Tue, 19 Feb 2002 06:44:21 +0800
csj [EMAIL PROTECTED]
debian-user@lists.debian.org
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and
less someone who would formulate constructively his
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 10:08:14 +1030
Tom Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
csj wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 10:41:48AM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
Wendell Cochran wrote:
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 03:52:42 +0100
Carel Fellinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
and here is really no
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002 17:50:02 -0800
ben [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as far as the shift key is concerned, do you really contend that any phrase
consisting of a misplaced sequence of english words that, by your own
suggestion, might be rendered apparent in its meaning only through
On Tuesday 19 February 2002 11:21 am, csj wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002 17:50:02 -0800
ben [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as far as the shift key is concerned, do you really contend that any
phrase consisting of a misplaced sequence of english words that, by your
own suggestion, might be rendered
csj wrote:
[snip]
Deviant is a politically incorrect term (but you're free to use it).
Yesterday's conformists may well be today's deviants. Imagine somebody
wearing Victorian dress to work or speaking Shakespeare at a board
meeting.
My apologies. I was aware of the incorrectness of deviant,
Wendell Cochran wrote:
[snip]
Here's the great precept of Unix: Let each command do one thing,
do it well. That goes for English sentences, too.
This is wisdom condensed, and is too great for me.
Tom
Carel Fellinger wrote:
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 06:37:23PM -0800, ben wrote:
On Saturday 16 February 2002 06:33 pm, you wrote:
On Saturday 16 February 2002 11:41 am, MH wrote:
[snip]
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and less someone
who would formulate constructively his
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 10:41:48AM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
Wendell Cochran wrote:
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 03:52:42 +0100
Carel Fellinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and
less someone who would formulate constructively his
csj wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 10:41:48AM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
Wendell Cochran wrote:
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 03:52:42 +0100
Carel Fellinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and
less someone who would formulate
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 06:44:21AM +0800, csj wrote:
[snip]
i really really don't want you to construe this as any kind of
xenophobia,
but this phrase above just doesn't work in english. i have no idea
what you
meant to convey by this.
I admit, I'm no english man,
* Tom Cook ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
...
This paragraph runs close to nonsense! Imagine (you don't need too much
imagination!) if Micro$oft released a product which didn't conform to
the relevant standard.
No need for any imagination. Just see .sig (and weep).
Dima
--
Riding
On Monday 18 February 2002 02:44 pm, csj wrote:
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and
less someone who would formulate constructively his
criticism and suggestions ...
For the life of me, I can't see what's unclear about this
construction.
apparently.
On Saturday 16 February 2002 06:52 pm, Carel Fellinger wrote:
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 06:37:23PM -0800, ben wrote:
On Saturday 16 February 2002 06:33 pm, you wrote:
On Saturday 16 February 2002 11:41 am, MH wrote:
[snip]
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and less
ben == ben [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ben On Saturday 16 February 2002 06:52 pm, Carel Fellinger wrote:
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 06:37:23PM -0800, ben wrote:
On Saturday 16 February 2002 06:33 pm, you wrote:
On Saturday 16 February 2002 11:41 am, MH wrote:
[snip]
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 03:52:42 +0100
Carel Fellinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and less someone
who would formulate constructively his criticism and suggestions ...
i really really don't want you to construe this as any
Wendell Cochran wrote:
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 03:52:42 +0100
Carel Fellinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and less someone
who would formulate constructively his criticism and suggestions ...
i really really don't want you to construe
On Sun, 2002-02-17 at 18:11, Tom Cook wrote:
Here endeth the lesson. ;-)
One can't help but be educated by reading this list... :) While I'm not
a native English speaker per se, I'm about as close as one can get,
and I still consider myself educated by that post! :)
-Alex
signature.asc
Tom Cook wrote (on 18 Feb 2002 at 10:41):
[You should be more optimistic.] There is no interest here in
ridiculing anyone, even less someone who formulates his
criticisms and suggestions constructively.
Here endeth the lesson. ;-)
How much is less than no interest?
SCNR
(BTW I'd guess
Tony Crawford wrote:
Tom Cook wrote (on 18 Feb 2002 at 10:41):
[You should be more optimistic.] There is no interest here in
ridiculing anyone, even less someone who formulates his
criticisms and suggestions constructively.
Here endeth the lesson. ;-)
How much is less than no
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 12:09:06PM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
Tony Crawford wrote:
Tom Cook wrote (on 18 Feb 2002 at 10:41):
[You should be more optimistic.] There is no interest here in
ridiculing anyone, even less someone who formulates his
criticisms and suggestions
On 2002.02.17 16:50:32 +0100 Wendell Cochran wrote:
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 03:52:42 +0100
Carel Fellinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and less
someone who would formulate constructively his criticism and suggestions
...
i really really don't
Eric G. Miller wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 12:09:06PM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
Tony Crawford wrote:
Tom Cook wrote (on 18 Feb 2002 at 10:41):
[You should be more optimistic.] There is no interest here in
ridiculing anyone, even less someone who formulates his
criticisms
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 01:27:08PM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
Eric G. Miller wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 12:09:06PM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
Tony Crawford wrote:
Tom Cook wrote (on 18 Feb 2002 at 10:41):
[You should be more optimistic.] There is no interest here in
Dimitri == Dimitri Maziuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dimitri * dman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 12:56:19PM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| Ok, now bitchx depends on xutils, who in turn suggests
xfree86-common, | who in turn depends on
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 07:51:32AM +0100, MH wrote:
Dimitri == Dimitri Maziuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dimitri Besides, that wasn't my point. I was referring to all
Dimitri those useless libraries that get installed because
Dimitri somebody might want to * run $foo in xterm *
Colin Watson wrote:
Because that wouldn't make him feel so l33t? It would also require him
to actually read the changelog.
* Depend on xutils to eliminate a godawful postinst hack which no
longer worked anyway. This isn't my favorite solution, as xutils
is big, but it will do for
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 01:06:02PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
Because that wouldn't make him feel so l33t? It would also require him
to actually read the changelog.
* Depend on xutils to eliminate a godawful postinst hack which no
longer worked anyway. This
* MH ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
...
What's about filing a bug against bitchx instead of passively
complaining here...
I'm complaining rather actively (check the archives). My gripe
is not with bitchx per se (I've only logged on to irc once or
twice last year, I just did a dpkg --purge
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 02:54:39PM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| * dman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
| On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 12:56:19PM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| | Ok, now bitchx depends on xutils, who in turn suggests xfree86-common,
|
* Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 01:06:02PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
Because that wouldn't make him feel so l33t? It would also require him
to actually read the changelog.
* Depend on xutils to eliminate a godawful
Dimitri == Dimitri Maziuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dimitri * MH ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly: ...
What's about filing a bug against bitchx instead of passively
complaining here...
Dimitri I'm complaining rather actively (check the archives). My
Dimitri gripe is not
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 01:09:31PM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
* Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
Yup, I saw that. I get rather fed up with people who transmute a known,
acknowledged issue into a rant about all of Debian though ...
You didn't read my relpy to dman, did you?
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 12:51:48PM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
As far as I can tell the bug is between maintainer's chair and
keyboard. I don't see how filing a bug against $PACKAGE will fix
that, I fully expect that bug to be marked wontfix. Ridiculing
the guy in public, OTOH, might work.
* Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 12:51:48PM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
As far as I can tell the bug is between maintainer's chair and
keyboard. I don't see how filing a bug against $PACKAGE will fix
that, I fully expect that bug to be marked
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 03:50:22PM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
* Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
You are on crack. The maintainer's bug report against debhelper
explicitly said that he didn't like the dependency on xutils.
I'm on pot actually. I'm whining about a general QA
On Saturday 16 February 2002 06:33 pm, you wrote:
On Saturday 16 February 2002 11:41 am, MH wrote:
[snip]
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and less someone
who would formulate constructively his criticism and suggestions ...
i really really don't want you to construe
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 06:37:23PM -0800, ben wrote:
On Saturday 16 February 2002 06:33 pm, you wrote:
On Saturday 16 February 2002 11:41 am, MH wrote:
[snip]
and here is really no interest in ridiculing anyone and less someone
who would formulate constructively his criticism and
Ok, now bitchx depends on xutils, who in turn suggests xfree86-common,
who in turn depends on libaxw and so on (THIS BOX HAS NO FSCKING X!!!).
So I have a suggestion: why don't we make ALL libraries required and
just install all of them as part of the base system?
(Well, sans non-DFSG-compliant
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 12:56:19PM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| Ok, now bitchx depends on xutils, who in turn suggests xfree86-common,
| who in turn depends on libaxw and so on (THIS BOX HAS NO FSCKING X!!!).
It is a sugggestion, not a
* dman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 12:56:19PM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| Ok, now bitchx depends on xutils, who in turn suggests xfree86-common,
| who in turn depends on libaxw and so on (THIS BOX HAS NO
Hi.
When will Debian/GNU Linux 2.2 be releases?
Which what kernel version will it be released?
Thanks.
Regards,
Yoav Russo,
QA Department.
Aladdin Knowledge Systems.
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 03:51:09PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When will Debian/GNU Linux 2.2 be releases?
http://www.debian.org/News/2000/2726
moritz
--
/* Moritz Schulte [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* http://hp9001.fh-bielefeld.de/~moritz/
* PGP-Key available, encrypted Mail is
Just wondering if XFree86 3.3.3 is being considered for the next release
(2.2) or not... I would really like to have XF86 3.3.3 since it contains an
X-server for the Riva TNT chipset.
Thanks,
Chris
Chris R. Martin wrote:
Just wondering if XFree86 3.3.3 is being considered for the next release
(2.2) or not... I would really like to have XF86 3.3.3 since it contains an
X-server for the Riva TNT chipset.
Thanks,
Chris
Just go to xfree86.org, download the 3.3.3 Xserver (by
On Fri, 8 Jan 1999, Chris R. Martin wrote:
Just wondering if XFree86 3.3.3 is being considered for the next release
(2.2) or not... I would really like to have XF86 3.3.3 since it contains an
X-server for the Riva TNT chipset.
Yes, as soon as Branden is done with the X in frozen(slink), he
Just wondering if XFree86 3.3.3 is being considered for the next release
(2.2) or not... I would really like to have XF86 3.3.3 since it contains an
X-server for the Riva TNT chipset.
Yes, as soon as Branden is done with the X in frozen(slink), he will start
working on 3.3.3 for
46 matches
Mail list logo
