar 2008, Pierre THIERRY wrote:
For the nth time, I have a package that dpkg is unable to remove because
it tries to stop a service that either is already stopped (I didn't want
For the nth time squared, an initscript MUST NOT FAIL to stop an already
stopped service. Ever. It must
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008, Darren Salt wrote:
I demand that Henrique de Moraes Holschuh may or may not have written...
On Sun, 23 Mar 2008, Pierre THIERRY wrote:
For the nth time, I have a package that dpkg is unable to remove because
it tries to stop a service that either is already stopped (I
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, John Goerzen wrote:
On Tuesday 11 March 2008 4:41:57 pm Ian Jackson wrote:
He is polishing revision logs by rebasing changes, reorganising
commits into a different order, moving code between files,
gratuitously reformatting[2], etc.
What is it that people don't get
On Sun, 09 Mar 2008, Clint Adams wrote:
On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 10:14:14PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
In Developer Locations page(*), it seems that Debian Developer is in
Antarctic Continent... awesome! Is it real??
Not that one; someone made a sign error with his coordinates.
Can we
On Wed, 05 Mar 2008, Mike Hommey wrote:
... and in a do what i say, not what i do fashion, the default sa-exim
setup (at least in etch) leads to receiving bounce notification because
of spam being rejected.
What *is* valid in the context of this thread is the following policy:
IF the
On Sun, 02 Mar 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
I would never say that the barrier for new developers is low. I don't know
in which world Robert lives but dpkg is a complex piece of code and you
don't understand it in a few minutes.
As if everybody were experienced C hackers that have used
On Tue, 04 Mar 2008, Mike Bird wrote:
On Tue March 4 2008 10:44:22 Ian Jackson wrote:
Of course this triggers feature has a proper specification. It was
discussed and agreed on debian-dpkg and now resides in the doc/
subdirectory of my dpkg triggers tree, which is what Raphael is
On Sun, 02 Mar 2008, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sun, 2008-03-02 at 02:09 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
And I am completely *sure* it would not be irrelevant for me were I
debugging dpkg without a full, complete, dpkg-regular-developer level of
understanding of the code. Or if I
On Sun, 02 Mar 2008, Mike Bird wrote:
You've rattled on at great length without showing any value to git
logs beyond providing clues to a successor developer where a
predecessor falls under a bus part way through developing a feature.
That's still good enough for me. Seems that I got something
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Mike Bird wrote:
On Fri February 29 2008 09:26:32 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Mike Bird wrote:
I'm not a DD but I've been programming since 1963 when I was 7.
Based on decades of software engineering experience, I would
just like
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Paul Wise wrote:
Perhaps in future mass ITPs could be mostly filed with only one to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and the rest to [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead?
That would defeat a lot of the purpose of the ITPs (like looking at the
descriptions, etc). I think we just have to deal with
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, John Goerzen wrote:
On Mon February 25 2008 9:31:15 am Otavio Salvador wrote:
Right. Well said.
This however doesn't changes the value of logical changes. I doubt
git.git people would accept patches like:
Now it compiles again
Ouch! Syntax error
First try to
On Sun, 24 Feb 2008, Ian Jackson wrote:
But for the reasons which were discussed at length on debian-dpkg in
October, this is not a good idea. Sadly I was not able to persuade
Raphael.
Given that many of us work on the kernel, some of us are both upstream and
downstream in git, and therefore
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sun, 2008-02-24 at 16:46 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Yet, rebasing is still routinely performed in the Linux kernel
development.
What I find interesting and rather amusing here is Linus talking
negatively about rebase
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
For having worked quite a bit in git.git (I sent my 100th patch that
should go upstream on yesterday), I can tell that it's not true. I mean,
the very people designing git, are also the one using it in the kernel
developpement, and look at git
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:46:30 -0300
Source: rng-tools
Binary: rng-tools
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2-unofficial-mt.10-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:07:52 -0300
Source: autotools-dev
Binary: autotools-dev
Architecture: source all
Version: 20080123.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:13:21PM -0500, Robert Edmonds wrote:
Luk Claes wrote:
It was rejected with the following message:
Rejected: ip4r_1.03-1_multi.changes: Missing mandatory field
`description'.
Hm, looks like mergechanges is to
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Toni Mueller wrote:
A few things: why is it called tcpwatch when it only watches HTTP
requests? A better name would be httpwatch.
it's named that way by upstream. I want to keep confusion to a minimum
Well, personally, I'd rather not have such a thing in Debian with
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Debian should be able to handle automatically detecting IDE
CDROM's after docking by now, it is 2007 after all!
I would like this too. Unfortunately, I have no clue on how to detect
that we're plugged into a dock. And it's not even clear that
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:
Personally, what made me stick to Exim so far is the ability to
configure retry behavior on a per-domain basis. One of my mail servers
Postfix does that too. You direct the domains to a different
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:
Personally, what made me stick to Exim so far is the ability to
configure retry behavior on a per-domain basis. One of my mail servers
Postfix does that too. You direct the domains to a different transport, and
setup that transport with whichever
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Miles Bader wrote:
Why is it worth worrying about, though? Are the difference between exim
and postfix really great enough to matter for typical use?!?
No, they are not. And I speak this as a Postfix user (I replace exim with
postfix in every box I use or admin, and all
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Frans Pop wrote:
A patch is available, but the question facing Debian is: should we do a scan
of the archive to see if and which binary packages are affected?
Given the sort of insiduous, nightmarish to debug kind of bug this thing
could cause, I'd say that yes, we should.
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
IMHO we should declare a quarantine of a minimum of 6 months on every new
libdb upstream, and only package it *if* openldap (*the* heavy-duty user of
libdb advanced features) and cyrus imap (*the* thousands-of-concurrent-
locks, mmap-happy user of
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Russ Allbery wrote:
Michael Biebl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Today, while browsing through aptitude, I noticed that I had the
following bdb versions installed:
version: # of packages depending on it (apt-cache rdepends)
libdb4.2 40
libdb4.3 26
libdb4.4 55
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, John Kelly wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 08:41:29 + (UTC), Sune Vuorela
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2007-09-12, John Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
With RFCs available to anyone with a web browser, it's absurd to say
they're
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Josselin Mouette wrote:
RFC 1725 is (quoting the text) primarily a minor revision to RFC
1460, which in turn is (again quoting the text) primarily a minor
revision to [RFC1225], which itself in turn is based on ideas from
RFCs 918, 937, and 1081.
You can draft
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
I opened an upstream bug report with ntp. But I would rather see the
default get changed. I think there are just too many
people/applications that assume a certain behaviour that's different
then what we have now.
Exactly, especially in
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 12:21:02PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Imho Debian's ctte should decide about this, and if they decide to have
sorted IPv4 addresses by default, somebody needs to take care that _ALL_
programs using IPv4 are changed.
On Sat, 08 Sep 2007, Michael Banck wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 06:40:19PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Is there any advantage for that default in Debian? Anyone who cares about
network proximity on round-robin IPv4 already knows to pick one host and
to stop using the round
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 00:12:16 -0300
Source: autotools-dev
Binary: autotools-dev
Architecture: source all
Version: 20070725.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
On Sat, 11 Aug 2007, Daniel Baumann wrote:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
But what about HPLIP? No volunteers for it?
i do have a lot of various models using hplip.. but i'm not actually in
search for new packages.. what about torsten, doesn't he want to take over?
I wouldn't mind
On Thu, 09 Aug 2007, Gregory Colpart wrote:
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 11:11:24PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
[...]
The requirements for amavisd-new is a good grasp of perl and email
infrastructure, and the usual careful attitude one should have when dealing
with packages
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
So, this mail is a request for new maintainers for both hplip and
amavisd-new.
I've already had three people (two DDs and a non-DD) join in for amavisd-new
work. So it looks like it will be well-cared for in the future.
But what about
On Thu, 09 Aug 2007, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
The reason? It's counterproductive and silly, when upgrading from
oldstable to stable, to get lots of news that was ever relevant only for
sid-to-sid upgrades.
Better to do that cleanup near the freeze, if at all. Otherwise, once could
Unfortunately, due to various reasons I have been unable to dedicate as much
time and effort as HPLIP and amavisd-new require, lately (as in I couldn't
dedicate any effort to them, really).
Both of these packages are team-maintained in alioth (pkg-hpijs and
amavisd-new projects, respectively),
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007, Loïc Minier wrote:
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
Hmm. I would argue that gnome shouldn't recommend gnome-dbg either,
according to policy.
I'm disturbed by this too, but -- as I clarified on IRC -- I think
there's a conflict of interests between
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
debconf is definitely not the proper way. Using alternatives is.
Remember you are dealing with essential stuff.
/bin/sh must *NEVER*, not even for a milli-second, be unavailable. You are
only to change it using atomic operations, and when you are
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh dixit:
There is just too much crap out there that thinks /bin/sh is bash.
Not in Debian ??? /bin/sh scripts must be POSIX compliant and not use
No, not in Debian.
But in practice, if many people can't change that away
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Vincent Danjean wrote:
What about circular dependencies that must be broken differently
depending on the admin configuration ?
You have your answer right there: let the admin fix it.
For example, looking at openvpn and nfs :
* On some machines, openvpn must depend
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Alexander Wirt wrote:
Please never make it a default. Humans make errors and I never want packages
Recommends *are* to be installed by default, unless you specifically tell
the tool not to. This is the whole point, one that has been broken for a
few *years* now and has
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
Or are you questioning that most libraries ought to be using version
scripts? I said they ought to, not that they currently did; and using
Yeah, that. Apparently my english failed me, and I didn't parse what you
meant correctly.
I am all for symbol
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
It's been possible to avoid the export of symbols for years using version
scripts, which most libraries also ought to be using anyway.
Maybe on Solaris. On Linux? Who are you kidding?
--
One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 12:07:52 -0300
Source: hplip
Binary: hpijs hplip-data hpijs-ppds hplip hplip-doc hplip-dbg
Architecture: source all i386
Version: 1.6.10-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 23:06:42 -0300
Source: autotools-dev
Binary: autotools-dev
Architecture: source all
Version: 20070306.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Frank Küster wrote:
Michael Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 10:11:18AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently preparing an NMU for a package which, besides an RC bug,
also has a bug in its last version number. The upstream version is
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 09:12:33AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 12 avril 2007 à 21:15 +0200, Robert Millan a écrit :
I think compression ratio is better than speed in most cases. With better
compressed packages we save archive
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
Out of curiousity, how would source packages be handled? Would you
In whatever way the maintainer told dpkg-dev to for that package, I suppose.
the uploader uploads a wrong format for a binary upload, would the
archive repackage it or would it
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Actually, I've considered adding hardware reporting to popcon, using a
separate question (or more options, not sure which), and hardware
reports do not need to be sent as often as package usage. Such
report-once setting should report the output
On Sun, 01 Apr 2007, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
IIRC signing subkeys are not accepted at package uploads, so maybe that's
what you were thinking about.
AFAIK, they are.
--
One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Andreas Barth wrote:
another week or so. Our secret plan was to announce the release on April 1st
(that would have been fun, don't you think so :) ), but well - quality is
more important.
You realise, of course, that you can still announce the release on April
1st anyway,
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
The issue there was using a signing key not in the debian
keyring. If you are doing the same, please stop.
You do not handle signing subkeys? That would mean one has to add that
dreaded ! to the keyid, so as to make gpg not use any subkeys.
701 - 800 of 1562 matches
Mail list logo
