archive, but that will be rectified
shortly.
Participants
Jim Pick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Web page
- Packages: orbit, gnome-libs, gnome-core, gnome-guile, gnome-objc,
gnome-utils, gnome-media
Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] to be added to this list
Hi,
I've uploaded the Gnome 0.20 Debian packages to incoming on
master.debian.org (also available at http://www.jimpick.com/ )
I had some problems with the gnome-admin package, so I didn't finish
it. I will be travelling for 4 days, and I will figure it out when I
am back. I also did not
Michael Meskes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Am I correct that we currently do not have a complete desktop with gnome?
Since there is no wm yet, it's pretty difficult to judge it.
This is a Gnome FAQ item.
Gnome is not meant to have a single window manager. In it's final
form, it will work with
Meskes, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, I tried starting icewm and then some gnome applets resp. some of
the desktop tools. But they all seg fault. And I get a message that
imlib is lacking the file in /usr/etc. Do I have to set an environment
variable?
I think we should add a
Rob Browning [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim Pick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I should probably add that to the README - and maybe a note to try
running panel to get to all the other applications. Anything else I
should put into the README?
I don't know about the README, but I just
somebody gets around
to releasing a libjpeg62 package, we should stick with libjpeg6a.
Oooh. Interesting snag. So. We need to make a joint decision. I talked
to Jim Pick last night about putting 6b in slink, and get it in before the
freeze. However this makes me edgy. Jim, Chris? Your
Andrew Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Oct 06, 1998 at 11:49:26PM +0800, Stephen Darragh wrote:
Is there any way to get Debian to rebuild or repair a corrupted
package information database (e.g. on beldin)?
Not that I know of unfortunately. I'll ask on debian-devel as this is
Brian White [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could I get some official word on which architectures wish to be included
in the 2.1 release of Debian? Thanks!
ARM is nowhere near being release ready (we just started).
Cheers,
- Jim
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 important) bugs at ship time.
What do you think we should do with the
Chris McKillop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Quick One...
I know that the gnome 0.30 deb files are alittle messed up,
but I don't remeber every seeing a fix to the segv problems. Was
it a gtk/gdk problem with 1.0.x vs 1.1.x? I am trying to get eeyes
to work and not having much
Havoc Pennington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Craig Sanders wrote:
maybe a compromise would be to leave the packages in slink, make sure
the Description: field highlights their alpha status, and automatically
close all non-packaging bugs (and forward them upstream if
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Pfaff) writes:
This morning I uploaded a version of w3-el that doesn't compile upon
installation--instead, there are separate precompiled packages for
Emacs 19 and Emacs 20, plus a shared documentation package. I see
this as a better way to go than forcing the
Havoc Pennington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, Stephen Crowley wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 1999 at 09:14:14AM -0500, Brian Almeida wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 1999 at 03:03:26PM +0100, Sven LUTHER wrote:
and how the unfortunate of us who already have upgraded to 1.0.2 can
Hi,
Soon, I'm going to upload a cygnus-stylesheets package. It's
basically the same thing as the docbook-stylesheets package, but it
has some modifications and additional hacks that Mark Galassi has
added.
This package is based on the same source as what the Red Hat people
are using. The
Adam Di Carlo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Soon, I'm going to upload a cygnus-stylesheets package. It's
basically the same thing as the docbook-stylesheets package, but it
has some modifications and additional hacks that Mark Galassi has
added.
This
Adam Di Carlo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Essentially, Cygnus has forked the code.
Huh.
That might be a bit strong - I haven't really looked into the
differences in depth. They are being maintained separately, and they
are tracking Norm Walsh's stuff.
I understand that Gnome needs db2*
Adam Di Carlo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Adam Di Carlo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I understand that Gnome needs db2* scripts... why do they need the Cygnus
stylesheets?
They use them internally at Cygnus for their documentation. They are
Adam Di Carlo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Adam Di Carlo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Essentially, Cygnus has forked the code.
Huh.
That might be a bit strong - I haven't really looked into the
differences in depth. They are being maintained
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Aaron Van Couwenberghe wrote:
OK, in the past week or so I've seen several people posting from
California. Has anyone thought of having a gathering in some semi-central
location? Get to know faces, sign keys, etc?
I would be interested. If
Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
giflib3g-dev gdk-imlib-dev
giflib3g-dev imlib-dev
giflib3g-dev libfnlib-dev
The full dependencies for these is more like:
libungif3g-dev | giflib3g-dev
Basically,
Greg Hedger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I just installed Debian Linux - just the kernal and the core system, no
XWindows, no frills. So where can someone new to Linux (indeed Unix)
find answers to very basic questions like how do I mount a floppy
drive, can I read a FAT32 partition, and why
Ossama Othman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Can the 2.1/2.2 kernels handle a gigabyte of memory?
Yes.
For more than 1GB, go to:
http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/more_than_1GB.html
There was a lot of discussion about this on the linux-kernel mailing
list lately.
Also, I remember reading
Lalo Martins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OTOH, we could just sign all packages with a same key (the
Debian key); when dinstall verifies the signature and md5sum in
the .changes file, it signs the package and updates
Packages.pgp).
I prefer this method. Then we have less key distribution
Why don't we officially not have an official logo?
If 5 years from now, everybody likes a certain unofficial logo
(ie. Debian equivalent of the BSD daemon), we could go with that.
Cheers,
- Jim
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A package I maintain uses libtool. To remove the rpath stuff, I
apply this patch to configure.in.
Actually, I sort of like the following technique better:
Add the following to debian/rules right before calling $(MAKE) all
(but after configure):
Brent Fulgham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Try Japhar/Classpath:
www.japhar.org -- free JDK (compiler, runtime, debugger, etc.)
www.classpath.org -- free implementation of the essential java libraries
Plus...
www.transvirtual.com -- Kaffe JIT
www.mozilla.org -- ElectricalFire JIT
Cheers,
Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
/usr/lib/libgnomeui.so.0: undefined symbol: argp_program_version
This happens with some of the GNOME based packages I've installed
from both slink and potatoe lately...
Any ideas what I'm missing or what I did???
You probably have mixed some of
Ben Pfaff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Bialasinski) writes:
Hmm, with a strong enough improbability field, you will see dragons in
the sky.
Dragons and octopi in the sky are Somebody Else's Problem.
Flying Octopi? Sounds like a Detroit Red Wings game...
Amos Shapira [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, January 29 1999, Ionutz Borcoman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wro
te:
|Hi,
|
|Is the gnuclient/gnuserv broken in XEmacs ? Using the latest versions
|from potato I am no more able to start a gnuclient :-( Is anybody else
|experiencing this ?
I've
Phillip R. Jaenke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A bit of history first, as it is somewhat important. For those of you who
don't know; Linux runs on PowerPC's. Yes. It does. Now, what big names do
we know that have PowerPC based systems? Let's see. Apple. Amiga. UMax.
IBM RS/6000 (RISC System
Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is kinda neat, considering what we were talking about with libtool
and all, examine this ldd output:
Wakko{jgg}~/work/apt#ldd `which wmakerconf `
libgdk_imlib.so.1 = /usr/lib/libgdk_imlib.so.1 (0x4000f000)
libgtk.so.1 =
Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
And note that it links to libglib twice. Turns out this is because there
is two 'gdk-imlib1' packages with the same soname but linked against
different versions of glib! By my count we have 72 different package
Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
I somehow sense that slink/potato gtk/gnome is going to be painfull..
I agree. I'm only planning to support Gnome 0.99.x/1.0 on potato.
Oh, I was just reminded of this on the dpkg list.. The gtk (gdk? I
Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 16:52:48 -0700 (MST)
From: Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's not what I'd like libtool to do. I agree there is a problem to
be fixed, I just think that libtool is not the only piece of software
Marcus Brinkmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 12:19:48PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
In short, we have only three choices, regardless of what happens in
libtool:
1) Implement Red Hat's ugly patch in our libc5 ld.so, and thereby be
bugwards compatible
Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
libgdk-imlib1 in slink did not seem to depend on any glib, in potato it
depends on a new and incompatible glib from potato BUT the soname was not
changed. So the instant you install this new libgdk-imlib1 ~40
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale E. Martin) writes:
Oscar Levi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In my opinion, this problem is not sufficient to warrant an upload at
this time since, contrary to the bug reporters claim, it does not
prevent the packing from functioning. It is annoying, yes.
Phillip R. Jaenke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Kernel and hardware incompatibilities can lead to binary
incompatibilities.
Plus, IIRC, the current PowerPC distributions are all
compiled for UP. As I said, most RS/6000's are SMP.
You'd have a separate RS/6000 kernel which would be compiled
Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If glib, gtk, gnome, imlib, etc used versioned symbols then yes you
-might- advoid this.
-HOWEVER- my understanding how how versioned symbols would need to be
implemented would make this pretty much impossible for a large portion of
the libraries
There is apparantly an EGCS patch called libapi, available in the
Debian egcs package, which is supposed to implement the above.
Adopting and improving this patch would definitely solve your GNOME
problems, Jim.
Can you give us some pointers? This sounds like a good thing for the
Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are currently 72 things that link against imlib. I suspect that
about half were linked with the 'old' imlib and half with the 'new' imlib.
That's to be expected. The current situation demands that all those
apps should be rebuilt
xemacs worked until this morning, when I used
dselect to upgrade some packages.
Now, when I type xemacs, I get:
fleming:~$ xemacs
xemacs: can't resolve symbol 'xbitmap'
xemacs: can't resolve symbol 'xbitmap'
xemacs: can't resolve symbol 'xbitmap'
xemacs: can't resolve symbol 'xbitmap'
xemacs:
Hi I still have a few packages left that need a new maintainer.
...
rxvt
ircii
tf
mandelspawn
xtron
Andrew
I guess it's time that I learned how to put together a Debian
package - now that I've finally been able to subscribe to
the debian-devel list.
Sign me up for mandelspawn
Didn't we use to have a PGP package?
I noticed that it disappeared a few days ago too. What's up?
Did I miss an announcement or something?
- Jim
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please clarify - unpacking a Debian source package is different
than unpacking an upstream source package (which may require tar,
unzip, zoo, lha, jar, etc.). Right?
Andy Mortimer wrote:
Personally, I'd be inclined to disagree here, especially given [1.5]
below. If I've gone to all the
Jim Pick wrote:
Even if we wrote one, I doubt the KDE guys, especially Matthias Ettrich,
would
be willing to use it. Really an unfortunate situation, IMHO. :-(
Noel Maddy wrote:
Berate me for missing the obvious, but couldn't KDE just be compiled with
a QT clone for Debian? What am
On Tue, 13 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
If someone wants to contribute to an effort to clone a toolkit, they'd
probably be much better off contributing to the WINE project (Windows
emulator) or Jolt project (Java clone - kaffe, biss-awt, guavac, etc.).
What do you think about Lesstiff
How about where part of the upstream archive could go into the main
distribution, but part needs to go into non-free or non-US, even for the
sources?
That's a case where you _must_ repack the original archive.
MfG Kai
No. I'd just say upload the upstream sources to the non-US
Tom Lees wrote:
This gets more complicated. To allow for cross-compiling or bootstrapping,
some packages need to be compilable using the Source from another package,
so eg:-
SrcPackage: xmp
Depends: awe-drv | src.awe
I don't think it adds any complexity if upstream source packages,
Hi,
I was asking over Linux-ISP about doing cleanup after breakins and got
many use tripwire answers, and one which says that RPM has a verify
mode which checks for files which were changed since they were
installed. Can the dpkg maintainers consider adding such a feature
for Debian?
In case you're interessed, I just got the acknowledgement of bug report
#1 (which happen to be a documentation buglet in package qt-doc).
*cracks open a virtual beer* _(;
Out of those ~1 bug reports, about 2200 are still outstanding.
Congratulations.
BTW, if you believe the
This might be a mini-project for someone:
I'd like to see a graph of the total number of bugs, number of open bugs
plotted on a graph vs. the date. Perhaps superimposing the release dates
on it too.
It would be cool if we could somehow track the number of machines/users we
had too.
I checked
(looks like we beat Red Hat, go figure...)
Much more CDs of RedHat have probably been sold than Debian CDs, and
people installing from CDs may not have internet access and not register
with the linux counter? Also that's only statistics...
I just thought it was neat. Anyways, the Linux
Crack dot Com has decided to release abuse as public domain software. So no
more a.out abuse, once I get the new one built. But I do have a couple of
questions about their copyright:
This release is to the public domain, meaning there are very few
restrictions in on use. But here are a
Galen Hazelwood wrote:
This is a legitimate version format. You failed to upgrade dpkg
before upgrading everything else. Fellow Debian developers, we
_really_ need to put up warnings that this needs to be done! Otherwise
innocent people will corrupt their systems by upgrading.
Maybe we
We are running cvs.debian.org over an ISDN line. Currently the only
code under it is the Deity project.
I can make other source trees and set up other users if others want to
do distributed development this way.
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to set up world read access yet
because
Im not dissing your work, its excellent ;) Just hoping things can be a
little more open... It seems like its getting to be an old boys club.
You guys are pretty mature compared to the IRC channels, but it seems that
already the administration is top heavy, taking away a lot of coding/devel
dpkg-cert already does something like this. Klee is going to fold the
capabilities of dpkg-cert into dpkg, so I think a solution is on
the horizon. :-)
We just have to wait patiently for Klee and his upcoming proposal to overhaul
dpkg.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpD2sxtAmlaW.pgp
Description: PGP
Andreas Jellinghaus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
great. since i meet other debian developers at the linux congress, i my
a big friend of a cvs server with all debian packages. does anyone have
a server with enough hard disks and a good conection to run it ?
Some problems arise:
Should
I'm using dpkg-dev 1.4.0.17. The problem is that not just with
source packages I create. It is with all source packages I'm
downloading, e.g., hello.
The type of error I'm getting is as follows:
dpkg-source: failure: remove patch backup file
As for OSS -- I had the impression that if I submitted patches to make
the modules *accept* command line arguments, they wouldn't be
included. But yeah, if they're straight GPL'ed that's good enough; I
could still distribute such patches even if they weren't included.
(and actually,
yeah, cygwin32.dll is under the GPL. So? It's a DLL, like libc5 and
libc6 are... [the *only* thing I'm aware of that actually uses the
LGPL is libg++; it was as much of an experiment as anything, and I'm
not aware of any not-otherwise-free software taking advantage of those
terms...] Just
Two questions: (1) in what way is cygwin32.dll different from libc5.so
in this regard (since the license for both is the same: GPL)
libc5 appears to be under the GPL, while libc6 appears to be under
the LGPL. Weird. Does that mean that anything that is linked
against libc5 has to be GPL'd?
Yes, very limiting. The code actually cannot be linked statically!
Can't be linked dynamically either... read the GPL.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgp6b75kk1gUm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
For some more perspective on the interface argument, go back and see
some of the flaming a year or two ago about the GNU libmp (multiple
precision integer math library.)
Actually, I had a very similar polite argument with RMS via private e-mail
(about linking Java libs with mixed
There already is a tkinfo package (version 1.3). cas [EMAIL PROTECTED] is
listed as the maintainer.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpjw0BNcP82y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
[ I've not been following this thread too closely,
so if I've got the wrong idea, please forgive me ]
The GPL is a very restrictive license. In many ways, it is just as
restrictive as the Qt license. Particularily in the case of libraries,
using it as Cygnus is doing (to make
On Jun 2, Jim Pick wrote
The cygwin.dll case in an example where the GPL is being used to restrict
the
rights of other people using the code so that they can't do something taboo
such as charge money, while at the same time, reserving the right for the
authors to do the exact same
The senior maintainers and copyright holders of ncurses (Zeyd benHalim
and myself) both feel very strongly that Thomas Dickey hijacked the
project in a way that was unethical, injurious to the interests of
the free-software community, and arguably flat-out illegal under our
license terms.
I just wrote:
In addition, all of the programs
compiled against it should be moved out of the main distribution,
and into contrib.
(I just noticed that dselect/dpkg falls into this category)
This is not a good situation.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpPwqLOmli3A.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Eric S. Raymond wrote:
I don't yet know. I believe Debian's position on this is (a)
unreasonable, and (b) not even internally consistent. Are you going
to also cease immediately distributing all of the important software
released under the Artistic License and similar ones?
I don't think
Brian White wrote:
I agree with you on this. I personally believe that Debian should relax
this requirement about non-modifiable redistributable code not being
suitable for the primary distribution. I've never seen how it helps any
cause other than sticking a finger in the eye of those who
I did find a serious problem after rebooting (ok, I could probably have
done this more subtle) the machine to start xdm. From reading several
debian related lists I already knew that xdm will break with shadow
passwords. However, I doubt if everyone who just installed debian 1.3 will
realize
On Jun 2, Jim Pick wrote
Just so you understand why I'm so interested - I'm working on porting dpkg
to cygwin32.
Porting or re-implementing? If it's a port, dpkg is already under
gpl, so cygwin32 being under gpl shouldn't be an issue. [Even if
it wasn't, I don't understand how a gpl'd
Well, it's fine for the author to _require_ that modifications in the
program be returned to the author. It's just not acceptable for the
author to not allow modifications to be distributed.
I don't think we should accept licenses that require modifications to be
returned
to the author, or
Regarding the assignment of copyright, I took that out of the draft
document.
Yay! I knew you were a good guy! :-)
Cheers,
- Jim
pgptBXGtMKzg2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
John Goerzen wrote:
Back in March, Siggy had indicated that he would be taking over
PostgreSQL development (the Postgres95 package currently in Debian is
now very out-of-date). I e-mailed him about this and got no response.
Back on May 7, Siggy posted the following:
Hi all,
after losing
Jim,
why didn't you upload shared Motif library version of jdk1.1-runtime?
I just wonder if there is any reason for that.
Thanks.
Alex Y.
The jdk1.1-runtime package can be used either way - read the
/usr/doc/jdk1.1/README.linux.gz file for details.
You can use a shared Motif
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The real reason I'm replying to this: I wonder what the other developers
think about bug reports that just say a new version is available (as opposed
to, a new version is available, and fixes this nasty bug).
I think it's a good idea. I don't always
All packages that provide HTML documentation should register these
documents to the menu system, too. Check out section section 4.1, `Web
servers and applications' for details.
Is that as well as registering with dwww?
I'm changing the way documents register themselves
I'm going to be away from my computer for approximately a week, while I travel
to Vancouver and Nanaimo (B.C., Canada) on business. I probably won't be
able to fetch my mail.
Unfortunately, I slipped behind schedule for a few things - so I won't be
uploading the experimental version of dwww
I suggest to use [EMAIL PROTECTED] as common identifier for Debian
friends. In case we get the money (why should we ?) I suggest to pass
50% to Linux International and keep 50% for Debian.
Please use an address at Linux International, not one in the Debian
domain. It is not our policy
People did complain that we were promoting Debian to the
detriment of Linux.
Yes - but remember, some of the people participating in these
contests were acting pretty infantile. Instead of focusing on solving
the problem, they want their team to be at the top of the
list at all costs,
I have some computers up running in that challenge and I could easily
contribute there output to the debian group, if we are going to have
one.
So will we have one, or will we do it each one by himself?
It's up to you - nobody's really organized anything. Some people are
already running
Thomas Koenig wrote:
I think we should start moving away from MD5 as our main hash function.
An attractive alternative would be RIPEMD-160.
http://www.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/~bosselae/ripemd160.html
This is probably a good thing to agree to do, before Klee redesigns dpkg to
handle verification
Hi!
Sorry for being absent from most of the conversation, and not getting
my latest release of dwww out... - I was working in Vancouver last
week, came back, got sick, one of my main modems burnt out (lightning?),
I replaced it, upgraded my server, messed up PPP, didn't configure
the modem
Karl wrote:
Can't apache do that? I think there's a mod-rewrite that will do
what we need. Though I suppose not everyone runs apache... You tell
me and we'll both know. I think it's a good idea to have a
light-weight server that can launch from xinetd.
I wrote:
The only way to
You can't fix the browsers, because we don't have the source for important
browsers like netscape.
You mean the Debian Project caving in and changing its standards because
some non free product cannot be changed? Where is our commitment to free
software?
We shouldn't be changing the way
One complication I can think of - dselect and the ftp sites have the
concept of overrides, where Guy can change the section a package
is assigned to. This wouldn't be reflected in the /usr/doc
directory - of course, this might not really matter.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpkROZcuIbKB.pgp
Description:
I only advocated this as a compromise. I am for #1. And I would go further
and abolish all compression everywhere. Compression should only be done if
its transparent for all apps (e2compr or zlib?). I have seen so many
broken packages because of manpage compression etc etc. The clean solution
I just did a du -s /usr/doc on my 386DX/33 (8MB RAM, 2-200MB HD) - and
it only has 11MB of docs installed. So uncompressing those isn't going
to kill me - I'm sure most other people using old hardware have similar
usage.
Who objects?
I do.
text/html/ps usually compress
Hi,
Also, 11M may not be a typical install. I get a far higher number:
__ du -s /usr/doc
92026 /usr/doc
Uncompressing this is very likely to annoy me.
11M was for my old 386 box (no X installed) - I'm only using about
200M total on that system. That works out to about 5%
Sounds slick. It wouldn't be too hard to do. It would be slick to
have some more network smarts (like DHCP, and dialup to an ISP) on
the boot disks (or some variant thereof).
As for configuration via the web - check out the GPL'd Java telnet applet
I've got installed on my webserver
The logo I chose is
http://fatman.mathematik.tu-muenchen.de/~schwarz/debian-logo/profile/si02.html
Good choice. You forgot to give some credit to the artist (Simon?) though.
Do you think SPI should trademark it? What sort of licensing do you think
would be best? What does the original
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I intend to package the beta enlightenment window manager, imlib, and
the default themes. If anyone wants to do it instead, I'll happily
fall back to kibitz mode -- let me know.
Lalo Martins [EMAIL PROTECTED] did a package of beta 12, back in August,
Check out the forwarded message below. I get the same error using
Debian unstable. Does this mean that Red Hat has thread-safe X libs
and we don't?
Cheers,
- Jim
---BeginMessage---
On Tue, 9 Dec 1997, Sascha Ziemann wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/szi$ phaser_chess
warning -- no way to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark W. Eichin) writes:
Check out the forwarded message below. I get the same error using
Debian unstable. Does this mean that Red Hat has thread-safe X libs
and we don't?
Well, I wouldn't mistake that for a bug report... no indication of
*what* is producing the
Hi,
This is a minor annoyance, but it always bothers
me. When upgrading or reconfiguring, I chronically
end up with orphaned lines in /etc/ld.so.conf.
ie.
Currently, on my main Pentium system...
ldconfig: warning: can't open /usr/X11R6/lib/libgtk.so.1.0 (No such file or
directory), skipping
Yes, it is discussed in the Debian Packaging Manual, section 12.
See:
/usr/doc/dpkg/packaging.html/ch-sharedlibs.html
You should just go ahead and file bugs against packages which don't
include the .so link as part of the package.
If I understand this correctly, there is no need to use
I don't know if this is a bug with procmail(3.10.7-1.5), exim (1.81-1), or
me, so I thought I would ask. I recently switched to exim from smail on my
hamm (currently as up to date as possible) which unfortunately bounced all
of my mail. It seems that exim doesn't like the mail filter pipe
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
