-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2018 12:10:40 -0700
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.21
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Marc Singer
Changed-By: Marc Singer
Description:
shellinabox
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 09:52:24 -0800
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.20
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Marc Singer <e...@debian.org>
Changed-By: Marc Sin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 17:25:31 -0700
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 0.4.9.4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Marc Singer <e...@debian.org>
Changed-By: Marc Sin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 23:05:35 -0700
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 0.4.9.3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer <e...@debian.org>
Changed-By: Marc Sin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2015 10:24:12 -0800
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.19
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Marc Singer <e...@debian.org>
Changed-By: Marc Sin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:53:38 -0700
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.18
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer <e...@debian.org>
Changed-By: Marc Singer <e...@d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2015 20:48:33 -0700
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.17
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:45:22 -0700
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.16
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 09:16:18 -0700
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.15
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 10:26:21 -0700
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.14-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 18:34:17 -0700
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.13-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@buici.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2012 15:39:11 -0700
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.12-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 20:53:32 -0700
Source: shellinabox
Binary: shellinabox
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.11-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:29:38 +
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 0.4.9.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@buici.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 19:38:19 +
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 0.4.9.2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@buici.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 00:54:34 +
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 0.4.9
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@buici.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 11:02:58 -0700
Source: uphpmvault
Binary: uphpmvault
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 0.8
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@buici.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 10:12:31 -0700
Source: uphpmvault
Binary: uphpmvault
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@buici.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 10:31:16 -0700
Source: uphpmvault
Binary: uphpmvault
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@buici.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:45:07 -0700
Source: apex
Binary: apex-nslu2
Architecture: source armel
Version: 1.6.10
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: critical
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 18:10:37 -0700
Source: apex
Binary: apex-nslu2
Architecture: source armel
Version: 1.6.9
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer e...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marc Singer e...@buici.com
Description
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 06:50:55AM +, Iulian Udrea wrote:
2009/2/18 Marc Singer e...@buici.com
Is your package patch available so I can review it?
Also, it doesn't look like you're a DD. Why are you so keen to
maintain it?
Yes, you're right, I'm not a DD. Anyway, I've had
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 05:47:57PM +, Iulian Udrea wrote:
2009/2/18 Marc Singer e...@buici.com
It was not my intention to shut you down. I am just trying to figure
out how far you've gotten in packaging the program.
Sure, no problem. I haven't gotten too far in packaging
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
The upstream build of cgit requires a download of git to build libgit
which this package links statically. Thus, this package practically
depends on a change to git-core.
http://hjemli.net/git/cgit/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 06:30:58PM +, Iulian Udrea wrote:
Hello Marc.
I have already packaged this. I was going to submit an ITP and upload
it through a sponsor in the next days.
So, I would like to take care of this. May I take over this ITP?
Is your package patch available so I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:39:30 -0700
Source: uphpmvault
Binary: uphpmvault
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:21:22 -0700
Source: ixp4xx-microcode
Binary: ixp4xx-microcode
Architecture: source arm
Version: 2.4-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:48:17 -0700
Source: uboot-mkimage
Binary: uboot-mkimage
Architecture: source arm
Version: 0.4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 12:01:41 -0700
Source: ixp4xx-microcode
Binary: ixp4xx-microcode
Architecture: source arm
Version: 2.4-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 20:34:48 -0700
Source: apex
Binary: apex-nslu2
Architecture: source arm
Version: 1.4.15.2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 14:37:51 -0700
Source: apex
Binary: apex-nslu2
Architecture: source arm
Version: 1.4.15.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 18:35:11 -0800
Source: apex
Binary: apex-nslu2
Architecture: source arm
Version: 1.4.15
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 19:19:55 -0800
Source: apex
Binary: apex-nslu2
Architecture: source arm
Version: 1.4.14
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 14:20:13 -0700
Source: apex
Binary: apex-nslu2
Architecture: source arm
Version: 1.4.7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 07:58:18PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
Hi
I recently took over the buildd maintenance of signy.farm.ftbfs.de, a mips
buildd for experimental, sarge-backports, sarge-volatile and non-free
(whitlisted packages). I actually started in helping with the buildd
maintenance of
The ATI fglrx driver can produce debian packages for easy installation
on Debian systems. Unfortunately, the kernel source package build is
broken in the latest ATI releases. I'm not sure exactly when it broke
as I have had it installed on a machine for several months. Moreover,
the driver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 17:06:58 -0700
Source: apex
Binary: apex-nslu2
Architecture: source arm
Version: 1.4.4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:44:34 -0700
Source: apex
Binary: apex-nslu2
Architecture: source arm
Version: 1.4.5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 08:14:10AM +0200, Wolfgang Lonien wrote:
And for those who still are complaining about the installer not being
graphical: please, guys, there's more than your x86 machines. Keep that
in mind. And where is the difference between a mouse click and a return
key (yes, it's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 08:23:19 -0700
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.4.6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:54:59 -0800
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.4.5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:02:49 -0800
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.4.4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 19:29:22 -0800
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.4.3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 11:42:34PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 01:37:25PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
Kenneth Pronovici [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oh come on, of course not. But if you can't admit that this is a
novelty application and not a utility, you're
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 08:56:07AM +0200, Nicolas Kreft wrote:
Hi List!
Is it for a special reason that the default dhcp-client
in sarge is ancient (version 2.0pl5)?
This client does not follow the RFC correctly. When
it does a dhcpdiscover and the interface has been
previously
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:25:23AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
So, what do you think? Could this work?
I like the idea a lot. What I'd like to see is a way to do a
cross-platform build for the small system targets. I do a lot of ARM
work: low-performance, resource limited targets.
Frankly,
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:42:54PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
- Mirror only the popular archs.
- Support buildds for stable-enough archs that run them.
- Try to include everything in a release, but drop archs more
quickly than has been done in the past if there's a lack of
resources,
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 02:24:01PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 07:46:23PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
don't handle deps at all)
...
So, what do you think? Could this work?
Yes, this could work.
That's what Gentoo is good at.
[ snip ]
Your priority are
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:45:45PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
The speed of buildd systems mostly becomes irrelevant. They will
still have to keep up with base (the set of .debs that we do
distribute for a SO arch). Anything past that is there just for QA
purposes -- to make sure
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 03:15:58AM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
But to the best of my knowledge, Marco's (blog) post from a few months
ago which showed download from ftp.it.debian.org by architecture stands
undisputed: essentially all users are on i386 clearly dominating all other
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 08:56:27PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It does seem prudent to find a way to permit a release on x86 and
ppc before all architectures are complete. Especially if this
tactic will give Debian the ability to release more
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 07:37:27PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
During the Solutions Linux expo in Paris, the DD's present at the
Debian booth have been approached by a representative from Trend Micro
Corp. who develops and sells security software (the most well known
being probably a virus
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 10:57:08PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
Would any people around have pointers which could be given to such
people ? Do we already have an entry point for such technical issues
as proprietary SW vendors needing technical information about the way
to support
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:01:25PM +0100, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:35:41AM -0800, Marc Singer wrote:
I've been under the impression that the only machine-level
incompatibilities are really kernel and driver issues and not issues
with Debian per se
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 04:52:47PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
So, our problem is how to rebalance the vendor-customer relationship for
our purposes. Probably the most useful tool is the industry group
organization, where a number of similar businesses get together to steer
their
On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 05:33:38AM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 05:12, Russell Coker wrote:
Hmm, maybe we could make it the rule that anything with number 99 can
return
before it's finished initialising?
If the point here is to speed up boot then I think it would
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 07:21:57PM +0100, stuart whittaker wrote:
refuses to start and the retry process fails also...???
thanks for any advice.
stuart
stuart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This sounds like a user question and not a dev question. No?
Usually x doesn't start because of problems
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 09:37:51AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 06:20:15PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
(I thought I sent this, but now I cannot find it to be sure.)
I'd like to build against sid on a machine (ia64) I don't own but
which Debian does have available
(I thought I sent this, but now I cannot find it to be sure.)
I'd like to build against sid on a machine (ia64) I don't own but
which Debian does have available.
I tried the recipe from the developer's manual using fakeroot. It
failed because it could not find a package. Perhaps, this is a bug
On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 04:00:34PM +0200, Sam Hocevar wrote:
My openvrml packages have been failing to build on arm [1], mips [2]
and mipsel [3] for some time. From the build logs, it looks like g++ is
eating all the memory and the OOM killer kills it.
What can I do? Ask the buildd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 23:36:36 -0700
Source: curves
Binary: curves
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.8.19
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
Firstly, this isn't really the right place to ask this kind of
question as this list is for maintainers of packages for the Debian
distributions.
Tar said, I am not sure that what you want to do is possible with
Telnet as the telnet protocol is content-free. That is to say that it
has no
Are we expecting the latest unstalble gcc compiler to correctly
compiler the kernel?
gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 3.3.2 20030812 (Debian prerelease)
I'm getting a new error when I compile the kernel. In the structure
below, it doesn't like the declaration for slot_tablen complaining
that
On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 12:44:11PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
__u8 short slot_tablelen;
Isn't it just a plain error? Either it's a char, or it's a short. It
can't be both, right?
That's what I think, too. It looks, too, to be something added in a
patch because the indentation is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 21:39:49 -0700
Source: curves
Binary: curves
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.8.18
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 21:52:54 -0700
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.4.2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:35:54 -0700
Source: bsign
Binary: bsign
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.4.5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 12:55:11PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
Does someone have an ARM system that I could gain access to? I'd really
like to put the ARM specific bug[1] filed against the Jabber package to
bed once and for all. I've seen reports of Jabber running on ARM
systems and of
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 01:33:05PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 12:00:37PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 12:55:11PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
Does someone have an ARM system that I could gain access to? I'd
really like to put the ARM
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:18:33AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On a separate but related topic, I think a much better approach would
be to handle configuration as a step entirely separate from the
install phase. Let the install be entirely quiet, and let packages
have intelligent defaults.
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 01:11:48AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On a separate but related topic, I think a much better approach would
be to handle configuration as a step entirely separate from the
install phase. Let the install be entirely quiet, and let packages
have
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 01:06:14AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Marc Singer wrote:
There is the related trouble that the only way to disable most
packages is to uninstall them. Sometimes, it is desirable to
temporarily disable a service without removing the binaries or
changing
Perhaps we can look at this a different way. I haven't read anyone
voicing the opinion that GWB (can't say the name of the beast out
loud) is a 'good fellow'. I'm supposing that all of us agree that
he's a snake-oil salesmen of the odious kind, interested most in
lining his pockets and the
(Unintentionally, I first sent the reply to you directly.)
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 02:09:24PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
Incidentally North America != USA.
And your point is, what?
A Canadian conference would be in North America and satisfy the
objections of people who don't like the US,
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 10:03:38AM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
Marc Singer wrote:
(Unintentionally, I first sent the reply to you directly.)
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 02:09:24PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
Incidentally North America != USA.
And your point is, what
For those reasons, I am planning to organise Debconf 4 in Vancouver (or
maybe somewhere else, if there's a lot of hate for vancouver) sometime
in the summer of 2004.
Yipee!
I've found that G++ 3.2 has a problem optimizing this code.
#include stdio.h
int func_b (void** ppv)
{
*ppv = (void*) 2;
return 0;
}
char* test (void)
{
char* pa = NULL;
func_b ((void*)pa);
return pa;
}
int main (int, char**)
{
char* p = NULL;
p = test ();
printf (%p\n, p);
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 10:05:10 -0800
Source: buici-clock
Binary: buici-clock
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.4.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED
, I forced libc6-dev to reinstall the most
recent unstable version. The symbols are definitely still present in
/usr/lib/libc.a.
Any suggestions?
- Marc Singer
On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 12:02:01AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
However, when I fetch source I get version 2.2.5
What does your /etc/apt/sources.list look like?
Duh. Right.
On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 12:02:01AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 02:39:48PM -0800, Marc Singer wrote:
I'm tracking a memory leak that appears to stem from regexec().
Hmm. What makes you think that this patch fixes a memory leak? I ask
because the patch appears to deal
On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 01:42:36PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
The first one I was shown by my neighbor is called Knoppix 3.1 and is
produced by a German group. As a result it comes up in German, but there
is a simple fix that will boot it in English (boot: knoppix lang=us) that
only requires
On Thu, Aug 22, 2002 at 08:47:46AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 05:10:58PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
I was asking for real examples in order to discuss how the case of
bind and db.root is *not* a member of that set and how there may be a
genuine problem
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 10:19:49PM -0400, Scott K. Ellis wrote:
Still, breaking bind's access to root name servers is particularly
troublesome because it may tend to break all net access. It may be
worthwhile to remove db.root from the list of configuration files.
Especially, because this
On Thu, Aug 22, 2002 at 08:44:04AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 05:10:58PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
This terse reply is obviously inappropriate. If you are annoyed, stop
writing.
No less appropriate than your one-line dismissal of a reasonable and tactful
On Thu, Aug 22, 2002 at 01:49:39PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
because there is no compelling reason
to keep db.root a configuration file
But there IS a compelling reason to keep db.root a configuration file:
alternic
I don't use
I'm confused by the behavior of apt-get install --reinstall. I found
out yesterday that the /etc/bind/db.root file was missing on my name
server. I was able to recover by linking to an old copy and
restarting bind9. However, when deleted the link and performed the
--reinstall command, the
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 08:24:58PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 12:09:57PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
I'm confused by the behavior of apt-get install --reinstall. I found
out yesterday that the /etc/bind/db.root file was missing on my name
server. I was able
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 09:42:53PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
Sounds like you want dpkg --force-confmiss.
I wouldn't expect that since the documentation states:
confmiss: Always install a missing configuration
file. This is dangerous, since it means not pre-
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 10:04:28PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 12:49:19PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
Sounds like you want dpkg --force-confmiss.
I wouldn't expect that since the documentation states:
confmiss: Always install a missing configuration
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 03:00:52PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 21-Aug-02, 14:42 (CDT), Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 12:32:00PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
How could it be dangerous to install a *missing* configuration file?
If the default
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 10:21:17PM +0200, Oliver Kurth wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 12:49:19PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 09:42:53PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
Sounds like you want dpkg --force-confmiss.
I wouldn't expect that since the documentation states
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 09:21:39PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 01:10:29PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 03:00:52PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
To be, perhaps, a little more explicit: there are programs for which
the existence of an empty
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 07:06:22PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 12:49:19PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
For example...
_Any_ program whose default (Debian) configuration file specifies options
which are different from the compiled-in defaults.
For specific examples
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 07:32:04PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 04:23:16PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 07:06:22PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
_Any_ program whose default (Debian) configuration file specifies
options which are different from
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 06:39:55PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 21-Aug-02, 15:10 (CDT), Marc Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would help to have an example.
I could have sworn I had a footnote about /etc/cron.allow, with a
reference to the appropriate manpage :-). Okay, it's
On Wed, Oct 14, 1998 at 09:33:22PM -0700, Jim Pick wrote:
Brian White [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, everybody... It's that time again. I've gone through the bug logs
and made my list of packages to keep/remove should they still have
release-critical (i.e. critical, grave, or
On Thu, Oct 15, 1998 at 06:55:36PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
Can I move mutt-i from non-us to main?
There is no crypto code in the package, only SHA-1 (hash algorithm) and
code to run pgp or gnupg.
(Waiting to resolve this issue I haven't uploaded yet the stripped version
to main, I hope
On Thu, Oct 15, 1998 at 04:02:41PM -0500, Stephen Crowley wrote:
On Thu, Oct 15, 1998 at 08:32:02AM -0400, Brian White wrote:
What do you think we should do with the Gnome stuff?
The Gnome 0.30 stuff is still under rather heavy development. The
current packages in Slink are pretty
On Thu, Oct 15, 1998 at 02:09:23PM -0700, Kenneth Scharf wrote:
The intel version of debian packages are in some directory path
downstream from ../../i386/.. and the package names also carry i386.
While this is technically correct, it can be missleading to some that
the package only runs on
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
